PC3 Project CARS 3 | Developer Blog: Design And Physics

Paul Jeffrey

Premium
Slightly Mad Studios have released a new 'developer blog' about their upcoming Project CARS 3 title, where they share some insight into the design and physics decisions employed within the game.

Yup, pitstops are a thing of the past in Project CARS 3. As is fuel consumption, with the studio taking a decision to focus less on strategy and more on the driver and car upgrades... which I'm sure will cause quite a bit of discussion within the community.

Slightly Mad Studios appear to have taken a direction change with their new game, putting a greater emphasis on the driving aspect of racing, and car customisation side of the gameplay. Similar to the tactic taken by such games as Gran Turismo, whilst still promising to retain an underlying sim racing experience for those who want to disable the more arcade gameplay features, this departure from previous instalments in the series is an interesting one, but perhaps inevitable considering the cool reception from sim racing fans Project CARS 1 and 2 have received in recent years.

You can read the blog post in full below:

Project CARS has always been about racing with your heart in your mouth as you push your limits in legendary race cars on epic tracks around the world—that unparalleled connection between driver, car, and surface that comes from our passion and the know-how we’ve acquired through the years, all of it validated by pro’ drivers. Project CARS is the driver at speed—that moment when you’re right on the edge and you’re loving every moment of the experience. For Project CARS 3, we’ve really doubled-down our focus on the driver. Yes, we’ve added assists and graphic effects to bring in a new audience to sim racing, but these assists and settings are purely optional—turn them on, or turn them off, the choice is completely up to you and what you want from the game. Project CARS 3 remains, at its core, a Project CARS experience, and with the same philosophy that has always been central to the franchise—to give you the Ultimate Driver Journey.

Kris Pope: Lead Designer: Yes, Project CARS 3, from a game design viewpoint, is focused far more on the driver than the previous two games. With this new instalment, the direction was to laser-in on what makes motorsport evoke so much passion in those of us who love the sport. The cars, the driving, the racing, the speed—we’re really narrowed down on those things with Project CARS 3.

David Kirk: Principal Physics Programmer: Project CARS 3 is both new and traditional, if I can call it that—the details, handling, the motorsport and the freedom of choice, the weather and so on, that’s what our long term fans want and that’s all there—though we’ve gone in and improved on all of that. New this time around is customisation for cars and drivers, and of course upgrades which is really an exciting addition. We’ve also added a whole layer to the game that introduces weekend warrior racing on road circuits and other options designed to get a new audience into sim racing in a way that doesn’t overwhelm them.

Kris Pope: Lead Designer: As in the real-world, drivers drive, and mechanics and the team worry about the minute details, and that’s what we wanted to aim for with Project CARS 3. In the end, it doesn’t matter what series it is—an amateur weekend or track-day or the top echelon of motorsport where 300 engineers with science degrees are pouring over reams of data—drivers are there to drive. And that’s really what we wanted to highlight with this new game. We wanted to bring a renewed focus on the driver and the racing. So now you don’t need to spend hours in a practice session working out the tyre life of a set of tyres for one car in one condition, and you don’t need to do the maths on how many litres of fuel you need to finish the race, and you won’t be punished for picking the wrong strategy and so on.

PCARS 3 1.jpg


Jussi Karjalainen: Handling QA Lead: All the good, dynamic tyre heating maths is still going in, and in many cases improved, just without the potential to overheat in the long term. All the dynamic situation-to-situation stuff is still there—but now, if you want to go sliding around for an entire race, you can. You’ll also be slower, though, but that’s another story!

Casey Ringley: Vehicle Technical Art and Handling: That’s actually a good example—the thermal model in layers above that does still happen as it did in Project CARS 2. The core tread temperature is locked, but the rubber contacting the road is still fully modelled for all heat effects.

Jussi Karjalainen: Handling QA Lead: To make it a little easier to understand—tyres aren’t part of “what suits the weather situation” problem anymore, they’re now “how much performance do we want”. Within most real-world racing series, hard and soft tyres are meant to be alternatives to each other, depending on the temperature, track type and strategy. But from one racing series to another, there exist differences in outright performance. A cheaper slick used in a regional series is usually worse than what a national GT3 series would use, GTE/prototype slicks can be two seconds a lap faster than GT3 tyres, and the rubber compounds used for Formula 1 are even faster than that. The core temperature of the tyre is locked to the “optimum” value (what you’d want to heat the tyres up to in Project CARS 2), but all of the layers from there towards the outside are still fully dynamic.

