Opinions on Assetto Corsa Physics (1.4)

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

  1. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest

    The biggest culprits of that immersion, in my opinion, are the trackside visuals. I think even the current lighting can be fine but the way the grass blurs and loses definition, and the "lack of depth" of objects, with varying shading, all combine for a look that separates you from the environment. 3D grass isn't necessary but when you see the iR and R3E tarmac and immediate trackside details, in any angle, static or in motion, it really jumps out.

    [/Off-topic]
     
  2. Minibull

    Minibull Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,556
    Likes Received:
    18
    For me that is a issue with having really nicely detailed textures. As far as I know, there is no texture streaming type stuff going on, so you see a high res grass texture, at a low angle being on track, far away from the camera too. Results in a green mess, especially at speed.
    Maybe if you had a really high resolution it would look better? Dunno
     
  3. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest

    I have tried that DSR thing, and my native resolution is 1440p. I have run the game maxed out, it doesn't change anything. At speed or at rest, unless the camera is pretty much on edited chase cam or another trackside cam angled at a high º value, with clear visibility of sharp textures (like Atlanta), it won't be attractive. The iRacing grass and merging to the road is so good, as far as I know there's no 3D grass there so it can be achieved.
     
  4. Minibull

    Minibull Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,556
    Likes Received:
    18
    Yeah, I meant more along the lines of a super high res screen that could actually represent some of the high res texture when you see it from a distance. Thats where I've seen some games have lower quality and slightly more "noisy" textures in the distance, seems to give a better representation of the actual texture when its only on a small section of the screen.
    Not making much sense here to me as I reread this, so my apologies XD
     
  5. peterchen

    peterchen Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    2,099
    Likes Received:
    287
    Oh, this silly graphics comparison again; coming up from a guy for whom gxf seems more important than physics.....

    A friend of mine fires up pcars from time to time and invites me. For friendships sake I do some laps with him, so I have the A / B comparison.
    For me rF2 looks far more natural and less "gamey", shadow/lighting is a blast!
    If this is not the case for some people, they have wrong settings (both game and monitor) and/or a bad monitor! That´s all I can think of.
    This friend does the same "rF2 looks like rF1"-moaning, but he has a crappy TV to game on. Seems that on crappy TV´s pcars looks better than rF2...
    Over and out of this "discussion" that never should have came up (again).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2016
  6. unknwn

    unknwn Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2015
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    10
    Some rF2 car/tracks models are quite good looking, however its not what bothers me. I dislike lightning/HDR implementation/grey shade of rF2 a lot which creates a picture of ugly/lifeless/colorless autumn day(?) (which is in fact a realistic scenario). Some tracks look nicer though. If I had a choice of a sunny/nice/colorful summer day (which is also a realistic scenario) I would easily choose it over something that might give a depression.
    P.S. I am not talking about pCars like graphics (although their 3d models/textures seem to be consistently better than rF2/AC, however I dislike their colors/lightning for going too far in other direction (gamey), though I appreciate their performance/graphics from the technical point of view). Personally I prefer AC shading/lightning/colors with modified "Natural Graphics Mod".
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2016
  7. mmaruda

    mmaruda Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    3
    Assetto definitely feels the most "photorealistic" out of the whole bunch, but trackside details are sometimes poor, not to mention those horrible grotesque 2d "people". Whoever though that it is acceptable to put these characters there should say "I'm so sorry". Every time I look at the people on the Monte Carlo track, I think of Grim Fandango and the part when Manny goes to the land of the living. rFactor 2 on the other hand has this lighting that feels very natural and I love it, but that is about it. The graphics are something like 10 years old and I am having performance issues in the last few builds. What bothers me is that while it does look significantly better than 2 years ago, some cars are in great need of a visual update and I doubt this will happen soon, if ever. Same goes for the rain effect - they teased this great video years ago and nothing has come out of it. Even more problematic is that if they eventually fix the rain to make it work, most cars don't even have working wipers... I forget about the looks of rFactor as soon as I start driving, but justifying the graphics by some TV/crappy monitor theory is lying to yourself. :)
     
  8. FauxPo

    FauxPo Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Quote:
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Doug: How similar in complexity are the physics engines and calculation rates?

