Keep AC2 like AC ! Not like ACC please

[W-G]

Relating to:
- Car handling
- Physics
- Force feedback

Add:
- More options to customize FFB, include switch-off track and curb vibration
- Detail relating to each car setup option, how it is implemented
- FOV options, increase / decrease and also: ADJUSTMENT FOR FOCAL LENS increase / decrease in order to ensure correct FOV implementation
- Race Engineer suggestions for track and weather conditions, as if actually checking your telemetry while driving
- Option to calibrate / set wheel rotation per car and track
- Race Engineer "Notice" to driver, if wheel rotation, throttle, brake inputs are not within expected parameters, before heading out on track
- After race, Option to: View / Save other driver setups

 

[Cristian Haba]

The "car handling, physics and FFB" in ACC is a generation or two better than AC, do you mean to keep those for AC2? Im confused.

With the increase in DDW I think we will see an even bigger jump in FFB fidelity, and Kunos never disappoints in physics, the way they kept improving ACC even after release is nothing short of amazing. Shown by how many high profile eSports contests are being held for GT3 solely on ACC.

 

[gamma123152]

Relating to:
- Car handling
- Physics
- Force feedback

This is all better in ACC.

The only thing that's better in AC is VR support (great mirrors, better performance, MSAA looks better than TAA).

I hope that AC2 will be the next big thing, not a remake of AC1 and especially not a downgrade on ACC (back to AC physics/FFB/graphics etc).

 

[brotto marco]

It would be beautiful if at least they kept the modding similar. You know, what if I could complete my manual about AC and add something like this: "for AC2, change this, this, and this".
Yeah, it would be awesome.

 

[TRASGU]

Relating to:
- Car handling
- Physics
- Force feedback

Physics in ACC are way more deep and realistic than in AC. The car handling was based on real life specs and geometries that came directly from the car manufacturers, real life telemetry, some engineers and real life drivers collaborating with Kunos. The force feedback algorithm is exactly the same as in AC, Kunos devs have been saying it about the FFB for years and people still believe that they changed something.

 

[Vintagedriver01]

This is all better in ACC.

The only thing that's better in AC is VR support (great mirrors, better performance, MSAA looks better than TAA).

I hope that AC2 will be the next big thing, not a remake of AC1 and especially not a downgrade on ACC (back to AC physics/FFB/graphics etc).

I think the whole VR implementation is in ACC much better then in AC. Much lesser jaggies/shimmering/flashing, more detail depth at the cars cockpit trim & dashboard instruments, no need of taking your VR headset off for getting into another race.
My AC is complete optimized for VR, based on more then 3 years of VR experience and readings, while in ACC its was only a try without real optimized VR adjustments. 100% sure I will get the same VR performance in ACC when spending more time to this game.
BTW, not real into ACC/AMs2, because I have zero interest in modern race cars and circuits. AMs2 is my opinion for VR ranked between AC and ACC.

 

[FurryestXYTDJ]

They already said that were going to use the same Graphic engine and base of Assetto Corsa.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, Investigate before saying things that are ALREADY confirmed

 

[Deleted member 197115]

They already said that were going to use the same Graphic engine and base of Assetto Corsa.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, Investigate before saying things that are ALREADY confirmed

You must be confused, nobody said that the graphics engine will be the same as AC, Marco hinted in his interview that they might develop own graphics engine, that's it.
We will see how well this pans out with the small team, no Stefano, and modern graphics fidelity requirements, especially after beautiful ACC.
Physics engine is not a problem, they've nailed it in ACC which was an evolution of AC engine.

 

[solrider666]

You must be confused, nobody said that the graphics engine will be the same as AC, Marco hinted in his interview that they might develop own graphics engine, that's it.
We will see how well this pans out with the small team, no Stefano, and modern graphics fidelity requirements, especially after beautiful ACC.
Physics engine is not a problem, they've nailed it in ACC which was an evolution of AC engine.

an evolution? there 2 totally different engines are they not

 

[TRASGU]

an evolution? there 2 totally different engines are they not

No. As it is my understanding, from things said from Aris, Stefano and in kunos forum along the years. ACC apparently was made initially as a project to gain experience with a graphics engine not made by them by making a small game. They pondered about the pros and cons from some graphic engines. When they first tried unreal engine 4, to test as fast as possible they used cars and tracks from AC with AC's original physics and as much code from original AC as was possible to test it bare bones.

After that, they kept evolving the physics and adding features to the physics engine. Of course the ACC's physics engine is a lot more advanced than AC's one, but there is no need to reinvent the wheel with the physics and starting all over again when all the baseline math is correct, they simply kept improving it, fixing wrong things and adding new features.

At some point in time when they introduced the 6 contact point tyre model that fixed the famous kerb issue they thought about adding those changes to original AC. But at the time they feared that a new game files and executable could mess up the shaders patch and SOL, so they never did. If they though about improving AC's physics with code from ACC's, it means that for them it would had been very straightforward to add those changes to AC's physics engine form ACC.

The code has to be very very similar to allow adding algorithms and math from one physics engine to another and not deviate a significant amount of developer man hours to upgrade a game that had already stopped development and no longer was the main source of income of a very small company.

 

[TRASGU]

- After race, Option to: View / Save other driver setups

If by that you mean a feature that allows other driver to send you voluntarily his setup to you like rFactor 1 had then I'm totally on board with you.

If by that you mean forcing to all the drivers to reveal their setups that they have worked for weeks on them just so lazy people that think that setting up a car is bothersome, unfair but they don't even bother with learning from the many tutorials on internet how to do a setup, then they can do it OVER MY DEAD BODY, that's simracing comunism.

I hate people that expect to take advantage of others hard work in exchange of nothing. It is one thing to share with another person of my choosing the results of the many hours of work testing endlessly, creating excel spreadsheets and analyzing minute details in motec data to gain a slight edge over other competitors, and another very different thing to force me to make many hours of painful work public to everybody.

 

[solrider666]

No. As it is my understanding, from things said from Aris, Stefano and in kunos forum along the years. ACC apparently was made initially as a project to gain experience with a graphics engine not made by them by making a small game. They pondered about the pros and cons from some graphic engines. When they first tried unreal engine 4, to test as fast as possible they used cars and tracks from AC with AC's original physics and as much code from original AC as was possible to test it bare bones.

After that, they kept evolving the physics and adding features to the physics engine. Of course the ACC's physics engine is a lot more advanced than AC's one, but there is no need to reinvent the wheel with the physics and starting all over again when all the baseline math is correct, they simply kept improving it, fixing wrong things and adding new features.

At some point in time when they introduced the 6 contact point tyre model that fixed the famous kerb issue they thought about adding those changes to original AC. But at the time they feared that a new game files and executable could mess up the shaders patch and SOL, so they never did. If they though about improving AC's physics with code from ACC's, it means that for them it would had been very straightforward to add those changes to AC's physics engine form ACC.

The code has to be very very similar to allow adding algorithms and math from one physics engine to another and not deviate a significant amount of developer man hours to upgrade a game that had already stopped development and no longer was the main source of income of a very small company.

interesting read, thankyou

 

[Rui Santos]

Please don't make AC2 like ACC!!