RD Series on Simracing.GP

Daily WTCR races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT3 Endurance races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT3 Sprint Races on Simracing.GP Weekly GT4 Sprint Races on Simracing.GP

PC3 Project CARS 3 Released

Without reading through 16 pages of comments, my thoughts are that PC3 is not bad at all. Certainly not a sim racer, but more of a fun racer like Forza, GRID, or NFS Shift. This game has a LOT in common with the NFS shift games, not sure why they didn't use that series to name it. It would have been more appropriate than the Project Cars series. The game feels a lot like NFS Shift and GRID mixed together which is not a bad thing. Controls are very good with a gamepad, not so much with a wheel. I'm enjoying it, as long as you know what you're getting when you buy it, you shouldn't be disappointed.
i post it earlier they told us tey making next pCARS, then Bell thought they make shift, he always wanted to make shift, so sad. tey make 2 shift games it was very succesfull and tey was so encouraged think they can make proper sim, tey made 2 sims that is two pCARS but community was disappointed cause driving was "too easy" as tis community is used to thinking sim should be hard to drive, on the other side pro racing drivers tellin us sims too hard compared to real life xD so Bell decided he not make sims again and go shift way, but it was too late as they arleady announced pCARS3, then instead tellin us they suspending it and make shift 3 , they tried to sell us shift 3 by naming it pCARS3, but we are not fooled thats why so much hate. And i not tellin pCARS3 bad game, im just disappointed IT IS NOT SIM, cause no matter physics, no matter how real driving is if there no tyre wear, pits, different tyres for dry and wet etc, no fuel IT NOT SIMULATES real life.

I am sure all the hate is caused by the choice of naming it pcars3. if not, nobody would really care at all.

i agree, all reviews tey making they tell like if it about to be sim, cause SMS always lying to us it is sim xD if tey make reviews as new game, imagine there never was any shift, any pCARS games, imagine its first SMS game, reviews would be good, an im sure game is better than grid, or any nfs etc i dont know arcade games so much to compare it to, but it definetely suck compared to pCARS 2 or even 1.
i tell they should be honest wit us and tell they suspendin pCARS3 for now and make shift 3 , then split to two teams or makin 2 different series like codemaster do wit DIRT 4 and DIRT Rally 2.0. yo know one is arcadey the other one aims for simulation
 
I am sure all the hate is caused by the choice of naming it pcars3. if not, nobody would really care at all.
And the SMS marketing, overselling it as a simulator while it clearly is not.

Personally I think it gets way more interest then deserved. It might be ok as a fun racer and will be doing well on console, but pretty much out of scope for anyone who is only interested in simracing.
 
So correct me. If i drive a Ferrari or a Porsche the weather is different? Maybe those rain droplets hit a Mercedes with different textures? Or if i play at Spa or Brands hatch? Does rain depend on location? Maybe i missed your point.

yes indeed you missed my point by a considerable margin!

The more variables you introduce into a physics engine the more complex it is to tweak every variable to make sense and feel right. PC2's biggest problem is introducing a smeg load of variables, multiple cars, multiple tracks, and multiple weather/temp. That's why some combo's of cars and track feel so good and other felt not so good.

ACC does what a lot of people asked for, kept the content relatively simple which eases the burden on tweaking the cars to feel good. It's a much more "focused" sim.

So in short the only modern game that has the CONTENT AND WEATHER that PC2 has is RF2 and even then the content is short (excluding mods).

So I wasn't saying PC2 has better weather effects than ACC as SupermonacoGP implied, both are equally good IMO. And I didn't say any of the things you say.

Name me a sim that has the content of PC2 with all the weather effects?

Hopefully that clarifies things, if not then <shrugs>.
 

CC

Premium
yes indeed you missed my point by a considerable margin!

The more variables you introduce into a physics engine the more complex it is to tweak every variable to make sense and feel right. PC2's biggest problem is introducing a smeg load of variables, multiple cars, multiple tracks, and multiple weather/temp. That's why some combo's of cars and track feel so good and other felt not so good.

ACC does what a lot of people asked for, kept the content relatively simple which eases the burden on tweaking the cars to feel good. It's a much more "focused" sim.

So in short the only modern game that has the CONTENT AND WEATHER that PC2 has is RF2 and even then the content is short (excluding mods).

So I wasn't saying PC2 has better weather effects than ACC as SupermonacoGP implied, both are equally good IMO. And I didn't say any of the things you say.

Name me a sim that has the content of PC2 with all the weather effects?

Hopefully that clarifies things, if not then <shrugs>.
If you put Kunos physics and audio into PC2 probably be the best game ever made Offers so much just drives like crap.
 
yes indeed you missed my point by a considerable margin!

