PC1 Latest Build testing.

[Andy_J]

As you all know, Ian gave me a free pass to test the latest builds and that's what I have been doing for the last week. I will report here as and when I see fit to tell all about my findings.

But I will say that the latest build (296) is quite good. Now lets make some sense of my statement. I used a Lotus 98T in helmet cam using my antique MOMO red wheel and I can honestly report it is coming along much better than I anticipated. The actual feel and immersion is damn fine at this point. The handling is strange at first compared to say...RF2 and FVA, but it grows on you within minutes. At this point in time, this actual car feels good. I like it and I love the Milan circuit. The damage model has come on leaps and bounds.

I am doing some more testing all of next week using a G27 and I will also test some of the other cars that don't interest me as much (I am a F1 nut) and see how the feel in comparison to Shift 2, because that is what I was initially comparing PCars to.

I would like the replay function to have a directors mode though. Something that jumps from action to action and from car to car.

Aside from that, the replay's do crash my PC quite often but I understand that is being looked at.

Watch this space.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

Thankfully these things have been highlighted on WMD by some although more often than not it's drowned out by the usual denialistcrowd, hopefully it gets through to the devs though.

Some of them act as though weight transfer is a visual thing, and that how we set up our view determines our perceptions......this is total nonsense to me and is just an excuse for what will most likely be Shift3.

 

[Mark Quigley]

Some of them act as though weight transfer is a visual thing, and that how we set up our view determines our perceptions......this is total nonsense to me and is just an excuse for what will most likely be Shift3.

This is very general and depends on the vehicle, try getting as long wheel base sprinter or a rigid flatbed sideways, you feel nothing through the wheel or arse.
The opposite being say an mx-5/miata/eunos or anything rwd, you feel it before it happens through the wheel and arse.
With ffb tweaking and the use of tweakers you can get all the cars feeling good but i'm getting fedup tweaking every car on the grid, by the time I got all the cars I enjoy dialed in, its a new build and it all starts again. I have not found a single setting that works for all cars yet.

 

[Graham Byford]

I can't get proper feel out of any of the cars in the game even with tweaking, I find a dead zone in the middle masked by a spring and the proper forces don't build up early or strong enough to feel what the rear of the car is doing until it's too late, also it feels quite notchy and I can't make sense of many of the effects I'm feeling. I'm going to be busy working over the next few weeks so will not have time to test the builds, hopefully when I return to the game it will have improved in this area.

 

[LaFail]

Ok so i gave rFactor 2 and iRacing a try after getting my money back from SMS. What a relief, not having to deal with idiotic negativists, which is will jump on every thread that points out something negative about the game and they will praise patience and faith, replying to you that everything is still WIP thus you cannot complain about anything. Virtual office my ass, what a joke.

Back to us.

rFactor 2

Bought it and asked for a refund after 3 hours. The FFB is good, the physics feel right but you can't simply have that kind of shitty graphics in 2013. I mean those textures are simply terrible, it may be a step forward to those who played rFactor but god damn it look so bad that it confuses me while i'm driving. NO NO NO. The irony is that i get catastrophic FPS in this thing. (yeah i know it's a beta, but it should run better). Haven't tried MP, which i guess is better than Project Crashfest.

If you get over the graphics it's not bad at all, with the mod community providing a lot content you won't get bored. I guess the online community is very good too.

iRacing

Got the free 3 month subscription (thanks to cadillac cup). Wow. The graphics are OK, not good but i wasn't bothered by it. The FFB is spot-on, perfect. Weight transfer, every single crack in the laser-scanned track, wheel-locking, losing traction on rear wheel. Everything is in there.
Physics are good, but i now can see why some call iceRacing. It's not that bad thought you just have to be more careful on brakes and throttle, and you won't have any problems.
iRating, licences and SR are very good ways to match drivers and the community is no doubt the best. Clean, fast racers even in the rookie class. Perfect MP structure.
The only bad thing i can think of, is the absurd price for additional content and also the subscription isn't cheap at all.
But i assure you i raced the same MX-5 on the same track for a whole week and i have yet to get bored.

Conclusion ? pCARS is a piece of crap, rFactor 2 is outdated, iRacing is very expensive (but almost worth it). Don't buy anything yet (especially pCARS) and wait for Assetto Corsa.
AC should have the best of every game above, pCARS graphics, rFactors modding community, and iRacing's FFB and laser scanned tracks. Oh, and Ferrari's

 

[Chronus]

There you were talking about "not having to deal with idiotic negativists" and here you are proclaiming to having spent money on rF2 and after a hugely long 3 hours asking for a refund.

One thing is criticism. Those "idiots" you referred to above that jump on every criticism and defend pCARS blindly are just what you call them. No more and no less.

But those that can take a criticism and reminded you and others that pCARS is a work-in-progress told you the truth. You don't understand it and accept it, fine, but they are right: pCARS is still undergoing development in many areas and it will take a while before anyone can claim it is a finished product and therefore a rightful target of reviews and criticism.