Casey Ringley: Vehicle Technical Art and Handling: The tyres being locked at ideal temperature and constant pressure means the tyre pressure setup is simpler as well. So, comparing to Project CARS 2, the only difference is that we reset the core tread temperature to an ideal setpoint at the start of each physics tick. And we do this to avoid penalising drivers who don’t have endless hours to assess their tyre wear before races. In the real world, teams come to race weekends already armed with all that data.

Jussi Karjalainen: Handling QA Lead: So rather than wear, it’s really the tyre heating where most of the magic happens, handling dynamics wise.

Casey Ringley: Vehicle Technical Art and Handling: The tyre discussion is actually a good reference point to how Project CARS 3 differs. I guess it’s geek-mode on time?!

PCARS 3 2.jpg



Jussi Karjalainen: Handling QA Lead: Here we go!

Casey Ringley: Vehicle Technical Art and Handling: Basically, while you have no actual wear in Project CARS 3, you’ve got multiple layers related to the heat model. Flash, Layer, Tread, and so on. Flash is the elements which touch and grip the track surface, Layer is an intermediate layer for diffusing heat energy, and Tread is the core bulk of tread rubber. All the heating dynamics in Flash and Layer still happen, we just lock temperature from Tread down through the rest of the model. I suppose a simpler way to put it is that the rubber layers influence tyre grip naturally at these time levels:

Flash Layer – What are you doing this instant?
Surface Layer – What were you doing in the last 5s?
Bulk Tread – What were you doing in the last 5m?

The biggest benefit comes from those three rubber layers of varying thickness and how they separate transient behaviour of the rubber from longer term heat effects.

The first, Flash layer, models the individual Setae contact points and is only 30 microns thick. This is where we do all the work-energy heating and you see huge temperature swings here—the heating of Flash layer is a primary tool for shaping our slip curves. We then have a surface layer between 0.5-1.0mm thick for the heat to diffuse though; this reacts more slowly but still pretty quickly.

If you really abuse your front tyres in a corner, this surface layer will be overheated by corner exit and results in Flash Setae entering the patch hotter than ideal. It recovers quickly for the next corner, so long as the bulk tread temps below it are in the ideal zone. What we’ve done in PC3 is lock that bulk tread to stay in the ideal zone so short-term transient behaviour is retained while minimizing long-term effects. Early in our “Seta Tyre Model” development, we only had Flash and Bulk Tread layers. Adding that middle one for the 0.5mm surface layer was a big improvement in handling feel, particularly how the car progresses through a corner. There is just something that makes for a clean, natural feel when the surface layer is slightly cooled at corner entry, heats up to optimal at apex, and is flirting with over-heatedness at corner exit.

Jussi Karjalainen: Handling QA Lead: Of course you still have access to your setups, though—aero, brake tuning, weight distribution, ride heights, alignment, springs, dampers, gearing and differential as well as tyre pressures are all there—but we’ve made the options a little easier to engage with and digest. We know that in Project CARS 2 the differentials were extremely complicated. There were 4 different kinds of differential (plus a spool that doesn’t allow for any differentiation), with at least 7-8 settings, and then all of that potentially for rear, centre, and front diffs separately, depending on how the car was set up. For Project CARS 3, we thought about what a driver would ask of their engineer: Preload, accel’ lock, decel’ lock, and done. The complex differential modelling is still there in the background, but the player has an easier time dealing with it through the new interface. Again, this goes to the driver-centric part of the design—less analysis paralysis, more straightforward tuning changes and racing.

Kris Pope: Lead Designer: So yes, if you want to get out on-track on a cold morning at Spa and just go drive and tinker with your setup, that’s obviously still there. And actually, if you do, you’ll notice that the driving physics have been improved (we’ve really nailed the over the limit feel). The key to this is the driver journey—the upgrades, the racing, the feel of the cars from the driver’s seat. Making the driving fun and the visceral enjoyment of driving a car at speed that sort of echoes that emotional connection we all get from motorsport.

Nick Pope: Principal Vehicle Handling Designer: So, for example, by removing tyre wear and fuel usage, we could in turn remove pitstops, which resulted in much closer and more consistent racing. Thus, the whole process of getting to the part that matters most—the actual racing and driving of these amazing cars and their upgrades—became a far easier and more streamlined affair. All these game design decisions have had great results in terms of the racing— with the tyres at their optimal range all the time and fuel at optimal load, there is no break in the action to stop for more fuel or new rubber. It’s pure racing action, and it’s just made Project CARS 3 into a much better racing-driver experience.