The more variables you introduce into a physics engine the more complex it is to tweak every variable to make sense and feel right. PC2's biggest problem is introducing a smeg load of variables, multiple cars, multiple tracks, and multiple weather/temp. That's why some combo's of cars and track feel so good and other felt not so good.

ACC does what a lot of people asked for, kept the content relatively simple which eases the burden on tweaking the cars to feel good. It's a much more "focused" sim.

So in short the only modern game that has the CONTENT AND WEATHER that PC2 has is RF2 and even then the content is short (excluding mods).

So I wasn't saying PC2 has better weather effects than ACC as SupermonacoGP implied, both are equally good IMO. And I didn't say any of the things you say.

Name me a sim that has the content of PC2 with all the weather effects?

Hopefully that clarifies things, if not then <shrugs>.
agree for the most part, still ACC strongest point is "quality over quantity".
also, having directly involved all Blancpain teams and Pirelli in providing real data for cars and tyres, in such a deep way no other sim dev has ever done before.
I am personally a huge fan of this approach, which is mainly proper of Kunos and in some extent also of R3E, iracing, AMS2 and S397 (as for their original content) there is really no point in having 200+ cars if in the end only a few feels right.
 

Ardylicious

Premium
yes indeed you missed my point by a considerable margin!

The more variables you introduce into a physics engine the more complex it is to tweak every variable to make sense and feel right. PC2's biggest problem is introducing a smeg load of variables, multiple cars, multiple tracks, and multiple weather/temp. That's why some combo's of cars and track feel so good and other felt not so good.

ACC does what a lot of people asked for, kept the content relatively simple which eases the burden on tweaking the cars to feel good. It's a much more "focused" sim.

So in short the only modern game that has the CONTENT AND WEATHER that PC2 has is RF2 and even then the content is short (excluding mods).

So I wasn't saying PC2 has better weather effects than ACC as SupermonacoGP implied, both are equally good IMO. And I didn't say any of the things you say.

Name me a sim that has the content of PC2 with all the weather effects?

Hopefully that clarifies things, if not then <shrugs>.

You clairifed my post. So your margin was actually closer to the mark. You knew exactly what i was talking about.

How many tracks where added to PC2 after release? How many cars?
How much does weather relate to the undulation of the tracks?
The game itself is an engine. You could argue that PC2 weather is better than ACC but i think that has little to do with content more about the engine regardless of how many tracks are in game. Although i agree there are variables. I doubt they are large enough to notice. Infact i know they are not.
RF2 is an exception as its new shaders have been added after release; one of the beauties of modding.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I disagreed with paragraph 2 and 3. Time to shrug.
 
thats why i tell tey should make one sim engine, most realistic engine and let other third party devs make cars and tracks. like it is wit DCS flying simulator. them Eagle Dynamics made most realistic flying engine DCS World and other little devs live and gain money from makin like one plane for 10-20 USD and eagle dynamics take % of it. then we have greatest engine, most realistic engine and devs spend much time to make one plane 100% accurate then tey sell it. We have DCS World free on steam wit 2 free planes and one big map, then we have many devs and many planes to buy and some maps like nevada state, dubai city etc and it all made from third party devs not eagle dynamics itself. Like if SMS or other dev make pCARS to be free game/engine wit 2 free cars made 100% accurate wit ffb and physics, drivin like real thing, imagine tey spend 3 years on makin 2 cars only and one track. then tey invite small devs like modders we have here and tey sellin them cars made 100% accurate too, and others make tracks laser scanned etc
 
Really? I don't think so. You can play games if you wanna, it's easy but not challenging in any way, see this:

This is HC simracing (see GPL video below), you just can't drive flat out until you learned how to drive these monsters! It will take months to learn how to drive fast with this sim, that's why most of you do not like it, you do not have time to learn, you wanna beat Hamilton immediately because you wanna be hero number1!

Seriously, how long does it take to get F1 driving position, long time, normally years, you have to drive years karting, smaller formula cars etc. It's is a long way. So why simracing should be easier? I just tested official F1 2019 game and it was ridiculous, anyone can drive it fast, what is the point of that?

GPL driving, yeah, this is the best sim ever made, it is too difficult for most of "simracers" so that's why you do not like it. Okay, it is old, I myself do not drive it so often nowdays because of AC etc. but GPL separates good and bad drivers best. Last time I tested it this summer and it works fine in Win 10.


You wanna learn more? See this, see especially last minutes how McLaren guy reprimands Bono Huis after they just adored Greger Huttu, the one of the fastest GPL driver ever.

I totally agree, I was gifted F1 2019 and it was a f***ing joke.it's closer to Mario Kart than F1
 
If you put Kunos physics and audio into PC2 probably be the best game ever made Offers so much just drives like crap.

