F2Chump
The trouble is, if the physics are simcade but you have epic weather, what type of simulator is it?
msportdan
flipside to that..
if a pc is restricted by hardware to produce a real to life simulator with forces, motion, exact data for tyres etc etc.
Arent we then all just playing dumbed down simulators anyway?
So arent we just playing simcade versions of the ones f1 teams/multimillion dollar simulators etc use?
if a pc is restricted by hardware to produce a real to life simulator with forces, motion, exact data for tyres etc etc.
Arent we then all just playing dumbed down simulators anyway?
So arent we just playing simcade versions of the ones f1 teams/multimillion dollar simulators etc use?
F2Chump
I'll let chronus chime in on the diff between the commercial and pro versions, but that doesn't change the fact the closer the data is to real life values, the more a simulation must represent reality, which is all we can do, so to some degree your question is kinda pointless, we may as well have no distinction between any racing game if you're going to self define it that way.
Anyway you seem to enjoy a range of games, whereas myself and others would prefer proper values, that said, chronus's physics models weren't hard to drive, they just did everything as expected, and actually made both braking and applying the gas easier due to the incredible 1:1 correspondence between input and output.
msportdan
Anyway you seem to enjoy a range of games, whereas myself and others would prefer proper values, /QUOTE]
i give up with you, because you know exactly what i enjoy dont you. Ill ask do you own pcars? If you don't ill kindly ask you to not post in this thread anymore.Because you really dont know anything about pcars and its tyre model.
Again ill say this one more time for it to sink into your head.
PCARS ISNT AS GOOD AS RF2 ....
BUT ITS NOT AS BAD AS SOME SAY
F2Chump
Wow, take a chill pill dude.
simcade is bad if u favour simulation, but i don't know whether it's a good or bad simcade.
simcade is bad if u favour simulation, but i don't know whether it's a good or bad simcade.
WhiteShadow
You have game with awesome physic and epic car like Cobra but you don`t have clutch, what type of simulator is it?
msportdan
another thing if rf2 is so close to real numbers, why do i have to crank the caster up to beyond normal levels in the dallara to get a heavier more realistic feel to the wheel and ffb.?!
theres flaws all over the place in rf2, not to mention th f2 feels likes its on ice.//
Just not sure if "rf2 is in a glass house throwing stones".lol./
wanted to add what i clarfied in another thread..
But my experience in a FRenault has made me doubt the realism of some of the sims we take for granted. But on the other hand i think okay, its on a home cpu, how real can they get. I respect you in your knowledge and im sure you know hell of a lot more than me, ive been siming for only two years. What i try base my experience on is the feel i get when i sit in a real car, im no physics guru. But im trying to learn, and if ifeel somethings off I'm not afraid to raise it. i would love to gain some knowledge from you, about the mechanics behind these sim engines. Just in my experience is that i thik some sims are harder than what they really need to be. The f2 rf2 car is a great example. Some of pcars cars i think are more nearer real life, if you were to compare the f2 (rf2) to the formulagulf (pcars).
As i said, ive driven rentals a subaru wrc rally spec car, a caterham on track, road cars on a track and the unforgettable formula renault 2.0. (im missing a gt car lol)
These are my experiences i try to bring to my sims.
Maybe im more of a simracer after feel than numbers. Maybe thats wrong?! or maybe im just unexperienced in sims to have a say. i dunno.
theres flaws all over the place in rf2, not to mention th f2 feels likes its on ice.//
Just not sure if "rf2 is in a glass house throwing stones".lol./
wanted to add what i clarfied in another thread..
But my experience in a FRenault has made me doubt the realism of some of the sims we take for granted. But on the other hand i think okay, its on a home cpu, how real can they get. I respect you in your knowledge and im sure you know hell of a lot more than me, ive been siming for only two years. What i try base my experience on is the feel i get when i sit in a real car, im no physics guru. But im trying to learn, and if ifeel somethings off I'm not afraid to raise it. i would love to gain some knowledge from you, about the mechanics behind these sim engines. Just in my experience is that i thik some sims are harder than what they really need to be. The f2 rf2 car is a great example. Some of pcars cars i think are more nearer real life, if you were to compare the f2 (rf2) to the formulagulf (pcars).
