PC1 Project CARS (pre-release thread)

[Philip Oakley]

Three months ago, Slightly Mad Studios’ Ian Bell shared his vision of a community-funded simulation title right here on VirtualR. What many may have dismissed as a very much utopianklar vision has gotten extremely real as the studio has been hard at work for the past few months to turn a great idea into a working project.

Named Community Assisted Race Sim, or C.A.R.S. for short, the project will allow ordinary sim racers to become investors in a racing simulation title and get a share of the profits and unmatched access to the development process and a say in the title’s direction.
For the past few months, the guys at Slightly Mad Studios have been hard at work on all fronts as Ian Bell has revealed some exclusive details on the team’s progress. The legal work on the project has just been completed and SMS is ready to launch the project’s website and accept investors within the next 2-3 weeks.

The studio will be offering investment options that will fit any budged, starting out with a 5€ option ending with gold-level commitment of 1000€ and beyond. All investors will be getting access to downloadable development builds throughout the development process, the level of investment will determine the amount of influence each member has though.

While every investor will get to vote on the direction the new title will take, gold members get to participate in board meetings where the bigger calls will be made, always considering the requests from the regular investors. Gold members will even get source-code access to the simulation while smaller investors will be given script access to play with.

Slightly Mad Studios promise a completely transparent development process as all investors get to follow every single bit of progress and every single discussion the developers will be having. The SMS team will work out in the open for all investors to see, there will be no closed-off development forum as all investors get to follow everything the development team does, “even the arguments,” as Ian Bell points out.

C.A.R.S will be used the stripped-down Shift 2 Unleashed engine as starting point, as the team will be adding new modules to it during the course of the development process, including a new DirectX 11 renderer, a new physics engine and new AI. Slightly Mad Studios expect a development cycle of at least 12 months until the finished product is ready, however all investors will be getting access to development builds throughout the process to keep everyone entertained.

Below is a first high-resolution preview, showing an immensely-detailed historical Lotus Formula One car in the garage. SMS is planning to release the first build shortly after the first investors joined, the first release will include a handful of cars and tracks to try out. The base content won’t be too advanced though as the investors will have the final say in the direction that the title will take and what content will be included.

SMS is planning to have fully-licensed content in the finished product, the team may be dealing with generic content in the development builds though while the licensing is being finalised in the background.
For years now, sim racers have been bemoaning the publishers lack of interest in sim racing and the missing influence on developing titles. It looks like Slightly Mad Studios will be changing all that with C.A.R.S.

Link to VirtualR article

 

[mesa]

No, it's a rendered image.

 

[ReDi]

No, it's a rendered image.

No it's ingame

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

A playable game or a tech demo

 

[Muhammed Patel]

A playable game or a tech demo

lol.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

I wasn't joking, actually a serious question, so I should have left out the smiley. When devs make a game they often build a tech demo to show to to interested publishers.

More than once these versions are in super high quality and I was wondering if the shots above our coming from a potential retail version or are just shots to show of the skills of the developers to impress us (as the community is assisting/paying to build this sim).

I doubt if even my high end pc will be able to run a game with such graphics.

 

[ReDi]

I wasn't joking, actually a serious question, so I should have left out the smiley. When devs make a game they often build a tech demo to show to to interested publishers.

More than once these versions are in super high quality and I was wondering if the shots above our coming from a potential retail version or are just shots to show of the skills of the developers to impress us (as the community is assisting/paying to build this sim).

I doubt if even my high end pc will be able to run a game with such graphics.

It's the actual game rendering engine turned op full (DX11), but only in the garage as they are re-building the track gfx engine from the ground up again. See this thread for some statements from Ian Bell (SMS Head of Development) on these screenshots and the game's gfx engine.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

With all respect to his previous work in his SimBin/Blimey!Games days. Its the same man that said that SHIFT had the best physics engine ever built For me SHIFT felt like a continuation of GTR2 with dumbed down/weird physics and upgraded graphics. In nothing it was a real sim like they have previously built.

