Formula Vee

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Adrianstealth, Jun 14, 2021.

  1. turtleCZ

    turtleCZ Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2021
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    59
    True with AMS1. But rF2 feels so different to any other sim that it probably has something right :D I like AMS1 but why bother if I can play rF2.

    Today I did 60 laps on Lime rock (Skip style :D) and it was great. I don't think I will try any other game soon.
     
    MiguelVallejo and atomed like this.
  2. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    10,606
    Likes Received:
    5,417
    Sure, you can have bad tyres with either approach. But are you really sure you're not sure? Because you keep "asking" whether it's too difficult in rF2, and talked about the physics not being updated for a long time (but, as above, good physics are simply good physics, so that itself doesn't mean something is wrong...)
     
  3. avenger82

    avenger82 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    771
    Likes Received:
    310
    Yes I’m not sure, but I suspect it’s a bit too difficult in rF2. I’m pretty sure IRL it’s easier to race, because of butt feel that you get etc.,
    If in two other respected sims F Vee is significantly easier to handle , then it’s natural to wonder if in rF2 it’s in deed too difficult in some aspect. Of course rF2’s Skippy and Vee can still be closest to RL. What I’m trying to say is that we don’t really know. But If a RL driver says that I.e.iRacing’s Skippy is pretty close to RL, then it’s some kind of validation. ( Problem is another RL driver can say it’s rubbish:) )

    Yes I noted that Skippy haven’t been developed, or updated by S397. So for instance tire model improvements weren’t implemented. Do we know how much real data ISI got for the Skippy? I don’t think so, but I guess it was less than recent DLC officially licensed cars.
    Vee hasn’t been done by S397 either , but IIRC they helped Reiza.
    I actually used to like the cars made by iSI more. But when I went back to some of them after long break - something felt off. AFAIK ISI cars’ physics weren’t touched by S397 , so it probably was my subjective feeling.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2021
  4. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,694
    Likes Received:
    3,619
    High difficulty will keep on getting more and more common reason of disbelieve, complaints and doubt in simracing. I'll avoid pointing out reasons to avoid wall of text.

    Surely more difficult doesn't mean more realistic, but the same could be said about the opposite - why it isn't said nearly as much ?

    If you are expressing suspicion about something being too difficult than reality, you need to look at the reality, understand the issue. When simracers say that something is too difficult than reality without looking into reality and fairly comparing themselves to high level real life racers, then they are putting on whole simracing in regress.

    Also "seat feel" has been popular rationalization of arguments to keep on making simulation easier. While seat feel argument might have some ground, it is quite abstract thing, and nobody who understands how simulation works would wish for car dynamics to be sacrificed in order to compensate some quite subjective sensation that no one could define how much it actually helps, it is absolutely separate thing from cars physics. And then again... no one thinks about things where some reality specific aspects, and those same g forces included makes driving fast harder than it would ever be in simulation.

    I respect those who are interested in understanding where the realism is. IMO desire to win and be best is what makes one a racer, but learning and getting to know reality well while also pursuing driving and racing skills mastery makes one a simracer. I don't want to be too negative, but a lot of simracers are just racers. Thats not a shame, but it doesn't help with pushing simulation optimally where it should be going.

    Damn... and I have it... wall of text... and I lost half an hour. Aaand I wasted your time reading, if you are still reading - I respect you, and I am sorry :D
     
    turtleCZ, Sim_Player and atomed like this.
  5. green serpent

    green serpent Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2016
    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    584
    Surely though chassis flex also comes into it too? A chassis with zero flex on a car like that would be dramatically different than one with flex. Or do those other sims have chassis flex? But yes, physics is pretty much physics, it's the way that surfaces interact with each other (eg friction) and the properties of the objects (i.e flex), that's the hard part (and probably a million other tiny things), which is where rF2 is (presumably) more realistic. I think the dynamic nature of the physics makes it harder, but then easier once you get a feel for it. All other sims feel more like driving a spreadsheet, like controlling a character in a video game (ams1 to lesser extent), rF2 feels the most dynamic, so you've got to 'feel' it IMO.
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2021
    turtleCZ likes this.
  6. avenger82

    avenger82 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    771
    Likes Received:
    310
    iRacing has chassis flex and I think AMS1 doesn’t. BTW: I believe AMS2 (and Project Cars 1&2 ) has it too. Still it’s possible that AMS1 F. Vee is the most realistic. I think realism is more dependent on how accurate car values/parameters are fed into the mod. For instance Madness engine is very advanced, simulates many aspects that rF2 engine doesn’t, but still handling varies depending on a car.
     