David Kirk: Principal Physics Programmer: Though none of that means we’ve simplified the tyre model. It’s just all happening under the hood. Overall, this change has kept the focus on the racing and less on engineering tactics. It makes the racing fairer—it’s about what you do behind the wheel that counts—and as a driver it makes the experience a lot closer to what you’d get in the real world.

Doug Arnao: Physics and AI director: The AI has also responded well to this new direction and it makes them a lot more predictable and really human-like. And obviously there’s no rubber-banding.

David Kirk: Principal Physics Programmer: As Casey said, the core of the simulation is still the core of the game, but we’ve really made Project CARS 3 about the driver. In the end, racing and driving is actually meant to be a fun and rewarding experience, and being competitive in a race should be more about your skills and the upgrades and so on, and less about whether you can afford to sit and spend countless hours deep-tuning every layer of your setup. The moment-to-moment experience of the franchise remains as it always was, we’ve just really focused-in on what makes a driving game—and what makes driving—such an emotional and cool experience.


Original Source; Slightly Mad Studios.


Project CARS 3 is set to release on Xbox One, PS4 and PC August 28th 2020.

Want to discuss this new game with fellow sim racing fans? No worries, head over to the Project CARS 3 sub forum here at RaceDepartment and start up a new thread!

PCARS 3 Footer.jpg
 
Last edited:
Looking at this sentence. I think there is a problem that we need to acknowledge that there are way too many sims out there now. Each and each one of them has a lot of overlap in content which at the end, how many of the same game we all want to have? Honestly, I can drive the similar Mercedes Benz GT3 across all these titles, including AMS 2 as it was teased in one of the monthly updates.

In some sense, we do have an issue with the oversaturation of sims and I just can't find time to play all of them frequently. It is a nice problem to have because I can always jump to AC for the 250F, 1M in Pcars, Audi GTO in R3E, Fiesta R2 in Dirt Rally then rF2 for the awesome Porsche GTE and followed by racing semi-trucks in AMS2.

However, it sucks for the developers, because they have to compete with a large number of established competitors and their loyal audience. In a way, I am not surprised that Pcars 3 decided to to the more mainstream way because what else you have in the market? Forza Motorsports 8 is likely won't be out soon while GT7 is far away in the future. What else the mainstream audience can look forward to? Other than the annual F1 games? Pcars 3 would be a nice fill-in slots for these people, with the console generation ending that has a massive install base.

The other thing I will say is, it is utterly utterly stupid to release a refined version of Pcars 2 with Brazillian content with AMS2 then release a more general version of Pcars 3 with car upgrades. They had to do something so we get this abomination.

I am still disappointed with this decision but I think it is done more like a business decision than anything. The CARS part is no longer Community Assisted Racing Simulator, it is CommeriAl Racing Simulator now.
I think I'd probably agree that there are more "sandbox" sims than needed, and I'd love to see developers create more series specific titles. ACC is obviously the best current example of such an approach, and I hope it's selling well enough to encourage other devs to follow suit.

Personally, I'd probably kill for some historic series as well. Although I'm not sure how the licensing process would work (assuming it's even possible), mid 90s BPR would be awesome, as would an early 70s - mid 80s Trans-Am and/or IMSA series.

Regardless, whether single player career mode or online multiplayer fans, I think sim racers prefer more than one or two cars from a series, and I wonder whether that even explains the poor participation seen in iRacing's historic road content.
 
The car physics are still simulation... Its not an arcade game because some features are missing...


ACC tire modell has way more realistic simulated features than the iRacing tire model... Is iRacing arcade because of that ? Cmon...
Unless you're referencing phenomena such as flatspotting (which iRacing doesn't yet model), I'm not sure the ACC tire model has way more realistic simulated features.

I do agree that the ACC tire is currently more enjoyable to drive, at least vs. iRacing's GT cars, but I'm not sure it's way more realistic. Although I don't believe that a harder to drive car is necessarily more realistic, ACC is probably a bit too forgiving.

And FWIW, iRacing's last two GT tire patches have freed up the tire on, and just above, the limit, and indicate the devs are moving the right direction at least.