Since then I take all his quotes with a little salt and its up to SMS to prove that this time they are really making a genuine sim.

I am very sceptical where this sudden community love is coming from. To me it looks like they ran out of money or something after they have been ditched by EA. Of course a Porsche Cayenne and a Ferrari 599 have to be paid for. But not by me

If the game is good ill buy it, but I am not going to fund a project that is not transparant. Lets hope they can give some more insights about the directions of the C.A.R.S. project.

One thing is for sure, they have L.O.T.S of talent in their development team. I hope they can work with a lot of freedom and make an absolutely fantastic sim game.

 

[ReDi]

With all respect to his previous work in his SimBin/Blimey!Games days. Its the same man that said that SHIFT had the best physics engine ever built For me SHIFT felt like a continuation of GTR2 with dumbed down physics and upgraded graphics. In nothing it was a real sim like they have previously built.

Since then I take all his quotes with a little salt and its up to SMS to prove that this time they are really making a sim.

If you'd ask Ian now, he'd still stand by his statement that Shift's physics engine is the most advanced at present. However, he also admitted that they had to compromise the game's physics by tweaking certain input parameters in order to make the game playable with digital controllers. Most notably they fudged the tyre wall stiffness to soften the car response to controller input. This was done under pressure from EA, deadlines and the intended target audience. If you supply iRacing's engine with BS values, you'll get stupid car behaviour as well

 

[ReDi]

I am very sceptical where this sudden community love is coming from. To me it looks like they ran out of money or something after they have been ditched by EA. Of course a Porsche Cayenne and a Ferrari 599 have to be paid for. But not by me

If the game is good ill buy it, but I am not going to fund a project that is not transparant. Lets hope they can give some more insights about the directions of the C.A.R.S. project.

One thing is for sure, they have L.O.T.S of talent in their development team. I hope they can work with a lot of freedom and make an absolutely fantastic sim game.

Hmmm I think you're missing some relevant info on how the project will run and the community's role in it (but then again, no official info has been given yet so I cannot blame you :wink. The basic idea is to make the development of the game as transparant as possible to the community by letting the investors/community decide what the game will look like and let them test weekly builds (allowing them even to tinker with the physics engine). As soon as the website is up, you'll be able to read all about it, and ask questions too.

As for the funding, don't forget it's not just funding but moreover an investment for which you'll get profit returns as well. The base game will be free-to-play when it's released, profit will be made from selling add-on content.

And finally, SMS wasn't ditched by EA. They were hired by EA for a specific time frame and work package, to develop a game and provide patch support for a limited time after game release. They were pre-paid a fixed amount of money for that, and after that the contract was closed.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

For me it's relevant is to know the ratio between investors/community. We both know creating a game can be very costly. With the (no offense) "tight ass" attitude some simracers have I don't think the community will fund millions or maybe a little over a million of Euros.

This means imo that the investors will have to bring the largest sum of the money which automatically gives them the majority vote when it comes to development.

And we all know what the goal of investors is: profit. And profit and simracing games don't go hand-in-hand unfortunately. Its much easier to focus on the "other" group of gamers.

Don't get me wrong, I don't blame anybody but to me the current news is more to make the community enthusiastic to buy their game instead of the other way around that they really want our imput. The development team is talented enough to know what we (and they probably too) want. But unfortunately that doesn't sell

 

[ReDi]

Based on initial reactions in our forums, you'd be surprised about what the hardcore sim racers are willing to invest As for the financial side in general, Ian has already hinted that even without the community funding finances are secure due to the involvement of corporate investors (who, of course, are not interested in the game's content, just in the projected profit). Hence, investment is simply giving you a voice in the development of the game, and it will entitle you to profit return.

And we all know what the goal of investors is: profit. And profit and simracing games don't go hand-in-hand unfortunately. Its much easier to focus on the "other" group of gamers.

