Heavens to betsy ! http://pretendracecars.net/2015/09/...-in-the-exact-same-way-does-anyone-even-care/ lool Read comment starts with "crappy" cars and ends with Bathurst and rF2. lmao and what does he do.........uses the 1 car in rF2 people have said is broken at Bathurst. lol
Why would you even read that garbage? I thought virtualr was bad but sheesh, that site takes the cake.
Why ? I enjoy a good laugh. lol On another site there are respected modders that do great work in other sims, I try to gently prod ( lool ) them to try it online for 6 days. In cars and tracks they like with some good open room people and find out some of the features and things never mentioned in any review I ever see... ? Then they post things like that article in response. lol I mean I understand I do ! How do they know it is selective truth when all they have done is drove a demo, most likely a early one. ? But you try explaining that. lol
Meh, it's garbage and I don't want to give them the traffic. The sad thing is that site sums up the average sim racer pretty well nowadays. Kind of embarrassing I enjoy doing something those negative twits do as well.
This is what reviewers do not understand or conveyed. I mean I can relate to that 100% ............where as AC and pCars did the exact opposite for me. ie: Swept me away with visuals that I never bothered much about physics before it was too late.
Why are you rambling on about rF2 and yet another crusade against someone else somewhere else? That page's tagline pretty much says it all. I've read some articles and sometimes there is something enjoyable to read that can shine a light on something I didn't know, to the stuff I find badly laughable I ignore. One of the guys there joined a CART 98 server in SCE and managed to lap Kyalami at a whopping 1:04, 5.5s me in p2 and almost 6s behind p1. Only maybe 2 or 3 people out of nearly 30 were slower. On that AI issue, if there is a known issue then why isn't it addressed? If a disclaimer is needed then there should be one. "We strongly recommend AI aggression to be left at 25%" or a pop-up box ingame warning "this car is from an earlier build and may present irregular gameplay experience."
I've been thinking about this for a while now and I'm finding it hard to explain my feelings here ill try anyway..... Take away the gfx visuals ffb etc, how similar are all these sims in handling etc. I mean they are all working with the same processing power of home pcs how much different or real can they actually be. One thing with me is that i do jump from sim to sim and sometimes my posts on various forums reflect that, i could love one sim at any given moment. They are all improving so much every month. What I'm try on to get at is, strip away all the fluff around the physics, how much different are all these sims really. Is it put placebo/fanboyism/nievity or genuine advantage to some sim devs and their engine?
Processing power of home PC is every year less and less of a limiting factor. We had a sim like rF1 released 10 years ago that people still enjoy playing today. Heck, even the latest console "sim" pCars isn't really a big advance of physics compared to rF1. Now imagine someone in 2005 playing a 1995 sim. That would not happen. Today it's different, CPU power is no longer the main limiting factor. The main factor is how much developers want to put effort on the physics model. In console-driven market physics will never be the main selling point, so it will always be secondary to most developers. The physics approach of iRacing and rF2 (using physical tire model) is so different from AC & pCars to begin with, it's not even worth going to detail explaining.
Well, i think hardcore sim racers could not play anymore without realroad, changeble weather and new tire model. I think at some point with the new vr devices, people will not accept to go back with monitors. I think still has much more to improve.
Forza 3 and NSF Shift (consoles) have physical tire models. AFAIK, rF2 is some variant of a brush model. Like Forza and Shift, these, I think, are known in the trade as a "semi=physical" models. LFS has one too. Iracing's (if we believe them) is very different. It's purely physical. Based on modelling physical behaviour from a very low level molecular properties of rubber! And it's exhibited some horrible characteristics over the years that you wouldn't expect to put up with in a good Pacejka implementation. You obviously haven't met "Chronus", because he'd be 'informing' you in his uniquely condescending way that pro race teams use non-physical tire models. They don't need to model hundreds of different cars, and have tons of data for what they do drive that they plug into formulas and get accurate results. But that requires lots of good data and is somewhat arduous which is one reason sim developers like the physical approach. But purely physical tire models are probably a black hole, because the physical system is so complicated no-one can understand it properly. The best ones don't run in real time, and they're still wrong. Iracing's is now on ver 6 and there have been massive differences in handling between some of those. The present one has removed most of the whacky behaviour but IMO at the expense of getting more like an arcade game. Feels very different to rF2 and in some ways (lack of slidey/spinny behaviour) is more like pCars. Some people here seem to think cars wanting the rear to snap about is real, but it isn't and the ease of snapping it back (if you know what you're doing) isn't either. There should be more resistance to rotation (inertia) but....when it does go, it should be hard work getting it back. That would be more realistic. In rF2 now, a slight nudge from an AI in a very low speed corner will have you snapping into rotation faster than on ice in real life. I'm assuming this apparent lack of rotational inertia is due to tires.
I couldn't disagree more... Assetto Corsa, Live For Speed, rFactor 1/2 (SCE, etc.), Netkar Pro, World Series Racing, iRacing, etc. all drive completely different from one-another. I can tell within 1 corner which physics engine im driving - ISI, LFS, AC, IR, NKP, WSR. They're all unique with their own driving behaviour characteristics as-well as driving behaviour positives and negatives. On a another note, raw processing power doesn't really have anything to do with it. All engines are, well, completely different engines from eachother (regardless of processing power). That's why IR still generally drives like iRacing (from NTM1 in 2008 to prsent day NTM6), NKP still generally drives like NKP (from first release all the way to final), RF still generally drives like RF (from at-least F1 2002 to prsent day RF2), AC generally still drives like AC (from the tech demo to present day), and so on and so on.
