So....who has PCars?

Hhmm rf2 Skippy probs the hardest sim car to drive ever, but difficulty doesn't mean realism.

I have a formula Renault track day Friday. I'll tell you how difficult rf2 is compared to real life.

Again rf and ac fanboys wow shame really.

 

Lol

 

Again, I guess you have finally found your ultimate sim, hope you enjoy it. No need for ac or rf2, right? XD
Hope it means we see less threads from you, lol jk

And please take into consideration how much the physical forces have an effect on your body and driving when you are doing your trackday. It's brought up over and over again, and yet it still seems to get washed over.

The Skippy isn't actually that hard imo, once you have your throttle control sorted for the funky weight bias, it's easy as.
If you've watched that going faster video, the Skippy is pretty damn close to what I could see in the video. So then take into account your lack of feeling in a sim...

I'd love to try Pcars, but until they release a demo or something, I'm not paying 90 bucks for it.

 

90 bucks?? lolaussie

 

You what bud? Calling me an aussie?!

XD

 

No need for anything but rF2 right ?

I have never ran one sim in over 20 years, why would I start now. ?

No New Zealand is a country all on it's own.

 

Skippy is nothing douche

 

whoops, kiwi!

 

hey , he's not one of us..


btw the skip is a training car , simple to drive once you have learnt how to drive from training. if you cant drive it at 100% back to school with you

 

Thank goodness....

 

Cmon guys I'm just having a stupid love affair with pcars u know I will come back to my true love when I've had enough of being hit by ai!!!

I know the Skippy is a good car and really rewarding. But gsc and rf will always be top for me ,just for know I'm.enjoying something else and there's nothing wrong with that right?

 

Yes, please do post all settings you can.

 

Most people under-drive the corner entry, as well as the braking. but then get some understeer mid-corner when they apply more steering lock and therefore think they're actually on the edge of the car's limits/performance. Don't fall into that ever-too-common trap. Also, If possible, try to find out what a top-end open wheel driver's record laptime is.

If you haven't been racing open-wheelers all your life, or at-least consistently for a year or so (and/or aren't very relatively quick) then what you'll almost certainly experience is just that - an "experience", rather than something where you can start analyzing and picking apart all the complex handling dynamics (and therefore compare to sims).

I worked at an F2000 track for a year, (and even instructed some fast up-and-coming hotshot karters) and tons of clients came for 1, 2, 3, or 4 day schools and would talk about how the car is understeering/oversteering, or how it's impossible to take certain corners flat ("the car just isn't capable of doing it" they'd say), or "the car is so grippy! It's on rails!" (under-driving). Needless to say, 90% of them didn't have a clue.

It took about 25 out of 30 of us workers there almost a full year just to be able to properly trailbrake the rear-end around during entry since most would overslow to where they feel some understeer (not understanding that they had to counter-intuitively ignore the understeer and carry even more speed into the corner than you think is possible, and only then will the rear be light enough to rotate on entry - assuming you press and release the brake pedal properly in combination with proper steering input). About 25 out of 30 people still could hardly do this properly and competitively after almost an entire year.


I'm not saying that you or anyone aren't/isn't a good enough driver to compare real-life to sims. What I am saying is that a relatively inexperienced (and/or only moderately fast) driver is going to be getting a completely different experience with some track days here and there than a sim-driver and the way we push cars in sims.

 

It's not about fanboys. I'm willing to bet most players/drivers are unbiased and just want the best with no loyalty to any company/developer. But I'm telling you "straight-up", PCars is not a sim in the sense that RF2, GSCE, and IR strive to be. The dynamics are fun, yes, they're not arcade, not at all, but they're simplistic compared RF2, GSCE, and IR, let-alone real life.

It's probably easier for some to notice this in the rain. The car dynamics in the rain are more obvious proof of this "videogame trying to be fairly realistic" type of dynamics rather than "hardcore to real-life as possible".

I've driven F2000s in the rain at Mosport , and F1600s in the rain at Infineon Raceway (Sears Point), and trust me, the driving dynamics in PCars are extremely simplistic. Trust me.

This type of "videogame-ish" vehicle behavior in PCars can also be easy and clearly seen with the karts It's more like a light-weight car than a proper kart. You steer the kart into and throughout the corners like a car not an actual kart. And GSCE does not have as advanced an overall physics engine as RF2, yet GSCE displays better kart dynamics than PCars, so it's not all down to RF2's relatively advanced physics engine, but rather just the ISI physics engine in general.

The overall vehicle dynamics (compared to RF2, GSCE, IR, let alone real-life) are simplified and not a "true", "proper" sim. Again though, I still really enjoy the game, it's EASILY realistic enough for me to enjoy but it's not on that "hardcore/pro-sim" level, and that is TOTALLY fine with me

 

i know im not going to change yr mind, nor do i really want to, but i will point out that your logic is "poor rain physics = not a sim" is a bit presumptuous...and a little ironic based on what ive seen ppl on here say about driving in the wet in rf2, even if rf2 goes the other way with it. as for the karts, its not a kart simulator, & tbh i dont care too much if they did a poor job on those, & i doubt they did either. my only point being, i personally dont find either of those valid reasons to label it "non-sim", even if they are totally valid points.

 

I didn't say it's wrong because of the rain, I said it may be more obvious for some people to notice in the rain. Meaning that the people who aren't/can't noticing/notice the simplified driving dynamics in the dry may be able to notice it in the wet.

The rain - or dry for that matter - isn't perfect in any sim obviously, but there's a difference between imperfection and "videogame-ish" & simplistic.

And it's not about being a kart simulator, neither is RF2 and especially pre-RF2 ISI engines (RF1, GSCE, etc.), yet they perform miles better than PCars. It's about overall vehicle dynamics and kinematics, and that is all a result of the overall core physics engine (including tyre model), not some special per-car basis.


P.S. I also said it's realistic enough for me to enjoy the game, and that I do, honestly . So please don't hate on me just because I'm trying to give my fully unbiased point of view. I'm no fanboy, I have people hating me on both the RF2 forums and AC forums because of my physics-issues posts/complaints/analyzations, lol

 

Vacuous rubbish.

That was not the point of my comment.

Verbal anesthesia.

As we know, the money is in the console consumer crowd segment. The gentleman's statement with regard to the changes in physics since the beginning, arguably relates to a compromise to the physics for the sake of console players.

Random spewage.

If you say so.


Have a nice internet forum filled day.

 

Noticed many mentions of SCE suggesting it having one of the good physics and FFB. Setting it up is relatively simple too so I'm wondering why PC didn't simplify setup similarly?


-via iPad

 

Best to not be talking about me in the last line but if you are, who cares anyway.

 

Some of you may know that whilst i consider rf2 a sim, I'm critical of many of the cars, that said, the skippy isn't one of them, it's easily one of the best sim cars and won't tolerate amateur drivers.