Reiza please consider editable files

[morsify]

Reiza,
this is definitely the best incarnation of GSC so far, but I must ask you again, please let us edit some of the files.
Many of us enjoy the fact that the AI are very good to race offline, perhaps the best I have seen.

I am not an expert by any means but I have learnt a fair bit about editing the Gmotor files over the years, and with access to hdv & engine files, I can build a season where the racing is extremely close, the tyre wear and fuel usage closely match mine, the field behaves realistically, there are mechanical failures in line with the racing era, and the pit stops become an important part of the strategy.

You know far more than I do, and you therefore know that it is difficult, with these files locked away, to really enjoy any more than short sprint races. So while it works ok for the Stocks and the Minis, the discrepancies are too noticeable on a 70 lap formula 1 race. There is no way to adjust these discrepancies and keep the racing close for the entire race.

You know what I am asking. I respect your work completely, but I do not understand why this tweaking is discouraged. It is surely what the GMotor engine was designed for, to allow the user to access and control the race experience.
It would give your brilliant game a much wider appeal and longevity.

The same applies to the race calendar. First, there is no way of knowing what the next race is until you actually go there, which seems strange. Secondly, we should be able to edit and choose the order of races, to alter the season. Again, more longevity for the game. Let's not fool ourselves, I know that you know, that we use other tracks. But even your team members have produced some superb addon tracks, so for instance we cannot even include Alex's tracks in a custom season. This is surely a must have option in current race sims, to be able to alter the season from year to year.

I am not moaning about the quality of your game, I think it is excellent, and also great value. But please consider what I have asked. Many of us enjoy offline racing only.
Thank you if you have read any of this.

regards
Keith

 

[soda]

I've just thought of something though. Now that the rFM files aren't hidden, it's possible that you could use CTDP's Championship Manager NX to create championships for GSC (just point it to your GSC directory rather than rF) - I haven't tried it but it might work...

yes, it does work FerrariMan96, thank you!

 

[Wedsley Dias]

Thanks @FerrariMan96 for the information and suggestion . As soon as I get home I will test it.

 

[FerrariMan96]

yes, it does work FerrariMan96, thank you!

Glad to hear that myself

 

[Tom Lory]

My favorite feature of rFactor (rF1) that makes it a sim not a video game for me is being able to customize the performance, feel and sound of the vehicles with the hdv, sfx, tbc, engine and gears ini files. Being able to do so also means being able to fix, improve and make more realistic mods which missed the mark for me and my online sim racing friends.

A mass market product almost never meets my requirements nor standards fully and it's refreshing to be able to improve it with minimal investment.

Because of the similarities to rF1, I assumed that GSC was the same in that regard and was very disappointed that I got caught up in the hype and didn't take a closer look before I committed to and purchased GSCE.

I appreciate the accessibility of the engine and gears files but an explanation of how hiding a couple of text files (hdv and tbc) will prevent "piracy" of GSCE would be entertaining, especially when I doubt that getting to them would be difficult for those who would seek to "steal" them. I'm sure that doing so would screw another customer but "hide" the .mas files instead, if that's even possible.

Perhaps Reiza views free mods to the sim as "piracy" in which case it's creating nothing but another game console product and diverging from the rFactor model that keeps people buying rF1.

I'm content to stick with rF1 and the dozens of mods and the hundred or so tracks that I've barely tried until someone releases a sim that is better in every way.

Just give me rF1 plus rF2 force feedback, dynamic rubbering in and marbles. That's it, I don't need prettier graphics, more realistic deformation of bodywork nor animated umbrella girls. Barring a monetary miracle, this is the only way that I get to go racing.

 

[David Wright]

Reiza are using the rF engine but just like simbin, they are not trying to sell an rFactor type mod platform, but a complete sim out of the box. Nor would ISI want them to sell a mod platform - I'm not sure how much rF1 costs now but when GSC came out it was cheaper than rFactor.