The hidden catch is that SMS are confident that they can make a game that caters for both sides, i.e. the hardcore sim racers and the casual racers. Now that SMS are not dictated what to do by a publisher, they have much more freedom to make the game the way they think it should be, including being interesting for both sim racers and casual racers.

Don't get me wrong, I don't blame anybody but to me the current news is more to make the community enthusiastic to buy their game instead of the other way around that they really want our imput. The development team is talented enough to know what we (and they probably too) want. But unfortunately that doesn't sell

Well reading 44 pages of discussion on NoGrip is a little off-putting of course, but if you did then you'd see that C.A.R.S. will be just that - what the community wants. But of course they'll need to 'sell' it to attract people, but that is to make people invest in it.

Of course SMS know what the sim racing community wants, but they also know what the casual gamer community wants. Depending on how much is invested by either party, the game will go into one direction or the other. HOWEVER, since SMS are interested in building a sim themselves, they will try and cater for the casual gamers while retaining the sim. And as long as you can make the casual gamers happy without compromising the sim side, everybody can be happy.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

We'll see, I hope I am wrong

 

[William Levesque]

I'm not expecting much aside from nice graphics to be honest

Knowing they are the bunch that claims that Shift is a sim racing game, it can't be looking good for a new sim... And don't tell me it's because they adapted the game for digital controllers, you can't make me change my mind with that stupid argument... Of course we don't mention the lack of pitstops, proper damage behavior and such

Nah, maybe it'll look good on wallpapers but I don't think it'll feel as good as the graphics...

 

[ReDi]

I'm not expecting much aside from nice graphics to be honest

Knowing they are the bunch that claims that Shift is a sim racing game, it can't be looking good for a new sim... And don't tell me it's because they adapted the game for digital controllers, you can't make me change my mind with that stupid argument... Of course we don't mention the lack of pitstops, proper damage behavior and such

Nah, maybe it'll look good on wallpapers but I don't think it'll feel as good as the graphics...

Since when is a fact a 'stupid argument'?

Ah well, we'll see if your misconceptions and misinformed opinion are true or that SMS' claims and promises about what C.A.R.S. can be are true Of course if the investors decide that C.A.R.S. should become Mario Bros Racing Unleashed then there's nothing they can do, but looking at the lengthy discussion between the community and SMS/Ian Bell up till now, SMS have all the intention to make C.A.R.S. a full-on sim with everything in it. And with great graphics

Time will tell what direction C.A.R.S. is going to take, but SMS have the talent, possibilities and intentions to make it the sim we all want...

 

[William Levesque]

Yeah, maybe they are gonna go to a full racing sim, but with their previous work I can only expect something rubbish...

I mean, after all, they are the ones who did Shift 2 and claimed it was by far more advanced than GTL, the latter being said as "old"...

I don't think they proved they know what a sim racing game is... today... A couple of guys knew, but it seems they forgot...

 

[ReDi]

Yeah, maybe they are gonna go to a full racing sim, but with their previous work I can only expect something rubbish...

I mean, after all, they are the ones who did Shift 2 and claimed it was by far more advanced than GTL, the latter being said as "old"...

I don't think they proved they know what a sim racing game is... today... A couple of guys knew, but it seems they forgot...

I think you're a little short on information there and jumping to (wrong) conclusions.

What they claimed is that the underlying physics engine is much more advanced than that of GTL. It is more detailed and has a much, much better tyre model. These guys do know what a race sim is, but knowing it and being allowed to make it are two different things. What Shift and Shift 2 turned out to be was for most part if not all determined by EA. They decided what the target audience was, how the game should be structured and how easy it should be to drive. I'm not saying that SMS coudn't have done better (because they chose some rather poor solutions), but given the constraints that EA posed and the strict timing they had, I'm not sure that any other games developer could have done better.