    ISI / Gjon: That is difficult to say as rFactor Pro is typically integrated into an already complex system."
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Well if Gjon doesn't know, then how can anyone else say anything?

    Again it still seems to me misleading to assume physics similarities between professional teams' models and their data, and what we have in rF2.
     
  9. FauxPo

    FauxPo Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I cared more about graphics than physics I'd drive pCars and rF2 wouldn't be on my computer. I want it to be better.

    And if you think graphics aren't a problem, then you're a fool. And you're not, so you're actually just protesting too much. Doesn't help.

    some of the track side details are great. Some are dreadful. Langford mostly looks excellent. Last night, sky was darkening, looked atmospheric. But as I say, a lot of 'artwork' on the ISI content including cars, drivers, marshalls is an immersion killer.
     
  10. Associat0r

    Associat0r Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    307
    Likes Received:
    9
    rFactor Pro is only for manufacturer teams.
    Most professional race teams (even top teams) and professional sim centers use regular rFactors for real race car development and driver training.

    Max and Jos Verstappen's former F3 team using regular rFactor.
    http://www.vanamersfoortracing.nl



     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2016
  11. FauxPo

    FauxPo Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Reference please for most teams? And not a sim racer on wiki or someone with a entertainment business using rf. Or even any other teams?

    If you read the comments from Atze on youtube about those videos, he says that the physics are "custom made for rfactor". "They are just on a different level." - he compares iRacing and rf (below)

    He also says back then (2 years ago):

    "I haven't tried rFactor 2 properly, but currently rFactor, iRacing, Assetto Corsa are all three a very good training for the real car."

    And one year ago, asked to compare rF2, iRacing and AC with real life says:

    " Tough question. Depends on the hardware and specific car you drive :) "

    Which, if nothing else shoots a big hole in the claim that AC is simcade constantly repeated in this cave.

    He made a comment about braking in rF2 very sensitive and altering the curve to make it less aggressive btw.

    Atze was a former rf world champ, but then moved to iRacing and is teammate of Huttu. He's trained with Verstappen in iRacing, and has a company providing driver training using sims so he's in a good position to make comparisons.

    Just keep some perspective guys. All sims are a compromise and relentlessly trying to discredit AC's physics because it's got laser scanned tracks ,good graphics and popularity isn't fooling anyone (else). Huttu said it's what he drives when not competing in iRacing because it feels great. Although presumably not with the AI because they are s**t. :)
     
  12. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest

    One aspect of AC that has been of huge annoyance, and interferes with everything, is the FFB. I have tried many different things with my wheel and it just has never hit a sweet spot. If anything, it's only become worse since 1.2 or 1.3, whatever it was. I don't have a full motion rig that could perhaps interpret the game's output into some feeling through transducers so, with just a wheel, it really hurts any finer judgment as though I can see and experience nuanced behavior, I don't have fine control over it.
     
  13. Associat0r

    Associat0r Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    307
    Likes Received:
    9
    https://drracing.wordpress.com/2015/04/02/should-motorsport-revise-the-drivers-career-path/
    http://steamcommunity.com/app/339790/discussions/0/610573751160274820/#c610574106424826109
    http://www.virtualr.net/meet-simfunding-sim-racing-crowd-funding-platform#comment-1871850631

    http://www.izoneperformance.com/
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEOktMQc3cM
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZX9a3cCG3c

    GT Academy winners using rF1 and rF2.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oV-Qp8rhIM
    http://images.caradisiac.com/images...r-candidat-Francais-dans-la-course-302709.jpg
    http://www.techradar.com/news/gamin...ic-driving-physics-and-3-that-didn-t-1305257/

    Another pro simulation center using rFactor.
    http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/26641-Simulating-Success
    http://strakkaperformance.com/
    http://www.dailysportscar.com/2014/04/17/strakka-back-on-track-in-days-not-weeks.html

    Highest respected vehicle dynamics seminar by Claude Rouelle for professional race car engineers and designers, also uses rFactor.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8RvOgKIAmo

    And all this is just the tip of the iceberg.