The first edition of GSC was not encrypted and it was said there were more people running GSC on rF1 servers than GSC servers. This is presumably the piracy issue. I'm not aware of GCS 2013 or GSCE conversions on rF so the encryption does seem to have worked.

 

[Tom Lory]

The bottom line should be preventing anyone from having a working and useable copy of GSC without paying for it not what is done with it by the purchaser for personal use afterwards. That GSC was modified to use on an rF1 server doesn't speak for the users' copies of the sim having been obtained without purchasing from Reiza.

 

[Chronus]

My favorite feature of rFactor (rF1) that makes it a sim not a video game for me is being able to customize the performance, feel and sound of the vehicles with the hdv, sfx, tbc, engine and gears ini files. Being able to do so also means being able to fix, improve and make more realistic mods which missed the mark for me and my online sim racing friends.

Well said.

I appreciate the accessibility of the engine and gears files but an explanation of how hiding a couple of text files (hdv and tbc) will prevent "piracy" of GSCE would be entertaining, especially when I doubt that getting to them would be difficult for those who would seek to "steal" them.

Good point.

Perhaps Reiza views free mods to the sim as "piracy" in which case it's creating nothing but another game console product and diverging from the rFactor model that keeps people buying rF1.

Ah...! That's the crux, isn't it?

The follow-up to that point is...dangerously complicated.

I'm content to stick with rF1 and the dozens of mods and the hundred or so tracks that I've barely tried until someone releases a sim that is better in every way.

You can't go wrong with rF1.

You can't go wrong with GTR2 either, or with Race07. Too many people badmouth the work done by SIMBIN (and Blimey, to a point), conveniently ignoring what ISI themselves consider "redevelopment" (as MR and DS explained, extensive redevelopment on suspensions, tire models, etc).

Just give me rF1 plus rF2 force feedback, dynamic rubbering in and marbles. That's it, I don't need prettier graphics, more realistic deformation of bodywork nor animated umbrella girls.

There are more ways then one to skin...a game engine.

 

[roby13]

i suppose the content that feeds the engine is equaly important or no? are we talking about a sole platform for a die hard modder or a complete product directing to financial success? i think isi motor 2.5 is up until now the most complex vehicle/racing simulation engine accesible to the wider audience but i easily drive gsc cars from niels than anything for rf2.. and by the way why would someone want to edit niels physics files? even if his name is chronus

 

[Tom Lory]

Not saying that Roby13 is stating that they are but I wouldn't consider the hdv and tbc files to be physics files, they're just settings; well, maybe the tbc tires file is somewhere in between.

To me sim racing game physics is the deeper programming that attempts to duplicate real life physics and relay vehicle dynamics through a force feedback steering wheel and the display. In real life terms, swapping my street tires for DOT track tires isn't altering physics, it's just raising the grip and traction levels.

Even a super highly regarded mod like Enduracers is strife with simple mistakes either through misunderstanding, poor testing, perhaps goals set by people who know little about real life cars and racing or just not enough time to keep polishing. For example, there's an engine mapping "boost level" available in the game. At least one of the cars made LESS power and used more fuel when it was supposed to be on a faster boost map. For the most part, the only way to get a balanced racing class of cars for most of the mods that I've been exposed to is to tweak them or just run a single make spec class.

 

[Chronus]

I wouldn't consider the hdv and tbc files to be physics, they're just settings; well, maybe the tbc tires file is somewhere in between.

Well, they are part of the physics. That is a misconception many have.

In a somewhat high-level perspective, two things are crucial to any physics modelling (from astrophysics simulations, to flight sims and racing sims):
- the encoded mathematical/physical algorithms and the coding blocks (classes, interfaces, methods)
- the data calibration models

What you have exposed by hdv/tbc/engine/pm files are the interfaces for calibrating the model. They're not, however, just simple settings. You can find settings for gears, camber, sway bars, toe, caster, brakes, pressure and springs/shocks, but most of these are subject to and the result of calculations prior to the game engine's own calculations. There was a video of a Mclaren Systems vehicle dynamicist in which he explained what exactly are these data calibration models, and the kind of calculations that go into them, how crucial they are for the right output from the simulation itself.

