I recommend not to give up AC before trying LUT generator and FFBClip app. I was also dissapointed initially but these two apps transformed FFB into something great. As already mentioned AC FFB is different, accent is on suspension and weight. Regarding physics I wouldn't be so sure, there are many examples of real racing drivers praising AC lately.
Yeah, I am using those settings. I didn't change anything in the .json or .ini but I am using Logitech Profiler settings and in-game I have FFB Smoothing to 4 and FFB Minimun to 8%. I tried with FFB Smoothing 0 but its giving me clipping. Assetto Corsa just feels better FFB for me. rFactor 2 has better physics.
+1 I think this transformed AC for me, although I still find it a little bit lifeless in gameplay/physics/ffb it does make the game x10 better than out of the box & without it I would not have ploughed 350+ hours into it.
The real need for any ffb in any sim is that it feels the way a person perceives that car should feel to "them". Most of us have never, nor will ever drive any of the cars we drive and crash in sim. So the reality is its all in perception and some give the feedback by calculation or canned effects or a combination or even the placebo that a laser scanned track will give more accurate and therefore better ffb detail on a consumer pc. <-- not possible. My point here is...it doesn't matter, as long as the person using the sim is getting the experience they think they should while using it.
RF2 is the one and only simulation whose FFB is totally connected to physics. Without false effects or amplified effects. So, if RF2 has the best physics, it also has the best FFB. In fact, this is 100% verified, the RF2 FFB is fantastic. The FFB is therefore RAW, directly from physics, which are far ahead compared to other simulations. With the fact that the car content is excellent and that other things like the realroad are very realistic, the physics/FFB are the only reasons I stay on RF2. The other "simulations" do better in almost all areas. And the deplorable quality of the graphics engine makes me "pull my hair" (I do not speak of course graphic quality, but incredibly disastrous performance. You know what I mean.). FYI, for my T500rs which is almost 2 times more torquey than the G27, the FFB multi is almost systematically 0.85 or less .... For your G27 never put more than 0.85 .... I'm not sure that I was right, but I put 12.5% of minimum torque to my old G27. The filter avoids the unbearable noise of the G27, but the FFB is not raw .... instead, put 1 or 2 and LOWERING the FFB multi : better solution. Adjustments in the logitech driver, NEVER take anything else : Overall effects strenghs = LEAVING THE STANDARD value (I do not know it anymore). Spring and damper effects = 0 (very important, these are fake effects, the formidable physics of RF2 will send these forces into the steering wheel). The centering of the wheel by the game. But read the first post of the thread.
Would be interesting to know the origin of these informations (the information that says that it's true, or the information that says that it's false)
I thought that the info about rF2 was from ISI or S397 and that the info about Assetto was from Kunos. I don't beleive what is written here about Assetto, the same that wouldn't beleive what is written in the Assetto forum about rF2. Note: Sorry a don't have access to the Assetto forum.
That is info on AC forum from main AC dev about AC not having canned effects. Being RF2 thread they (users, not devs) are speculating about RF2 ffb but that is irrelevant.
@Filip In which part of the sentence is he wrong according to you? RF2 is the one and only simulation whose FFB is totally connected to physics. Without false effects or amplified effects. 1) it is not the only one. Other simulation's FFB is also connected to physics without canned effects. 2) It is not totally connected to physics/introduces canned effects. It is not the same.
"RF2 is the one and only simulation whose FFB is totally connected to physics." I said that without know any proof. But I think RF2 FFB is totally connected to physics, without canned effects (I THINK). Nevertheless, I confirm that *FOR ME*, RF2 FFB is exceptionnal (and physics because I think it is directly related), and AC FFB Is very very bad (again-again-again, FOR ME). That is why I choose RF2 and not other sim, despite the innumerable flaws of rf2 (catastrophic performance etc.).
He is wrong about 1) rf2 being only sim with pure physics ffb. AC is also (with option to turn on effects). AMS has pure ffb option. iRacing claims no effects. It turns out all sims have ffb derived from physics
That is totally ok and if you said it that way in the first place I wouldn't react. You can prefer whichever you like
no disrespect to anyone, but any one else fed up of the willy waving of sim physics over others? They all are great and they all have flaws. I love rf2 but its far from perfect! I'm sure even marcel and the gang can admit that, otherwise Michael wouldn't admitted that theres been a mistake/error in rf2 tyremodel after all this time!! Theres always room for improvement. AC imo is just as good as rf2 in its own way.
Tried to love assetto many times. i failed every time i tried. i m a looser. or maybe rf2 physics connected only. gonna try to love assetto corsa 2. i dont care if i fail again. if i ever gonna play assetto in the near future isnt gonna be because of physics.