As i said, ive driven rentals a subaru wrc rally spec car, a caterham on track, road cars on a track and the unforgettable formula renault 2.0. (im missing a gt car lol)
These are my experiences i try to bring to my sims.
Maybe im more of a simracer after feel than numbers. Maybe thats wrong?! or maybe im just unexperienced in sims to have a say. i dunno.
Last edited:
Chronus
Indeed.
Something the other poster said:
"f a pc is restricted by hardware to produce a real to life simulator with forces, motion, exact data for tyres etc etc.
Arent we then all just playing dumbed down simulators anyway?
So arent we just playing simcade versions of the ones f1 teams/multimillion dollar simulators etc use?"
A motion simulator is not a requirement for the "physical realism" or "accuracy" of a sim. Nor should it be.
If that poster and others think it is, then consider this:
1-The plant at Sindelfingen (used by Mercedes GP), is the most advanced motion platform with 360º motion and screen and a 12 meter long rail for crosswise, horizontal motion...and it cannot deliver sustained high-g's for several seconds. [There were rumours about building a 5 to 7 meter arm based centrifuge for F1 training, but the associated costs were exceedingly large.]
Professional racing motion platforms fall short of the real experience and cannot simulate the actual level of accelerations experienced in real life for duration and magnitude - regardless of the impressive payload figures. In our "cheap" simracing corner, it's even worse.
2- Traditional platforms used by air forces to train pilots can exert substantial "forces" (several years back, max g-force was between 1.0 and 1.5g in any given direction - and not sustained), but again, not delivering (limited) sustained forces higher than 5g's.
Current DFS technology, on the other hand, which uses the good old centrifuges (and somato-sensory perception devices - inflatable suits and seats, plus mechanically actuated harnesses that tighten up), can deliver high sustained forces in 4 axis of motion - if memory serves me well, 14g's are attainable. This is only possible via use of cumbersome and powerful centrifuges, obviously.
3- Motion platforms used by racing teams can (within low limits) simulate impact forces, but they cannot simulate sustained lateral or longitudinal forces that last for seconds. Case in point, with LMP1's (and even more so with F1's) there are circuits with corners which allow/demand the driver-car system to experience "g-forces" from 2.3g, up to a peak of 3.4g and down again to about 2g, and this can last over 2, 3 or even 4 seconds - this cannot be simulated in any non-centrifuge based motion platform.
That's, in a nutshell, why we should leave motion platforms aside when discussing the physical fidelity of our sims. Better to focus on how we model the physical interactions of the contact patch, the suspension elements, the chassis and aerodynamics devices - for the foreseeable future we will not be able to fully or accurately represent the physical sensations of actually driving a real car (definitely, there's nothing like the real thing). Maybe some day, with some "holodeck" type of tech we will, but not now.
As for a pc being "restricted by hardware to produce a real to life simulator [...] exact data for tyres etc etc."...
Not sure what he intended to say in regards to "exact data for tyres", but if he meant to say we cannot use "exact data" then that is not correct.
I have used "exact data" and seen others use "exact data" (i.e., data provided by tire companies testers/engineers, or data from data acq. systems) in different platforms, including old "dumbed down" rF1. The work around "exact data" is indeed overtly complex (collecting it, cleaning it, interpreting it, verifying it and applying it to a set of models), but it is routinely done by performance centres or even inside the teams themselves by a host of "technicians".
The problem, as always, is not whether we can use "exact data" but if at all it is useful within the confines of a simulation platform. It's not uncommon to filter out data considered to be "out of range", it's not uncommon either to discard recent data sets in favour of "old" batches of data if inconsistencies are found. It's not uncommon to employ a variety of noise reduction methods (to deal with low-level errors, often resulting from flaws in the data collection processes) and pick that which provides the best approximation (or the one that hinders data analysis the least).
Errors, uncertainties, flaws, exist in all levels of "simulation", professional or non-professional. There is no "PERFECT" system, no "100% accurate" system, but we can use that which works the best (regardless of price, complexity, supported hardware).
My 2 cents, mate.
msportda said:
Define:
1) what "real numbers" are those?