That misconception above ("I wouldn't consider the hdv and tbc files to be physics, they're just settings") is partly why we have so many bad mods for a number of sims
(isiMOTOR2 based or otherwise).

For instance...

Inertias (contrary to how some "modders" and devs think) are vital to getting the proper car behaviour. Those that dismiss it usually mistreat the subject or don't quite know enough about it. The calculations for getting the inertias right, outside of CAD-tools (which I have seen can output incorrect figures due to a number of factors), are complex. [NOTE: there's another reason for dismissing inertias, and that is lack of confidence in pMOTOR2. For those, a simple box suffices, when in fact it does not.]

The same goes for suspensions (roll centers and gradients, springs, shocks, TLLTd, etc), tires (slip curves, peaks, longitudinal and lateral forces, speed effects, load sensitivities, rolling resistances, damper figures, springyness, temperature generation due to rolling and sliding, friction coefficients), aerodynamics (which are rather complex if one intends to calculate CoP's, drag, negative/positive lift, lateral and longitudinal forces, etc).

All these require extensive calculations prior to defining chassis physics (inertias, suspensions, aeros), tire physics, and even suspension geometries, in order for the final physics model of each car to make sense and yield the proper behaviour from the physics engine.

By the way, one major dev studio that I visited had a massive and complex vehicle dynamics calculator the vehicle dynamics team uses for defining the physics for each car (from american stock cars, to Grand tourers, to GT3 and GT2 cars). Goes to show that, regardless of the final result of the sim (light sim, arcade, serious sim, hardcore sim) some studios take these "settings" rather serious...

To me sim racing game physics is the deeper programming that attempts to duplicate real life physics and relay vehicle dynamics through a force feedback steering wheel and the display. In real life terms, swapping my street tires for DOT track tires isn't altering physics, it's just raising the grip levels.

Well, it's not. A lot of things go into physics modelling. What you are referring to as "physics" is only part of the whole equation.

Even a super highly regarded mod like Enduracers is strife with simple mistakes either through misunderstanding, poor testing or perhaps goals set by people who know little about real life cars and racing.

Not at all.

Firstly, Enduracers is not "highly regarded" by everyone - least of all by those involved in motorsports or motorsports simulations.

Secondly, again wrong: it's not "through misunderstanding" or "poor testing" and (really?!) "goals set by people who know little about real life cars and racing". QUITE the contrary.

They know the equations and modding techniques. They also have great feedback from actual racing teams. They're also fanatic about simulations and believe in what they do.

Their Problem is one of strategy. As explained by a few team members and their development logs, they base "much" of their development and testing on the "feel" conveyed by this or that driver, which ultimately leads to, for example, tweaking tire curves (slip, loads, temps) in order to have proper behaviour under this or that level of downforce.

At some point, this was discussed with a few of the team, but to no avail.

Again: only a matter of strategy. From what I and others know, they don't lack neither the data, nor the information on how to properly use isiMOTOR2.

Change the strategy, and things will change radically.

 

[roby13]

no need to argue about "physics" definition. everyone can have its own. when it comes to terminology we can just look up to chronus' above writings. for example hdv/tbc files are "interfaces for calibrating the model" in a more formal scientific language, so yes u can say they are "settings" in a casual descriptive language. the only thing i wanted to add is that yes, changing tires on track will not alter physics laws but it will certainly change physics output.

 

[Renato Simioni]

The files are encrypted not only to help protect content from being converted, but to protect their own integrity. Per design original content is not supposed to be tampered with.

It´s understandable that if modding is your thing that would come accross as restrictive, then again if that´s the case rF1 is still out there and it´s still excellent as ever as a modding platform.