On many other cars, of course, iRacing's tire feels anywhere from good to fantastic, and I expect continued improvement.

Nonetheless, if I primarily drove GT cars, I'd definitely give ACC another look. I wish their online multiplayer was more robust and better organized, and their VR support a little more optimized, but everything else is probably best in class.
 
FYI - David Kirk: Principal Physics Programmer

- Physics Lead on Codemasters new IP "Onrush"

- Developed the physics and handling model on Driveclub

- Implemented physics for all MotorStorm titles



so it's been codemastered

Just wanted to point out that it looks to me like SMS signed over the publishing rights for PC3 to Bandai Namco. Without being privvy to CM's and SMS' business arrangements re. the former's acquisition of the latter, all I can say is that my *guess* is that Bandai Namco might have had a sales target (read: projected income) in mind when they signed the PC3 deal with SMS.

So if anything, PC3 has been Bandai Namco'ed.
 
Just wanted to point out that it looks to me like SMS signed over the publishing rights for PC3 to Bandai Namco. Without being privvy to CM's and SMS' business arrangements re. the former's acquisition of the latter, all I can say is that my *guess* is that Bandai Namco might have had a sales target (read: projected income) in mind when they signed the PC3 deal with SMS.

So if anything, PC3 has been Bandai Namco'ed.

Yeah, that guy literally made 1 game under Codemaster (OnRush), he was let go from Codemaster when OnRush didn’t sell as expected.
 
My take is that this could also be seen as a preparation to dump the Project CARS franchise name and have the gameplay PC3 represents be a sort of canary for the upcoming Fast & Furious title's sales targets.

My take is that (some of) SMS' core tech will live on in e.g. the F1, DiRT and/or WRC franchises and that SMS is now trying to zero in on a good Driver Journey + Car Culture (= cool cars with upgrades) title, which will eventually take over the GRID/NFS SHIFT/PC3 perch under the auspices of CM.

It's possible that this will be the F&F franchise on the more "fun" end (to compete with Forza Horizon, Forza Motorsports and Gran Turismo) and it's also possible that (if the F&F deal is DOA) that it'll instead be a GRID: Revolution thing. The commercial intricacies of who holds the licence (SMS or Bandai Namco) will largely determine whether the F&F deal with be a one hit wonder or a long-running franchise I guess.

Either way, I think it comes down to the largest addressable target audience and hence potential ROI, really. CM is a business and since their acquisition, SMS' job is to help boost and expand that business, possibly with yearly franchise releases which allows for continual refinement of the existing MADNESS tech.

However, if there's one thing I've learned over the years, it is that customers recognise both passion and technical excellence from a studio. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me. Fool me thrice ... yeah. :cautious:
 
I think this is what the pcars and shift series has always been about. It is a simcade franchise with cool cars and track list and an enjoyable career mode and good enough online. Definitely above gran turismos and forzas, definitely below rfactor 2, iracing and assettos. But finally its own thing. I don't see any way how these changes the pcars team is making could ruin pcars when this is what those games have always been about. It is still funny how they claim they still have the bestest tire model though. Maybe there is still someone out there who believes it and needs this yearly reassurance... Just call it a fun racing game because that what it is and be proud of that instead of being ashamed of it.

Personally this is the first pcars game that I find interesting. It doesn't pretend to be a sim anymore so they can truly make the game they have already tried to make 4 times. And their track record proves they can make simcades and not simulators. And this sim-pretend made them worse both as a simcades and simulators. This game can be a good simcade for pc that is still fun to drive. Something you can just pick up and play with massive car lists and hopefully active online servers. This time going all in with simcade features and gameplay. All I hope they still keep their steering wheel and graphics setting and don't dumb it down where they don't need to. So people can set their seating positions and fovs and other settings. Doesn't have input lag, can turn off vsync and view shaking while hopefully having some kind of online rating system on top of it.

In the end I'm not sold on the concept yet. Like everything that comes out of that studio you go like "yeah right". But I feel this is still the most honest marketing campaign from them since ever. Just stop pretending to be a sim and embrace being a simcade. Own that word and be the best kind of game that can exist in that niche. It is a cool niche that can be fun to play (and sell billionz). Making a good simcade is just as difficult than making a good arcade or simulation racing game. All have their own challenges. The word is not derogatory. It is descriptive word for something that sits between sim and arcade and when executed well it goes right there with forzas and gran turismos. Not a company to be ashamed to be associated with.
 
