PC1 Is Project CARS a simulation? lets vote!

[Mike85]

Hi guys!

The time has come and many sim fans have purchased and tested Project Cars already! So lets express our opinion about how ''SIMMY'' this title is!

 

[Leynad777]

Definitely not a sim,all you have to do to find out is to get the c9 mercedes out for a spin at Nurburgring with both games assetto and project cars ,you will soon find out the huge difference between the arcade and the sim.
I think we all understand the words arcade and simulation ,that's why i think that project cars is a bad simulation ,it is impossible to hit full throttle in a 900 hp beast out of a corner and nothing to happen not even a decent spin .If you do it in assetto you'll find yourself spinning out of track. I don't say that in the assetto the representation is super exact as it is in real life but i can say for sure that is far more near to it.

And you think, a real C9 could only be as sensible as in AC, even when the corner-speeds with full wings are lousy compare to a much heavier Lotus Evora GX. I don´t think that these cars are so sensitiv with the throttle than AC is assuming. I can´t find a video of the C9, but one of a C11 from 1990, and as you see (green bar), he´s giving full metal before the car is straight and in AC he would spin like an idiot with this technique:

And there´s one thing pCars has better physics for sure. Driving turns like Schwedenkreuz or the Eau Rouge in a GT3 with full speed is only possible in AC. In every other sim you have to slow down a little, like in reality

 

[ouvert]

So I`ve done some quick testing as suggested ..
BAC Mono is sliding to extend when watching steering inputs from real world videos it feel almost like bug
Formula Renault 98Turbo has some kick in a back if you over rev it on 2nd gear and when turbo kicks in .. just enough to be fun to drive, not enough to be really challenging
McLaren P1 is as I expect it to be, easy to drive, stable, padal to the floor with little understeer
Old Merc is floaty as it should be
Group 5 cars are forgiving



I think that cars that supposed to be easy to handle are done well and cars that supposed to be more challenging are made more "user friendly" to avoid frustration and ease it up for wider masses while maintaining illusion you are doing a good job driving that monster
Overall physics are good, more forgiving, specially in catching slides and I often get out of situations I shouldn`t .. at the end I get what I expect to get and what I wanned pCars to be: fun simcade with lots of options .. as that is something that is missing on this platform ... so I fine with it

 

[siranodb]

And you think, a real C9 could only be as sensible as in AC, even when the corner-speeds with full wings are lousy compare to a much heavier Lotus Evora GX. I don´t think that these cars are so sensitiv with the throttle than AC is assuming. I can´t find a video of the C9, but one of a C11 from 1990, and as you see (green bar), he´s giving full metal before the car is straight and in AC he would spin like an idiot with this technique:

And there´s one thing pCars has better physics for sure. Driving turns like Schwedenkreuz or the Eau Rouge in a GT3 with full speed is only possible in AC. In every other sim you have to slow down a little, like in reality

www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1lgTWWoCMo
I didn't saw spinning like an idiot there in assetto did you?
Assetto is difficult but i could say the same for the real life car if i or you had the opportunity to drive the real thing i am sure that we would spin like idiots !
At eau rouge in a gt3 you can do that in assetto you are right but with optimum grip ,in real life we don't have optimum grip the most of the time ,in assetto you have the chance to try different grips which are variable with the progress lap after lap and with the number of cars .
Nevertheless there is a video in which a z4 passes eau rouge in full throttle.
https://vimeo.com/101746997
Try assetto and you will not lose ,but you must have patience to understand the depth of the simulation achieved by kunos.
I don't want to say that i don't like project cars but i want to say that assetto is a better sim.

 

[Kyle Pearson]

What some people seem to forget: many many many race with 100% grip in AC and wonder why there is so much grip. If you turn that down to green for example things look different.

Can you change the grip level in PCars? Haven’t checked that, yet.

Can't directly force the track to be green or rubbered in on pCARS.
.

