So....who has PCars?

schigara said:
When did I ever say any of that? All I said was that Pcars was like a Hollywood action movie and that to enjoy, for most people, it requires a suspension of disbelief. Well, I happen to like an action movie from time to time.

Don't put words in my mouth that I never said. You can worry about what you do with your own time and I will do the same. lol
Click to expand...

lol

No no :rolleyes: lol

I was using your post to explain to him (F2Chump) how your quote sums up the situation for a lot of us.

If you go back through posts you will see where he said exactly that.

F2Chump said:
Some of us don't want to waste our limited time and money on junk.....
Click to expand...
 
Anyway, AC is a much more convincing drive than pcars, plus its loaded with decent mods, unlike pcars.
 
F2Chump said:
Anyway, AC is a much more convincing drive than pcars, plus its loaded with decent mods, unlike pcars.
Click to expand...

I actually don't feel that AC is a more convincing drive, far from it actually. I guess it may be because of flawed aero physics or perhaps because of the tires. But I have trouble driving more than a few laps because it feels so stale and disconnected. Certain aspects of AC are so poorly executed that I simply can't be bothered with it anymore.
 
F2Chump said:
Anyway, AC is a much more convincing drive than pcars, plus its loaded with decent mods, unlike pcars.
Click to expand...

More convincing in physics, most would agree.

If I compare AC and pCars first thing I do is take away all the things only one/ or more have ie: careers, mods , weather

Then I rate the rest. ;)

pCars gets my nod for Ui, content and visual immersion.

rF2 online, FFB, physics, tyres, road, terrain and driving immersion

AC: honestly, nothing comes to mind, it is in the middle of all category for me.


If you compare each just as a histoirc sim rF2 eats them all.

No way in the world the others can make my F3 Evie feel the way she does...... not possible. lol
 
PCars feels like a dumbed down (physics wise) version of AC. Neither are near rFactor 2 in terms of depth.
 
Thing some of you need to get off your rf2 high seat.

This comparison looks pretty similar to me, the car even reacts the same in the last tight right hander in both versions. @1:09


I mean look at this video.. Rf2 wheel movement looks almost dead, where the real driver is fighting the wheel. So your saying is rf2 simcade too, or even worse dumbed down well course it is , because its not like real life?!
lol

heres another with lifeless steering

I like Rf2 don't get me wrong, and it does simulate a racing car very well. But dismissing everything else as simcade, because a dev has gone another way about their perception of realism. Frankly you should be embaressed of yourselves, and you say the console kiddies are the kiddies.
 
Last edited:
do you know what wheel setting he used?do you know what wheel did he used?do you know who drive on that video?did he use aids?
ahahahaha...funny stuff
go on msdan this is nice to read with coffe..you showing your knowledge about cars..
 
oh really,,

but when a pcars vid comes on,, how comes those exact same issues don't get raised.

yeah go on with my tea showing your common sense?!

its about a video game not real cars
 
Calling AC and pCARS simcade is silly IMO.

No doubt they're not on the same level as rF2, people in the know about physics have pointed that out countless of times.
pCARS does not aspire to be rF2 and this has made me respect SMS way more than I respect Kunos.
AC does aspire to be rF2. Or it used to, anyway. "The most realistic PC simulator" - Kunos' own words.

But that was a long time ago... maybe Kunos have realised that directly competing with rF2 is a bit pointless. Kunos doesn't have an engine that has been developed and refined for decades.
Like I've already said, I think the move to the consoles is a very smart move and perhaps shows some honesty on Kunos' part, finally acknowledging that their title isn't the super hardcore sim it originally set out to be?

Take a step back and look at the real competition... Forza. Gran Turismo. pCARS. Titles that Kunos actually has a chance of "beating" in certain areas.
There's a ton of cash in it for Kunos if they manage to do so. And access to a ton of more casual racers who will love what AC has to offer.
 
hexagramme said:
I actually don't feel that AC is a more convincing drive, far from it actually. I guess it may be because of flawed aero physics or perhaps because of the tires. But I have trouble driving more than a few laps because it feels so stale and disconnected. Certain aspects of AC are so poorly executed that I simply can't be bothered with it anymore.
Click to expand...