  • Deleted member 963434

Unless you're referencing phenomena such as flatspotting (which iRacing doesn't yet model), I'm not sure the ACC tire model has way more realistic simulated features.

I do agree that the ACC tire is currently more enjoyable to drive, at least vs. iRacing's GT cars, but I'm not sure it's way more realistic. Although I don't believe that a harder to drive car is necessarily more realistic, ACC is probably a bit too forgiving.

And FWIW, iRacing's last two GT tire patches have freed up the tire on, and just above, the limit, and indicate the devs are moving the right direction at least.

On many other cars, of course, iRacing's tire feels anywhere from good to fantastic, and I expect continued improvement.

Nonetheless, if I primarily drove GT cars, I'd definitely give ACC another look. I wish their online multiplayer was more robust and better organized, and their VR support a little more optimized, but everything else is probably best in class.
acc a bit too forgivin? yo saw pro real life drivers laughin bout iracing too hard? and i find games from easiest to hardest PC2<iracing<AC
PC2 is just spot on (was before pc3 now i hate it) , iracing little harder but cars still turn as i want them, AC is just ****, focken understeer boat simulation its worst racing game i ever played, forza horizon 4 much better, but ACC i can feel cars are connected to road.
youtube video i told about, pro drivers laugh about i racing hardness... but kids who not even have driving license and never drove real cars still think pc2 is simcade cause cars drive too easy xD
 
i still hope they just trolling us to make it controversial as it always was, make discussion, make hype, all youtubers now say pc3 would not have pits, all community talking about it, then its game premiere and we got pits and Bell post rick rolled video xD but that just may be my pipe dream
Ian Bell is way too clever to mess around like you mention this close to launch.

Keep in mind, if tire wear and fuel etc., suddenly appeared, everyone would (rightly) assume they were an ill-conceived, last minute addition. And if the subsequent PR disaster revealed that they were included all along, we'd simply wonder, and rightly so, whether Bell was, in fact, crazy.

Unless they really are added in at the last minute (a disaster in it's own right), or patched in later (probably the best possible option), they're gone.
 
  • Deleted member 963434

why focken anyone would think them engineer first make cars fast then turnable? it goes other way
car is first as much easy to drive, then they make it faster but still driveable, if they get it even more easy to drive they make it faster and so on.
real cars are so focken easy to drive. if real life driving cars would look like it is in AC then focken drivin license would be as popular as having fighter jet license xD
 
Oh boy... so much talk about "They disrespect us" and stuff like that. But come on SMS can go in any direction they want - trying to get as many sales they can...
In the end - if you don´t like it - don´t buy it. Simple as that.

I look very much forward to getting this "NFS Shift´ish" sim. I think it´s going to be a blast. And since the majority of my races are too short to actually think about tyre wear and pitstops, it´s not an issue for me.
For those who think it a no-go - well you have a ton of other sims to buy and drive, so what´s the problem? And as one said earlier - NO matter what SMS would come up with, it would get flamed into the ground here amongst all you God gifted simmers. Christ it´s pathetic.
So many whiners here that one could easily get queasy from it.
 
  • Deleted member 963434

Ian Bell is way too clever to mess around like you mention this close to launch.

Keep in mind, if tire wear and fuel etc., suddenly appeared, everyone would (rightly) assume they were an ill-conceived, last minute addition. And if the subsequent PR disaster revealed that they were included all along, we'd simply wonder, and rightly so, whether Bell was, in fact, crazy.

Unless they really are added in at the last minute (a disaster in it's own right), or patched in later (probably the best possible option), they're gone.

i dont know, maybe they really just trolling like that, i would laugh if it turn out they trolling, not think Bell is crazy xD
 
  • Deleted member 963434

Oh boy... so much talk about "They disrespect us" and stuff like that. But come on SMS can go in any direction they want - trying to get as many sales they can...
In the end - if you don´t like it - don´t buy it. Simple as that.

