bug physique suspension
- Thread starter lucarace
- Start date
As a huge AC fan,i have to admit that this bug is quite annoying,but i am sure that devs will work on finding a solution for it asap ! most likely a suspension model bug ! but i can't be 100% sure !
It's possible the bumpstops are underdamped (dampers take energy out of the suspension, less damping = more bounces) but that's just speculation.
I do think damage modeling will help, when you hit suspension that hard it bends and breaks parts, rather than storing more and more spring energy.
I do think damage modeling will help, when you hit suspension that hard it bends and breaks parts, rather than storing more and more spring energy.
LO I did that on monza hey sometimes i get the modern one the classic one mixed up and forget there is a chicane there or here, went full speed through one.......
Sigh stupid pb limits ill find them get them uploaded elsewhere i have one on my gplus page so its probably messed up also.
Was an older build of the game though maybe .4 .5? cars in general had a super bouncy ball effect if they collided with stuff i recall cars hitting walls and flying like 200 meters straight up into the air.
Sigh stupid pb limits ill find them get them uploaded elsewhere i have one on my gplus page so its probably messed up also.
Was an older build of the game though maybe .4 .5? cars in general had a super bouncy ball effect if they collided with stuff i recall cars hitting walls and flying like 200 meters straight up into the air.
Aristotelis
Kunos Simulazioni
That's a really bad video, biased, ironic, smart ass style. I don't like it.
I have enormous amount of admiration and respect for everything the ISI guys are doing. I'm in contact with some team members too, great guys. So to have to comment on such a bad video that puts rF2 vs AC is the last thing I wanted to do and so I will try to not mention rF2 in my analysis. I think rF2 is doing a great job in that situation. I don't think it's perfect, but who cares, it's a racing simulator and it does a ton of other things perfectly. That's all I have to say on rF2.
Please allow me to defend AC though.
First of all. It's not like you put two real cars on the same track/bump and test. No, you put a virtual car on a virtual circuit with some virtual physics, against another virtual car on a virtual circuit made differently with some different virtual physics...
I can hear you scream, "the results should be similar". Well... no.
The most important thing is the circuit. It's evident by naked eye that the bump kerb on our version is quite higher. Add to that, the grass side of the bump is lower in AC, the difference is quite important. Strangely all the test are made from that side of the track (grass to bump to asphalt) and never the other way around... wonder why.
This alone is the most important fault in this whole video. A comparison of two optically similar bumps, that differ in height as much as a normal sidewalk.
Other details.
- Why compare an old late 80s street car with whatever dampers they used back then, against a modern panoz with top of the line dampers, much better chassis, geometry, inertias and so on? Why didn't he choose the X-Bow for example. It's true that even our X-Bow will jump on that kerb but IMHO in a much more predictable way. Remember our kerb is higher and more straight. I'm pretty sure of course that somebody will try hard to make the X-Bow to jump in an equal way... but whatever.
- There is a bug in the current version of AC. I'm sure most of you know. The body of the car goes through kerbs without colliding. It is evident in the video too. This adds to the strange behaviour in many ways, i.e. car does not jump very high at higher speeds (suspension absorbs everything)
This bug was not there in older versions, should be fixed in the next update.
- We have a resolution of 6 vertices on that kerb. This is very low, the tyre goes bumping on practically a straight vertical face from the grass side.
"what? wow you're laser scan the track and then use 6 vertices for a kerb?"
No. We use millions of vertices on the actual track and normal kerbs. On a kerb like that we decide to make economy so that we keep vertices number logical and gaining fps. Why on that kerb or similar? Because that kerb's job is to keep you from cutting. At 6 vertices it does so even better. Decision and compromises. I'm sure rF2 has its own.
- Our low speed physics (under 3-4km/h) sucks. Yes it will manifest in such occasions. What happens is that under that speed the whole suspension/tyres/collision pretty much everything movable, is damped in extreme values. That's why the cars do not bounce nicely when stopped for example. That also means that everything becomes so stiff, that you get those nasty rebounds and jumping at an extreme situation like that.
Why we haven't fixed it yet? We do a racing simulation, such as driving at high speeds against other high speed cars... things like that.
Yes we know that when you park your AC car on a bump it seems silly, but do you prefer we lose a week or two on that, or making better multiplayer? I'm sure people complaining about this will be happy for 2 days of bump riding and then forget it forever, but let us know.
- Do you know most of the bimmers (especially M3's) work on their elastic bump stops most of the time? That design decision makes them comfortable at normal speed cruising and much stiffer when pushing. Being the bump stops much stiffer, means that in extreme situations (such as this) the elastic energy cannot be damped by the dampers quite well. Bouncing is what you might get.
