Oh boy was i wrong about this....!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by msportdan, Feb 18, 2015.

  1. Noel Hibbard

    Noel Hibbard Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,744
    Likes Received:
    34
    I'm guessing English isn't your primary language. I'm trying to think of how to explain what canned means. The best I way I can think of is it is a predefined response that is triggered by and event. In the sim you can run over a curb and the physics engine can ether trigger a canned response where it just vibrates the wheel exactly the same way every time or you can have a simulated response that is tied to the physics engine where the wheel pulls left and right each time the wheel goes up and down on the undulations of the curb. Another example would be backfire sounds when downshifting. In rF2 those sounds are canned. They are prerecorded. Sometimes the modder will record several of them and they are selected randomly so it isn't as obvious that it's canned prerecorded. The alternative would be a physics engine that fully simulates an engine and dynamically generates a back fire sound. Obviously this isn't happening anytime soon due to the limits of modern CPUs. This is just an example. It isn't always practical to simulate everything, but I would prefer everything be simulated over canned.
     
  2. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Noel, you are plain wrong.

    I worked at a racing school for a year (plus racing experience with quite a dew cars) so please don't tell me something isn't a certain way when I experienced. If anything, you're the arrogant know it all. I mention my experience because I figure that racing is something not a lot of ppl have done / can do and therefore ppl would appreciate some input, NOT because I'm trying to be a conceited know-it-all. You are the one who acts arrogant in almost everysingle thread. For eg. you have the nerve to tell me to jump in a road car, and see for myself and that we're going into fantasy land, right after I finished telling you how it was based on my experiences. My experiences weren't in fantasy land, sorry to disappoint you.

    Im not even talking about torsion/twist and stuff like that, I just literally mean vibration and changing frequency based on RPMs. Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Just because YOU've never experienced it before?


    About the FFB. What a surprise, you're wrong once again. I was just in a track-mod thread a couple months back where the modder was saying how he was using the "fake" rumble for certain parts of his track when I questioned him about it because I didn't know that was still available and I was told it not only was - and by possibly more than 1 person - but that the very circuit in discussion had a bit of it implemented.

    Please stop trying to firmly and blindly follow and defend every belief of yours "to the death". None of us are right all the time. I've been proven wrong more than once around here, you though seem to have your set beliefs and nothing budges from that (eg. I just told you I've experienced the vibration for myself and you're still trying to tell me how I'm wrong, wow). Drop your pride; all that matters in life is the truth, regardless of what you wish to believe.

    Not anytime soon due to CPU power? Richard Burns Rally had all sorts of engine physics from what, 10, 15 years ago. And regarding the sound, again, Richard Burns Rally + both, Live For Speed and Netkar Pro (up to, and including v1.03) had dynamically generated sounds based off engines, firing order, all sorts of physics involved and those game's are old.

    Again, just....stop with all your misinformation. At-least start your statements with "in my opinion" or "from what I know/remember/heard" or something like that. Geez.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 20, 2015
  3. msportdan

    msportdan Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    0
    can I ask why does gsc karts feel like karts and rf2 karts doesn't?

    and I know how a kart feels, reiza have seemed to nail it... ive only found 2-3 cars in rf2 worth driving
     
  4. stonec

    stonec Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,289
    Likes Received:
    1,406
    I bet many of us know how karts feel in real life, I personally think it's one of the best cars in rF2. Check out empty box video and his opinions:

    The feel and drive "deeper". Not that the GSC Karts are bad, they are quite good, but AFAIK (rFactor 1 was this way) they have no tire deformation or chassis flex - which on a kart chassis flex is huge. I personally found the rF2 karts more "easy and logical" while still having more depth in the driving.
     
  5. Je suis Luis

    Je suis Luis Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2015
    Messages:
    328
    Likes Received:
    0
    Indeed Noel. It isn´t my primary language. I think your explanation is an extended version of what Guimengo´s said: "The canned in this aspect is a misinterpreted manner of saying it isn't calculated in real time."
    I found the sound a good example about what can be considerate "canned" since i think no way the software is calculating this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back-fire
    Still disagree with you last sentence and some aspects (i think when cannot be simulated it must be "canned") and of ffb generated by engines in real life on steering wheels but would such a pain in the ass to try to explain myself that is better let this way.
    Thanks
     
  6. Satangoss

    Satangoss Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    7
  7. Noel Hibbard

    Noel Hibbard Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,744
    Likes Received:
    34
    Plain wrong? Okay.. your right, the engine has an output shaft that is directly connected to the steering column. Drop the clutch and BAM your arms rip off. Yes, I am twisting your words just like you are twisting mine. I will explain again, the FFB in rF2 is directly connected to the forces on the rack. Yeah sure, vibrations from the engine could be transmitted THROUGH THE CHASSIS and then into the wheel because it is mounted to the CHASSIS. But as I said, the FFB is connected to the steering rack, not the chassis. But you knew exactly what I was getting at but chose to argue for the fun of arguing.

