1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.


Discussion in 'Project CARS' started by Zem Zver, Mar 18, 2014.

  1. I don't own pCars, but after having watched this video

    I have seen enough. PCars is basically shift 2 with a little bit better graphics. And It made me sad, because I expected nice things from pCars.
    Does anyone still remember this?

    Pcars was supposed to be a sim. And now it's simcade AT BEST. Do you maybe know why? Was it pressure from investors? What happened?
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  2. So you don't own it, haven't tried it and are judging it from a video. Mmmm, nice analysis.
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Like Like x 1
  3. That video shows the MP is working great actually.
  4. Yes I am judging from a video. The driver went at super high speeds, over a crest into a corner. With no understeer or oversteer. Both of which should have happened.
    Or the extreme braking in corner entry with no lock up or understeer? Not even the best abs can do that at those speeds.

    And the MP might work like a peach in NFS hot pursiut, but it dont make it a good game.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Just a few points to consider:
    • Pcars is not done yet - far from it - Pcars is W.I.P.
    • Some of the cars visuals are not tied to the physics yet, yes physics and visuals are separate in games
    • Most images and videos are made by community members and represent W.I.P.
    • The physics, tire model and FFB are not complete
    • Much of the rest of the game is not complete
    • Judging W.I.P. videos is pre-judging based on incomplete information and does not represent the finished product
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Last edited: Mar 18, 2014
  7. The a****e claims are so trite by now. In effect it shows a complete lack of understanding, not only for what pCARS is, but for what a racing simulation game is, and also what a simulation is from an engineering perspective.

    A****e does not mean "simulation that you don't care for", and as such the OP is nothing to take seriously.

    Still, and though it's futile, I'll humor the thread starter, with some answers:

    That is unknowable, seeing as it's firmly in the territory of simulations.

    The pressure that WMD members excerts is to make it a good simulation and a good game.

    It's in development, with the associated ups and downs, but what happens overall is that it's getting better all the time.
  8. Do you mean like this one?

    It looks like no oversteer nor understeer is an issue.

    Again, don't judge on the video, you don't know what kind of aids are enabled. Besides, this particular car has more or less placeholder physics and is actually slower in terms of top speed than real life LMP1 cars, whilst acceleration and deceleration (braking) is about the same. Aero is also not finished, so this car could have more downforce at some speeds than in RL.

    Beside all that, each car must go through focused physics testing at least once before you can even remotely start comparing it to real life counterparts.

    It's not an MP race, if you look closely you'll see it's single player offline race with AI opponents.
  9. Oh. This old discussion :)

    Well, might as well give my opinion here again. As a WMD member i test the builds from time to time to see the progress.

    To me it is clear that the focus of pCars is different than "sims" like rF2.

    Let us take a comparison from FPS:

    The new Wolfenstein game is a pure arcade game with fast, relentless action

    Battlefield 4 is a "semi-real" shooter that "feels" realistic but is emphasized towards multiplayer and pretty visuals with rapid action

    ARMA with ACE is the harcore realistic option, where you can stare at a tree for 3 hours waiting for an event to happen in real time, only to die of a shrapnel 5 seconds later, with MP focused on coop in large massive scenarios, often mimicking real world politics

    And in the racing world this would equate to Wolfenstien being the "pure" arcade racers.

    I would view pCars in the same vein as Gran Turismo and Forza, all belonging to the Battlefield 4 category. They "feel" real, but are simplified and streamlined for the purpose of action and mainstream sales.

    Then you have the racing equivalents of ARMA such as rF2 and to some extent AC. Products where mainstream sales are important but not more important than accurate simulation down to miniscule details. This is a subcategory only attracting a few select users, however very vocal ones. In these products it would be as hard to "drive" a formula car as it is in real life, meaning hours upon hours of practice and actual real life skill is needed to even be remotely ok at it.

    Belonging to the "semi real" category as i think pCars does is however not really a bad thing OUTSIDE of this place. There is a reason why ARMA can not rival the sales of BF4... Accessibility is king, if you want the console market as well, which pCars does.

    So it really is comparing the wrong way... All product categories are good, and i will definitely enjoy pCars when it's done, but not for the same reasons i enjoy the deeper and more nuanced experience of something like rF2, with it's relentless focus on detail simulation.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Andy Jackson

    Andy Jackson
    Sponsored by BRUT Premium Member

    Superb post. Well explained. I completely agree with everything you said.
  11. Your argument relies on the assumption that pCARS is like GT or Forza. In reality it clearly isn't. It's a far deeper simulation than those, both in the driving physics and the racing.