Dunno how the panoz work, can't comment on that.
- Have a re-read of what @Stereo says in his analysis. It's good and can make you understand some more things.
I could go on and on but I won't, makes no sense. Tomorrow, an existing sim or a new one might do off-road surface displacement modelling. Will this make rF2, AC, iR and all the other sims instantly "not real sims"? Heck I thought we were racing on the asphalt.
AC brought Laser scanned tracks, movable aero parts and whatever other features we added... Did all of these made other sims "not real sims"? Really?
I'm a bit pissed off with that video as you can see
But I shouldn't because fortunately there are guys like you that can discuss nicely about such things and I thought I owe you some explanations. But yeah, buy AC because arcade
I have enormous amount of admiration and respect for everything the ISI guys are doing. I'm in contact with some team members too, great guys. So to have to comment on such a bad video that puts rF2 vs AC is the last thing I wanted to do and so I will try to not mention rF2 in my analysis. I think rF2 is doing a great job in that situation. I don't think it's perfect, but who cares, it's a racing simulator and it does a ton of other things perfectly. That's all I have to say on rF2.
Please allow me to defend AC though.
First of all. It's not like you put two real cars on the same track/bump and test. No, you put a virtual car on a virtual circuit with some virtual physics, against another virtual car on a virtual circuit made differently with some different virtual physics...
I can hear you scream, "the results should be similar". Well... no.
The most important thing is the circuit. It's evident by naked eye that the bump kerb on our version is quite higher. Add to that, the grass side of the bump is lower in AC, the difference is quite important. Strangely all the test are made from that side of the track (grass to bump to asphalt) and never the other way around... wonder why.
This alone is the most important fault in this whole video. A comparison of two optically similar bumps, that differ in height as much as a normal sidewalk.
Other details.
- Why compare an old late 80s street car with whatever dampers they used back then, against a modern panoz with top of the line dampers, much better chassis, geometry, inertias and so on? Why didn't he choose the X-Bow for example. It's true that even our X-Bow will jump on that kerb but IMHO in a much more predictable way. Remember our kerb is higher and more straight. I'm pretty sure of course that somebody will try hard to make the X-Bow to jump in an equal way... but whatever.
- There is a bug in the current version of AC. I'm sure most of you know. The body of the car goes through kerbs without colliding. It is evident in the video too. This adds to the strange behaviour in many ways, i.e. car does not jump very high at higher speeds (suspension absorbs everything)
This bug was not there in older versions, should be fixed in the next update.
- We have a resolution of 6 vertices on that kerb. This is very low, the tyre goes bumping on practically a straight vertical face from the grass side.
"what? wow you're laser scan the track and then use 6 vertices for a kerb?"
No. We use millions of vertices on the actual track and normal kerbs. On a kerb like that we decide to make economy so that we keep vertices number logical and gaining fps. Why on that kerb or similar? Because that kerb's job is to keep you from cutting. At 6 vertices it does so even better. Decision and compromises. I'm sure rF2 has its own.
- Our low speed physics (under 3-4km/h) sucks. Yes it will manifest in such occasions. What happens is that under that speed the whole suspension/tyres/collision pretty much everything movable, is damped in extreme values. That's why the cars do not bounce nicely when stopped for example. That also means that everything becomes so stiff, that you get those nasty rebounds and jumping at an extreme situation like that.
Why we haven't fixed it yet? We do a racing simulation, such as driving at high speeds against other high speed cars... things like that.
Yes we know that when you park your AC car on a bump it seems silly, but do you prefer we lose a week or two on that, or making better multiplayer? I'm sure people complaining about this will be happy for 2 days of bump riding and then forget it forever, but let us know.
- Do you know most of the bimmers (especially M3's) work on their elastic bump stops most of the time? That design decision makes them comfortable at normal speed cruising and much stiffer when pushing. Being the bump stops much stiffer, means that in extreme situations (such as this) the elastic energy cannot be damped by the dampers quite well. Bouncing is what you might get.
Dunno how the panoz work, can't comment on that.
- Have a re-read of what @Stereo says in his analysis. It's good and can make you understand some more things.
I could go on and on but I won't, makes no sense. Tomorrow, an existing sim or a new one might do off-road surface displacement modelling. Will this make rF2, AC, iR and all the other sims instantly "not real sims"? Heck I thought we were racing on the asphalt.
AC brought Laser scanned tracks, movable aero parts and whatever other features we added... Did all of these made other sims "not real sims"? Really?