2) what do you mean by "rf2" being close to real numbers? The physics engine (i.e., the physical/mathematical modelling) or the physics calibration used? If you mean the latter (physics calibrations), then by all means, anyone can try their luck with it, change it and see for yourself. Then, and only then, you can comment on both aspects.
Last edited:
Backmarker
Has anyone picked up and played the newest DLC?
http://www.virtualr.net/project-cars-racing-icons-car-pack-now
http://www.virtualr.net/project-cars-racing-icons-car-pack-now
msportdan
chronus
i think your post about real life simulation that cant replicate real world gs. helped me realise the dallara problem.
Obvisouly rf2 has troubles communicating all feedback across the range, into certain wheels. Especially when expensive wheels have massive torque and bigger ranges (right wording?) so lighter wheels may "communicate ffb" wrongly so to speak?
Hence the dallara lack of weight/caster problem?
i think your post about real life simulation that cant replicate real world gs. helped me realise the dallara problem.
Obvisouly rf2 has troubles communicating all feedback across the range, into certain wheels. Especially when expensive wheels have massive torque and bigger ranges (right wording?) so lighter wheels may "communicate ffb" wrongly so to speak?
Hence the dallara lack of weight/caster problem?
Associat0r
That's because you're using a toy steering wheel that doesn't cover the dynamic range of the real DW12 steering forces. ISI keeps things accurate instead of fudging values to "feel nice" as in other sims, but you can change it.
Show us telemetry evidence.
Maybe he has an improper sim hardware setup, or improper FOV, or just not used to sims without full body feedback.
Last edited:
msportdan
a) whats the point of accuracy when probably 90% of us use these toy wheels?
b) real life experience in a similar car isnt the same, real life has more grip and not to mention im more confident irl than in rf2?!
c) i would say my t300 is not the best hardware i can get i agree.
b) real life experience in a similar car isnt the same, real life has more grip and not to mention im more confident irl than in rf2?!
c) i would say my t300 is not the best hardware i can get i agree.
ErnieDaOage
forcefeedback has nothing to do with a proper physics simulation. forcefeedback is just a feature to translate some effects from the game itself onto your controllers. you can still race every sim with a pad or even the keyboard that will not effect the physics of the sim at all and all cars would behave the same way on the same inputs.
i like the selection of cars and tracks in pcars but only the h-shifter thingies. i don't like racing semiautomatic gearbox cars at all, just don't get any fun out of it. I like that pcars has a drivetrain model which is still missing in rf2 and it looks just stunning. you get great immersed by the game itself but in some cases i miss points from rf2, like curbs and bumps are much more dangerous in rf2 to spin out and also pcars is much more forgiveable when you lift the throttle completly going round a corner.
Last edited:
Chronus
msportdan,
why should we settle for less when a part of the system is not good enough? What can possibly hurt to have a good, reliable, accurate physics engine fed with good, reliable data?
At the very least, with a good physics engine and good data you can say CLEARLY and without the shadow of a doubt, that your "sim" of choice is actually not that different from a multi-million dollar one - you just don't have the right equipment, that's all.
Can you at least understand that by thinking in those terms ("whats the point of accuracy when probably 90% of us use these toy wheels") we simracers are actually making it easy for a group of hacks (devs or modders) to come up, cheat all the way through development, and excuse themselves and their lousy work with a "who cares, this is not F1 level anyway"?
Which is why we should continue to support companies such as ISI whenever possible.
Real life has more grip?... A good sim (AC, rF2, rF1, etc) can be made to have as much grip as real life. It depends on how we engineer the data we feed the game engines. That's all.
I heard a story about a known simracer...he changed the rotors and pots inside his desk-mounted wheel, cranked up the FFB, broke the desk, ruined the 23' monitor (it fell backwards) and ended up ruining the wheel as well.
Our "toys" leave much to be desired, true, but that's all we have. Otherwise, be prepared to put aside upwards of 30 000 dollars for a reasonable sized motion platform/system (and even that...hmm...).
hexagramme
Most of us sometimes 'overdrive' like crazy in the sims because we don't have to worry about injury or death. As an inexperienced guy you would never ever push that hard during a track day for example. This is also why it's not completely relevant to make some of those real life grip versus sim grip comparisons imo.