    About the TDF. I did actually state that I "believe" they are ignored but a friend of mine that is a track dev pointed out that they are still used even in rF2. DevMode will also let you visualize the generated bumps that the wheels will ride over. He explained that it can be done this way to reduce the poly count of the track. I am fully capable of admitting I was mistaken about something. If I am unsure of something I make that clear when I say it. But here is what I said:
    And actually I wasn't completely wrong. Although the curb shape isn't entirely ignored, it isn't triggering "canned" effects like it would in rF1.

    Anyways, you should stop..... just stop with dissecting every little thing I say desperately trying to twist it into what ever you want it to be.
     
  8. Noel Hibbard

    Noel Hibbard Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,744
    Likes Received:
    34
    Yeah, I agree with you with some canned stuff. For example head physics. Those canned effects have been debated to death. Most people think it's unrealistic and disable it. I personally like it as it gives a little more info in braking zones because the head movement moves back a little as the brakes lock. Not everything can be 1:1 so compensating needs to be done sometimes. The Fanatec pedal vibrator would be a better place for ABS effects IMO.
     
  9. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    In my opinion, RF2's karts drive much closer to real karts than any other sim. The karts in GSCE are amazing fun, I love them, but many times they still tend to drive like a regular car rather than a kart. There are times in the GSCE karts - and in-fact any kart in any game besides RF2 - when the kart needs a lot of steering input like a regular car (nothing to do with steering ratio settings). Or where you turn the wheel and you just hold it there near the limit like you can often so in "regular" cars. That is not how karts drive, you are constantly doing tiny turnin inputs with extremely reactive and small corrections, and the karts tend to snap turn-in, snap correct, snap turn-in, snap-correct, in very, very tiny incrimints. It's a battle of constant corrections with tiny inputs, all while managing the kart which turns-in on entry, and continues to rotate mid-corner very, very easily. During the entire cornering phase, you're constantly trying to manage this very, very extreme turn-in and rotation tendency - which can cause a sudden loss of momentum/speed if the rear-slide gets too large - while trying to be super smooth and trying to limit all those corrections by purposely putting the car in a sort-of smooth and predictable state by manipulating the karts behavior with your throttle/brake/steering inputs. RF2's physics engine (including tyre model) seems has highlighted this overall general behavior and kart-style-driving better than anything, by far, in my opinion.


    And Noel, some people were mentioning how feeling engine vibrations through the wheel would be nice and is actually realistic. I said so as well. Then you said I'm wrong and in fantasy land. Then you starting going off about how an engine Isn't connected to the steering column (since that's the physics that RF2 bases the majority of it's FFB off of) and explaining how RF2's FFB works. Well noone is arguing how RF2's FFB works, and noone is arguing whether the engine is connected to the steering column or not - and you're correct about all that, but that's not the point or the discussion. The point is, engine revs can be felt through the wheel in real-life and therefore a "canned" FFB vibration - which is "connected" to in-game engine revs, and can change vibration-magnitude and frequency accordingly (like in RF1) - wouldn't be unrealistic.

    It has nothing to do with "arms ripping off" when you floor the gas or whatever it is you are going off about. You can simply feel engine revs through the wheel in real-life; simple as that.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 20, 2015
  10. speed1

    speed1 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,858
    Likes Received:
    0
    What planned are you on, everything connected to the chassis is oplique connected together, no matter the strength of any effect, which you may not feel clearly but it is there and when your physic engine don't produce it, than there is something wrong, and not somewhere else.
     
  11. Nimugp

    Nimugp Registered

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    140
    Well, I think in all fairness, I can in my road car feel the steering wheel vibrating when revving the engine, but that's it. It vibrates, it doesn't start turning left/right. So to simulate it without canning it, you would probably have to vibrate the unit the steering wheel is connected to, and not have it as FFB effect ;)

    I personally wouldn't want the FFB to submit those forces of the engine revving, since it would push the wheel left/right instead of up/down/sideways (possible at a cost of feedback from the tyres???). But I can see no harm in it being an option for those who do like it (but then from my own selfish point of view, only when it doesn't take away to much time for ISI to add it features I like :p )
     
  12. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    9,595
    Likes Received:
    4,606
    Two ways to look at that.