I'm a bit pissed off with that video as you can see
But I shouldn't because fortunately there are guys like you that can discuss nicely about such things and I thought I owe you some explanations. But yeah, buy AC because arcade
like it when devs give decent explanation! keep it up KS!
btw s3 isn't a road car, it's a challenge car
Well, I usually try and stay away from any curbs as much as possible since they scare me...
Hi all. First of all I would like to apologize to @Aristotelis and the entire team of Kunos by the video. I have great respect for their work regardless of what you may think of him. The video was created in response to another user of our small community. It was made after a discussion, at a bad moment, never imagining that would come out of there and I never thought that I would create so much controversy. My apologies again as there is somewhere that is quite offensive.
In my defense I will say that just try to recreate some as similar conditions as possible and that everything you see on the video is what happens in the game. He could have chosen another car, but the result would have been the same as these problems happen with all cars.
At no time pretended start a comparison between RF2 and AC but simply show the problems that exist in AC and because I think the suspensions are better at RF2, which was what I asked before making the video.
I just hope this video at least have served to take into account these problems and are solved in the future.
Greetings and sorry for my bad English. (Google Translate)
In my defense I will say that just try to recreate some as similar conditions as possible and that everything you see on the video is what happens in the game. He could have chosen another car, but the result would have been the same as these problems happen with all cars.
At no time pretended start a comparison between RF2 and AC but simply show the problems that exist in AC and because I think the suspensions are better at RF2, which was what I asked before making the video.
I just hope this video at least have served to take into account these problems and are solved in the future.
Greetings and sorry for my bad English. (Google Translate)
Aristotelis,
thank you very much for your explanations. I can totally understand the circumstances why this has been done in AC.
Of course it is slightly off comparing what one would expect from real life experience but to be honest I couldn´t care less if the car jumps 10 cm´s higher when I go over a curb at 3-10 km/h.
So I´m perfectly fine with the situation since I agree with you that this case won´t disturb us going in circles at high speed around a track.
I too feel that the video´s intention was to stir things up.
Keep up the good work, I appreciate it.
All the best
thank you very much for your explanations. I can totally understand the circumstances why this has been done in AC.
Of course it is slightly off comparing what one would expect from real life experience but to be honest I couldn´t care less if the car jumps 10 cm´s higher when I go over a curb at 3-10 km/h.
So I´m perfectly fine with the situation since I agree with you that this case won´t disturb us going in circles at high speed around a track.
I too feel that the video´s intention was to stir things up.
Keep up the good work, I appreciate it.
All the best
That's a really bad video, biased, ironic, smart ass style. I don't like it.
I have enormous amount of admiration and respect for everything the ISI guys are doing. I'm in contact with some team members too, great guys. So to have to comment on such a bad video that puts rF2 vs AC is the last thing I wanted to do and so I will try to not mention rF2 in my analysis. I think rF2 is doing a great job in that situation. I don't think it's perfect, but who cares, it's a racing simulator and it does a ton of other things perfectly. That's all I have to say on rF2.
Please allow me to defend AC though.
First of all. It's not like you put two real cars on the same track/bump and test. No, you put a virtual car on a virtual circuit with some virtual physics, against another virtual car on a virtual circuit made differently with some different virtual physics...
I can hear you scream, "the results should be similar". Well... no.
The most important thing is the circuit. It's evident by naked eye that the bump kerb on our version is quite higher. Add to that, the grass side of the bump is lower in AC, the difference is quite important. Strangely all the test are made from that side of the track (grass to bump to asphalt) and never the other way around... wonder why.
This alone is the most important fault in this whole video. A comparison of two optically similar bumps, that differ in height as much as a normal sidewalk.
Other details.
- Why compare an old late 80s street car with whatever dampers they used back then, against a modern panoz with top of the line dampers, much better chassis, geometry, inertias and so on? Why didn't he choose the X-Bow for example. It's true that even our X-Bow will jump on that kerb but IMHO in a much more predictable way. Remember our kerb is higher and more straight. I'm pretty sure of course that somebody will try hard to make the X-Bow to jump in an equal way... but whatever.
- There is a bug in the current version of AC. I'm sure most of you know. The body of the car goes through kerbs without colliding. It is evident in the video too. This adds to the strange behaviour in many ways, i.e. car does not jump very high at higher speeds (suspension absorbs everything)
This bug was not there in older versions, should be fixed in the next update.
- We have a resolution of 6 vertices on that kerb. This is very low, the tyre goes bumping on practically a straight vertical face from the grass side.
"what? wow you're laser scan the track and then use 6 vertices for a kerb?"
No. We use millions of vertices on the actual track and normal kerbs. On a kerb like that we decide to make economy so that we keep vertices number logical and gaining fps. Why on that kerb or similar? Because that kerb's job is to keep you from cutting. At 6 vertices it does so even better. Decision and compromises. I'm sure rF2 has its own.