Drive a car in rF2 like you would in real life, safely and responsively, and it will never ever feel like ice.
Drive a car in rF2 like you would in real life, safely and responsively, and it will never ever feel like ice.
Spinelli
YES!!!!!
Been saying this for so many years! Most people not only can have their physics judgement affected by FFB, but even worse, some people literally just-about base their entire physics perceptions on FFB. As you say, it's about vehicle bahviour modelling, and how all the dynamics of that vehicle behvaiour change/act/react based on the user's (driver's) inputs combined with what the virtual car is going through in the virtual "world", NOT on how much you happen to like or dislike the FFB, NOT on how good of a job the developers did with the programing of translating and outputting data through a FFB pipeline back to the user's device.
How many times have you heard someone complain about physics (or even about a particular car's handling) only to completely change their minds and praise the physics once they discover better FFB settings? Countless times.
I've even heard the opposite. People saying a game's physics are "sim-cade", or just bad, or whatever, then once they have have FFB settings finally to their liking, well, all of a sudden that game is actually a very good sim to them. I'm sorry, but just because the developers have done a good job of outputting a car's grip, slip, etc. etc. through the FFB "pipeline", doesn't mean a game is necessarily a sim. it literally is just that - a good job of translating the car's state through the FFB. Nothing less, nothing more.
Bad, or non-personally preferred FFB feelings can make great physics seem bad to some, and good or personally preffered FFB feelings can make bad physics seem great to some. It can deceive people's physics perception/judgement for better or for worse.
EDIT: To expand on this just a bit further, I find it dubious when people dislike a game's physics but then, just because they use a better wheel (e.g. OpenSimwheel), all of a sudden that particular sim has amazing physics. Personally, my perceptions about RF1, RF2, NKP, AC, GTL, LFS, R07. etc. physics have not changed the slightest bit when going from a Momo Racing ("Black"), to a G25, Momo Force ("Red"), CSR, T500RS, TX, and CSW V2. Nothing. Did my laptimes and consistency change? Sometimes, sometimes not. Did the smile on my face change? Definitely. Did the feelings in my hand change? Of course. Did the game's physics change? Of course not. The car and overall physics never, EVER seemed to behave any differently just because of a different wheel. The way it slipped was the same, the way it gripped was the same, going through corners was the same. The specific behavior traits I liked/disliked about a particular car-setup, car, or overall sim didn't change.
Last edited:
msportdan
when i did my expereince one of the mechanics turned around to my brother and said, wow hes not shy is he - as i lit the tyres up when i pulled away, also out broke myself into a sharp corner and went straight on Thank god there was nothing to hit lol
But I didnt fear for my life at all, i didnt want to break the car either vo lol. Not saying i was doing pro speeds but was going faster than most of the civilians there!! I can safely say that was due to playing years and years of racing games/sims i suppose.
But its the low speed grip that surprised me the most. (dont want to hash over this) in the real thing, i was expecting to spin around every slow corner, just had this confidence th tyres were doing their job. Something i dont feel in the f2.. Even in many laps in rf2 with the tyres at high temps i feel unstable at slow speeds and not confident inspiring , not to mention the wheel weight is all out of whack on the f2.
But ay i know im going in circles, and i dont think you guys are understanding me, hey maybe im wrong... i dunno. Maybe it is the ffb thats not right on my toy wheel. As spin says it can mask great physics and vice versa.!
Last edited:
Spinelli
Agree msportdan...
Rear-end
- That low speed Fernando-Alonso-Style Warmup driving is still not there. Not only in turns of attacking with the front end and cranking some mad lock with the tyres biting and slipping but without sliiiiddddddiiinnng, but also in terms of the rear. Check-out the angle of the rear-end and how you can throw it around aggressively on it's slip angles in real-life (not only a low speeds, but any speed, just watch the Canadian grand prix qualitying session, or about 100 million other open-wheel vids) compared to in game where the cars sometimes get all weirded out and darty or overly-responsive as if they're on cocaine, lol, more-so the more "hardcore" the car is (e.g. F1 car).
