Opinions on Assetto Corsa Physics (1.4)

Discussion in 'Other Games' started by PearceYaussy, Jan 2, 2016.

  1. mmaruda

    mmaruda Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'll add my 2 cents. There is a big difference between a developer like ISI and Kunos. ISI probably does not make a huge profit form rFactor 2. As far as I understand rFactor Pro is their main source of income, so they could allow themselves to not target a broader audience, not be on Steam until recently and not add a ton of flashy Ferraris to fuel the sales. With Kunos and other devs it's a different story. They a have one product, which they still have to work on. They need to pay the people who work for them every month, so they need a source of income like DLCs and going for the console audience. In a perfect world (around 15 years ago lol), you would make a game, release it, make 2 patches to fix that odd font bug one guy is having and maybe improve FPS for the other guy that still uses this old Radeon card, than maybe make an Addon and move on to make the next game.

    Unfortunately, nowadays games are more complex, take longer to make and are generally more expensive in that matter, the awareness of the public is greater (especially the sim-focused public), so they are more picky and complain a lot more (forums, comments, twitter and metacritic), so you need to constantly improve what you released. But at the same time, you have to pay the people who work for you. This is especially hard, when customers find bugs, announce them and further sales are in jeopardy, unless the bugs get fixed. And you still need to pay your team of programmers, graphic and sound artists etc. If you don't pay them, or pay them little, they will quit to work for someone else. AND THAT is also a big issue that is often overlooked.

    I come from flight-sims primarily and you know what the big problem with these games is? People think that if the dev get more money they can hire a bigger team and produce a better product... Wrong! Because in order to do so, you need not only programmers, but programmers who know about flight physics and there is not many guys around who can both write code and be aeronautical engineers at the same time. I would assume that with racing sims it's the exact same issue. You can hire more coders, but how many of those will understand how tires and suspension behaves and can put that into you game?

    Consider how many devs make racing sims... There is ISI, Kunos, SMS, Sector3, maybe Codies? ISI probably has the most experience, because rFactor Pro. Kunos is around 23 people and that included graphic artists, sound artist and I guess only Stefano is writing physics code. If it was as simple as the number of coders than we would have a crapload of quality mods for any given sim. But unfortunately, these people need to know what they are doing.

    I'm not going to defend Kunos here, but I understand the situation they are in. It could also help, if the community would understand how this works and how being overly critical can turn the situation around and slap you in the bum.

    Let me tell you a flight sim story. Back in the 90's flight sims were the hype. You had a ton of games to play and noone complained. But at some point 2 games came out. Falcon 4 and IL-2 Sturmovik. Both surpassed what anyone expected and murdered the competition. Everything else was arcade and the public wanted more. So the Falcon guys went out of business because the costs exceeded the profits and only thanks to the code being leaked and some talented people it lives on as BMS and is still unrivalled due to some features like the dynamic campaign. IL-2 on the other hand lives as something that is frowned upon. The devs decided to make a more realistic sequel and failed due to constant delays and problems with the engine, physics and so on. Cliffs of Dover eventually released in a broken state and only thanks to moders it's sort of playable, with online focus and... one server... with around 60 people on it. And those are all the 60 people who play it. When IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad released last year it lacked many core features like a proper SP campaign, maps and planes. Realism increased, but there is only several flyable planes compared to over 200 in IL-2 1946 and still most hardcore fligh-simmers hate it like the plague, because no campaign, no clickable cockpits, Russians OP and the works. There is also DCS which is getting better, but one plane costs around 50 dolars, it's in constant beta, and you can hardly count on even having a theatre to properly fly in (P-15 Mustand over moders Caucasus, yeah right). Also due to a more complex nature of the simulation, fewer people can get into it - you need to buy a HOTAS (joystick) which is either from Saitek/Mad Catz and is crap and breaks after 3 months and costs the same as a G29 or you can go Thrustmaster with prices around the same around as a T500. Mostly the hardware is out of stock though, so yeah. Add to that the fact that you need to read a 700+ page manual to fly the plane you bought (because realism or GTFO) and than learn to actually fly and use the proper tactics (about 6 months if you have a lot of free time) and the picture is... not very bright. And the funny thing is, there are still people who play the old IL-2, mod it and so on and... they are regarded as arcade kiddies, because people had read stuff, how broader knowledge on the subject and now know the physics in this game suck. What actually keeps this whole community going is the arcade stuff like War Thunder and the latest space sims, since people buy joysticks for it.

    My point here? Don't bash the Assetto Corsas, Forzas and CARS, these are the games that bring new people to the hobby. Out of 100 guys who buy Assetto on console, if 3 consider the physics below their expectations and look for something better... like rFactor 2. Also out of those 100, probably around 80 will buy a wheel and thus tell Fanatec or Thurstmaster that it's still worth to produce those instead of switching to making gamepads.