  7. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,694
    Likes Received:
    3,619
    Car manufacturers, designers, engineers usually tends to highlight increases of chassis stiffness, so I guess the stiffer the car body is, the better it is for handling. Or maybe not always ? I imagine cheap FVee wouldn't be the stiffest car in the world.

    In Reiza DLC thread, which I have linked to in this thread earlier, Renato from Reiza provided some examples of how difficult is Brazilian FVee. It is obviously more difficult comparing to Australian for example. I guess it could be because Brazilians might use cheaper components, cheaper and worse tires... Reality is right there to examine, there is footage where you can see Brazilians really fighting the car. I guess for rF2 they decided to do it as fair as possible, especially knowing that for AMS2 they won't go "hardcore".

    p.s. I think rF2 FVee is awesome, I just think its default setup isn't good.
     
  8. avenger82

    avenger82 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    771
    Likes Received:
    310
    That's your subjective opinion. For a long time I had similar feeling that rF2 had most RL driving feel. Especially FFB and tires felt very communicative, dynamic and "natural" when driving at and over the limit. Then I've read that perhaps FFB is too informative vs RL.
    Also there's no consensus, but few RL GT drivers said ACC is most realistic sim. Now does ACC feel like driving a spreadsheet?

    BTW: So in rF2 is the most immersive, mostly due to it's (overly?) dynamic FFB, where I feel every little bump etc. That's why despite complaining and it's flaws I still get back to it from time to time.
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2021
  9. green serpent

    green serpent Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2016
    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    584
    TL;DR: I drank too much beer today.

    Seeing as I used the word "feel" three times in the sentence, you are 100% correct that it is subjective! However rF2 IS technically the most dynamic sim, i.e quasi physical tire/chassis flex, physics driven ffb etc (unless I'm mistaken), so I guess my subjective opinion happens to be inline with objective fact ;)

    Compared to what? An old Alfa Romeo or old Porsche where you can feel the very texture of the road through the thin wooden steering wheel? Or a modern Gt3 racecar with power steering? The former it's probably pretty close, the latter rF2 would probably have more feel than RL (IMO). The raw signal seems pretty correct... self aligning torque etc, but the intensity/lack of dampening of the signal is probably a bit much. But those things are adjustable by the end user... they can't make it be the perfect experience out of the box, because everyone uses different gear. Unless they said, on a "fanatec DD with this and that setting, that is real", short of that, the end user has to tweak it to make it feel right, which is going to be subjective. As far as I know, rF2 does not simulate powersteering, so until they do that, then it makes sense that the FFB is a bit more communicative.

    I'm going to confess, I have driven basically every sim but not ACC. I will use AC to illustrate my point. AC feels like driving a spreadsheet in the sense that it feels like a curated experience, like a bunch of really talent people got together and said "we're going to make a pretty realistic game, and we're going to tweak the parameters and ffb to make it feel as good as we possibly can". The result is it feels really good to drive (maybe not totally realistic though).

    Some cars in rF2 IMO feel downright terrible, and perhaps they even have handling that is not like the real life car, they STILL feel more dynamic and "real" in the sense that there is not some point where the physics kind of stops and you're at the limits of the physics where there is no more deeper information. rF2 is just more granular than other sims, more layers to the onion, even if the onion makes you cry sometimes (laughing face).

    99% of what I'm saying is simply speculation and my opinion, I'm not saying I'm right. This may be some A-grade apologetics here and a bit of babble, and not to labour on the point, but even if an rF2 car is not the most perfect 1:1 with real life, it still has the most deep, nunaced, natural, and fun feeling driving. Nothing feels wrong with it within the reference frame that is rF2 as if it were a self contained entity. Other sims by contrast reach a point where "computer says no", like, you've reached the event horizon of information and you got there in about an hour and there's nothing more. It's like trying to have a deep conversation with someone and after about 5 minutes you realize there's no more depth to them and they start repeating phrases like an NPC.

