Anyone else feels this game is just...

[dopedog]

Once you drive some of the cars around, going back to PCars is difficult because it feels like an arcade game.

Behave, PCars is arcade? You mad? AC have taken some of the worst bits of GT and Forza, quick 4 lap races, must come in top 3 to progress, ticking down timers where you must trigger invisible gates to progress, pure arcade. It's not even close to PCars as it stands now. I'd argue that the FFB in PCars is a little less over done also.
Now don't get m wrong PCars is far from perfect, but for a racing title it ticks many more boxes than AC right now. PCars 'career' puts you into full race weekends with practice/qualy/race, with anything from 8 laps to 60 odd laps depending on car...
I'll play AC for the odd hot lapping session but i'm religiously playing PCars as its the only true racing game on consoles. Which doesn't make me gloat, it makes me sad.

 

[Ryan81]

Behave, PCars is arcade? You mad? AC have taken some of the worst bits of GT and Forza, quick 4 lap races, must come in top 3 to progress, ticking down timers where you must trigger invisible gates to progress, pure arcade. It's not even close to PCars as it stands now. I'd argue that the FFB in PCars is a little less over done also.
Now don't get m wrong PCars is far from perfect, but for a racing title it ticks many more boxes than AC right now. PCars 'career' puts you into full race weekends with practice/qualy/race, with anything from 8 laps to 60 odd laps depending on car...
I'll play AC for the odd hot lapping session but i'm religiously playing PCars as its the only true racing game on consoles.

Must agree with you, dopedog. PCars definitely doesn't feel like an arcade game in comparison to AC. I would say both feel more simulation-like than arcade, that's for sure. PCars does have pluses over AC and vice versa. One of my main gripes with PCars (not many of them to be fair) is the lack of Ferrari, Alfa Romeo, Lamborghini and Maserati.

 

[boxster233]

I'm only comparing the driving aspect. The feeling and weight of the cars in Assetto Corsa felt more realistic. I'd been playing it for 2-3 days and I'm angry at AC, but when I went back to PCars, the cars felt like I was playing DriveClub compared to AC in how they handle.

 

[dopedog]

I don't even think AC is gunning for the same territory as PCars, its clearly a Forza / GT wannabe with the way its presented, I mean 4 laps to get top 3 is so dated now I really hoped we'd put that to bed Kunos are way behind the curve with respect to the game part of the game. FFB is great though.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I'm only comparing the driving aspect. The feeling and weight of the cars in Assetto Corsa felt more realistic. I'd been playing it for 2-3 days and I'm angry at AC, but when I went back to PCars, the cars felt like I was playing DriveClub compared to AC in how they handle.

Have to agree with the assessment that the feeling of weight and weight transfer is more believable in AC and I think a lot of it has to do with the FFB as well as the physics, for a wheel user like myself anyway.

 

[dopedog]

Have to agree with the assessment that the feeling of weight and weight transfer is more believable in AC and I think a lot of it has to do with the FFB as well as the physics, for a wheel user like myself anyway.

I use a wheel and i can get PCars feeling plenty of weight transfer, DiRT rally for me has the best weight transfer out of the 3 games, but i appreciate rallying is so different to road racing i don't like to compare on physics or FFB.
But yeah PCars is so close and I think one of the main reasons AC amazed me so much was the road feel, but now i'm wondering if its bit over done, some tracks are remarkably smooth in real life.
To call PCars arcade is absurd, utterly absurd.
AC is a great physics engine stuck in an arcade game.
PCars is a good physics engine in a racing game.
I have both and glad they both exist.

 

[Scaff]

I'm only comparing the driving aspect. The feeling and weight of the cars in Assetto Corsa felt more realistic. I'd been playing it for 2-3 days and I'm angry at AC, but when I went back to PCars, the cars felt like I was playing DriveClub compared to AC in how they handle.

I've been doing back to back comparisons of both and have to say I don't agree.

PCars has the issue that you need to get the ffb setup for each car, but once it's done the difference between the two is not as great as is often made out.

That is for race cars, road cars is a different matter, but they still don't feel arcade like.

 

[skazz]

I use a wheel and i can get PCars feeling plenty of weight transfer, DiRT rally for me has the best weight transfer out of the 3 games, but i appreciate rallying is so different to road racing i don't like to compare on physics or FFB.
But yeah PCars is so close and I think one of the main reasons AC amazed me so much was the road feel, but now i'm wondering if its bit over done, some tracks are remarkably smooth in real life.
To call PCars arcade is absurd, utterly absurd.
AC is a great physics engine stuck in an arcade game.
PCars is a good physics engine in a racing game.
I have both and glad they both exist.