    Personally, I am disappointed with Assetto Corsa, but still enjoy it quite a lot, but I am not a hardcore virtual racer. If going console helps them gather the money to keep the game going, that is fine (though as a gamer in general, I think they have no idea what they are doing, if they think they can compete with the likes of Forza) It's also worth mentioning that my Virtual Squadron lost 2 members last year to iRacing... I played it around summer for some time, tapped the brakes during a high speed corner and my first thought was "I would have spun out 3 times in rFactor at this point".
     
  2. peterchen

    peterchen Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    2,099
    Likes Received:
    287
    Good post mmaruda, with much truth in it.
     
  3. Guineapiggy

    Guineapiggy Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    S'true, people tend to get the uncanny valley reaction to things that don't behave quite as they expect. iRacing and rFactor2 have an almost totally transferable skillset due to similar advanced physics but throw that same person in to Forza or GT5, and things will be close enough to be familiar but different enough to be off-putting. The car gives them enough that instinct and memory kicks in and they wait for the car to slide a certain way or to react to a bump a certain way and in these less advanced titles... it just doesn't.

    It's an understandable phenomenon and it's particularly easy to spot when you realise that a good chunk of people who dub themselves hardcore sim racers will gladly sit down and enjoy some Mario Kart or similar. It may be a very basic racer but because it makes no stabs at realism there's not that uncanny valley feeling of something lacking or imperfect.

    So to us a game like GT, Forza or Codemasters F1 might feel wrong or unappealing, (might, that is) doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad game.

    And hell, even if an argument could be made to a lack of expected realism making a piece of software like AC bad think of this - when in the history of racing has there been this little of a divide between more casual racers and hardcore simulations? As mmaruda mentioned these games can be a gateway to going in to straight up sim racing and that step is now a smaller, easier step than it ever has been. I once tried to introduce a friend who loved Gran Turismo to Grand Prix 3 and he was just lost. Can you imagine if he'd tried the hard-as-nails Grand Prix Legends? He had no idea how to get the car to behave and no idea what he was doing wrong. Stepping from AC to rF or IR requires far less adjustment.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 21, 2016
  4. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest


    Are you just writing for the sake of writing something and posting? Seriously. This follow up makes no sense. Why are you going on about their games from 2003 to now?
    Who here claimed DiRT to be a "proper" sim? It's made to be enjoyable with ungodly grip and disappointing FFB.

    Seriously, DD.
     
  5. DurgeDriven

    DurgeDriven Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,320
    Likes Received:
    43
    Where did I refer to anyone I could be talking about Steam comments.

    I am saying with all the millions they made from numerous console titles including years of F1 it
    never helped make a better PC simulation game did it.

    You say you want them to fix key things in PC version.

    ............and I hope Kunos does not slide down the same slope as other multi platforms like EA, SMS and CM, etc etc .................. something wrong with that. ?
     
  6. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest

    My point remains. It's like you have arguments in your head and instead of keeping them in your head, you pop in the forum and post something completely non-sequitur.
     
  7. Depco

    Depco Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2014
    Messages:
    854
    Likes Received:
    523
    Simmer down boys. This has been a very good thread so far. Let's keep it that way and avoid the personal attacks.
     
  8. Saabjock

    Saabjock Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    19
    I am sometimes dumbfounded by the simracing community and their ever-present demand for perfection of every title out-of-the-box.
    I am a flight simulator technician...that's my real job. It's what I do everyday for a living.
    Simulators and simulation is a very, very complex business.
    Newsflash: None are 100 percent perfect...never will be.
    I fly a ten million dollar simulator everyday and it too is constantly being tuned to achieve as close to perfection as possible.
    In the past ten months, I cannot count the number of engineering visits just to tune different sub-systems.
    They're the AFCS engineers from auto-flight, sound guys, they're guys from eCLMNT for motion, they're DEV guys working behind the scene, just to name a very few.
    It uses nine servers to input, relay and gather info...
    There's a System file server, System computational server, Development computer, Sim input/output server, SRS server, Weather server, eCLMNT server, SND server and IOS server.... all doing what most game developers are trying to achieve on a regular household computer.
    Give the Devs and modders a bit of credit... and understanding if some of the products still need additional tweaking by the time you get them.
    I'm not saying you should not point out obvious things.
    It's not good to continuously 'knock' them for everything you perceive as being wrong without first pointing out the good things.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 22, 2016
  9. Joe

    Joe Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2013
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    21
    @Saabjock:

    This is off subject, but I got to ask you, hope you do not mind.
    I see many of DIY 6DoF motion setup for fly simulator. I like to have your opinions on this if possible.

    1) HW, they commonly use 6 1kW motors, some one sell their own controllers. Ofc, the gearbox can be get easily too. Here is a video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z84mFYEQy-E
    do you think such HW setup is good enough? If not how much off from "pro ones"?

