PC1 Should I buy pCARS or not

[Ihab Abbas]

Hi there,​

​

It is decision time to me "Should I buy pCARS or not"?! and to answer this question I have to ask some questions.​

​

​

1- Do you consider it as a racing simulator when it comes to physics like rfcator and Race07 and iRacing, I want also the rfactor and iRacing guys to answer?​

2- Does it has a respectable online system that allows bunch of cars to compete or not?​

3- Should I pay one time payment or monthly payment like iRacing? ​

4- What is the best minimum computer configurations that could give out the maximum performance with every thing on maximum as graphics and frame rate?​

​

Best​

 

[citivsaltivsfortivs]

Just because a game looks pretty doesn't mean they wasted time on gfx instead of physics. The two require different types of programmers. What are the gfx guys supposed to do while the physics guys are working on the physics? "better not make it look too good otherwise ppl will think the physics suck"

I am not just referring to CARS, I think AC is also a good example of not needing to sacrifice physics for gfx or gfx for physics.

The word "waste" is not referred to in any of the sentences in my post. For the time spent on the graphics to be counted as "waste", they must have failed to make it a good looking game. However as I said in my post the game looks "great".

In addition, one of my sentences was: "emphasis put on graphics should be put also on the shaky and unstable physics"

If you are able to see the word "also", you can easily understand that I do not mean the efforts put into graphics should be substituted for those put into physics. I mean "additional efforts" should be put into the game in terms of physics while those put into graphics should be kept and are meaningful.

For these reasons, I have to say that the first paragraph of your post is related not to my statement but to your flawed perception of my words. But the second paragraph of your post might be right although I do not have any hands on experience with "AC" and that is another story.

 

[Kazumi]

that's wrong.ian told us in the first month that the new physic system needs a long time to integrate.

Even without that, things can take time - but that wasn't my point

We are at least four months from having proper physics built into the game, and FFB is in it's earliest stages. IOW, it's not ready yet

(...) not exactly what was planned.

 

[glight]

The word "waste" is not referred to in any of the sentences in my post. For the time spent on the graphics to be counted as "waste", they must have failed to make it a good looking game. However as I said in my post the game looks "great".

In addition, one of my sentences was: "emphasis put on graphics should be put also on the shaky and unstable physics"

If you are able to see the word "also", you can easily understand that I do not mean the efforts put into graphics should be substituted for those put into physics. I mean "additional efforts" should be put into the game in terms of physics while those put into graphics should be kept and are meaningful.

For these reasons, I have to say that the first paragraph of your post is related not to my statement but to your flawed perception of my words. But the second paragraph of your post might be right although I do not have any hands on experience with "AC" and that is another story.

So you are just saying that you wish you could like the physics as much as you do the gfx.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[Andy_J]

I know they are saying that now but it's not exactly what was planned.

edited. Wrong person replied to. Martin should carry on eating dog or whatever he eats in his country.

 

[Andy_J]

The game is aimed at the Forza and GT5 type of racer. Bell admitted this. That means it will never be a proper PC sim.........ever. Lets get used to it. Pretty screenshot material only I'm afraid.

 

[Kazumi]

.

 

[martinsalat]

"The game is aimed at the Forza and GT5 type of racer" that's wrong. were did you read this.source please

 

[Ivo Simons]

http://www.racedepartment.com/2012/04/autosimsport-magazine-volume-6-issue-2-out/

I believe this issue?

 

[martinsalat]

http://www.racedepartment.com/2012/04/autosimsport-magazine-volume-6-issue-2-out/

I believe this issue?

but you cant read there anything about that "The game is aimed at the Forza and GT5 type of racer"

 

[Ivo Simons]

I dont know, just trying to help.
Believe in this issue they said something about GT5 and Forza, thats all i remembered.

 

[Knut Omdal Tveito]

Q: Do you see yourself in the same field as iRacing, ISI and Simraceway - or are you playing a different field altogether?

A: We're a more realistic GT5 and Forza 4 for the masses and multiplatform

 

[Mapu]

Thanks Knut, even better, now I don't have to search for that ridiculous spreadsheet created by SMS.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

Great looking game to be fair but, as a user of both rfactor 2 and Project Cars, I must say that rfactor 2 has a more efficient graphics engine (at least for me) though Project Cars looks nicer. Project Cars is not a disappointment but emphasis put on graphics should be put also on the shaky and unstable physics.

The car GFX's are epic, but everything else isn't, but it's a WIP, so "if" track GFX can match car GFX, then it'll be incredible and incredibly resource hungry.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

You carry on eating dogs or whatever you do. There's a good chap.

I think there's a mistake here, Kazumi seems to be quite a knowledgeable and reasonable chap...

 

[Andy_J]

but you cant read there anything about that "The game is aimed at the Forza and GT5 type of racer"

I think enough people have quoted Bell's message now matey. Do you think we make it up?

 

[David Ignjatovic]

be reasonable.

If all you guys ever said was it's a WIP progress, then we'd have nothing to argue about, but some of you guys told me months ago that this FFB/physics and steering mess already felt as good as GTR evo, and that was MONTHS ago.....on top of this, your WMD portal is loaded with pretentious attack dogs whose aim is nothing more than to protect their investment, even though I'd do a backflip if this doesn't sell at least 2m units.

The only thing at risk with pcars is the truth.

 

[Jamie Shorting]

If all you guys ever said was it's a WIP progress, then we'd have nothing to argue about, but some of you guys told me months ago that this FFB/physics and steering mess already felt as good as GTR evo, and that was MONTHS ago.....on top of this, your WMD portal is loaded with pretentious attack dogs whose aim is nothing more than to protect their investment, even though I'd do a backflip if this doesn't sell at least 2m units.

The only thing at risk with pcars is the truth.

Are you clinically insane? You're ranting in the iracing forums, now you're bringing your rants here? Get a life buddy!

 

[Nathan Robinson]

Lol if only you knew jamie. David is very high maintenance and hard to please, kind of like my wife.

Some people may have enjoyed the physics 3 months ago, so what if they did. Your opinion is exactly that david, yours. Its not the written word.

I do not think pcars is the best sim ever,i just enjoy it for what it is.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

now you're bringing your rants here?

rants=negative commentary regarding a fanboy/investors pet project.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

I do not think pcars is the best sim ever,i just enjoy it for what it is.

This is the problem, it's not a sim at all IMO.

EDIT....Btw, I'm pleased with these genuine sims

GTR2
RACE07
GTR Evo
RACE0N
All simbin ex packs
rf2 b85 on some cars{WIP}
FVA
Netkar 1.3
GSC