    Okay, I might have to go and buy ACC now and possibly eat my words!
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2021
    pkelly and turtleCZ like this.
  10. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,694
    Likes Received:
    3,619
    Isn't it subjective as hell ? Just another thought that hangs loose in the air without any tie to any reasonable argument, example...

    I suggest you read and listen less what others say, and try to form your own view. Could start doing it by looking at how reality looks like.

    Also have you driven a real car ? Because I have, and the way rF2 physics feel is most natural.
     
  11. avenger82

    avenger82 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    771
    Likes Received:
    310
    It’s subjective, but was said by person who raced the same track IRL. Don’t remember if it was with the same car though. And that’s the key: opinion from RL racers who race same car with similar setup is very valuable. Especially if he goes on about specifics. On contrary opinion that rF2 feels most natural by someone who never raced at and over the limit with the particular car is almost worthless. Onboard comparisons are a bit better to assess if something is realistic or not , but I don’t have time for that.
    I’ve been on track with a sport cars, but too scared to really push to the limit (except karting where risk is much lower).
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2021
  12. avenger82

    avenger82 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    771
    Likes Received:
    310
    I'm not an expert, but as said earlier I think except tire model rF2 physics is not superior or "most dynamic" as you said.
    I believe iRacing, ACC and now RaceRoom have purely physics driven FFB. BTW: rF2 is not purely physics driven as there are a lot of effects defined in controller .json files that allow to "enhance" the experience. Even AC has physics based FFB, but they have few "fake" optional sliders that enhance FFB. RaceRoom is similar that you have optional sliders.

    How do you know rF2 is the "most dynamic". Madness engine has many variables, that rF2 doesn't, so perhaps it's more dynamic?
    Agreed

    I had somewhat similar feeling when started driving rF2 - I mean especially in comparison to other sims. For instance I didn't like AC FFB, was not informative etc. Yet many people said it's quite realistic.
     
    green serpent likes this.
  13. leseb64

    leseb64 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    742
    when the car reacts as if it were on ice you don't need a thesis on physics to know that there is a problem!
     
  14. Korva7

    Korva7 Registered

    Joined:
    May 22, 2014
    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    206
    It for sure would be nice if we, simulator customers, had more objective ways to judge the realism of the physics of these sims. These subjective experiences of realism can be influenced by a lot of different things. Also more objective ways to measure the realism would create an insentive for making sims with actually realistic physics. Now it's more important to just make people think the physics are realistic, which isn't necessarily the same thing.

    In Hifi the focus on subjective testing instead of objective measurements seems to lead to more efforts being put on marketing and other things that give nice placebo effect, instead of improving the sound quality of the equipment.
     
    Sim_Player and mantasisg like this.
  15. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    10,606
    Likes Received:
    5,417
    The ice analogy is massively overused anyway, but what are you actually talking about?
     
    nonamenow and mantasisg like this.
  16. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,694
    Likes Received:
    3,619
    I think it is fair for you to say that my opinion is almost worthless, but also it is rude. I might have never had a chance to play with race cars IRL, but I also noticed that tons of people who did, brought any kind of feedback in very rare occasions, and still in some cases things that they had to say didn't seem fully clear if they definitely got to magically understand it all and unlock all truths by some RL driving. I think it takes some specific skills and knowledge to be able to pick details, understand what makes stuff do things that it do, and understand that in both worlds. For example Jimmy Broadbent could never accumulate anything near as valuable as Neils Heusinkveld, even if he drove all race cars full time everyday for the rest of his life, no disrespect, it is just how it is.

    The "too much FFB" could be anything. First of all what is this too much to begin with ? Too much details ? Too much force peak ? Too much constant force ? When we would know what is too much, it would be easier to tell if... Stiffer car than real one, or something in setup ? Different caster than real one, steering ratio ? Stiffer tires or in some way different than real ones ? Differently modeled track surface ? It could be something with wrong settings perhaps, it could be settings outside a sim, like settings in wheel profiler. And yes it could be deeper thing within sim, like some wrong parameter or geometry in cars physics, or some inaccuracy within underlying physics is also can't be impossible. It also could just be in persons head, having to drive a race car IRL doesn't make someone to be right about everything with absolute certainty.

