Or that they need more testers to test these things so they can roll them out all at once. Like I said, I can understand quarterly changes as it relates to new content and features, but when it comes to something that changes the entire way a car feels, I would rather than be rolled out for every vehicle at the same time. I shouldn't need to keep notes to know which NTM each car is on at the moment.
Blkout, you raised very good points in these posts (the one responding to a post of mine, and this one, specifically).
I too feel that the NTM roll out was done poorly, and even worst explained. At some point, there was chaos, with people looking at the release notes stating which car had received the NTM, but at the same time wondering why cars which hadn't were however behaving worst then before.
I understand what Bakkster said and agree (with the need to fully test, and the time it takes), however here's what I think:
if a sim is well built, then it follows RL processes. In this case, the tire model is (should be) independent of the other physics aspects (chassis and aerodynamics and also suspensions). If it is well built, then it is (as DK claims) modular, which means you can take out the OTM and put in the NTM.
I can understand rolling out the NTM in phases (the initial release was more of a marketing necessity, especially considering they didn't have the people to a roll out across the board), which is why you have to maintain two entirely different TMs in the same engine (what a mess that can be).
Problem is: what if the NTM is not exactly legacy-code free? That is the only way to force the coexistence of two entirely different pieces of systems of physics algorithms. Which means, the NTM holds inside the OTM, which can be switched on or off depending on the roll out map.
Another thing is not vehicle engineers but rather vehicle dynamicists. You don't need an army of them. But you do need one or two good ones. If I understood it correctly, other than DK himself, the core team didn't have a vehicle dynamicist, but programmers and testers which could and had to do all things at once. Chris Lerch will have a enormous impact on iRacing, if he sticks around and he truly believes in its physics engine (one look at his tools tells me he is on the right path).
Anyway, as Blkout said, no one should have to keep notes on which cars have a NTM, which have the NNNTM, which have the OTM, which will be transitioning soon. Looks messy and doesn't instil confidence.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Seta model updates for pCARS didn't always come out on every car at once, right?
No indeed, if I'm not mistaken. And the reason is similar to what happens in some professional simracing leagues when we got hold of specs for last summer's tires chosen by FIA or the organization of this or that championship:
you have to see what impact tire changes will have on the projected handling. Curiously, just like in real life.
If a model is well designed (at the core, physics implementation) then it's no longer a matter of looking for inconsistencies, but rather check and recheck and re-re-check the calibration models in order to see what exactly is contradicting the intended nature of the tire.
It may sound odd and overly complicated, but that's my experience and also what I was told by devs.