If you feel the road is too rough in AC, then you are ready to turn down the road and slip effects to 0%....

 

[Johnnypenso]

But yeah PCars is so close and I think one of the main reasons AC amazed me so much was the road feel, but now i'm wondering if its bit over done, some tracks are remarkably smooth in real life.

Sounds an awful lot like you're making the claim that Kunos has taken the laser scan data and enhanced it to make it more bumpy and/or that the FFB is not representative of the real track surface. Do you have anything to support either claim?

To call PCars arcade is absurd, utterly absurd.

Who did this?

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

But yeah PCars is so close and I think one of the main reasons AC amazed me so much was the road feel, but now i'm wondering if its bit over done, some tracks are remarkably smooth in real life.

Have you compared the same laser scanned track on 2 different games ? They should be similar and not worlds apart in bump details/accuracy if they used the same scan data source.

With laser scanned tracks, the game would need to use laser scan physical mesh/vertices of the track for physics simulation for maximum possible details, what you see when playing have different polygonal visual meshes which are simpler and less detailed. The point clouds scanned by laser scanner are very dense that if they are reproduced in real time while playing would be very GPU intensive, and would make the performance drop massively ( fps )

Another reason, the details like bump that you feel in a game is limited by the physics tick rate ( different games have different rate, Pcars I think 600Hz ), and to maintain fidelity as the original physical mesh if its way denser/higher in accuracy for the tick rate, sometimes compacting the vertices/mesh to bigger spacing is preferable, like 0.2m or 0.3m ( Iracing used 0.3m if not mistaken ) from original 2-10mm ( just example ). The effect of this may lead to loss of details in mathematical maps or sometimes depend on the bump,cracks,patches, undulations size ( larger/wider/deeper/higher bump/dips ), amplified.

Physics road surface output maybe adjusted in relation to FFB ( not sure if this is done in AC ), but I read that there is road effect for FFB setting ?

There's also the issue of different laser scan equipment quality used to capture the data and different version ( from different date/condition )
The source of the laser scanned data alone plays huge role in the quality of source data ( mm or cm accuracy ), and the process to bring it into the game and work with the physics engine.

 

[boxster233]

Sounds an awful lot like you're making the claim that Kunos has taken the laser scan data and enhanced it to make it more bumpy and/or that the FFB is not representative of the real track surface. Do you have anything to support either claim?
Who did this?

I said that compared to Assetto Corsa's feel PCars feels more like an arcade. I love PCars, but I felt the gap between the two gaps was significant and that is what I was stating. It's not an arcade game by any means, I felt the handling in comparison to AC, it felt way more loose and forgiving, much like the gap between PCars and Driveclub.

 

[freedom1104]

Have you compared the same laser scanned track on 2 different games ? They should be similar and not worlds apart in bump details/accuracy if they used the same scan data source.

With laser scanned tracks, the game would need to use laser scan physical mesh/vertices of the track for physics simulation for maximum possible details, what you see when playing have different polygonal visual meshes which are simpler and less detailed. The point clouds scanned by laser scanner are very dense that if they are reproduced in real time while playing would be very GPU intensive, and would make the performance drop massively ( fps )

Another reason, the details like bump that you feel in a game is limited by the physics tick rate ( different games have different rate, Pcars I think 600Hz ), and to maintain fidelity as the original physical mesh if its way denser/higher in accuracy for the tick rate, sometimes compacting the vertices/mesh to bigger spacing is preferable, like 0.2m or 0.3m ( Iracing used 0.3m if not mistaken ) from original 2-10mm ( just example ). The effect of this may lead to loss of details in mathematical maps or sometimes depend on the bump,cracks,patches, undulations size ( larger/wider/deeper/higher bump/dips ), amplified.

Physics road surface output maybe adjusted in relation to FFB ( not sure if this is done in AC ), but I read that there is road effect for FFB setting ?

There's also the issue of different laser scan equipment quality used to capture the data and different version ( from different date/condition )
The source of the laser scanned data alone plays huge role in the quality of source data ( mm or cm accuracy ), and the process to bring it into the game and work with the physics engine.

I don't know the tick rate of AC. But yesterday i was trying this X2010 red bull car mod on nordschleife in AC. Its like going over a dirt road, so i think the tick rate is quite high as well.

I said that compared to Assetto Corsa's feel PCars feels more like an arcade. I love PCars, but I felt the gap between the two gaps was significant and that is what I was stating. It's not an arcade game by any means, I felt the handling in comparison to AC, it felt way more loose and forgiving, much like the gap between PCars and Driveclub.

