Tell that to the million iRacers that have had access to proper FOV via their in-game calculator since that sims inception. We here are all going for realism in its purest mathematical form and although some of us struggle with only our single screens and head tracking, we persevere. I just can't imagine someone with your hardware being unable to adjust, easily. Give it the week and try to remember what you are actually doing to the view in scientific terms and not in any "feeling" sense. You don't get to adjust your real life eyes if you want a higher fov. You just have to live with it.
Also, keep in mind that gfx side of the sim is far from perfect - that means, shadows and lighting and material properties are not advanced enough to give you the neccesary illusion of depth of view, you see in your everyday life. What I mean, is when you look through your window on a nearby forest located like 200-300m away from you, you see it's at noticable distance away due to all the atmospheric effects taking place in real world. In rF (in rF 2 it is better but still far from great), without actually looking at the ground and by that knowing, how far such forest is away from you, you might have a false illusion it is much closer to you. Here's an example (more on the extreme side) of what I'm talking about: Without that wavy road, you'd almost completly loose sense of scene depth. And the lower the FOV is, the more that impression builds up on your screen. With more advanced lighting and more details to track objects, you should get a better feeling of that, towards how you'd see it in real world.
For me It's as one, As I see it, I feel it. However, you could say, and may be what your referring to is "looking ahead" in that case you yet to experience that since that ground has yet to be covered, yet you're in constant preperation ready when it arrives, emotions run high, Hence, the Visual, Sound, Vibration and Movement plus another elemnet is leading up to that point in preperation for that execution...All these elements work toghether as one which deliver the ultimate immersion.
You mentioned that things with audio and FFB or motion were not in sync with your view when you set the vFOV to what it was calculated to be. That is why I was asking the question, which is lagging for you, the audio, or the video or the motion?
Ok, a low Fov is giving a slow sense of speed, which is killing the immersion, Having said that, looks like you guys want me to persue this further, OK, I'll keep driving perhaps my eyes need further adjusting, I can understand that, back to the drawing board.
Low FOV gives natural sense of speed (besides it looks slower than with high FOV). IF you want to feel the speeeeeeed, you are looking for NFS-like immersion, not real one.
Have you ever driven over 150 Mph, or 241 Kph depending on where you live? You actually only feel the speed when you are close to an object, be it a tree, a slow car or even the stripes on the roadways. If you are looking at the road just ahead of your car, then yes you can see the road travel past you real fast, but you are not looking where you should be then hehe.
First of all while driving I'm looking mostly through wind-shield. There is no time to look through side windows with high speed. That's why I think correct fov should be set to value simulating windshield view, instead of missing side views. Second thing, sense of speed depends significantly on distance to side objects. And believe me, on racing tracks, which are often wider than highways, the sense of speed is dimmed. And yes, I driven a car over 200kmph on highway and it was still boring.
I driven a car above the 230/240 Kmh, and most of the time the sense of speed is lowest than driving at 70 in a sequence of turns...so it's not 100% true that more you go fast more you get sense of speed. When you drive at 250Kmh in a streight the sense of speed is awful...unless you're driving a very old car that is near to implode due the speed and vibrations ...
Sense of speed is mainly determined by how fast things are moving by you, visually. 60mph feels like warp speed in an office hallways, but feels like granny's driving out on an airport runway. Additionally, this is why 60mph often feels faster on a motorcycle than in a car--because you can actually see how fast the road beneath you is moving. In a car, you can't see so close, so the scenery seems to move by much slower due to 'parallax'. When you use a wider FOV, the scenery moves by much faster, because, similar to the motorcycle, you're able to actually see the scenery that's closer to you. Also, the perspective is much more exaggerated, so things go from being really small to being really big onscreen happens much faster. In a narrow FOV, depth is flattened out quite a bit, so, the sense of speed due to changing size is MUCH MUCH more limited. Conversely, though, when you're using a narrow FOV, small rotational movements (i.e. roll, yaw, pitch) and lateral/vertical movements appear to be moving faster than at a higher FOV. Hmm...maybe I'll make a nice little animation demonstrating these differences.
