The "my sim is better than your sim" thread

[Amanda]

Implementing a feature like brake wear in terms of coding is't a matter of just a few hours.
Using the feature across 150 cars it's a very different matter and you do it just if the cost benefit is positive.

This doesn't make much sense. You shouldn't have to code/test the brakes for all 150 cars. If you have, say, 20 different brake combinations to implement, that's all you need to test. A brake disk/pad used in "Road Car A" should be interchangeable to "Road Car B" if they're similar in real life, just as I should be able to use the tires of a Z4 GT3 in an AMG GT3 if they use the same tire in real life.

Still, if implementing this feature is so easy, one has to wonder why Kunos didn't do it in the many years they supported their title.

Either way, the point still stands: as an engine, AC's is vastly inferior to PC2's, there can't even be a comparison between both. In many regards, AC's engine is inferior even to simulations of the rF1 era.

How many users will not play AC because it lacks brake wear? Maybe 0.01% so... not worth it.

So it's OK to be lazy and cut corners in what is supposed to be a simulation, because almost nobody will stop playing it if you don't implement said feature.

Got it. What a nice simulation base you got there.

That kind of time and money can't be saved using a different platform that, yes, has the functions already implemented but not a single example where they work properly.

I believe in data. If I read your post correctly, you're saying no other sim out there simulates brake wear properly. Do you have any data to back such claim? Also, do you have any evidence that PC2's physics features (aside from the tires, which are horrible) aren't on par with real life?

Adding features and not testing their consistency is the main reason why PC2 is such a mess.
A great engine with no one able to properly calibrate it due to overcomplication and spreading across thousands of cars/track combinations.

You're not getting my point. My point is that it's way better to have the features in the engine already (requiring just a simple "calibration") compared to having to code the features in the first place, which is way more time and money consuming. And it's not just brake wear, but the many features I mentioned above.

Reiza with AMS2 is trying (and mostly succeeding) in giving value to SMS work, but it will require some time with the real risk of losing customer base and thus money to support the needed expansion of licensing (missing big Brands and iconic tracks is not good for sales).

I'm not sure how they can lose customers by improving on features and physics. But hey, they can always cut corners and have many more players, as other "simulations" did

Opening to modders would have strongly mitigated the risk but I think, no matter the official position of Reiza, that it has been explicitly forbidden by SMS in order to avoid the immediate migration and improvement of all PC2 content on the new game.

I always prefer official content before mods. Nothing against modding itself, but I doubt 99% of modders are able to get the reliable data they need to launch a good car.

Case in point: the Enduracers mod for rFactor 2. rFactor 2 is a good sim platform, but the mod was horrible. In this case, it's preferable to drive AC's GTE content (OK physics, really good tracks) than the mod (stellar physics for rFactor 2, but the car was way off).

 

[Avo77]

They are not lazy, they invest time where there is interest and apart from some obsessive hardcore Endurance fans I can't see any interest in brake wear (and even for them I'd like to understand the actual impact on strategies of such a feature).

I have no data about what happens in Pcars2 but they have misregarded much more important aspects (AI, tires, rain...) so I would be surprised that the most obscure features are working fine while the core is flawed.
"Pcars2: your brake wear simulator"... they could use it in advertising

Reiza will not lose customer base because they improve features and physics but because people may lose interest waiting for it (as happened for Rf2).

Modding... Yep, Enduracers was quite bad (it improved over time) but there are several mods for AC that exceeds or are on par with official kunos content (IER, racesimstudios...) and the reason why it happens is that modders have virtually infinite time to research, test, improve, measure in real life... Documentation from manufacturers is often VERY limited and regarding tires (the most relevant aspect for handling) is almost non existent, so don't be surprised if good modders can achieve even better results than official studios.

P.S.
In terms of coding everything that has been implemented in ACC, including your incredibly important brake ducts and brake wear code could be easily ported to AC. Of course at the moment they have no reason to do it...

 

[sbabb]

In fact, in an ideal world, the best move for Reiza would have been to license AC engine, hire Ilja and Peter and continue developing it.

That gives me nightmares now thx

I hope the AC engine never gets to be used again, its just to simplistic in every way, if AC2 ever becomes a thing it should be on a completly new engine, Reiza had like 2 realistic chances that made sense, either PC2 engine or rFactor 2 engine, I am not sure if rF2 engine wouldn´t have been better, I would have choosen it but PC2 is just simpler to use, while actually having quite a few things it simulates and if done right its also not bad, its just the question if they can "tame" it somehow, that was the issue with the PC games, they have what they need it has just never been done with enough detail, like just add more content and copy paste everything else has been their motto looks over everything else, just to say they have the most and the prettiest, driving was always secondary for SMS sadly, AMS2 has the potential, just remains to be seen what they do with it, but its already looking promising

Edit: realized it may be looking like I hate AC, but AC is pretty good, would like to See a new Version of it tho

 

[Avo77]

That gives me nightmares now thx

I hope the AC engine never gets to be used again, its just to simplistic in every way, if AC2 ever becomes a thing it should be on a completly new engine, Reiza had like 2 realistic chances that made sense, either PC2 engine or rFactor 2 engine, I am not sure if rF2 engine wouldn´t have been better, I would have choosen it but PC2 is just simpler to use, while actually having quite a few things it simulates and if done right its also not bad, its just the question if they can "tame" it somehow, that was the issue with the PC games, they have what they need it has just never been done with enough detail, like just add more content and copy paste everything else has been their motto looks over everything else, just to say they have the most and the prettiest, driving was always secondary for SMS sadly, AMS2 has the potential, just remains to be seen what they do with it, but its already looking promising

Edit: realized it may be looking like I hate AC, but AC is pretty good, would like to See a new Version of it tho

I would call AC simple, not simplistic.
The first rule you should learn in programming (or design in general) is the KISS one: keep it simple, stupid!
Beside loose surfaces and rain, also thanks to some modifications to physics management introduced with CSP, at the moment AC has no relevant limitation in simulating any kind of car , including complex electronics management (kers, active aero, electronic differentials).

Can you share what in your opinion is too simplistic for having a satisfying and realistic driving experience?