PC1 Reaction to the newer builds

[Randy Winston]

I have been avoiding pCARS for a while, because of problems with input lag and laggy graphics at the lowest settings. I decided to give it another try this evening as I had nothing to do. I'm glad I did, as it is massively improved since I last tried it a couple of months ago. I think some fine tuning with regards to my ffb settings and this could be great fun. I'm looking forward to this game, mostly on the consoles, because if there isn't going to be modding, I'd rather have it on there anyway. So to the detractors, I urge you to give it another shot. They are getting there.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

. No approximation in simulators.

How many physics programmers do SMS have?

 

[Super Koala]

How many physics programmers do SMS have?

Don't know, you can probably ask them. I don't see the what that has to do with simulation. I should think the bulk of the equations are fairly standard by now. I should think it's a question of processing time at the moment. Might just be a bunch of look-up tables in these games for all I know. The actual graphic of the vehicle could be shaped like a brick and still drive like a e type Jag.

Also, don't get me wrong. The reason I don't critisize pCARS is that I'm not qualified to and I know their game is in it's early stages of development. If you feel something is wrong I know they will appreciate constructive critisism. I have seen some of these venomous posts that gets people banned. I wouldn't call them constructive and I can understand if SMS reacts to the unqualified slagging it takes.

 

[Peter]

How many physics programmers do SMS have?

The way the game drives, none. But they must have about a hundred grafics programmers the way it looks.
After the freezes in the latest build they must be fired.

 

[Super Koala]

The way the game drives, none. But they must have about a hundred grafics programmers the way it looks.
After the freezes in the latest build they must be fired.

Can't help you there Peter. I have a minimum spec machine and using DX9 and I'm not getting freezing. Are you using DX9 or DX11? Maybe trying the graphics settings to a low resource regime might be a starting point. If it still freezes then I can only suggest you try a clean install. If no luck then go to SMS support thread unless anyone here has any more ideas

 

[Peter]

Can't help you there Peter. I have a minimum spec machine and using DX9 and I'm not getting freezing. Are you using DX9 or DX11? Maybe trying the graphics settings to a low resource regime might be a starting point. If it still freezes then I can only suggest you try a clean install. If no luck then go to SMS support thread unless anyone here has any more ideas

I'm not the problem, the problem is build 244/245. There's a new one up(246) but I'll wait till friday.

 

[Graham Byford]

In theory at least, the higher tik rates[more calculations p/second], are supposed to improve fidelity, so if the need for a quad is all about GFX, then maybe we could run at low res/detail and test physics performance.

rf2{the best physics/FFB at the moment} runs fine at 1080p with HDR on my 4yr old e8400 3ghz CPU, so pcars physics on high tik should be astonishing.

As for the SS's, they're obviously very selective, and the cam positioning makes a huge difference, but there's no question pcars has very good GFX, but I worry if the cockpit coffins of Shift2 are returning, ie, cockpits are dimly lit at best.

Regarding tickrates to improve fidelity, don't you need a good working physics engine first using the correct calculations and numbers. Every time I drive pcars it feels and looks nothing like real world physics, the numbers must be way off somewhere...increasing the tickrate is trivial, as is the tyre model, the entire physics engine still needs major work even for a console release.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

I don't see the what that has to do with simulation.

Moreover, consider that part of the reason each of the cars in GSC are done to the level they are, is precisely because we are able to put proper development focus to get the best of each one of them. That´s something we value highly. Even larger dev teams suffer with inconsistent quality when focus is dilluted accross too much content. Most cars in GSC have been extensively developed over a timespan of two years...

Basically, it´s a matter of quality vs quantity.

http://www.racedepartment.com/forum...r-2012-too-good-to-go-without-more-dlc.53022/

 

[David Ignjatovic]

.increasing the tickrate is trivial, as is the tyre model, the entire physics engine still needs major work even for a console release.

I haven't driven the high tikrate builds, but if you're saying it makes no difference then we have a problem if it still drives like the older builds{if simulation is the goal}

 

[Mapu]

You do not need a high-performance race car by all means to judge the driving model of a simulator. To some extend, there is a very easy way to tell the quality of a car simulator and its driving model. Let me stress this again, this test doesn't cover everything of a virtual driving model!

Compare the behavior of the virtual car with the behavior of your real car at low speeds.

That's where even serious pc simulators tend to struggle at times while RBR is the only exception in my opinion. Saying PCARS and the likes have no problems with that is absurd because from what I know, the engine from SMS does exaggerate that imprecise feeling of floating. I mean even some of the much respected driving models (like gMotor) do struggle here.

 

[Super Koala]

You do not need a high-performance car by all means to judge the driving model of a simulator. To some extend, there is a very easy way to tell the quality of a car simulator and its driving model. Let me stress this again, this test doesn't cover everything of a virtual driving model!

Compare the behavior of the virtual car with the behavior of your real car at low speeds.

That's where even serious pc simulators tend to struggle at times while RBR is the only exception in my opinion. Saying PCARS and the likes have no problems with that is absurd because from what I know, the engine from SMS does exaggerate that imprecise feeling of floating. I mean even some of the much respected driving models (like gMotor) do struggle here.

I have a merc 3.2 litre M Class. It does not feel like my old mini at low speeds and I would not expect it to feel like a 288 GTO at low speeds or like a F1 or any formula car at low speeds either. My old Rover 3.5 litre V8 felt nothing like my later Rover at any speed. Who said pCARS have no problems. Not me although I have said it is in it's early stages of development. I amazed people compare it to finished games. Still It's just a video game like all the rest IMHO

 

[Super Koala]

I do know how you feel about real Drivers and their opinions of realness. Thanks to them I bought Dirt 3

 

[Mapu]

I believe I have to add a long list of links to my former posts before saying anything about pcars. Otherwise I would end up writing essays every time I make a post about or in any form of pcars related discussions. Funny enough this only happens when criticizing the early game.