I partly disagree. I have an issue with the FFB and since it's the main way connecting me to the game, it of course impacts everything. That spring feeling and what feels like a layer of "something" between the road and what I get through my wheel diminishes the detail. I'd rather have FFB like rF2, which provides me with more than just the steering (realistic or not, this is a game and we need these factors to assist us) feel. I read reports from modders here and there about aero and there was something about where the pressure is applied that people have to work around, but I also read here about an issue with aero load.

But the mix of the wheel spring, which I can live with if I am enjoying the car, with the static feel of certain interactions of the car with the track - like going over a kerb or hitting bodywork - is the same in a F1, Group C, or GT (with the same audio cue, grr!) bugs me.
 
DurgeDriven said:
lol

No no :rolleyes: lol

I was using your post to explain to him (F2Chump) how your quote sums up the situation for a lot of us.

If you go back through posts you will see where he said exactly that.
Click to expand...

Sorry DD. My bad. Hard to follow a thread sometimes.
 
Guimengo said:
I partly disagree. I have an issue with the FFB and since it's the main way connecting me to the game, it of course impacts everything. That spring feeling and what feels like a layer of "something" between the road and what I get through my wheel diminishes the detail. I'd rather have FFB like rF2, which provides me with more than just the steering (realistic or not, this is a game and we need these factors to assist us) feel. I read reports from modders here and there about aero and there was something about where the pressure is applied that people have to work around, but I also read here about an issue with aero load.

But the mix of the wheel spring, which I can live with if I am enjoying the car, with the static feel of certain interactions of the car with the track - like going over a kerb or hitting bodywork - is the same in a F1, Group C, or GT (with the same audio cue, grr!) bugs me.
Click to expand...

What wheel do you have?
 
Dubia garbage F1 tracks

If anything pCars made it more interesting with more elevation changes. ?

All the people think pCars is not a simulator......?? then why should it have exacting circuits ?? :rolleyes:
 
That totally wrong corner elevation suggests some sloppiness in the track modeling work, so you might start to think if they were that neglected in other areas of the game development that you can't even see.

At least in some areas, I assure you they were, as for the bugged pits in Mount Panorama, defective pit stop in Le Mans and other bugs.

DurgeDriven said:
Dubia garbage F1 tracks

If anything pCars made it more interesting with more elevation changes. ?

All the people think pCars is not a simulator......?? then why should it have exacting circuits ?? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
 
I agree mate, Historic Belgium and Rouen looked like GPL rips to me, terrain wise. lol ;)
 
To me, the detail people talk about is down to the coding being a closer representation of real world data, this realism limits and defines car behaviour, so some of the silly crap we see on pcars videos are due to EXTREME liberties being taken with data.
 
Last edited:
who says the physics are unreal..

you? What experience have you had. many race drivers have said its pretty authentic, and don't give me that BS that their getting paid, they still have reputation you know, is it was that bad they wouldnt put their name to it.

I have experience in a car similar to pcars and i would say apart from real world forces etc, it isn't that far off in terms of grip and feel.
SMS put all the manufacturers data into a tyre model like ISI, who says their data is wrong

But I've seen numerous videos of people constantly turned and having grip with little over steer. i think this is a flaw in either off road grip which the AI showcase when they go off course. Or an oversight in rear wheel grip. Inboth cases I'm sure they will fix.

Still its not a simcade arcade or whatever you want to call this. i think peoples mentality is soon as its on console it must be dumbed down. But you forget ISI have to create a physics engine that can work on cpus less powerful then modern day consoles. It would take supercomputers to create an ultra reallife physics engine. Not some average PC.

So who's to say that their physics aren't good...
 
The physics of pCARS are good, no doubt. In many cases better than the physics of AC.

The faked exaggerated steering forces of AC tricks people into thinking that the physics are top notch. The weird default ffb settings of pCARS tricks people into believing that the physics are inferior.
 
So a f1 car driving with NO TYRES is the result of sms putting all their money into the tyre model?
 
are these sim traits??
no its a glitch. Like your example.
 
Last edited:
Silly to judge a sim off of its glitches imo. On very rare occasions a car in rF2 can miss its wheels and wings when alt-tabbing in and out of the sim. Does that mean that the entire physics engine is crap? :D
 
msportdan said:
are these sim traits??
no its a glitch. Like your example.
Click to expand...

