This "it's a sim, not a game"-argument is nuts, because sims are games and nothing wrong with it. You can get severely injured in all kind of ball-games, but stupid mistakes usually don't cause physical harm like in Sim-Racing. Just real fighting, racing and athletic sports are not called games, but with infinite cars in a fake-reality more safe than a walk outside it objectively shifts to a game-thing. Never heard of Golf-, Chess- or Tennisplayer complaining for calling their sports 'games' and makes more sense for me to establish Sim-Racing as a gamey sport discipline, because they are more than 'just' computer games.
"Simracers" are a funny bunch, they really don't like to be called "gamers" and be thrown into the same bunch as first person shooters and Fortnight players and yet some of the most incredible human beings train their whole life to once achieve to compete for their nation and themselves at the Olympic Games !
Sim racers are a pretentious bunch ;-)
Thanks.
Part of me is wondering, it's because people have had triples they naturally want them. No one likes change you see, as humans we can be bad at dealing with it. Hence my question.
Of course, everyone is different. But on the flip side, if people dip their tow into ultrawide they might like it.
Your point here is simply incorrect.
A multi screen setup with multi screen projection is by definition a technical improvement over a single single 2 dimensional projection screen.
There is simply no argument if one or the other is better or worse or that users of triple screen setups like to keep their status quo.
It is the analogy of the one day that all car manufacturers phase out motorized vehicle production and start setting wooden carts you can pull with your donkey or horse or cow. One is simply the technical evolution of the other. One is better then the other, more immersive, more accurate, offering more options.
One could have the same argument about VR goggles vs screen based devices - VR is the evolution of 2 dimensional screens. There is just no argument about that.
The current situation though is that with proper multi projection multi screen support there are more options to the user.
You can go for a cheap route, get three 27" computer screens, angle them properly and have a great experience.
You can also go for three very large screens (like 42" TV screens) and have a somewhat different experience or you can do what most racing teams on a big budget are doing, built a large, life sized projection screen surface and drive that large 180º projection wall with three projectors and sophisticated perspective control software.
These options are only possible with proper multi screen support (which UE4 completely lacks sadly) and they do offer flexible and FAR SUPERIOR results than any use of any commercially available single computer screen.
On a very tight budget or with very limited space to your sim racing gear setup a single screen can offer great value. It can never ever compete though on immersion and flexibility to build the ultimate experience at todays technology.
In 20 years we may not even have that discussion any longer as by then VR systems will be developed to a quality and convenience where they make any other display device obsolete. Right now though multi screen is here to stay. I wouldn't want to race anything without proper multi screen support (and so far although I enjoyed ACC in many ways as of its much improved aero, tire and suspension physics I have not used ACC more than the occasional look see).
ACC usually has found me hitting ALT+F4 sooner than later as of the horrid display issues and I rather spend my time in AC + CSP + SOL which provides such a polished experience.
