[OT] Anyone believe that pCars will become a real sim racing game when its released?

You're welcome, I had fun doing this

I didn't control any jumps here, it was full throttle for each car. I agree the Lotus seems really weird and "fly" pretty weirdly, anyway I can also see progress when comparing to the flying Gumperd of 2012. Yes, this is a fantasy track, south of France. I wasn't able to retrieve those jumps from the old video in California track. I know they work on those tracks to make then more realistic and AFAIK this place I found for my video will be worked sooner or later. It's use for test purpose if I remember well (they also have a test track BTW with some extreme reliefs). Making this video was fun. Currently I spend 95% rF2 and 5% Project Cars. It's mainly due to all settings you need to reset and redo each time a new build is released (daily), and also because to get the most of the FFB you need to tweak a lot of settings including having tweaking files for each cars. Each time I take the time to do so I have great fun and very good feeling driving all those cars. That's why I know they will go far. One day all will be out-of-the-box ala rF2 where I only push a little more FFB for each car in menu, and that will be a big step to be user friendly. If you just fire pcars and keep all default settings you will have something really annoying on FFB side. When you fine tune, you feel everything, and as an old Shift 2 player (and rF1, GPL, GTR2, NKpro, Dirt, Grid, etc. all kind of car games in fact) I can see this has strictly nothing to do with a Shift 3!

Edit: and I love Trackmania!

 

+1

If this is meant to be a "fun" aspect of pCARS then fine, I`ve no real problem with that.

It does look rather stupid though imo to have such cars doing those kind of jumps and not suffering any damage (I know some cars did suffer damage but some did not)

Plus I`ve got to agree about the Lotus 49... all that weight at the back of an old F1 car and it goes down nose first.



Laughable really (imo)

I played many a build of pCARS and took loads of screens of it. It`s fantastic for screens as it`s an eye candy game but sim it will never be...

NWDogg, I never noticed any sunglasses either lol...

 

flying characteristics of a sim is not really relevant as its outside the normal driving zone and nothing to do with the tyre , handling physics. There are videos of iracing cars almost going into outer space after big accidents, because physics go crazy out of their normal zone. Its not an important issue. I prefer to focus on how the car feels on the ground than in the air.

 

I say yes. Pcars means Community Assist Racing Simulator. And that name is being represented in wmd forum where we can say about anything, getting a response about their evolution. The community is asked to CPRSI simulator. Do not see why it will not be so if it appears that it will be.

 

They are trying to 'simulate' the Lotus 49, from the era of Forumla 1 when the cars actually took off quite often (Flugplatz at Nordschleife *cough*) and you tell me that how the cars act in the air is not important? I would not wish to land on my nose at the Flugplatz every lap. And watching the video posted at page 4 it looks like they have actually included a big hill (read: jump) in one of their tracks?

I do not own PCARS and probably I will never do. IMO: SMS=need for speed, shift 2 and test drive, so arcade gamers are probably their biggest customers and it's them they want to please. That's all I need to know

 

Your "defence" of this title is admirable although imo, misguided...

The Lotus 49 and other cars (certainly from that era of F1) did leave the track(s) as Hedlund has already said and the 49 in pCARS comes down nose first.

A car that had so much weight at the rear of the car would never come down nose first.

This IS an important issue whether you choose to see that or not.

 

I have seen a fair few rFactor2 car crazy jumps too, if you made a track with the same angle of that pCars one, they would jump too

 

This isn't a physics issue we are talking about, yes rF2 cars and iRacing cars can act odd with collisions bugged etc, the flying cars in pCars are actually modelled to do that in the video, which IMO is completely wrong and completely arcade, but I still believe SMS are aiming the game at your casual arcade racer, It won't be a full sim and it won't be suitable for league racing.
It will be a great pick up casual racer but it has a lot of competition on the consoles.

I shot a video of Ales URD Venom going over a jump ( from about 30 seconds ) on Nords I know which I prefer to see and feel.