Once again for the record, I never said pcars is a finished product (although everyone is entitled of having a different idea towards which direction this game is heading), and whoever is taking part or joining this discussion knows that. Nobody can miss the "pre-alpha", "early alpha", this game is "not ready" shouting, annotations and advertisements when peeking into the direction of pcars.

People have a strange opinion about people these days.

You do not need to to bluff out of my comment by saying - yeah I have a whole car park and every car behaves differently. Sure they do, but all of your cars have to obey to certain physics, forces and gravity. I know you understand the basic idea of my rough message.

 

[Super Koala]

Sorry Marcel I was not thinking of you when i mentioned the comparison of pCARS to more established games

I did not mean to bluff. I do have a lot of experience of driving different cars as I had a relative who was a car dealer. When I didn't have a car of my own I took whatever was available when I needed transport. This varied from builders vans to The big old Vanden Plas Princess. The only cars I can say I have any expertise in comparing similarities are ex company 1600 fords orVauxhalls. As there were usually a lot of those about. I could probably recognise the feel and characteristics of those in a virtual model, as could many other people.
As regards the basic virtual model, I think most games have a handle on that. The only issue I have is all the nasty posts some people make where pCARS is concerned. When people liken the physics to a turd I would like to know how they know it is so bad. What expertise they have, then I know how valid the criticism is. Comparing the games physics to another game is not realistic in my view unless there is an accepted game that is known to have realistic physics. I haven't met one yet apart from the open cars in rf2. But I am the first to admit that I don't really know, they just have a good feel to them.
Simulation is a whole other ball game. People band these words about and I just wanted to know how they could so positively criticise in such a poisonous manner. If someone said they drove lotus cars or Le Mans prototypes I would then have my validity. If they drove sports cars or raced and had experience I would value their opinion.

Let me point out my logic with pCARS

If someone said pCars has great physics and the cars are realistic I would say, how do you know it's not finished yet

If someone said pCars has the worst physics and the cars are unrealistic, I would say, how do you know it's not finished yet

I also wanted to point out the invalidity of people who drive outside the cockpit as regards simulation and how important good visuals are in simulation being the most important of our senses. As far as I know SMS have not said that they are going to sacrifice a completed physics model for game content or graphics. Or maybe I'm wrong and they have and I missed it.

 

[Andy_J]

Commercial airline sims were the most proffessional, the RAF treated their sims more like a toy really, as I remember.

LOL, you are a troll. Disrespecting the RAF is extremely childish. Yes I did take that personally. But it's only to be expected.

Any way, you are past it now and on a downhill stretch. Modern aviation simulators in use today far surpass your basic overpriced tat.

Back on topic: I think you don't have a clue about modern race sims Peter.

 

[Super Koala]

You are right I don't. In fact that is what I said. By the way I did my time in the RN so I'm well versed in disrespecting the RAF.

 

[Andy_J]

You are right I don't. In fact that is what I said. By the way I did my time in the RN so I'm well versed in disrespecting the RAF.

That explains it.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

. Comparing the games physics to another game is not realistic in my view unless there is an accepted game that is known to have realistic physics.

It's not so much realistic physics*, but also FFB and steering precision, at least that's how I judge, and if you read people's thoughts on why they value any sim, it's often down to those factors.

*obviously the more proof someone can provide regarding the physics of a sim will help it win acceptance with those concerned with realism, but I have heaps of sims, and there often isn't a huge difference between them{other than rf2 which has set the benchmark for quality of FFB, though not all cars, but even then, rf2's worst cars still feel very worthy, but are a bit spin happy on the rear, although front end and brakes are impressive.

Last time I drove pcars, it failed all over the place, in fact, IMO, it isn't as realistic/sim like as the F2P BMW M3 game from 2007.

None of this means that the game can't improve or won't be a success even if it's just GT5/FM on PC, but I have a hard time hailing this as the next PC sim.

 

[Xosé Estrada]

@Peter Nickells

Let's say you have 4 persons trying to measure a distance between two points just by walking it and saying what they think it is.

Number one concludes right answer is 61 m, the second concludes its 58 m, the third concludes its 65 m... And the last one concludes its 18 meters.

What people is doing is conclude the real distance should be around 60 meters, beacause 3 persons estimated something around that.

The same way, if roughly ISI based Sims (Race, rFactor, GSC, ...), iRacing, netKar go in the same direction and concept about what real means, and pCars goes in a total different one, most likely the person measuring 18 m is pCars in this case, specially if other simcades measure "18 m" as well.

Compare sims is not stupid, its a good tool.

Regarding comparission with real life, most real drivers will support the product they have contract with

For GT Academy drivers GT5 is "the real driving simulator", for simraceway ones that is over all the rest, for others iracing its the only sim, etc... all depends on who pays.

I never drove all the real cars in all the sims, but there are some basics in common and with my limited amateuristic experience in track with few of them I can say what is similar to what I feel driving in real life and what doesn't...

 

[David Ignjatovic]

To me, GSC 2012 and rf2 are the benchmark in sim racing, IOW, if it doesn't look and smell like either of those, then it's either a poor sim or a simcade.

 

[Randy Winston]

Well, so much for positive thinking