- Same goes with the steering lock in relation to rear slides. If you look at how much lock the driver uses in relation to the angle of the rear-end slide, you'll notice it's much more than in-game. They have so much more freedom to play with the limits whereas we need to give the car/steering a much quicker and smaller amount of "snap-correction" with sometimes weirdly odd and little amounts of steering lock needed to correct the slide.
- Also, the way the second part of the correction happens. When you finally save the car but then get to the point where you return the car's steering back to centre along with the car's. Lots of times you have to return the steering back to centre extremely quickly and darty, it's slightly digital, while in real-life you save the slide with the initial correction, then you sort of hold it there for a split second while the slide's swinging motion slows down to an eventual stop, and then you return the steering back to centre as the car returns back to straight and gripped. 1, 2, 3, done.
- The correction of slides can't be held and modulated under power anywhere close to real life. I've seen massive slides in, for eg. 90s F1 cars but in-game you just get this ultra darty, on-off behavior. Either grip, or slide & quick correction with hardly anything in-between. Try driving the SCE 95 Ferrari F1 as an example. Fun, complex, deep, but falls apart once you really push (not an issue with Rieza or Niels as it happens in any and every single car I've driven in 15 years of sims).
- You also hardly get the feeling of the rear weight swinging around, instead, you get a sensation of the front of the car turning sharply. Sometimes it literally looks like the car magically turned really sharply with steering input rather than the rear loosing grip and trying to swing around. The car literally turns sharply laterally across the track. Heck, you can even easily get this behavior in the super slow SCE rental karts.
- Due to that behavior, sometimes you hardly have to apply much lock to correct the slide, you just let the car turn on it's front really sharply against the track, then when the rear re-grips on it's own you continue on "albeit on the other side of the road since the car turns and cuts across the track.
- Lots of times the cars re-grip in a weird and sudden way and you often therefore need to add less initial correction steering lock then you should have to because the car all of a sudden out of nowhere re-grips too early upon the steering correction phase.
- Sometimes, once you correct the slide, the car doesn't naturally re-straighten out, but rather, becomes weird and overly sensitive to snap the other way in a death-overcorrection type of snap. This can happen in real-life but the way it happens in game is unnatural and digital.
- Other times, upon correction, the car doesn't want to re-grip back in line, instead, it keeps over correcting as if it was over correcting due to driver error, but it's instead just sort of flopping back and forth in a "lazy" way rather than the tyres re-biting and getting the left-to-right sliding over with. I even just experienced this a few times the other night with SCE's new and awesomely fun Superkarts. Catching and correcting a slide turns into this repeating left-right-left-right wobble-wobble game as if the car is made out of jello.
This leads me to the front-end...
You can tell by how front tyres bite, loose grip, bite, etc. that there are many instances where a front slide takes way too long to re-grip. The sliding phase goes on too long. The tyres don't want to "bite", they are "happy" to keep sliding for too long until they finally say "ok I think it's time to regrip". It really annoyed me with the SCE Mini exiting the final corner (long right-hander) of the Suzuka short track. Even when you let off the gas or make other sorts of corrections, it just takes an eternity (relatively speaking) for the rubber to start gripping again. It stays in the sliiiddeeee phase for too long and you see yourself going wider and wider closer to going off the track even though you should have gotten the understeer slip under control "an eternity" ago.
Also, the front tyres don't want to provide the grip and bite if you go too fast through a corner with a super grippy car. Lots of times you steer for the tyres to bite but you get a lazy sliiippp instead, and it's the same with the re-grip phase. This is improving in the RF2 engine (as is everthing), you can really experience it with SCE karts at times if you drive them less than perfectly. This missing midcorner front-end rubber "bite" leads to some of the fastest drivers using weird, ultra-darty car setups and driving styles in order to get around this issue but that just makes the car turn almost on it's own without having to use hardly any steering lock or tyre "bite" (sadly, I see some of the fastest people online using this extremely weird and unrealistic style of driving). Furthermore, this rear-darty style then leads back to my rear-end post above.
NOTES:
These behaviors are all more noticeable (whether by a little or a lot) in older engines (eg. SCE) than in RF2. So in ISI's defense, everything has improved and continues to improve (whether by a little or a lot) as they continue evolving their RF2.