    I agree that pCARS is different in that it doesn't only have an advanced physics simulation, it also goes further in simulating other aspects of racing and the racing environment.

    As usual, preferring a particular sim doesn't mean that other non-preferred sims stop being what they are. The idea is that pCARS will also appeal to a wide'ish audience by not being a bone dry simulation, but offering a little more, doesn't change the fact that it's a simulation either.

    What I see here is yet another attempt at trying to shoehorn pCARS into a non-simulation category. That does not stand to reason, since it's firmly a simulation by the very nature of the processes that it simulates to no lesser level than other racing simulation games out there.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. Well, to some of us it does stand to reason that games like pcars/Shift2/F1 2012 etc don't have the quality of physics fidelity and FFB which are the hallmarks of the established PC racing sims, of course, pcars is multi-platform, so it certainly makes me wonder whether the physics are dumbed down by default to cater to the lowest common denominator of a platform.

    I'm also witnessing the bizarre attitude that you're somehow entitled to define a sim, but we aren't.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. @DrJustice
    Well, i respect your opinion but i would disagree, obviously. In my opinion, NOT being a bone dry simulator (similiar to what GT tries to avoid) is what is pCars strong point. It makes it accessible.

    It of course "simulates" the various subsystems of vehicles and it does it well, but it then filters it to make it accessible. Codemasters do the same thing, albeit more extreme.

    If you instead look at rF2 it doesn't filter the simulation, but in return it is difficult and as you point out, a bit dry.

    So in my opinion i think defending pCars as a fully fledged simulator rather than a game at this stage, like i believe you do above, is actually harming the product. The bone dry vehicle dynamics geeks will not be attracted by pCars anyway, so competing on that stage is pointless. But compared to GT and Forza, pCars shines and is easily the beater of those two, hands down.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  14. @ David Ignjatovic : Neither of us gets to define what a simulation is as such. We can however observe a (claimed) simulation and judge it's characteristics - and just because, perhaps some nuances of parts of it are not what you prefer, that doesn't mean that it can be reclassified (read "belittled" in the case of many a discussion in some sim circles) to ones pleasing.

    As long as a simulation goes to lengths in it's engineering to simulate the systems in question to the best possible degree according to the state of the art, I think it's valid (and so does the accepted technical definitions of the term). If the bottom falls out of it completely, then I'd also be inclined to questions it's validity as a meaningful simulation. I don't think any of the current crop of racing sim games have their bottoms falling out though.

    In the case of pCARS vs other racing simulation games, those nuances get blown out of proportion here (again, in some sim circles, overstatement is a sport :)) . There are differences between all contenders, sometimes marked ones, and especially during development/tuning some things "gets out of alignment" for every sim out there. I've experienced questionable things in all racing simulation games I've tried (more or less the same list as David's), some so bad that I don't like to drive them, but I'm not about to belittle the work of highly competent teams making racing simulations for us. For the most part all these racers are amazing pieces of works in consumer simulation gaming software.

    @ Richard Eriksson: Fair enough. Still I'd like sims compared with allowance for the differences that are part of the genre, and not downplay those one don't care as much for as others as being less than what they are. But that's only what I'd like... :)
    • Agree Agree x 4

  15. I think what's actually true is we're all free to decide what is or isn't a sim, and remember, if it wasn't for games "like" Shift claiming to be realistic or the most realistic racing/driving sim, we wouldn't be having these discussions.

    As it stands, there are major differences in the driving model between what's become commonly known as a simcade and a sim, and compared to both the established PC sims and reality, pcars doesn't have the type of driving model that allows me to place it in any category other than simcade.

    I bought F1 2012 knowing it was simcade game, so it's not like a simcade game is destined to fail, especially as most people are casual gamers.

    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Andy Jackson

    Andy Jackson
    Sponsored by BRUT Premium Member

    How true. The same developers with the same promises.

    I agree though that it can become a good, if not excellent race game in it's own right and niche.
  17. Same old people, same old arguments, same old trolling.
    • Agree Agree x 4
  18. Rupe Wilson

    Rupe Wilson
    Keep Yoga real Premium Member

    Yes they don't seem to learn
    thread locked
    • Agree Agree x 1