I look very much forward to getting this "NFS Shift´ish" sim. I think it´s going to be a blast. And since the majority of my races are too short to actually think about tyre wear and pitstops, it´s not an issue for me.
For those who think it a no-go - well you have a ton of other sims to buy and drive, so what´s the problem? And as one said earlier - NO matter what SMS would come up with, it would get flamed into the ground here amongst all you God gifted simmers. Christ it´s pathetic.
So many whiners here that one could easily get queasy from it.
you know what is my problem? pc2 was just spot on, easy but dynamic, immersive driving, everyone who i showed my sim to say pc2 they feel most realistic.
cause it was, ac is boat simulator, acc is good but no road cars, i racing similar to ac , like driving on ice, there is no much sims left. and i wanted endurance racing with pits, weather.
pc2 was best sim i played but iracing fanboys tell its too easy, as pro drivers tell iracings too hard. who you believe? kids who never drove real cars or guys who racing daily?
 
people think barely driving straight, barely keeping car on track is realistic lol.
focken faggets ruining this game, if not so many faggets iracing fanboys would tell pc2 is too easy they sms would not remove pits and make it more "accesable to non sim racers" xD but would just make pc2 with fixed bugs and some improvements.
too many faggets still think real = hard
if it was so hard in real life as is in AC they would never let drivers to race but it would look like ski jumping who set best time lol
Since I doubt we'll be hearing from you again, or at least not for awhile, I'll be brief.

Every single comment (prior to your lunacy) I've read mentions that ACC cars are easier, and more enjoyable to drive, than their iRacing counterparts. They're more forgiving at, and over the limit, slides are easier to save, and they can be manhandled and pushed much more than iRacing's GT cars, which require millimeter accurate, absurdly smooth, inputs to be fast.

Since I've never driven either PCars title, I have no idea how hard its GT cars are to drive, but ACC's GT cars are universally described as easier to drive than their iRacing counterparts.

iRacing's GT cars appear to be moving in the right direction, but still need some work.
 
  • Deleted member 963434

Since I doubt we'll be hearing from you again, or at least not for awhile, I'll be brief.

Every single comment (prior to your lunacy) I've read mentions that ACC cars are easier, and more enjoyable to drive, than their iRacing counterparts. They're more forgiving at, and over the limit, slides are easier to save, and they can be manhandled and pushed much more than iRacing's GT cars, which require millimeter accurate, absurdly smooth, inputs to be fast.

Since I've never driven either PCars title, I have no idea how hard its GT cars are to drive, but ACC's GT cars are universally described as easier to drive than their iRacing counterparts.

iRacing's GT cars appear to be moving in the right direction, but still need some work.

in pcars2 gt3 is more responsive, more dynamic, not need to be as precise as in ac or acc (i never driven gt3 in racing) but you must more correct wheel, i mean its not so precise that you slowly turning wheel when going to turn, you wooble it hard and fast (but i saw comparison with real life and they driving in real life just like that)
you wooble it and car is so responsive, you turn and straighten, turn and straighten,
not so precise slowly turning, trailbraking shieet as in AC,
but in PC2 and that David Perel said in his stream (David Perel is a pro in Blancpain GT series) that even gt3 in pCars2 are too drifty, so its even hardest to drive in pcars2 than in real life, and kids still say pcars2 is arcade so funny.
 
I have absolutely no issue with the direction they chose, which is NFS SHIFT. What shift lacked was proper physics, or at least BETTER. The rest of it was quite enjoyable. But i have to say that their logic is kinda stupid.

-"...being competitive in a race should be more about your skills and the upgrades and so on, and less about whether you can afford to sit and spend countless hours deep-tuning every layer of your setup."

The best driver with the best car, will not be competitive with a poor setup.Spending a LOT of time to perfect the setup is indeed the most important part in any motorsport.


-"For Project CARS 3, we’ve really doubled-down our focus on the driver."

Race drivers train a LOT to be able to optimize their driving in order to conserve fuel and tires and be fast at the same time, and it's like the number one TREND of our times. Reducing fuel consumption and tire wear.
So by removing tire wear and fuel consumption they're actually focusing LESS on the driver and what he has to do in order to succeed. And that includes the previous statement as well, setup tuning.

They're contradicting themselves BIG TIME.So stupid.
 
acc a bit too forgivin? yo saw pro real life drivers laughin bout iracing too hard? and i find games from easiest to hardest PC2<iracing<AC
PC2 is just spot on (was before pc3 now i hate it) , iracing little harder but cars still turn as i want them, AC is just ****, focken understeer boat simulation its worst racing game i ever played, forza horizon 4 much better, but ACC i can feel cars are connected to road.
youtube video i told about, pro drivers laugh about i racing hardness... but kids who not even have driving license and never drove real cars still think pc2 is simcade cause cars drive too easy xD

I've heard this "understeer simulator" many times and i don't understand where it's coming from. I never had any understeering issues in AC. On the contrary i'm always on the oversteering side and i always tune for more understeer.