Not to give the wrong impression - users should be able to enjoy the game as they mean to, and we have actually taken measures to not only to free up parameters, but also improve modded content over the course of GSC´s development. But GSC is first and foremost about its own content, and the consistency in the development of this content which we mean to preserve.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

I've downloaded many mods over the years and most are undeveloped, so anything that we can do to better inform physics modders of "what it takes" has my vote.

 

[morsify]

Not to give the wrong impression - users should be able to enjoy the game as they mean to, and we have actually taken measures to not only to free up parameters, but also

This is the most important point to me as an offline player, and I am very grateful to Reiza for recognizing the need for this access to certain parameters. If the game were ever to become completely 'closed' as far as editing and tweaking, then I would no longer be able to refine it to meet my needs. No matter how good the game is on the surface, such a 'closed' product will always fall short somewhere - Tyre wear discrepancies are one example -

When I discover on a particular track that I have to pit on lap 18, but the AI can continue until lap 24, this is potentially a game breaker for me, as it will mean an extra pit stop for me during a full length race, and so the whole strategy and therefore 'simulation effect' is destroyed.

But having the abilty to add a simple line here and there in gdb, plr, rfm etc, makes all the difference - in this case a simple PlayerTireWear=0.80 or somesuch reduces my wear and puts me back on a par with the AI.

There are too many variables to expect any developer to create a situation where any car & track will perform equitably for any player over any race distance, so this edit-ability is *vital*.

So whilst I agree with the OP that it is great to have access to hdv, tbc files, (and indeed I have asked for it in the past as it allows maximum freedom and creativity), as long as Reiza continue to allow us access to enough of those parameters, I can still make my races completely believable. GSCE in it's current form allows me enough freedom to do this.

I only ask that Reiza continue to hear us when we identify and ask for such parameters to remain open or be made accessible.

And one more point - after all, the absolute genius that created the GMotor engine in the first place (and deserves to be rich on it !), surely intended it to be customisable and I for one am grateful for that.

 

[Chronus]

I can still make my races completely believable. GSCE in it's current form allows me enough freedom to do this.

That is ONE parameter only. With that one parameter you have freedom to influence one thing only. What other parameters are there that allows such "enough freedom"?

am very grateful to Reiza for recognizing the need for this access to certain parameters. If the game were ever to become completely 'closed' as far as editing and tweaking, then I would no longer be able to refine it to meet my needs. No matter how good the game is on the surface, such a 'closed' product will always fall short somewhere - Tyre wear discrepancies are one example -

You are given the ability to tweak...tire wear (among dozens and dozens of parameters) and for that you're grateful.

Well, you're not actually a modder or someone who wants to correct things that developers such as SMS/RS/SIMBIN/ISI (intentionally or not) incorrectly define.

Then this line is not for you:

It´s understandable that if modding is your thing that would come accross as restrictive, then again if that´s the case rF1 is still out there and it´s still excellent as ever as a modding platform.

Others (many), however, will return to rF1 (or go with rF2) when the ability to incorporate mods is gone. Some will even go the AC way ( a good friend of mine is slowly growing to like AC and believing in its proposed realism).

-----

There are 2 aspects to the "modding" matter in this and other sims:
- modify original content
- add content

With rF, GTR2, Race07 or even GSC2012 we can add content (tracks, cars, plugins) as we wish.

With GSC2012, however, the ability to modify original content is gone (by content, in this case, I refer to physics files). We can, however, replace the original content entirely just by editing a certain type of file which remains open to us. That is what I did, and for me that is a jewel - it's comfortably easy and certainly not illegal (I'm thinking of some alterations effected to some racing games in the last 3 years, via hex-editing some containers).

I ignore if this ability (to actually replace the original physics content) was eliminated or not - if it has been eliminated, then it is one more step towards the obvious conclusion.

As I said in regards to pCARS and SMS, preventing modding is the developer's right. We may not like it, but it is a business. That is their foremost concern (legitimate, yes).