Check the times those videos are recorded. At least the first one is with the initial beta version January 2012. It's silly to even post such, the collisions improved so much from those dark times.
 
hexagramme said:
Silly to judge a sim off of its glitches imo. On very rare occasions a car in rF2 can miss its wheels and wings when alt-tabbing in and out of the sim. Does that mean that the entire physics engine is crap? :D
Click to expand...
It's a graphics engine bug, also the first video is from January 2012 beta and was a netcode issue.
 
i had a car the other day bounce llike a pinball off a wall.. that the recent build. so glitches still exist in rf2.
 
Glitches exist in every video game and sim. That's just how it is. People using those glitches to judge the entirety of a title need to get real imo.
 
msportdan said:
i had a car the other day bounce llike a pinball off a wall.. that the recent build. so glitches still exist in rf2.
Click to expand...

What does wall bouncing physics have to do with vehicle dynamics while racing? Is this a pinball simulator?
 
doenst replicate real life, sims are supposed to.


ive had enough of this conversation anyway..

please lock thread Tim
 
F2Chump said:
To me, the detail people talk about is down to the coding being a closer representation of real world data, this realism limits and defines car behaviour, so some of the silly crap we see on pcars videos are due to EXTREME liberties being taken with data.
Click to expand...

During the development process the three main guys heading that stuff, especially two of them, were trying to sort out the tires to work well. I don't believe extreme liberties were taken, just things happening within the world they were able to create and package within the development time.
 
Spinelli said:
What does wall bouncing physics have to do with vehicle dynamics while racing? Is this a pinball simulator?
Click to expand...
Well not much, it is not the biggest issue in the world, these 'dynamite crashes' as I call them, or pinball crashes you get on RF2 when skimming a wall.

However I must say, I did go to iRacing recently having only ever played RF2 before that, I went not because I wanted to but because I felt I had to. iRacing is really superb in many many depts but once the racing us underway it really sucks balls in the areas which concern me, the physics/realism/ffb. I knew in advance IR would fall short of RF2 but I was shocked actually at how massively short it did fall. I planned to race the Lotus '79 a lot, but I will not even buy any content for IR, just use the free content with the basic subscription only from time to time.

I go back to RF2, we are running stock content (Cobra, Spa 66) it sure beat the crap out of anything in IR! And I took that final left kink at the end of spa onto the bit of straight down to la source, I skim the barrier and BOOM! I am blown sky high by a dynamite crash! It happened where the fixing posts are attached behind the barrier. Tigermoth barriers are terrible for it too!

I think its always been this way, and it never bothered me as it was all I ever knew, and it still does not. Having played IR though and brushed a few walls on there too I must say it did leave a nasty taste in my mouth to get wrecked like that. That is no way to go out of a race! I should be scraping the paintwork not wrecking down to 3 wheels. So it would be a nice thing to fix at some point, i do not see it as critical.

And also, the netcode/collision detection is TONNE better in RF2 than IR, or maybe it is just that the pings are always 2x/3x worse in IR but either way it works better in RF2.
 
Last edited:
pphhfttt ............That is not flying , just the pit bug.


This is flying !!! Feb. 2012


hehe ;)


r_Factor2_2013_05_01_13_02_35_62.jpg
 
DD, you just convinced me that the entirety of rF2 is fundamentally flawed and useless.
Goodbye. ;):p;)
 
msportdan said:
doenst replicate real life, sims are supposed to.
Click to expand...
I agree. I want exact world physics in every single situation as well. (E.g. how many bloody times do we see people hitting/skimming walls in sims without any damage happening? It happens in every sim.) Having said that, I don't think the quality/accuracy of vehicle-to-wall reaction physics determines how good/bad/accurate/inaccurate a particular sim's vehicle dynamics and kinematics simulations are, therefore "wall bouncing" is quite irrelevant when discussing & comparing the physics/handling/dynamics/behavior of one sim VS the other.

Take damage as an example. RF2 has crappy damage, just look at the deformation and correlation of damage in iRacing let alone some non-simracing games. Does that mean RF2 has inferior "simracing" physics? Obviously not (the vehicle dynamics in RF2 - overall - are some of the best in the industry, the best in my opinion).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top