I was prompted to post this here by GTRFreak (thanks mate) cos some may not know this function. Some users have expressed a concern about being unable to see mirrors due to low FOV. I recently discovered the very useful ability to move your cars interior mirror physically. For instance, in the Clio I have my usual low 30s FOV. With the seat at minus 190 I can only see the left edge of interior mirror. By using the seat controls with ctrl, shift or alt at the same time (cant remember precise keys required) I can move the mirror over to the left so I can see it fully if I require. I also have my glance angle in the plr set so I can see anything that the interior mirror doesn't show. It amuses me when I read people implying us lower FOV users are a danger to race against online cos we cant see whats going on around us. If your used to threading your way through or being overtaken by AI fields as maniacal as these sims all seem to have, you develop excellent awareness of whats going on around you. When you add those skills to a few visual tweaks like those I've mentioned you end up like me. One of the cleanest racers around (yeah, I know everyone says that but I'm too long in the tooth to bother bragging, vacantly) and pretty bloody quick as well. I took a week, probably less, to get used to realistic FOV. Just dont see the point of playing simulators if what you're seeing isn't what you'd be seeing if you were actually there (unsolvable limitations aside, of course). Waste of time. Oh Zeo, look what you've done to me.
Also, this reduced sense of speed thats been mentioned. If you could've sat by me watching me in my playseat on my G27 in front of my single Sony 32" with FOV 34 wringing the neck of every rfactor 2 car round any of the tracks online quick enough to mostly podium, you would NOT say these low FOVs lack a sense of speed. I would say the opposite. Due to in game objects appearing real size and due to elevation changes and corners looking real scale, I find the sense of speed increased, awesome and MASSIVELY immersive. I strongly feel anyone who isn't experiencing what I'm experiencing is SERIOUSLY missing out. p.s. Upper case used for emphasis not anger!
To summarize, whether certain FOV gives low or higher sense of speed depends on 2 things: 1)how many slow to medium corners the track has and how many and how long straights it has, 2)how detailed, how many trackside objects the track has. Low FOV actually increases sense of speed in lower speed corners, but decreases on straights. I have actually noticed that this effect is so great, that since using correct FOV I don't like ultra fast tracks much anymore. Old 14km spa with 60s car can be really boring, unfortunately, while monaco is a blast. And the more details on track, like more trees, spectators etc. the more sense of speed, irregardless of FOV though.
You also have to take head-movement and cockpit vibration into effect when you are talking sense of speed. My friend plays with 0 head movement and shake and I seriously can't tell if he is driving a 500hp Race car or watching a replay of a track steady cam. You need to rough it up a bit to really get that nervousness you need when you are at the limit.
@ZeosPantera: LoL, I hear ya on that one, why try and visualize a real setting of the car as viewed from the cockpit and then dumb it down with 0 headshake etc. If your going for realism, enable the head shake. And for those open wheel drivers, turn up the volume of the effects, specifically the ones that are used for wind noise. Can't drive an open wheel without hearing the wind rush past you.
You guys claiming 200 kph is boring and looks like 70, we aren't driving 5000 pound luxary cars for the most part in the sim. We are racing carsM. Cars that the next day you have bruises over your body because you get beat up, your body is getting thrown around, your head is bobbing all over the place, you can feel bumps that you would have never even knew existed AT ALL if you drove over them with your road car, everything is vibrating, you can't even see the number on the car behind you in your mirrors because its vibrating so much etc etc. In these cars the sense of speed doesn't feel like 70 when you are doing 200, anyone who says that is obviously ignorant or completely conceded in thinking they know what the real deal is like just because they have gone 200 in a road car on a nice big highway.
most of race tracks are just highways but with even better surface If you want to feel vibrations then enable them in plr and/or buy buttkicker. but imo changing visuals to cheat your brain is wrong way. In NFS they implemented fov changable in relation to speed. it must be something for you
Your correct Spinelli when you compare purpose built race cars to road cars as far as vibration is concerned, due to the stiffness of the suspension and associated components. Each higher class can have an increasingly stiffer suspension in order to handle the downforces that are applied due to Aero components such as splitters and wings. Yes you do feel every little bump and pebble in an open wheeler, but the feelings from the road surface are not what we are talking about here. What we are talking about is the sense of speed from visuals alone. Consider what 600 Mph looks like in a plane at 10,000 feet up compared to 200 Mph at 1000 Feet up. You don't see the speed unless you are close to other objects or are watching other objects grow larger ahead of you.
Your posts always have a negative sarcastic attitude, in many other threads aswell. Are you always an asshole to people or is this just your internet personality? lol. Dont know how I would like need for speed variable fov, but ok lol. Im the one who gives everyone crap for using a too high and easy seating position, but sure continue on, are you 12 years old? Completely understand what you are saying, I was just replying to tuttle and maxym who said that driving at 200 kph on a public highway is boring and that 230/240 km/h feels like 70 km/h, give me a break.
No I'm not 12 yo and yes I am sarcastic also irl. Sometimes it's the best way to show flaws in someones way of thinking.