    I refuse to be a simp for those who has driven like in simulation IRL :D

    This is rF2 forum, so we definitely not only bash it, but stand for it as well. So please pardon me, while I disagree.

    First of all, tires for a car is like half or more of it. And everything besides tires is not too shabby in rF2 either. But still most of the dynamics come from aero and tires. There are things like rain, which rF2 is really behind ACC, despite being on advanced tire simulation, I am not sure how is rF2 aero simulation comparing to ACC.

    Secondly, I'd like to know what "enhancements" for rF2 FFB is available in its notorious .json files ? I am not too expert on those. But I know that rF2 has perhaps the least sliders for FFB in game that minimally impacts it, and also from building car physics I know that there is only single physics unrelated parameter, that is only there to scale steering forces to fit better within what FFB motors can do. Everything else comes from simulating physics. And the more accurately and more physically correct core physics of a game is includign with cars physics set, the better quality FFB you get, it is almost there is no FFB in rF2, because you feel physics as good as they are, FFB remains there just as a term to describe what device on your desk/rig does, which is producing forces and directions - it is entirely commanded by physics directly. There is no way that the more physical and accurate physics will be, it won't be applied to FFB just the same. There are some other games that doesn't have as good FFB, simply because they don't have as good physics, because as you understand yourself - in simulations FFB is based on physics.

    How do you know rF2 is most dynamic ? I think trying it and have your own opinion should work for most. And what dynamic means ? To me it means that each lap every turn in rF2 tends to have unique feel, there is no feel of developing muscle memory and doing absolutely identical inputs, it is new everytime. It happens because great range of variables, which in other sims often are cut down to much smaller ranges due to use of a lot more approximated physics, less physical and more simplified. I am also not expert about madness engine variables, that rF2 doesn't do, I'd be interested to hear about them, perhaps it is more dynamic, but somehow doesn't employ those dynamics for some reason, because I never happened to notice many dynamics I expected, perhaps I should try better next time.

    I would also like to reply to your last thought. Why shouldn't people not say that AC FFB, or physics aren't realistic ? I think like them too. But how much realistic is it ? After 2000 hours in there and also modding, not enough for my mind. I found a lot more in rF2, which I am glad not to do a lot before AC, because I wouldn't have enjoyed AC that much as I did. I have 2000 hours in rF2 now too, and it just feels fresh, and the only reason I don't have more is because I have less time to play due to life and also writing walls of text in the forums, which I am sure is too much, so sorry :D I think I just happen to like posting.
     
    Nieubermesch and turtleCZ like this.
  17. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,694
    Likes Received:
    3,619
    True, overused and misused. For example calling iRacing iceRacing is kind of popular meme. But somehow incredibly quick and even quicker than realistic laptimes is possible in there. It just seems like it is more difficult to collect that grip, but it is there ,and there is a lot of it. People just doesn't seem to have a lot of understanding about how grip is composed, how it works in tire. I bet many doesn't even have in mind that there is two different types of friction that interacts.
     
  18. turtleCZ

    turtleCZ Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2021
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    59
    I don't have any FFB and still rF2 is top sim I have ever played. It's about physics and how car reacts to everything.

    Yeah, ACC is very strange to me. Hard to imagine it's real at all.
     
  19. turtleCZ

    turtleCZ Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2021
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    59
    R3E team has real racers too. Why they use strange tire model? Is it real? Hardly. Why iRacing has similar tires? Why every racer has different opinion?
     
  20. leseb64

    leseb64 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    742
    of course i'm exaggerating, but the skippy and the vee are too slippery, to have done formula renault and ford respectively 215hp and 130hp on Nogaro and Pau-arnos (I'm not a pilot, I just give myself 2 sessions a year) with my little experience i think they are too slippery and some irl drivers who are on iracing who have tested are of the same opinion saying that if irl they were like this there would be deaths every weekend!

    by the way i think the new single seater are much better made and conform to the reality usf2k or tatuus, it slides when the tyre are cold or with a mistake of driving as in real in my opinion, and for iracing alias iceracing it's those like me who knew the V2/3/4/5 tyres now i find them really good, not the best but nothing to see with those of 2008/2015 and when i drive the skippy or F-vee i could say icefactor2 lol
    Now if you like the GPL glide I have no problem with that it's your vision no more no less!
     
    avenger82 likes this.

Share This Page