- Our low speed physics (under 3-4km/h) sucks. Yes it will manifest in such occasions. What happens is that under that speed the whole suspension/tyres/collision pretty much everything movable, is damped in extreme values. That's why the cars do not bounce nicely when stopped for example. That also means that everything becomes so stiff, that you get those nasty rebounds and jumping at an extreme situation like that.
Why we haven't fixed it yet? We do a racing simulation, such as driving at high speeds against other high speed cars... things like that.
Yes we know that when you park your AC car on a bump it seems silly, but do you prefer we lose a week or two on that, or making better multiplayer? I'm sure people complaining about this will be happy for 2 days of bump riding and then forget it forever, but let us know.
- Do you know most of the bimmers (especially M3's) work on their elastic bump stops most of the time? That design decision makes them comfortable at normal speed cruising and much stiffer when pushing. Being the bump stops much stiffer, means that in extreme situations (such as this) the elastic energy cannot be damped by the dampers quite well. Bouncing is what you might get.
Dunno how the panoz work, can't comment on that.
- Have a re-read of what @Stereo says in his analysis. It's good and can make you understand some more things.
I could go on and on but I won't, makes no sense. Tomorrow, an existing sim or a new one might do off-road surface displacement modelling. Will this make rF2, AC, iR and all the other sims instantly "not real sims"? Heck I thought we were racing on the asphalt.
AC brought Laser scanned tracks, movable aero parts and whatever other features we added... Did all of these made other sims "not real sims"? Really?
I'm a bit pissed off with that video as you can see
But I shouldn't because fortunately there are guys like you that can discuss nicely about such things and I thought I owe you some explanations. But yeah, buy AC because arcade
Anyway, I hope AC gets close to the 10year old RichardBurnsRally Physics one day
another problem the problem is that it is not only borders, sometimes, for example in Formula Abarth in a curve at high speed, so great strength g, the car starts to bounce, so problem .. Imagine later realism during the implementation of the management of damage .... tested on different circuit with all pro setting.
With what car had you that experience? What were its full damper settings?
I have tried all kinds of changes in the suspensions both toughness and rebounding, but I have not gotten the dampers act appropriately. I've even tried to raise the values of aerodynamics to try to paste the car to the ground but it did not work, I modified the heights looking for more travel in the suspension. but not.
this afternoon will try to add captures. The Zonda is the car that I have more problems, but also the McLaren & formula abarth
this afternoon will try to add captures. The Zonda is the car that I have more problems, but also the McLaren & formula abarth
Try this settup for the Z4 GT3 on Nürburgring. Ths has very good and thorough damper and spring rate settings.
Try riding the high curb on Turn 12 (fast right hander before chicane), The car should take it easily, land firmly and prevent oscillation of the suspension.
Report back if that is not the case.
Something else to try: you can post a setup of yours (preferably a GT3 car since I have the most experience with them) and I'll have a look at it.
Try riding the high curb on Turn 12 (fast right hander before chicane), The car should take it easily, land firmly and prevent oscillation of the suspension.
Report back if that is not the case.
Something else to try: you can post a setup of yours (preferably a GT3 car since I have the most experience with them) and I'll have a look at it.
Last edited:
Latest News
-
F1 Manager 2024’s New Mentality System, Pitbox Order DetailedAlongside being able to create a custom team, drivers can now be poached, races can be simulated...- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 2 min read
-
Gran Turismo 7’s Next Update Includes Škoda’s Vision GTAn electric concept marks Škoda’s debut within Gran Turismo, and it will be joined by Honda’s...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 2 min read
-
How The BTCC and Motorsport Games ReunitedIn a surprise move last week, official BTCC content will once again be present within rFactor 2...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 5 min read
-
Sponsored MOZA Racing & Lamborghini Redefine Racing Boundaries with The Real Race Super Trofeo 2024MOZA Racing proudly announces its collaboration with Lamborghini for the launch of The Real Race...- OverTake.gg
- Updated:
- 6 min read
-
Forza Horizon 5 Apex Allstars Update Adds Five New Race Cars, Plus Yet More DLCA new Apex Allstars Festival Playlist kicks off this Thursday in Forza Horizon 5, joined by a...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 3 min read
-
F1 24's Updated Car Performance and Handling ExplainedWhile we haven’t tested it yet, on paper it sounds like significant changes have been made to...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 3 min read
-
Tim Jarschel Wins 2024 DTM Esports Pro championshipCombining searing pace with consistency, Jarschel took home the title despite a charge from...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 3 min read