Same thing with rF2 - actually, even more so. Asking for a refund based on "shitty graphics" and criticizing low FPS (many simracers take days or weeks until they can get most sims to run well) after 3 ridiculously short hours is absurd. rFactor's physics engine is still one of the best out there, so ISI will deliver an even better physics engine given enough time; its graphics now are not what the end-user will experience upon completion of development.

But it is easy to see where you're coming from...

 

[Andy_J]

Try Game Stock Car. You might be pleasantly suprised. But for me, I went back to the Race 07 and GTR2 sims for my fix. Might be old but they are whole and they are fantastic.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

Conclusion ? pCARS is a piece of crap, rFactor 2 is outdated,

Pcars has great potential as a simcade/Shift3 game, but IMO, there's very little to indicate that the driving model/FFB will have the level of detail that the typical sim has.

Even though rf2 was a bit rough when it first came out, it was obvious it's driving model and FFB were sim, and atm, it's better than ever, though I still believe that some of the problem cars are down to a G27, as many of them drive beautifully.....and as it stands, rf2 has the best FFB of any sim even with G27 limitations.

IMO, ISI should increase texture detail in the cockpit view, then it'd look far better.

rf2 has enough good-great cars and heaps of tracks for me to recommend any sim fan buy it, but do take the time to ensure your wheel and car are set well+10 or more laps have been run to rubber in.

 

[Chronus]

On the contrary, based on his comments and people working with him, AJ's physics engine shows potential enough to be used as a racing sim physics engine. Not simcade or Shift 3. From that, indications are pCARS will end up being a good sim.

But then...some very vocal managers and investors may derail or may have derailed that approach. And then there's the financial services situation.

As I said time and again, we'll have to wait and see. Reviews and "final comments" before release are unfair, to say the least.

That said, not being interested in the eye-candy and dramatic minutia of visuals/sounds, I am one of those that believes between ISIMotor2 and NKP we have everything to enjoy simracing (and then there's iRacing as well).

 

[Graham Byford]

AJ's tyre model shows some potential but other areas of the physics engine (not AJ's work) lets it down and in my opinion it still falls short as a simulation physics engine as an overall package.

Older sim engines like the original ISI engine produces more accurate and convincing vehicle response and behaviour, ISI's latest work and Kunos have raised the bar even further.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

. From that, indications are pCARS will end up being a good sim.
.

But rf2 for example released their beta 14-15months ago and it was obvious that a fully blown sim was the goal, yet pcars isn't close to rf2 from Jan 2012.
It just seems weird that it's taking so long, plus why are people pretending that it drives so well{it's adequate as a simcade}.

 

[Chronus]

AJ's tyre model shows some potential but other areas of the physics engine

What areas are those? Do you know the origins of the framework?

RE: older sims.

Age should not matter. If a game engine has the proper physics in place, it'll never be old or "outdated". People will always find ways of exploring it differently.

ISI's framework is solid and flexible - in particular its 2.0 version. They decided to "tweak" it a little bit in some areas and decided for a semi-theoretical approach to tire modelling, but the original 2.0 is still one of the best.

As for Kunos: I have read articles by Stefano and viewed his presentation, I am certain that most people that talk about raising the bar with AC don't know enough to say that. In reality, only Stefano or Aris know exactly how innovative, revolutionary the sim actually is.

Most of you are too caught up in the novelty of these latest developments and believe older sims are outdated - no actual, factual data to support that, just a fuzzy idea "better graphics+sounds+physics models equals raising the bar".

In regards to pCARS, too early to tell if it will be a fail or not. Let the developers finish what they are doing. It is inevitable that in pCARS and rF2 some of the things are far from being fully implemented, and others may still change significantly before the final stages. Labelling both titles as "crap" or outdated or way above anything else is premature and unjustified.

 

[Chronus]

But rf2 for example released their beta 14-15months ago and it was obvious that a fully blown sim was the goal, yet pcars isn't close to rf2 from Jan 2012.
It just seems weird that it's taking so long, plus why are people pretending that it drives so well{it's adequate as a simcade}.

Hmmm...ISI has a strong history behind it in terms of physics engine development. I believe their focus would always be primarily in improving ISIMotor; later on, netcode and gfx would also undergo significant development and changes. So, only natural to find rF2's beta as a precursor to a "fully blown sim".

I think there are reasons (some more obvious than others) for why pCARS is as it is today. SMS can count on Doug and AJ and also Ben C., but the company and the development itself is much more than these 3 alone. Plus, the mid and long term goals of SMS are not those of ISI, hence why the focus is not primarily (IMO) on physics and physical realism. This does not mean that in the end pCARS will be not sim-oriented - again, there is still some time to see it developed to the fullest.

 

[LaFail]

There you were talking about "not having to deal with idiotic negativists" and here you are proclaiming to having spent money on rF2 and after a hugely long 3 hours asking for a refund.