I'd prefer an amalgamation of all the best bit's from Kunos and SMS (and others!) phyics, I'm still not happy with low speed Kunos physics even with ACC, I just feel that once the cars start to slide at low speeds the slide just lasts too long for me. Never felt that in PC2. And Many cars in PC2 drive really good, it's just that there's so many different cars that some are not so good.

The other problem I found with PC2 was that choosing the right tyre was as much a dark art as it seems in reality. A wrong tyre for the track temp could have a drastic efect on how the car drove. Often there was no specific tyre choice that worked for me, especially UK tracks when cold and only choice was a tyre too hard. My driving style (which is smooth) just couldn't put any heat in the tyre and it was an awful experience, especially in a race. The answer would be a more agressive set up, but I was too lazy to perfect such a setup so alien to my driving style.
 
agree for the most part, still ACC strongest point is "quality over quantity".
also, having directly involved all Blancpain teams and Pirelli in providing real data for cars and tyres, in such a deep way no other sim dev has ever done before.
I am personally a huge fan of this approach, which is mainly proper of Kunos and in some extent also of R3E, iracing, AMS2 and S397 (as for their original content) there is really no point in having 200+ cars if in the end only a few feels right.

Indeed I always said I felt that SMS bit off more than they could chew, especially when you consider PC2 also had loose surface RX (which is really good IMO). I also feel that more than a "few" cars felt right, quite a lot did.

But yup you got my point, when you have the as much up to date data from not only the car manufacturers but the tyre data too then it can all "match up" easier. Especailly for a small team like Kunos. And even though SMS were a larger dev team, still much smaller than dev teams in other genres.

I also think suspension data is overlooked as a "complication" area for sim devs. a dev team could get data from Showa, but what if one of the cars in the series runs Ohlins? That Showa data is pretty much useless so tweaking of the figures is neccessary, same as trying to use Michelin data to figure out how Pirelli's work.
 
You clairifed my post. So your margin was actually closer to the mark. You knew exactly what i was talking about.

How many tracks where added to PC2 after release? How many cars?
How much does weather relate to the undulation of the tracks?
The game itself is an engine. You could argue that PC2 weather is better than ACC but i think that has little to do with content more about the engine regardless of how many tracks are in game. Although i agree there are variables. I doubt they are large enough to notice. Infact i know they are not.
RF2 is an exception as its new shaders have been added after release; one of the beauties of modding.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I disagreed with paragraph 2 and 3. Time to shrug.

Nope.

SuperMonacoGP got it. I'll simplify my point:

ACC Quality over quanitity
PC2 SMS bit off more than they could chew.
Real world data that is relevant. i.e. Tyre data, suspension data. A single tyre series where the devs get all the data from that tyre manufacturer will be more accurate. Michelin data will not just be "plug the numbers in" for a car that ran Pirellis. Also PC2 had vintage cars and RX cars, a WIDE variety of tyre types alone.

I have no idea where "undulations", DLC, "Beauty in the eye of the Beholder" and graphics quality has any bearing whatsoever, so no you missed my point.
 

Kimmo Kokkonen

Lord GTR3, His master's voice
Without reading through 16 pages of comments, my thoughts are that PC3 is not bad at all. Certainly not a sim racer, but more of a fun racer like Forza, GRID, or NFS Shift. This game has a LOT in common with the NFS shift games, not sure why they didn't use that series to name it. It would have been more appropriate than the Project Cars series. The game feels a lot like NFS Shift and GRID mixed together which is not a bad thing. Controls are very good with a gamepad, not so much with a wheel. I'm enjoying it, as long as you know what you're getting when you buy it, you shouldn't be disappointed.
Think twice, if and because we already have so/too many "good" Arcade games so why to create 1 more, what was the point and reason for PC3 if not just collecting more money with the almost same but worse source code? They promised so much more!
 

Ardylicious

Premium
Nope.

SuperMonacoGP got it. I'll simplify my point:

ACC Quality over quanitity
PC2 SMS bit off more than they could chew.
Real world data that is relevant. i.e. Tyre data, suspension data. A single tyre series where the devs get all the data from that tyre manufacturer will be more accurate. Michelin data will not just be "plug the numbers in" for a car that ran Pirellis. Also PC2 had vintage cars and RX cars, a WIDE variety of tyre types alone.

I have no idea where "undulations", DLC, "Beauty in the eye of the Beholder" and graphics quality has any bearing whatsoever, so no you missed my point.

I feel like Pavlovs dog. ACC can add a whole load of quantity and it would still have the same mechanics. Yawn. Look at AC as the answer. And also answers your second line.

Greek salad ensued. You missed my point or a dictionary but subjectivity and realism is in there which goes back to the point about which weather is better.