Hence, the fact that the Shift series did not have pit stops, practice sessions, customizable championships and all other things that we expect from a race sim, is not SMS' fault but was prescribed by EA in order to appeal to a certain target audience.

As for the specific claim of Shift 2 "This Is Real Racing", this is subject to a lot of personal taste. However, they clearly stated that what they aimed at with S2U was to let the player have a true racing experience, they didn't claim to be the most realistic race sim. Of course things got confusing when they started telling the media that their physics engine was the most advanced that is currently available, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the sim will be the most realistic. If you add aids, tweak model parameters or use wrong/fudged data, your most advanced physics engine will not have the most realistic output. In S2U, they tweaked the tyre wall stiffness to make the car response softer in order to be playable with digital controllers, for example.

However, what I have seen come up many times in the 'realism discussions' is the notion that because the cars in S2U were easier to drive, it must be a bad simulation. This usually boiled down to the argument "harder = more realistic", which is total male cow manure. Modern race cars aren't hard to drive, the hard thing about driving race cars is to do it consistently for more than an hour, in ungodly temperatures and noise Still, S2U's physics WERE dumbed down a bit, but the argument that easier handling = bad simulation simply does not hold.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

However, what I have seen come up many times in the 'realism discussions' is the notion that because the cars in S2U were easier to drive, it must be a bad simulation.

It was a bad simulation because the cars didn't handle like cars. In both shift games the car oversteers so much on the corner entry its more sliding than actual cornering.

A true simulation imo tries to simulate reality and that is exactly what shift didnt do in terms of car handling.

 

[ReDi]

It was a bad simulation because the cars didn't handle like cars. In both shift games the car oversteers so much on the corner entry its more sliding than actual cornering.

A true simulation imo tries to simulate reality and that is exactly what shift didnt do in terms of car handling.

Unfortunately I'm not a race car driver so I cannot judge whether the car handling in ANY game is simulated realistically. However, in case of S2U you're confusing a bad simulation with a badly set up car Shift 1 was dodgy IIRC with the constant sideways driving of most cars, but in S2U you can easily set up cars to be neutral on understeery as well. On top of that, the sound in S2U was tweaked to give the impression the car is sliding while it's not (yet).

The only main unrealistic thing remaining in S2U is the tyre sidewall stifnesses that were lowered in order to make the tyres respond less twitchy when using a digital controller, although the modders at NoGrip have found a good number of inaccuracies in the model parameters of many cars. The game certainly has its flaws, but so does GTR2, so does rFactor and iRacing apparently also feels totally different with the new tyre model which raises questions about the realism of that game, too, at least about the previous version :wink: Since I'm not a race car driver myself, I cannot judge what's realistic and what not, but if the cars act believably to me and the game is fun, I'm fine with it

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

You don't need to be a race driver to feel if a simulated car feels like a real car. Anybody who has ever driven a road car on a decent speed through corners knows how the handling of a vehicle feels At least for ordinary tin tops

 

[Alexander Rhodes]

ReDi Highlights something very important here, he isn't a racing driver, has never driven a race car, and therefore has no idea what it would feel like to drive one. Many of the simulation seekers have done, and still do, and have been searching for years to find something close to practice with.

If the developers have the same experience and goals as ReDi, i.e. "it it acts believable to me, and the game is fun, I'm fine with it", should we put the trust in developers that we have done previously?

There are numerous games, mods and programs out there which have been developed or are in development by people who have raced, still race and will carry on racing, and they created programs themselves to get exactly what they needed, they then shared the creations with us for very little cost.

So my point is, why is anyone still buying games from developers controlled by corporate publishers, just because it says "simulation" on the box!? The original Gran Turismo also claimed to be "The only simulator" back in it's day, does anyone remember how bad that actually was?

If I want one thing to come from this C.A.R.S. effort, I want corporations to back off, go make games for children and blood thirsty FPS fans, and leave the simulations to those people who actually have experience in the field, rather than just a good imagination.