Same thing with rF2 - actually, even more so. Asking for a refund based on "shitty graphics" and criticizing low FPS (many simracers take days or weeks until they can get most sims to run well) after 3 ridiculously short hours is absurd. rFactor's physics engine is still one of the best out there, so ISI will deliver an even better physics engine given enough time; its graphics now are not what the end-user will experience upon completion of development.

I already said that rF2 is a great sim, with great FFB. But there are games out there that you simply don't like/can't play for various reasons. The main reason here for me are the extremely outdated graphics, not physics. Sometimes it's that simple. I have nothing against rF2.

By the way, it took me 15 seconds to set up iRacing to run solid 83FPS on my pc.

(Also, i played it for 2 days after asking for my refund, so my opinion isn't based on a 3 hour experience)

 

[Chronus]

No, you stated clearly: "Bought it and asked for a refund after 3 hours."

It is that simple: 3 hours are not enough for anyone to evaluate a sim (any sim). It may give you an idea, but not one in which all the facts are known and weighed.

iRacing taking 15 seconds to setup? Ok, if you say so. But that in itself says nothing of other sims - they may be more complex than iRacing in some areas, or it may just happen that iRacing is a full product (even one under continuous improvement) whereas rF2 and pCARS are under development and have not been released.

But have it your way. You reject sims because they're not good looking or visually appealing - they're not finished (a long way to release time still), have placeholder graphics/shaders/etc, but still not appealing to you. Sure.

 

[Graham Byford]

Most of you are too caught up in the novelty of these latest developments and believe older sims are outdated - no actual, factual data to support that, just a fuzzy idea "better graphics+sounds+physics models equals raising the bar".

Not a novelty but driving and racing cars for the last 18 years both on tarmac and gravel and having an appreciation of real world physics, that's all the factual data I need.

 

[LaFail]

No, you stated clearly: "Bought it and asked for a refund after 3 hours."

It is that simple: 3 hours are not enough for anyone to evaluate a sim (any sim). It may give you an idea, but not one in which all the facts are known and weighed.

iRacing taking 15 seconds to setup? Ok, if you say so. But that in itself says nothing of other sims - they may be more complex than iRacing in some areas, or it may just happen that iRacing is a full product (even one under continuous improvement) whereas rF2 and pCARS are under development and have not been released.

But have it your way. You reject sims because they're not good looking or visually appealing - they're not finished (a long way to release time still), have placeholder graphics/shaders/etc, but still not appealing to you. Sure.

Listen...

I played it for 2 days before writing that post, don't bring me the clearly stated crap. It's enough for me to decide if i want to spend my money on it, so speak for yourself next time. iRacing also has bad graphics for today's standards but i can play it all day long. Those pre-2005 textures in rF2 on the other hand are really irritating, among almost everything else.

pCARS took me 1 minute to set up, GSC the same, AC the same, RRRE the same and every other older sim i just max the settings and it will run fine. What games are you speaking of exactly that take so long to set up ?

Why do you feel the urge to remember me that RF2 and pCARS (member since March 2012) are under development and what has that to do with adjusting the graphical settings ? I had no problems with either of those games in that aspect, even if they are alpha/beta.

Your "crap", not mine.

Come up with something less pathetic and answer my questions maybe.

 

[Chronus]

Listen...
I played it for 2 days before writing that post, don't bring me the clearly stated crap.

Your "crap", not mine.

Not a novelty but driving and racing cars for the last 18 years both on tarmac and gravel and having an appreciation of real world physics, that's all the factual data I need.

You confuse personal experience with factual data on the physics of racing sims.

My "personal experience" ("driving and racing cars") surpasses yours in 5 years or so, still that in itself is meaningless when it comes to the "raising the bar" idea. You have to dig deeper (vehicle dynamics and simulations) in order to be understand that, and even then you'll still be missing information which only developers are in possession of.

 

[Chronus]

Why do you feel the urge to remember me that RF2 and pCARS (member since March 2012) are under development and what has that to do with adjusting the graphical settings ? I had no problems with either of those games in that aspect, even if they are alpha/beta.

Come up with something less pathetic and answer my questions maybe.

Quite lacking in education, mate, aren't you?

Also, the part quoted above was added by you after my last post.

Anyway, as you deliberately missed the point and tried to editorialize your own words (your nickname does you justice), there really is no point in discussing this any further.

 

[LaFail]

Not at all, but it's fun to see you getting butthurt and replying to me with with cheap, pathetic insults. But please, feel free to "escape", flawed arguments take you only so far, you know ?

About your point....the same point that has nothing to with this thread or even pCARS you mean ? Open a thread in rF2 section and discuss with yourself, i don't care. It has nothing to do with my original post.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

pen a thread in rF2 section and discuss with yourself, i don't care. It has nothing to do with my original post.

You said you were getting low frames rates, so was I on my old PC, but my new one is 3x more powerful and some of the lag I was getting is gone, so now all that's left is the weird FFB on some cars.
If you get a more powerful PC, retry rf2, you should like it, but no question it's far more finicky than probably any sim.