 

[gabriel gary]

And you think, a real C9 could only be as sensible as in AC, even when the corner-speeds with full wings are lousy compare to a much heavier Lotus Evora GX. I don´t think that these cars are so sensitiv with the throttle than AC is assuming. I can´t find a video of the C9, but one of a C11 from 1990, and as you see (green bar), he´s giving full metal before the car is straight and in AC he would spin like an idiot with this technique:

And there´s one thing pCars has better physics for sure. Driving turns like Schwedenkreuz or the Eau Rouge in a GT3 with full speed is only possible in AC. In every other sim you have to slow down a little, like in reality

the only reason they lift is to place the car and because on real life you actually sense the danger about going flat out on such a place.....
its not like we havent see them going flat out they do in certain hot days they go flat out
this doesnt mean anything if you replicate a grip level of 94-95% that a track has on the usual 2-3 first lap then you will see how hard it is

 

[Jyri Kettunen]

Unfortunately it doesn't matter if it's even "old" grip, cold & hard tyres and a full tank. You can still go flat-out at Schwedenkreuz and Eau Rouge in AC with GT3s.

 

[Ghoults]

A vote means an opinion, and while you can have different opinions, facts are simply facts. And facts say it's a sim:

Tire model: http://www.wmdportal.com/projectnews/inside-project-cars-seta-tire-model/
Physics/simulation: http://en.pcars.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Physics

Those are not facts that prove anything about the quality of the tire model. But if you are willing to take their word then surely forza 4 was a sim too then? you know, they worked with pirelli to improve their tire model:
http://www.pirelli.com/tire/us/en/n...hts-pirelli-and-forza-motorsport-partnership/
Surely a marketing post on tire manufacturer site is a bigger fact than some pr material the pcars makers self published on their own website?

I have never understood why some people are so incredibly willing to take some developer's word as the ultimate truths. I mean gran turismo has called itself the "real driving simulator" for decades and I sincerely hope nobody believes that... no matter how much I personally played the gt5 for example...

In the end it really shouldn't make pcars any better or worse if it is a sim or not. What matters in the end how good it is being what it is. I can't help thinking that some people won't vote it as simcade because that term is so negative. It is almost like if the game isn't a sim it is not worth playing.

To me the game seems to fall very nicely into the same group with gran turismos and forzas. Believable handling, nice weather effects and still easy and light enough to drive few laps without having to manage your inputs as precicely as you'd need with a sim that has more depth to it.

That's complete bollocks.. Try the Lotus 49, 98turbo (not wastegate pressure defaults to mid levels! set it to full and it's one of the trickiest simcars ever), some of the american muscle, old mercedes benz (forgot the model but that old huge piece of junk), BAC Mono, McLaren P1 (which is way way harder to drive in pCars than for instance in AC where you can literally floor the pedal at any point in time without any consequences.. so I guess AC is complete simcade, right?).

Difficulty does not correlate with realism in sims. Some arcade games can be super difficult to drive because those games may have fully scripted spins, cars reacting weirdly to obstacles or just plain unpredictable tires or suspension. Some years ago I played some burnout paradise game and catching a slide in that game was more difficult than I've ever seen in any sim.

And you think, a real C9 could only be as sensible as in AC, even when the corner-speeds with full wings are lousy compare to a much heavier Lotus Evora GX. I don´t think that these cars are so sensitiv with the throttle than AC is assuming. I can´t find a video of the C9, but one of a C11 from 1990, and as you see (green bar), he´s giving full metal before the car is straight and in AC he would spin like an idiot with this technique:

Is the driver in the video using maximum boost like probably everyone does in ac? Same tires too?

Also it doesn't make pcars any more or less sim if ac is by someone considered to be simcade .

 

[gabriel gary]

Unfortunately it doesn't matter if it's even "old" grip, cold & hard tyres and a full tank. You can still go flat-out at Schwedenkreuz and Eau Rouge in AC with GT3s.

yeah and tell me something who in real life uses a setup anywere near our aggresive approach at camber/toe?
no one simply because the tire degredation on real life is much more quicker than on sim....

 

[Anindo]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1lgTWWoCMo
I didn't saw spinning like an idiot there in assetto did you?
Assetto is difficult but i could say the same for the real life car if i or you had the opportunity to drive the real thing i am sure that we would spin like idiots !
At eau rouge in a gt3 you can do that in assetto you are right but with optimum grip ,in real life we don't have optimum grip the most of the time ,in assetto you have the chance to try different grips which are variable with the progress lap after lap and with the number of cars .
Nevertheless there is a video in which a z4 passes eau rouge in full throttle.

Try assetto and you will not lose ,but you must have patience to understand the depth of the simulation achieved by kunos.
I don't want to say that i don't like project cars but i want to say that assetto is a better sim.