    2) Sim, which sim, X-plan or Microsoft fly sim, in your opinion is best for such 6DoF motion setup?

    3) SW, I see most people use X-sim, is this the best or other maybe better?

    4) Screens, considering three large fixed project screens (not moving). Can we project the images on the screens which will rotate (moving) in according with seat moving, is this possible? Does any Sim SW do that? If so, this is a big plus since we do not need three monitors to attach the motion rig. Also, can X-plan or other Sim do offer such proportional view of angle for realistic (large scenes but with proper portion of cockpit view (not over blow)?

    thanks

    Joe
     
  10. Saabjock

    Saabjock Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    19
    Lots of question there Joe....lol.
    I tried taking a look at your video and while it was not very apparent, it appeared he was using some type of rotary actuator....again it was not clear to see.
    He could greatly enhance his overall experience by using a 'black-out' curtain to shield light.
    Our sims use linear actuators from Moog.
    Most modern sims use either a 60" base or a 36" base. (base equates to the legs/actuators).
    It's a very complex layout of the six actuators.
    As to the visuals...we use three projectors in most fixed wing airplanes. One for channel one, two and three.
    Re-fueling tanker sims can use as many as eight...helicopters even more.
    The way images are projected is very complex.
    They're not simply projected onto a screen.
    There's quite a bit more involved and handled by the software to allow blending, color-correction etc....
    As to which sim flying programs are best for 6DOF...I couldn't say.
    I've casually played around with both but like X-Plane more.
     
  11. jkn87

    jkn87 Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    2
    nice info...but i feel we wanna more indepth stuff...heheh;)
     
  12. Emery

    Emery Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,900
    Likes Received:
    1,512
    Pretty sure rF Pro was sold off many years ago. It is no longer an ISI product. If they're still getting an income from it, that's great, but it's not "what they do" today.
     
  13. FauxPo

    FauxPo Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's difficult to see through all the fanboy sleight of hand trying to imply F1 teams are driving rfactor physics. But looking at the rFactorPro site, it seems that rFactor Pro is a completely separate, British company, that uses an ISI graphics engine. It seems to be some kind of software architecture that allows professional racing teams (only) to import their car models and physics (and probably the kitchen sink) into it. I'm guessing (please enlighten me otherwise!) that there is virtually no information about physics or tire data etc. going from F1 teams back down to ISI in this arrangement.
     
  14. FauxPo

    FauxPo Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know this thread is physics, but I think ISI shoot themselves in the head a bit. Graphics and visual immersion must be a factor. Some bits of the ISI tracks look amazing, as good as anything. Other bits, tracks and cars, are franky horrific. The drivers in the open tops/wheelers, the marshalls look ridiculous. Some car interior details too. Silverstone compared to AC or Pcars' versions looks like a cartoon. If they could just improve the art work and make it look grown up rather than a cartoon, then it'd be somewhere people actually wanted to be.

    I know most people here just don't agree. But it's jarring everytime I look at rF2 after other sims. Your heart sinks before you've even felt the physics. But as I say, there are moments - usually at high speed - when it looks as good as anything.
     
  15. boxer

    boxer Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2012
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    172
    http://imagespaceinc.com/software.php

    isiMotor2 became the software engine used by most of the Formula One grid when various advancements and a further opened architecture led to rFactor Pro. This product, which continues to evolve, has become the leading software solution for racing teams and automotive manufacturers.

    Taking what was learned from isiMotor2 and rFactor Pro, ISI began development of rFactor2, a huge step forward in the simulation of track, tire, weather and physics, with a newly improved graphics engine.
     
  16. FauxPo

    FauxPo Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    But what does "using isiMotor2" actually mean? Does it mean they are using the actual physics or something else?
     
  17. stonec

    stonec Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,321
    Likes Received:
    1,444
    Here's a comparison shot from Silverstone:

    rF2:

    View attachment 19154

    AC:

    View attachment 19155

    ISI tracks are as good as anything imo, more detailed trackside objects than competitors, except for maybe iRacing. The graphics engine itself lacks some obvious features (DOF, sun glare, rain effects). Other than that I'm not sure how it could be much improved.
     
  18. Old Hat

    Old Hat Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    8
    At max graphics settings, there's no comparison between rF2 and AC (or Pcars) on my PC (GTX 980/ i7-4790K)- apart from the frame rate! Which is odd. And it's not the physics calculations because turning down the graphics in rF2, and the frame rate shoots up. Would be an issue with the Rift should ISI decide to support it.
     
  19. Guineapiggy

    Guineapiggy Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    You get slowdown in rF2 with that system at 1920 x 1200? My graphically less capable system and slightly weaker CPU make mincemeat of it even in crowded fields. Weird.
     
  20. hexagramme

    hexagramme Registered

    Joined:
    May 25, 2013
    Messages:
    4,241
    Likes Received:
    194

Share This Page