On road car i guess its more forgiving on Pcars. For race car i don't see such big difference actually.

I've seen quite a few people complaining about the low car selection which is a bit strange to me since it has more cars than a lot of other games out there. At the end of the day, it's a tiny gaming studio that creates AC. They can't really compete with huge companies like T10, PD, or even SMS because no doubt are limited by resources, both manpower and budget. Yet, they still have managed to include cars which are not present in other racing games, such as the Scuderia Glickenhaus,Praga R1 and some of the Lotuses, not to mention bringing 24 Porsches to the game, even more than the number in Forza 6.

Sure, the graphics may not be stunning like DriveClub, Forza or GTS but they get the job done nicely IMO and I really like the ripple effect from the heat coming out of the exhausts. The physics and sound are both outstanding. It's such a shame that games like AC (and car games generally) have such a small audience and so really us car fanatics only get perhaps 3-4 games a year, unlike FPS that seem to come out every other week......

The only thing i would complained about the car selection is that AC need more road cars. Surely we don't need a huge roster like Forza or GT but there is very little choice for road cars, particularly mid tier performance car.


I would say every car i drove in AC is very welldone, i don't know how they compare to IRL, but every car are very pronounced.

 

[dopedog]

Sounds an awful lot like you're making the claim that Kunos has taken the laser scan data and enhanced it to make it more bumpy and/or that the FFB is not representative of the real track surface. Do you have anything to support either claim?
Who did this?

Well turn road feel up to 100% and see at at 100% its enhancing it compared to 20%, otherwise whats the point in a scale?!..... last time i did a track day i don't remember that option, the bumps were just bumps I couldn't turn them up or down?
I have PCars pretty much set up to feel better than this mythical AC, OK its taken a lot of time and messing about but for the most part I've enjoyed fiddling with it.
I like AC and i will play it, but PCars has been a joy for a race fan like myself, if you into drifting and time trials then AC is great.
It's not my loss if people chose to ignore other games and run them down, I take as many as they can throw at me and give time to each one depending on how much they grab me in.

BTW the guy who said PCars is arcade is the guy you were agreeing with...maybe check what he wrote fully before agreeing next time..

 

[novcze]

A complete edition or GOTY if it ever comes out will be best option to buy, that's my plan right now after I can get a PS4 Neo. Still waiting to see how the updates/patches will do to the game.

that's also my plan 👍

 

[dopedog]

I said that compared to Assetto Corsa's feel PCars feels more like an arcade. I love PCars, but I felt the gap between the two gaps was significant and that is what I was stating. It's not an arcade game by any means, I felt the handling in comparison to AC, it felt way more loose and forgiving, much like the gap between PCars and Driveclub.

Simply wrong IMO. I fear SMS have themselves to blame as the settings from get go can suck, but having said that its never arcade in a arcade sense regardless of how you set up FFB. Lets be honest here arcade is say The Crew, or Burnout or OutRun, sega rally. Its mental to suggest PCars is arcade.
Man I've criticized SMS in the past for a shoddy launch and down right fibs, but the effort in PCars is clear to see from top to bottom and even more so now i can compare it to a game like AC. The details in PCars are to be applauded.

I've said before the only game out of the 2 with arcade throw backs is AC with its "trigger invisible gate to extend time" and "3 laps get top 3", sorry time up GAME OVER please insert coin to continue...

 

[NLxAROSA]

Sounds an awful lot like you're making the claim that Kunos has taken the laser scan data and enhanced it to make it more bumpy and/or that the FFB is not representative of the real track surface. Do you have anything to support either claim?

Well turn road feel up to 100% and see at at 100% its enhancing it compared to 20%, otherwise whats the point in a scale?!..... last time i did a track day i don't remember that option, the bumps were just bumps I couldn't turn them up or down?

I think this is a fair question. How would one be able to turn up road noise/bumps separately from all other FFB if it's not modelled in some way? It simply could work with a multiplier on the amplitude of the track bump map (not sure what the correct term is there, but you get the point). Or the same way like PCARS where there's a multiplier on the wheels motions in the FFB code (Fx/y/z, Mx/y/z parameters).

I don't think they're fudging it or cheating, as it's still using the data from the track, just allows you to tune the noise up and down in real. Which is actually more realistic, since not all steering racks/suspension will translate bumps on the track into wheel feeling in the same way.

I also think that's the only way to do it if you're using actual physics as input for the FFB, if you're doing it afterwards, then it's fudging (canned effect).