I don´t think it´s the grip in AC. Cars with much downforce have to much of it in highspeed corners. Cars with little downforce don´t have this issue. The chief of Kunos itself called AC a baby born in January, which will grow up within the years. Some cars i find very accurate and some not so convincing. It´s just a feeling and i don´t like when people call other sims poor, just because it´s different than AC. I played over 250 hours AC and the Ruf RGT-8 GT3 in pCars is by far my favorite GT3-car, after adjusting the ffb to something like 100/140/140/140 (x/y/z/m) with 22 overall force.

And what i like in pCars most, that you can adjust the grip by the weather. If you like difficult experiences in pCars, take out a fast car in the rain with intermediates or play the career when it could rain any time. AC with the worst grip you can adjust is way more grippy against that.

I don´t like cars, which are way to sensible with the throttle control, because in real life you can adjust this. Old cars from the 80´s IMHO are not so hard to drive than some sims want to believe us. Look to the Nordschleife still record from Stefan Bellof, who did a 6:11 in his Porsche 956 nearly 32 years ago. Gerhard Berger made a 6:15 before. In a C9 you will crash dozens of times before getting near that record. The Mazda 787b i like more in AC and find it more convincing.

Some cars like the G5 are far more easy to drive than in R3E, but this oldschool cars today have modern tyres, suspension and who knows what else. In hillclimb races they are driving through tough corners like on rails. There´s still no career mode for this cars, but i assume it will be something like this and i don´t think, that they are all original under the hood:
http://youtu.be/qfSawdJ9iVw
But pCars should work on the sounds.

 

[Emerson Meyer]

IMHO, if you like it, that's all that matters.

 

[ouvert]

I don´t think it´s the grip in AC. Cars with much downforce have to much of it in highspeed corners. Cars with little downforce don´t have this issue. The chief of Kunos itself called AC a baby born in January, which will grow up within the years. Some cars i find very accurate and some not so convincing. It´s just a feeling and i don´t like when people call other sims poor, just because it´s different than AC. I played over 250 hours AC and the Ruf RGT-8 GT3 in pCars is by far my favorite GT3-car, after adjusting the ffb to something like 100/140/140/140 (x/y/z/m) with 22 overall force.

And what i like in pCars most, that you can adjust the grip by the weather. If you like difficult experiences in pCars, take out a fast car in the rain with intermediates or play the career when it could rain any time. AC with the worst grip you can adjust is way more grippy against that.

I don´t like cars, which are way to sensible with the throttle control, because in real life you can adjust this. Old cars from the 80´s IMHO are not so hard to drive than some sims want to believe us. Look to the Nordschleife still record from Stefan Bellof, who did a 6:11 in his Porsche 956 nearly 32 years ago. Gerhard Berger made a 6:15 before. In a C9 you will crash dozens of times before getting near that record. The Mazda 787b i like more in AC and find it more convincing.

Some cars like the G5 are far more easy to drive than in R3E, but this oldschool cars today have modern tyres, suspension and who knows what else. In hillclimb races they are driving through tough corners like on rails. There´s still no career mode for this cars, but i assume it will be something like this and i don´t think, that they are all original under the hood:
http://youtu.be/qfSawdJ9iVw
But pCars should work on the sounds.

Thing about that 6:11 record (what i red about it) ..it was made on 2 km shorter track (2 km of slow technical part) and measured by taking speed of a car in some corners and calculating/guessing the lap time.. When they tried to do better estimation based on on-board cameras and cameras on helicopter they got to 6:40... still great driving..

 

[Anindo]

Thing about that 6:11 record (what i red about it) ..it was made on 2 km shorter track (2 km of slow technical part) and measured by taking speed of a car in some corners and calculating/guessing the lap time.. When they tried to do better estimation based on on-board cameras and cameras on helicopter they got to 6:40... still great driving.. Just irrelevant in this case

That´s the most stupid thing i read this week and if you have proof, please post it
There was no shorter Nordschleife at this time and Bellof was the only one, who was driving the track with an average speed of over 200 km/h. The best GT-cars today could do close to 180 km/h, but there´s a speed limit on this track in three sections after the accident of the Nissan Nismo GT3 in march (Quiddelbacher Höhe 200 km/h, Schwedenkreuz and Döttinger Höhe 250 km/h). So no new records with the 24h race this weekend.

F1 cars are forebidden since after the Lauda-accident in 1976. Todays F1 cars could possibly do a 5:15 a former, i think, Mercedes-Sauber-Engeneer estimated in 2005 or so. The Radical SR8 did a 6:48 as comparison and i think, much faster prototypes are not allowed to drive there. So really a sim racing thing to beat this record.