    1. It's probably a 3 minute edit to re-allow plugin altering of the FFB, like in rF1. Then people can add such effects as they see fit without ISI having to lift a finger. Plugins could be made to try and compensate for the behaviour of specific controllers, supplemental feedback could be added based on what different people feel is appropriate, missing from the raw current feedback, etc. Sky's the limit.
    2. Such a change will probably very quickly end up with at least 3 splinters regarding FFB, arguments about which is best, whether a particular one is 'cheating', etc. (take a look at some of the FFB discussions... holy cow!)
    There are some useful things that such a change would allow, but when you look at the big picture it doesn't surprise me ISI has chosen not to do it. Assuming it's a conscious decision of course :)


    *PS

    That's true, it is still able to do it. I should have said a properly done rF2 track doesn't use this in the same manner; the .tdf will give the kerb surface some noise but it's not the primary source of the FFB you feel from the kerb, the shape of the kerb is. Bit like the track surface itself, the geometry in rF2 is the primary source and the .tdf 'wave' is just to provide noise.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 21, 2015
  13. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest

    I am yet to drive the v1.25 karts, but they supposedly did improve a bit with regards to the tires (it was my main area of feedback and concern). I find the rF2 go kart to be good but I struggle feeling comfortable in it because I just have such a tough time feeling the kart through my wheel and the way the steering behaves with the tire grip catches me off guard on occasion. Also it's instadeath on kerbs. Perhaps you struggle feeling confident in the kart as well.
     
  14. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    NimuGp, the host of FFB effects our wheels are capable of include vibration forces (not left-right spinning, but actual vibrations). I have felt them with cheap Logitechs, Fanatecs, and Thrustmaster.
     
  15. Dalek

    Dalek Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2014
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think we have gone off topic to the OP... but...

    I thought a steering rack had some form of damping on road cars, race cars no idea.
    On the other hand, the same steering rack is often bolted to the engine bay, so some sort of vibration should come through.
    But i dont think it should be a left right movement, but more a cross between left and right, but also up and down. Our weels cant represent that, so a left - right vibration would be canned or at least inexact.

    Why is it that every week some intresting knowledge gets diverted into an ego thread ?

    If this is all about street cred, well ok, i was a janitor for 10 years at a track, where do i stand ( XD )
    (PS. absolutley not true )
     
  16. Noel Hibbard

    Noel Hibbard Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,744
    Likes Received:
    34
    Yes road cars are dampened. My daily driver had too much dampening (Lexus) so I replaced the stock bushings with solid aluminum bushings. I mostly replaced them because they were completely deteriorated which gave a bunch of free play in the rack. But even with it literally bolted directly to the chassis it doesn't transfer much to the wheel. The vibrations from the road surface totally mask any vibrations from the engine. I also have an Integra GSR which is prepped for SCCA ITS which has a little more vibration mainly from the aftermarket engine mounts. Another issue is these toy wheels don't have enough dynamic range to reproduce the vibration on the same scale as everything else. If a max force on our wheel, such as running into a tirewall is so weak then just think how undetectable a vibration would be at the same scale. But in the end it isn't like you drive down the track focused on the vibrations. It isn't a feedback that you need to be able to drive a car on the limit. It's just an immersion sort of thing. Kind of like rocks hitting the undertray. It's cool and adds immersion but it isn't really a feedback that you need to drive the car on the limit. My whole point in explaining how the FFB works in rF2 was just to point out that adding something like vibrations would have to be in the form of a canned effect. Because the FFB is connected directly to the rack forces. Yes I realize chassis vibrations could indirectly make it into the rack. Anybody want to volunteer to code that based on physics rather then canning it? It isn't worth the work vs just canning it.

    This all started with someone asking why we don't have these effects in rf2 like we did in rf1. I made the mistake of explaining why.
     
  17. hexagramme

    hexagramme Registered

    Joined:
    May 25, 2013
    Messages:
    4,241
    Likes Received:
    194
    Your explanations are very well written and very informative, Noel. Thank you. :)
     
  18. Dalek

    Dalek Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2014
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
    Noel, IMO you made no mistake. I appreciate the logics and reason behind your replys...
     
  19. Nimugp

    Nimugp Registered

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    140
    is it really??? well, I didn't know that, and I've never noticed it (on a G27)
     
  20. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Yes, let's get back on topic here...you definitely were wrong, msportdan :)
     

Share This Page