As for pro drivers reactions video....well...i've said it many times, harder to control doesn't automatically means more realistic. As a driver i know for a fact that in all racing games, the cars overreact. The tires seem to have no grip or lose grip to easily and the weight transfer happens too easy or the diffs lock up too easy as well.

In real life cars are very easy to drive on the limit compared to racing games. Even road tires have a lot of grip, especially the high performance ones. So far the only racing game that i've played that replicates this better is ACC. You have a LOT of grip. The rest feel like i'm driving on deflated tires or very slippery surface.
 
Last edited:
I have a feeling that no pits action, no tire wear, no fuel... are mostly there to reduce costs of development and testing, and for their purpose it makes sense because I don't know why people who choose Project Cars should be interested in those things either. But I bet that doesn't end there, there will be a lot of underlying physics to make racing "more consistent" too. Easy catch, easy bring back - you'll slide as much as you like.


In real life cars are very easy to drive on the limit compared to racing games. Even road tires have a lot of grip, especially the high performance ones. So far the only racing game that i've played that replicates this better is ACC. You have a LOT of grip. The rest feel like i'm driving on deflated tires or very slippery surface.

****warning, geek alert, warning, not suited for project Cars audience****

I wouldn't argue, because "very easy" is subjective. But in my easy/hard scale and understanding it is not very easy. Of course there are different cars, with different basics, different tires, different aero, different, different, different... Some easier, some harder. And you need to dig physics at least a bit, to understand that you can't say so about all the cars like if they are equal.

I agree that tires should have a lot of grip, even road tires. That seems like truth to me. However - on the limit ? Not really. Drivign on the limit means driving tire on its last ability to grab to surface in static contact points, occasionally letting whole of it to slip a bit, but not too much so it wouldn't reach point of no return. And then temperatures and velocity are very important, especially for sliding friction. In case of slipping more than just a little- in case of over-rotation, the oversteer, the biggest challenge with high performance car is coming back from it and avoiding tankslapper. A tankslapper depends a lot on friction difference of fully sliding and staticly gripping tire and speed of that transfer which is essentially a slip curve. Usually the higher peak, the bigger friction amplitude, and if there is little progression, then it is quite challenging. In my opinion, sometimes in simulation static friction is too low, because sliding friction is too high, and that is so because they work together to provide a laptime, and if their combined friction is too high, then laptimes are too fast, and correct laptimes has to be considered as minimum requirement of realism in proper simulation, but of course many will just create their theoretical tire that isn't really exact representation of actual used ones.

By the way. It is possible to see how easy is real life, or lets call it physical world car handling. Look at the footage, exactly how much you see them overdriving those cars, how much rapid steering movements and corrections they make, it is that much easy to drive at the limit. Then also check examples how quickly cars come back from oversteer. Then also consider who is driving.
 
So you don't agree that in real life it's easier to drive on the limit? Come on man. In racing games, when you're on the limit, you don't know when you're about to lose it until you've pretty much already lost it, and once you lose it, you LOST it. You have pretty much no feedback other than what the FFB gives you and maybe some sound.

Even with the best FFB though it's impossible to replicate real life and the feedback you get combined with the sensation of speed,direction,G forces, weight transfer etc. Of course, some people "get it", some people simply don't. It's all about the level of PERCEPTION each person has. But because you have all this extra information, it's easier to calculate a correction or even just a prediction of what the car will do on the next corner.

Anyway, i don't really understand your point of explaining what are the tire dynamics during a tankslapper, but it does prove my point. Tire simulation in racing games simply isn't good enough yet in order to replicate accurately the dynamics of the real thing, so a tankslapper is indeed harder to control than it is in real life, which is exactly my point.
 

Latest News

How long have you been simracing

  • < 1 year

    Votes: 559 17.4%
  • < 2 years

    Votes: 379 11.8%
  • < 3 years

    Votes: 341 10.6%
  • < 4 years

    Votes: 243 7.6%
  • < 5 years

    Votes: 390 12.1%
  • < 10 years

    Votes: 367 11.4%
  • < 15 years

    Votes: 215 6.7%
  • < 20 years

    Votes: 168 5.2%
  • < 25 years

    Votes: 136 4.2%
  • Ok, I am a dinosaur

    Votes: 419 13.0%
Back
Top