PS: Maybe you mixed up some true informations. The Nordschleife was about 2 km longer in the 70´s with just two long straights and a hairpin at the place the GP-track is now. Niki Lauda did a 7,0 minutes lap on his Ferrari 312T on this 22+ km track and i don´t think anybody could do this in AC with this car.

 

[ouvert]

That´s the most stupid thing i read this week and if you have proof, please post it
There was no shorter Nordschleife at this time and Bellof was the only one, who was driving the track with an average speed of over 200 km/h. The best GT-cars today could do close to 180 km/h, but there´s a speed limit on this track in three sections after the accident of the Nissan Nismo GT3 in march (Quiddelbacher Höhe 200 km/h, Schwedenkreuz and Döttinger Höhe 250 km/h). So no new records with the 24h race this weekend.

F1 cars are forebidden since after the Lauda-accident in 1976. Todays F1 cars could possibly do a 5:15 a former, i think, Mercedes-Sauber-Engeneer estimated in 2005 or so. The Radical SR8 did a 6:48 as comparison and i think, much faster prototypes are not allowed to drive there. So really a sim racing thing to beat this record.

In 1981 they started working on some changes on track and in 1983 when Bellof set the record there was a bypass shortening track to 20.8 km (from original 22,835 km + 7.7 km Sudschleife ).

 

[DayGlow]

Everything I read says it is the fastest lap in the tracks current configuration. Haven't found anything about a bypass. Also if you watch video of the lap it was done with traffic on the track making it more amazing.

 

[ouvert]

Everything I read says it is the fastest lap in the tracks current configuration. Haven't found anything about a bypass. Also if you watch video of the lap it was done with traffic on the track making it more amazing.

I`m not saying it is not amazing .. it is still record, still terribly fast, still remarcable .. just saying there was a bypass shortening track (just read history of Nords somewhere ... lenght 20.8 km for that record is stated everywhere, even on official site) who knows how much would 2 km long technical part add to time .. let say he could do GP part in 1:30, take 2 km of those 4.5 km and it could be anywhere between 30-50 seconds (I didn`t go deep enought to find which part of was bypassed) and that would give you 6:40 estimated from onboard camera .. but who knows really

 

[DayGlow]

It's the current configuration. The track is now 20.8km. All the articles reflect this. None have an asterisks or anything else to denote this bypass you are claiming. The Zonda R ran the same length, same as the Radical.

Could you please provide any proof that the track layout is different from the current configuration with this bypass.

 

[Anindo]

In 1981 they started working on some changes on track and in 1983 when Bellof set the record there was a bypass shortening track to 20.8 km (from original 22,835 km + 7.7 km Sudschleife ).

Yes, i read this, but this was due to the shorting of the original track, which is 22,8 km. There´s no layout of the track which is 350m shorter than the 20,835 km from today, so it´s just to round off. And what´s even the difference of fu**ing 350m anyway in this cars, which makes no sense at all, if you know the layout. They had to pass T13, because there was never an other way.

And i estimated with calculator one time, that the 312T of Lauda could do the current layout around 6:25 without this 2 km.

 

[ouvert]

omg DayGlow just google "1000km Nurburgring 1983 bypass" .. .they even builded small pit line cause of that ..

"A year later, in 1981, work began on a 4.5 km (2.8 mi)-long new circuit, which was built on and around the old pit area. At the same time, a bypass shortened the Nordschleife to 20,832 m (12.944 mi), and with an additional small pit lane, this version was used for races in 1983, e.g. the1000km Nürburgring endurance race, while construction work was going on nearby. In training for that race, the late Stefan Bellof set the all-time lap record for the 20.8 km (12.9 mi) Nordschleife in his Porsche 956, which is still unbeaten at 6:11.13, or over 200 km/h (120 mph) on average (partially because no major racing has taken place there since 1984)."
Todays length is the same of course (slightly different layout .. some parts were shortened, some extended), I`m just setting facts straight

Anindo: yep .. pretty much

 

[Anindo]

@ouvert
What do you want to say? There´s no word of any kind that Stefan Bellof was driving only one meter less than today. And the track was bumpy at this times too. And even if he was driving 6:11 with 350 m less, which makes totally no sense form the layout, it would be like 6:15 without these few meters. Still very fast, but you just made this up

 

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

Ye, but that is still the same track that are being used today, and thus in the game I think is the point trying to be made.