Some of these situations and behaviors are much worse in other sims, so, please don't get the wrong impression. The ISI engine in Stock Car Extreme and especially rFactor 2 is still fantastic! It puts me in simracing heaving way more than any other sim/game out there, PERIOD. The dynamics of the vehicles - for the most part - are unparallelled in the simracing industry. And it's no different in-terms of the feel, the FFB itself. The best in the industry
Rear-end
- That low speed Fernando-Alonso-Style Warmup driving is still not there. Not only in turns of attacking with the front end and cranking some mad lock with the tyres biting and slipping but without sliiiiddddddiiinnng, but also in terms of the rear. Check-out the angle of the rear-end and how you can throw it around aggressively on it's slip angles in real-life (not only a low speeds, but any speed, just watch the Canadian grand prix qualitying session, or about 100 million other open-wheel vids) compared to in game where the cars sometimes get all weirded out and darty or overly-responsive as if they're on cocaine, lol, more-so the more "hardcore" the car is (e.g. F1 car).
- Same goes with the steering lock in relation to rear slides. If you look at how much lock the driver uses in relation to the angle of the rear-end slide, you'll notice it's much more than in-game. They have so much more freedom to play with the limits whereas we need to give the car/steering a much quicker and smaller amount of "snap-correction" with sometimes weirdly odd and little amounts of steering lock needed to correct the slide.
- Also, the way the second part of the correction happens. When you finally save the car but then get to the point where you return the car's steering back to centre along with the car's. Lots of times you have to return the steering back to centre extremely quickly and darty, it's slightly digital, while in real-life you save the slide with the initial correction, then you sort of hold it there for a split second while the slide's swinging motion slows down to an eventual stop, and then you return the steering back to centre as the car returns back to straight and gripped. 1, 2, 3, done.
- The correction of slides can't be held and modulated under power anywhere close to real life. I've seen massive slides in, for eg. 90s F1 cars but in-game you just get this ultra darty, on-off behavior. Either grip, or slide & quick correction with hardly anything in-between. Try driving the SCE 95 Ferrari F1 as an example. Fun, complex, deep, but falls apart once you really push (not an issue with Rieza or Niels as it happens in any and every single car I've driven in 15 years of sims).
- You also hardly get the feeling of the rear weight swinging around, instead, you get a sensation of the front of the car turning sharply. Sometimes it literally looks like the car magically turned really sharply with steering input rather than the rear loosing grip and trying to swing around. The car literally turns sharply laterally across the track. Heck, you can even easily get this behavior in the super slow SCE rental karts.
- Due to that behavior, sometimes you hardly have to apply much lock to correct the slide, you just let the car turn on it's front really sharply against the track, then when the rear re-grips on it's own you continue on "albeit on the other side of the road since the car turns and cuts across the track.
- Lots of times the cars re-grip in a weird and sudden way and you often therefore need to add less initial correction steering lock then you should have to because the car all of a sudden out of nowhere re-grips too early upon the steering correction phase.
- Sometimes, once you correct the slide, the car doesn't naturally re-straighten out, but rather, becomes weird and overly sensitive to snap the other way in a death-overcorrection type of snap. This can happen in real-life but the way it happens in game is unnatural and digital.
- Other times, upon correction, the car doesn't want to re-grip back in line, instead, it keeps over correcting as if it was over correcting due to driver error, but it's instead just sort of flopping back and forth in a "lazy" way rather than the tyres re-biting and getting the left-to-right sliding over with. I even just experienced this a few times the other night with SCE's new and awesomely fun Superkarts. Catching and correcting a slide turns into this repeating left-right-left-right wobble-wobble game as if the car is made out of jello.
This leads me to the front-end...
You can tell by how front tyres bite, loose grip, bite, etc. that there are many instances where a front slide takes way too long to re-grip. The sliding phase goes on too long. The tyres don't want to "bite", they are "happy" to keep sliding for too long until they finally say "ok I think it's time to regrip". It really annoyed me with the SCE Mini exiting the final corner (long right-hander) of the Suzuka short track. Even when you let off the gas or make other sorts of corrections, it just takes an eternity (relatively speaking) for the rubber to start gripping again. It stays in the sliiiddeeee phase for too long and you see yourself going wider and wider closer to going off the track even though you should have gotten the understeer slip under control "an eternity" ago.