 

again a very old build, its on 609 now and its changing all the time

I have them both, and BOTH need more work yet to be a true simulation imho

and your statement is of "the flying cars in pCars are actually modelled to do that in the video" is PURE fanboy talk, they simply are NOT

 

So tell me why they do it then and tell me why a lotus 49 can fly for 100 meters and land on its nose.

 

The jump complemation in pCars by Yololo is from build 605 ?

 

work in progress for christ, get a life mate
better still do as me, go on a real track

 

Never?

http://www.ausmotive.com/images/Lotus-F1-1969.jpg

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/8654/lotus49or8.gif

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/1756/p115ring.jpg

I appreciate the last 2 shots aren't a Lotus 49 but are rear engined F1/F2 cars of that period.

I'm afraid you don't understand physics.

 

I actually had two of those pics in my mind as I posted the last time...

Anyway, if I don`t understand physics (and I never claimed to) then maybe you should take your expertise up with ISI as they seem to think a historic F1 car with the engine at the rear should come down rear first too...

 

I'd like to see SMS succeed in turning out a full-fledged sim. No sim-racer benefits if they don't.
Given the time frame they quoted in pre-alpha I'm hoping, but they need to address physics...and soon.
I can't say they haven't made progress in certain areas, they have... unfortunately most of it has been in the areas that matter least.
The cars have plenty of graphics features. What needs to happen is an immediate 'assault' on handling.
Most sim-racer will tolerate an 'ugly' car..IF... the handling is good and there is a promise to fix the graphics. We're seeing that in rFactor2. Let's be honest, the car were not the best looking initially.
The same cannot be said for the reverse.
You may gawk at a pretty car, but that will only last for so long before you get bored and move on.
It's not helping their case either that any suggestion are followed by censuring so as not to "give the wrong impression".
What they need to do is lighten up and listen.

 

Since EVERYONE who has pcars should know about STM and the state its in and what's going on, I really don't get what you're trying to do with that post.

 

Short answer: no.

 

you forgotten something. Most of the real race drivers (like Rene Rast, ADAC GT Masters) say, that its not hard to drive a DTM/GT3 car. But it's hard to drive fast with it. But the fact that you screw up and have one spin after the other is just bull****.

I played rfactor 1 for a long time. After driving pcars i felt uncomfortable with the FFB. But now its the other way around. Now its the same with rfactor. It's the thing how much you are acclimatising with it.

Anymore.. there are some nice facts that pcars will have. The physics are developing great with the help of hamilton e.g.
The development in rfactor 2 is just terrible. The changelog for one month in rfactor is two or three days in pcars.

 

About these jumping F1 cars.

Attach a weight at one end of very light stick and throw it in various ways ( straight, rotating up, rotating down). You will note it will tend to turn so that lighter end is following the heavy end. Simply because of air resistance. That's why this stick needs to be light for the experiment - you won't be able to throw it 150 km/h so you need significant air resistance at slow speeds. Plastic ruler should do.

You can also watch olympics instead and see that when a hammer is thrown, it's getting a lot of rotation but always lands with heavy end forward

Heavier end merely moves center of mass for an object. It does not cause rotation. What causes rotation is air pressing onto an object.
If car is travelling upwards, air will tend to push nose down slightly. When it's travelling downwards, air will tend to push the nose up slightly.
But what happens at all times is that the car is travelling forward very fast, so air will try to push the nose back quite strongly.

So much depends on the way car was thrown in the air. Once car starts rotating, heavier end has the capability to push through the air and cause a 180 degree rotation.

Cars with weight in front should be pretty much stable during flight.
Cars with weight at the rear will be unstable. Which way they're going to turn depends on suspension, driver's input while jumping and some other factors. Therefore you can't really judge physics by the way such Lotus jumps

For the same reason, arrows either need heavy tip or feathers at rear to be stable. I've shot arrows with no feathers and they were stable, but required heavy tip (80/20 weight ratio or so).

 

I took a photo of a car lifting off at Flugplatz at the 24H earlier this year. The rear sagging happened more on Porsches and other rear-engined cars.