Guys I have a couple of questions... I tried Project CARS again today for the first time in a couple of weeks since I last went through every possible menu, setting and FFB file to get the game near to acceptable. I've gone through a very thorough guide and also tried all those files that someone released - can't think of his name. Anyway the physics, handling, and FFB are still not acceptable to me. So the questions I have: 1. Although the FFB settings have helped, I still notice when going down a straight the wheel on screen moving tiny amounts as if travelling over tiny bumps, but I feel nothing through my wheel. In rF2 and AC I don't have this problem, if the wheel moves on screen, it moves in my hand. So does anyone else have this issue? I also get little to no feedback during cornering, it's as if as soon as I turn in, the FFB changes. I can't feel weight transfer, bumps, or anything resembling grip, or progressive loss of grip. I can feel both these things in rF2 and AC. This kind of leads me onto the next question. 2. Does anyone else find it difficult to drive Project CARS fast, and on or close to the limit? I find the overall lack of feeling, especially mid corner makes it impossible for me to drive the car quickly as I don't know when I'm approaching, at, or beyond the limit. This is something rF2 excels at, and AC is reasonable at. I'm just wondering if it's a hardware issue my end, or a problem others experience?
when you hear real race car drivers say a certain car is "very stable" they are speaking in relative terms. Now lots of people believe race cars are easy to drive and that's fine, they're allowed to believe that but there are plenty of examples that prove otherwise. This is a clip from 4 years ago where a NASCAR driver does a Indy car test. His best lap is 7 seconds off pace and he spins the car in a slow hairpin. Jamie McMurray again, is a NASCAR Cup race car driver still to this day. Anyway, blanket statements referring to anything generally doesn't make for a good argument. At the end of the day a certain piece of software is your cup of tea or it isn't.
From my experience you either like the FFB experience or you don't. There are certain games that I have the exact same experience you get with pCars. I just have zero feeling of the car and only feel bumps but don't feel the tires at all. Hardware will definately make a difference though and it doesn't have to be expensive vs cheap. A thrustmaster for example is very different than fanatec.
The virtual wheel moving - yes, I noticed that, since you mention it. Turn it off - how many wheels do you need? Seriously, I don't know. I just keep FFB default. Personally, I treat FFB almost totally as an immersion feature. My G27 certainly isn't fast enough. I think of the number of times I've caught big slides and straightened out the car almost perfectly as it's snapped back, i.e. with pretty much zero wiggle/oscillation at the end but *against* the FFB. I remember a big one when I was fighting for an overall championship in iracing so that left an impression on me, I'd have been toast if I'd waited. As for speed, depends what you mean, it seems whenever I've done a few laps in pCars, without even trying I'm faster than the top of the leader board sometimes by seconds. Either no-one fast bothers with it or i'm choosing odd combinations. Maybe both. Basically, I'm arguing FFB isn't essential. It is particularly uninformative in pCars. rF2's is the most informative, but I can't drive over curbs without it shaking my G27 to pieces (what are they thinking?) - seems a shame to have to dampen all the feel out. I really don't keep up/bother with tweaking - hint (any advice? ) Although, I owe Durge a thankyou for his NvidiaInspector recommendation and setting's which improved my jaggies a tad. AC's varies from great to terrible even though I'm a bit of an AC fanboy (to declare an interest).
Yeah it is a bummmer how G27 behaves in RF2 Historics for some, and then they go and bring out that poxy G29 is even worse. I agree I always said try each sim with no FFB (4 years ago, people laughed at me that it was a stupid compare ......oh well ) You do this in all other sims they feel "plastic", it is hard to describe, even with keyboard and no FF you can still feel the tyres and chassis in rF2 F3 ......... ......it is pretty insane. lol
Not snappy at all I do not agree with this generalization. Some cars can be very snappy while some can drive like a boats. There are cars that will want to snap/loose rear just by lifting off throttle. Of course I am not talking about ice like driving/feel (unstoppable sliding) which is not the same thing as snappy but controllable.
I could post a vid of a guy sitting up in A&E literally with half his brain missing to prove brain injuries aren't serious. These random clips prove nothing because there are so many variables. For years people posted clips of cars spinning on grass to prove iRacing's grass wasn't too slippery. It's now completely changed btw. Racing slicks- so was he up to temp? That would be like ice wouldn't it? But there was a distinct lack of fast snap rotation there - which is what people complain about in sims. In fact, most people who drive any formula car for the first time let alone an F1 (assuming they're up to temp) are absolutely astonished by how much grip there is. What should be difficult is holding it on the limit. I'm actually saying the sim cars can actually be rotated back straight too easily too! It's not about "difficulty". It's about lack of rotational inertia..resistance to change of angular velocity (acceleration). Btw, adding brake and throttle together has a disproportional effect in controlling this relative to real life. I've been told this by 2 champion race drivers - which is why most don't bother doing it but almost everyone does it in sims. Flogging dead horse....
Indeed and that's why I say you're allowed to believe what you want to. It's no skin off my nose and since you're the expert because you know "champion drivers" it should be like water off a ducks back with yourself as well. At the end of the day my evidence is anecdotal just like yours is. Mind you a professional driver being 7 seconds off pace in a car he isn't used to driving isn't so anecdotal but I digress.