Also, the front tyres don't want to provide the grip and bite if you go too fast through a corner with a super grippy car. Lots of times you steer for the tyres to bite but you get a lazy sliiippp instead, and it's the same with the re-grip phase. This is improving in the RF2 engine (as is everthing), you can really experience it with SCE karts at times if you drive them less than perfectly. This missing midcorner front-end rubber "bite" leads to some of the fastest drivers using weird, ultra-darty car setups and driving styles in order to get around this issue but that just makes the car turn almost on it's own without having to use hardly any steering lock or tyre "bite" (sadly, I see some of the fastest people online using this extremely weird and unrealistic style of driving). Furthermore, this rear-darty style then leads back to my rear-end post above.
NOTES:
These behaviors are all more noticeable (whether by a little or a lot) in older engines (eg. SCE) than in RF2. So in ISI's defense, everything has improved and continues to improve (whether by a little or a lot) as they continue evolving their RF2.
Some of these situations and behaviors are much worse in other sims, so, please don't get the wrong impression. The ISI engine in Stock Car Extreme and especially rFactor 2 is still fantastic! It puts me in simracing heaving way more than any other sim/game out there, PERIOD. The dynamics of the vehicles - for the most part - are unparallelled in the simracing industry. And it's no different in-terms of the feel, the FFB itself. The best in the industry
Last edited:
F2Chump
auto clutch simulator.
msportdan
spin you mean this but when they do it really fast..
what happens on cold tyres and drs open lol
[video]https://vid.me/GzdT[/video]
what happens on cold tyres and drs open lol
[video]https://vid.me/GzdT[/video]
msportdan
im no pcars fanboy.. but I just want to leave this here and see what the ISI boys think of this...
http://forum.projectcarsgame.com/sh...ND-PHYSICS-!!!&p=976675&viewfull=1#post976675
http://forum.projectcarsgame.com/sh...ND-PHYSICS-!!!&p=976675&viewfull=1#post976675
C3PO
Tim Wheatley
100% of you have the options to set the sim and strengths how you'd like.
No it doesn't. I think you answered your own question though.
Ok.
Spinelli
Well that msportdan, but also other things. Consider the following video:
Also - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8AblngEFus 16:23-16:58 (Alonso), 1:14:32-1:14:36 (Raikonnen) - 2015 Canada
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVmzgITat5k 0:18-0:21 (Schumi 97 Spa)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZlS-AB4-ik 1:10-1:13 (Schumi 99 Suzuka)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2Kmz1wmedg 51:50 - 51:53 (Schumi 2000 Canada)
- In-game, that slide with that amount of steering lock would have likely resulted in an insane, snap over-correction that would have shot the car off towards the right-side barrier like a missile.
or
- In-game you may have been able to correct the slide but with some unnatural, snap-correct correction in combination with an unnatural amount of little steering lock required compared to real-life. Sort of as if you're steering inputs and overall amount of lock required to correct the slide are based on a very small range and on a digital knife-edge. Just compare the amount of steering lock needed relative to the angle of slide in the video.
- In-real life it's 1. Correct slide, 2. hold it there for a split second or so, 3. return back to centre and the car continues it's way on forward, then for the most part you're done (there was some more small drama after those 3 steps in the above video but that video showcases a very extreme example). In-game many times you have this weird left-right-left wobblying of the car as if it just doesn't want to fully re-grip and get the slid over and done with. It's like after you correct and have the car back in line it's sometimes still inclined to do some weird and - dare I say - sloppy back and forth sliding when, instead, the slide should all be a thing of the past by then. I experienced this a few times with the new Superkarts in SCE - very, very frustrating and annoying. It's very easy to experience in the FR3.5 in RF2 as well.
And finally, the issue that is the most frustrating and is hopefully in the process of getting rectified:
- You see how during the slide, in the video above, the car continues along the original direction of travel that it had before the slide began, while at the same time the rear-end wants to swing around? That hardly ever happens in-game. In-game, the car's direction of travel would change and follow wherever the front of the car is pointing to. You don't even have to drive/play the game to notice; you can easily just watch someone (or a replay) and see it from the cockpit view as well as external view. In-game it's sort-of as if the driver suddenly decided to turn sharply rather than the rear rotating while continuing - for the most part - in the original direction of travel from before the slide occurred. Basically, if the above video happened in-game, the car would ended-up at, or tried to travel towards either the middle of the track, all the way out to the left-hand side of the track, or worse-yet, completely off-track on the left side, but look in the video, the Ferrari is literally almost, if not fully, still traveling along the same original path of travel as he was before the slide occurred. This really, really, really needs to be rectified.