    It's regular rFactor as he said here https://youtu.be/d2ur0L0LDOw?t=6746
    The "custom made" stuff is just like any other rFactor mod, but with their accurate input data.

    Objective measurements have shown crucial differences, and besides it's not what what he said a year after that statement when he got to drive the real car and he said that AC missed the nuances of constantly sliding around during cornering https://youtu.be/d2ur0L0LDOw?t=6444
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2016
  14. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest

    Of all those links, to be fair, you can only pick out Nissan. rF1 was a smart software solution a decade ago and it took an opportunistic chunk of a potential market, so it's expected that especially centers like iZone would run it. A few of those links are from questionable sources. I can't/won't comment on that drracing, I like what he writes but I haven't checked who he is or what he has done.
     
  15. mmaruda

    mmaruda Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    3
    I never seemed to get what exactly people do not like about the FFB in Assetto. The first time I played the game, right after it hit early access, I loved it. I actually found it way better than rFactor and I liked the idea (or at least what they advertised) that it only simulates forces that are felt in the real wheel, but I guess people wanted a more "classical" effect. They complained about it so Kunos started changing it and it has become worse from patch to patch. I wish they had stuck to their guns and kept like it was initially regardless if the majority of people complained because it's not what they are used to. From my point of view, you will never get the same feeling as in a real car. Probably not even with a full motion rig. We are at a disadvantage with our wheels and that's that. The whole point is to drive clean and steady, brake consistently and then you don't need to feel what the rear end is doing, because it's not supposed to be doing anything that you should worry about. Unless you are a drifter...

    Anyway, the only thing that I find horribly wrong with the FFB in Assetto is that there is no resistance when you are standing still. Even pCARS simulates that aspect.
     
  16. FauxPo

    FauxPo Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly. Although you have a talent for understatement "questionable sources" lol

    Here's a long list of professional racing drivers saying iRacing is the best sim. I don't agree. But it's probably more credible evidence in terms of actual professional racing drivers driving it. But fairly sure the teams themselves don't use it. If I remember, this conversation started with the F1 grid supposingly using something relevant to rF2 physics. Anyway...

    http://www.iracing.com/testimonials/

    I've been drawn into this vortex of insanity...<gasping> got to escape.....
     
  17. stonec

    stonec Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,321
    Likes Received:
    1,443
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLAgf2_aMfM

    This track looks almost as good in rF2 as in AC, which is impressive considering it's not built for gMotor engine. I would say it's strong evidence that the graphics engine itself doesn't lose much to competitors (except those special effects...). It's mostly about the track textures and what color palette the artist chooses that makes the difference.
     
  18. Golanv

    Golanv Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,041
    Likes Received:
    9
    That's just classic thievery. I do hope that someone makes an example of this bozo. It's not like we are swimming in laser scanned content in our niche genre that we would afford to lose devs and their licencing partners.
     
  19. Golanv

    Golanv Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,041
    Likes Received:
    9
    I wouldn't go as far as they "suck". Come on, there is a lot of things right there that make it very enjoyable, entertaining, fun and immersive rally sim. I mean it wouldn't be those things without realism thrown in there.

    ps. There's a hilarious quote from AC forums that I have to show you... made me crack up! ;)
    - From Theboss to Michael Hornbuckle

    You are infamous my little Aussie friend!
     
  20. John

    John Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,085
    Likes Received:
    113
    It's only thievery if he releases it - a private conversion is just that - a private conversion.

    Oh, and if that "bozo" hadn't put in the hundreds of hours - there would be NO Ring (the existing and legal Com8 conversion) in RF2 at all.
     

Share This Page