So, as the quote above by RS hints at, we can always return to those racing sims we can still mod - rF, GTR2, Race07...or GSC2012.

And one more point - after all, the absolute genius that created the GMotor engine in the first place (and deserves to be [...]

ISI created isiMOTOR2 and intended for redevelopment to take place. SRW, SIMBIN and The Sim Factory have all made a mark via that redevelopment. That is the true legacy of ISI's work. Fully agree with you, we have to be grateful for that.

 

[morsify]

That is ONE parameter only. With that one parameter you have freedom to influence one thing only. What other parameters are there that allows such "enough freedom"?

Chronus, I simply gave ONE example of a parameter that can be changed. I do not pretend to know them all, but since you appear to have a higher than average knowledge of the subject, you will surely know that there are numerous other parameters that can still be accessed.
And with your apparent knowledge you are probably capable of adding any hdv, tbc, or pm file that you wish.

You are given the ability to tweak...tire wear (among dozens and dozens of parameters) and for that you're grateful.

Same answer as above.

I'm not arguing that things are as open as rF1. I simply state that I have been able to tweak things to MY satisfaction. That includes, but is not restricted to, tyre wear, temperatures & compounds, & aspects of refuelling, and I believe that anyone that is in search of high quality offline racing can still find it here if they research & experiment with those parameters.

 

[roby13]

u still can replace files through the .veh files pointing to the vehicles' various data to be called. but for me the question remains: is niels' physics calibration correct or not. and if someone thinks it isnt why not posting it to the bug report thread. niels has answered in the past.

 

[morsify]

u still can replace files through .the veh files pointing to the vehicles' various data to be called

Exactly this. I understand Reiza protecting their files, but there are still ways to add in changes you want to make, whilst their files remain protected

 

[Chronus]

There are a few things you can do with your "gdb, plr, rfm", Keith, but unless you have access to physics files, you will not accomplish anything relevant in terms of improving your offline experience.

That "access" has built much of the simracing community we have today since the early days of F1C and a little later GTR and rFactor (and it's been more than 9 years already).

Chronus, I simply gave ONE example of a parameter that can be changed. I do not pretend to know them all...

Yes, it's easy to see you don't - and that in itself is no problem, I have been modding/developing for more than 8 years and still today I am learning interesting things.

Which is why I asked which parameters gave you that "enough freedom". But ok, to each his own.

since you appear to have a higher than average knowledge of the subject, you will surely know that there are numerous other parameters that can still be accessed.
And with your apparent knowledge you are probably capable of adding any hdv, tbc, or pm file that you wish.

I bow to your compliments... (lmao)

u still can replace files through .the veh files pointing to the vehicles' various data to be calleds.

roby13, sharp and simple post.

I've downloaded many mods over the years and most are undeveloped, so anything that we can do to better inform physics modders of "what it takes" has my vote.

Fertile terrain for a discussion, and one many of us have had through the years (mostly pCARS related, eh).

With Bristow, Kangaloosh, Kalma, PeterV on physics, and Barry and others on the AI, much was learnt and documented.

The knowledge has been there for more than 10 years, but it still implies a lot of hard work (and professional level tools) and research/contacts for valid data.

Unfortunately, the majority of modders focus mostly on sounds and graphics. Physics is, for most, a matter of copy & paste, or worst case scenario, changes to "gdb, plr, rfm".

Too bad also Bristow and a couple of others staying away from all this. Along with 2 or 3 newcomers (the physics guy of the Blancpain Series mod comes to mind with his will to experiment), we still need good, solid modders around.

 

[morsify]

Yes, it's easy to see you don't - and that in itself is no problem, I have been modding/developing for more than 8 years and still today I am learning interesting things

If I have at some time insulted you I apologise, but I am really not sure what I ever did to incur your insults.
Still, I am surprised you should need me to list more examples. I never pretend to know everything, I just help when I can even if in a small way.
Meanwhile, if you choose to 'see that I don't know' then that is fine by me. Good luck to you.