To say that PC2 would have been a much better all round game with limited quantity is a bold statement. Purely academic and guesswork. We can only go on what we see and feel.

Maybe you should not go around corners with pace in ACC. A DD wheel can help with that.
 
I feel like Pavlovs dog. ACC can add a whole load of quantity and it would still have the same mechanics. Yawn. Look at AC as the answer. And also answers your second line.

Greek salad ensued. You missed my point or a dictionary but subjectivity and realism is in there which goes back to the point about which weather is better.

To say that PC2 would have been a much better all round game with limited quantity is a bold statement. Purely academic and guesswork. We can only go on what we see and feel.

Maybe you should not go around corners with pace in ACC. A DD wheel can help with that.

You havn't got the point I was making AT ALL!! AC does NOT have the answer because it has no weather, which is why I mentioned weather, not because I think PC2s is better than any other game or that PC2 is the better game.

I'll try ONE last time, when devs have a LIMITED amount of time to write a game, the more simple it is the easier it is to get right and the more complex it is the harder it is to get right. Reducing the content (in a sims case less cars, less tracks, no weather) can make it easier. Weather only came into it because it ADDS a smeg load of complexity to the sim. Out of all the top sims at the mo how many have weather:

AMS? Nope
AMS2? Yup
R3E? Nope
AC? Nope
PC2 yup
RF2 Yup
ACC Yup
IRacing Nope

Out of the 4 "yups" only RF2 has anywhere near as much content as PC2. AMS2 uses the Madness engine as well as PC2. Now out of all those which ones have loose surface as well and you're left with just PC2.

My point was NOT which game has the best physics or graphics, but rather SMS bit off more than they could chew especially with their limited support business model.

If you don't get it by now then <double shrug>...Just leave it, or look up to see my point passing over your head at 30,000 feet!



oh here's what you replies are like to me:


So you're saying Greek Salad is better than a burger?
 
Last edited:

Ardylicious

Premium
You havn't got the point I was making AT ALL!! AC does NOT have the answer because it has no weather, which is why I mentioned weather, not because I think PC2s is better than any other game or that PC2 is the better game.

I'll try ONE last time, when devs have a LIMITED amount of time to write a game, the more simple it is the easier it is to get right and the more complex it is the harder it is to get right. Reducing the content (in a sims case less cars, less tracks, no weather) can make it easier. Weather only came into it because it ADDS a smeg load of complexity to the sim. Out of all the top sims at the mo how many have weather:

AMS? Nope
AMS2? Yup
R3E? Nope
AC? Nope
PC2 yup
RF2 Yup
ACC Yup
IRacing Nope

Out of the 4 "yups" only RF2 has anywhere near as much content as PC2. AMS2 uses the Madness engine as well as PC2. Now out of all those which ones have loose surface as well and you're left with just PC2.

My point was NOT which game has the best physics or graphics, but rather SMS bit off more than they could chew especially with their limited support business model.

If you don't get it by now then <double shrug>...Just leave it, or look up to see my point passing over your head at 30,000 feet!



oh here's what you replies are like to me:


So you're saying Greek Salad is better than a burger?

I have to apologise on the word Greek Salad. If you have not seen Day of the dead or understood the word waffle then it will go over your head. Haha

Time is immaterial. We can only go on what was released not what could have been. I have answered everything else above. This got boring quickly and yes you can shrug all you like as i still disagree.

Obviously someone does not play AC with sol. Stick to PC2.
 

Andrew_WOT

Premium
These talks about "no weather", I assume in this context it's just dry/wet conditions as AC had some weather even in vanilla form, and CSP and SOL already took it to "weather simulator" level.
And wet condition is getting proper physics now, still WIP but getting there.
 
Last edited:
I have to apologise on the word Greek Salad. If you have not seen Day of the dead or understood the word waffle then it will go over your head. Haha

Time is immaterial. We can only go on what was released not what could have been. I have answered everything else above. This got boring quickly and yes you can shrug all you like as i still disagree.

Obviously someone does not play AC with sol. Stick to PC2.

Yes I've seen Day of the Dead, looong time ago. So now I know what you refer to I understand that you're apologising for the Greek salad of your posts...cheers! ;)

Ah so now I understand, this is all coming from a AC vs PC2 viewpoint. I have both I enjoy both and I couldn't give a rat's hairy crack about "muh sims betta than yurs". So I'll "stick" to AC AND PC2 AND ACC with a bit of AMS2/RF2/R3E if I have the time.

Oh and <sarcasm on> I didn't realise Kunos developed Sol.

<triple shrug>

OMFG now driveclub?....hey the new flight simulator has AWESOME weather it's the best of all AND a sim!!!!!!


I'm out.
 
Top