BTW, yes, there are times when the car can change it's direction of travel towards the front-end's. E.g. If you take too long to correct then the car can start doing that later on in the slide as the car may naturally re-grip on it's own and obviously then start traveling where the front is pointing. Or in very slow speed situations where there is hardly any forward momentum to begin with but those are very particular situations that should hardly be met in racing situations. For the vast majority of the time, the car should continue on by-and-large the original direction of travel.
Again, I want to stress that all this seems to be improving - whether by little or a lot - thanks to rFactor 2, not to mention ISI's continual work on updating the core engine of rFactor 2. You can definitely sense the improvements in these odd/trouble areas in RF2 when you come across them in pre-RF2 engines (e.g SCE, RF1).
Last edited:
F2Chump
People also need to factor in that our brains are trying to compute a high speed digital object within a condensed screen, so if the physics are "perfect", there's always going to be a extra degree of difficulty to accommodate the scale, so a race driver shouldn't be fast immediately, but if he keeps applying his race skills, then as soon as he adapts and gets his eye in, he should be able to keep going faster and faster without coaching.....but he must understand the initial learning/adapting curve is there...
buddhatree
You mean you just wanted to stir the pot lol.
"I'm not _______, but...."
"I'll just leave this here..."
Nice try
WhiteShadow
Relax Tim Ian has also some worries with members : http://forum.projectcarsgame.com/sh...ND-PHYSICS-!!!&p=976955&viewfull=1#post976955
F2Chump
msportdan is our iznogood from WMD forums?
Tim Wheatley
I have never seen any slide in real life replicated exactly by another car, or any save of a slide replicated by another driver. Attempting to quantify exactly what outcome there would be for any given situation, real life or sim, seems a little crazy to me. Never, ever, would two drivers have exactly the same input on throttle and steering, just no way, same with grip levels, downforce, springs, tire pressures, EVERYTHING that alters how that situation would feel. Then, of course, attempting to say exactly how it would lead to snap oversteer, overcorrection, etc? Frankly you're writing fiction and trying to make it sound like it can be the only outcome of any given situation.
You obviously have slower hands than I do when correcting slides. I'm quick to react, and I am quick to undo it and avoid overcorrection. I'm sorry that you aren't, but rest assured I was never good enough to be a real F1 driver either, because that's what this boils down to. Are you Alonso? No. No, you're not. Neither am I, and I don't have the issues you describe in control.
And this is not just for you, Spinelli... There is a disease on forums.
Frankly the whole comparison stuff between you and -insert world champion f1 driver here- is lunacy. John Watson once said part of the reason he wanted to quit F1 was after seeing Senna doing things with a car that he couldn't. I saw posted videos of people warming tires like Alonso has with rF2 back in 2012, dredging this one back from hell is pretty much exactly what is wrong with supplying a forum for customers. They'll argue about anything, and when they're bored, they'll argue about it again.
Run the sims you like, don't run the sims you don't. Answer a thread asking you if you have pCars with yes, no, yes - I like it, no - I don't want it, because x, because y, etc. Almost anything you can say isn't possible, someone else can do. Almost anything someone can find a video as 'evidence' of one position, someone else can find one against it.
Try racing your favorite racing sims, you might enjoy them. Don't want to? Here's a thread from 2012 with EXACTLY the same arguments, some of the same videos used as evidence, etc etc. Feel free to search for the terms "alonso tires" for more fun.
Sorry for closing, I made the mistake of assuming people wanted to move forwards.
Learned now, thanks.Noel Hibbard
This has already been discussed a thousand times. You have a toy wheel incapable of replicating the dynamic range of the real car. It's the very fact that ISI went the 1:1 route rather than fudging numbers that causes the light feel. You seem to ignore this explanation over and over again though.