Project CARS has better mechanics for this with its per-car FFB setup, but they went overboard with all the settings, so it's such a PITA to set up that no one will bother setting it up (I know I didn't).

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I don't know the tick rate of AC. But yesterday i was trying this X2010 red bull car mod on nordschleife in AC. Its like going over a dirt road, so i think the tick rate is quite high as well.

That's now how tick rate can be perceived It's not only physics tick rate, but the game input rate and wheel FFB update rate also factors in how much detail one received. So, we have physics tick rate - input rate - wheel FFB update rate = what driver feels.

Most steering wheels like DFGT, G27, Fanated GT3, T500RS are at most 500Hz with 2ms delay and 9-20+ms latency ( with latency, the game frame rate also related in how the driver can respond, but most games are in 60fps anyway ) So, no matter how high the game physics tick rate and input rate, the wheel FFB rate ultimately decide how much details the driver received. Expensive wheels said can have up to 1000Hz FFB rate which is higher than most if not any sims out there, AMS runs at "upscaled" 720Hz physics rate and 500Hz input rate.

I have read before that AC is about 300-400Hz in physics tick rate and the highest the traction control system used in AC has 400Hz tick rate, but anyone with info from Kunos, feel free to correct me

There's a way to test how high physics tick rate ( roughly ), but it's not accurate measure. Physics tick rate influence the stability of the physics when dealing high/large force on a small mass, when tick rate is not high enough, strange things happen that often seen as glitch like jumping cars. When a game limits the damper highest value or spring value on cars in lighter mass range, then this is usually caused by the limitation in physics tick rate.

This is what LFS dev, Schawen said on the matter and why he set LFS to run at 2000Hz :

"One example in LFS is the spring above the wheel which is supported by a tyre below. The wheel is light compared with those two large spring effects and can easily cause instability. That is the reason for LFS's high update rate of 2000 Hz in the sub-updates, which avoids the cars jumping up and down all on their own due to jumping wheels! You saw in the google video, at one point, in a crash when some vertices went a bit wrong.

What happens is you have some very stiff springs for the chassis members, supporting a node which let's say is 10 kg. The physics engine finds out in one update that the springs are stretched by 5 cm. Now the super string spring applies a force of [A LOT] to that 10 kg mass. So in the next update you find that 10 kg mass has gone maybe 10 metres away or whatever, when really it should only have moved a mm or so.

The update time steps must be small enough so that large force acting on the small mass at the node, doesn't push the node too far away."

So, simple test, crank up the damper and spring rate on lightweight race cars in AC, and see if strange thing happen when driving on the track ( if Kunos didn't limit these yet )

This is a list of some games physics tick rate that I gathered from LFS forum :

'98 Sports Car GT - 50 Hz [from Blackhole Motorsports article]
'98 Viper Racing - 60 Hz (general) / 300 Hz (some aspects) [email with Dave Broske]
'98 Grand Prix Legends - 144 Hz
'00 F1 2000 - 50 Hz [from Blackhole Motorsports article]
'00-'08 Racer - 300 Hz (general) / 3000-30,000 Hz (tyre rotation) [posted by Ruud in a thread archive on racer.nl, dated '01]
'01 F1 2001 - 200 Hz [from Blackhole Motorsports article]
'02 Total Immersion Racing - 100 Hz (uses RK4) [from press release]
'02-'08 Live For Speed - 100 Hz (collision detection) / 2000 Hz (vehicle dynamics) [posted by Scawen on lfsforum]
'03 NASCAR Racing 2003 Season - 288 Hz (possibly)
'04 VirtualRC Racing v1.0 - 300 Hz (general) / 600 Hz (tyre model) [posted by Todd on lfsforum]
'05 VirtualRC Racing v3.0 - 250 Hz (general) / 500 or 1000 Hz (tyre model) [posted by Todd on lfsforum]
'05 rFactor - 400 Hz
'05 Forza Motorsport - 180 Hz
'06 Test Drive Unlimited - 100 Hz (collision detection) / 1000 Hz (vehicle dynamics)
'06 netKar Pro - 333 Hz [posted by Kunos on RSC]
'07 Forza Motorsport 2 - 360 Hz [from wikipedia article]
'07 Rigs Of Rods - 2000 Hz [from ROR forums]
'08 Ferrari Challenge: Trofeo Pirelli - 60 Hz
'08 rFactor Pro - 800 Hz [from official website]
'08 iRacing - 360 Hz [from AutoSimSport]
'09 Supercar Challenge - 60 Hz
'09 Need For Speed: Shift - 180 Hz / might be 360 Hz (effective due to 2 physics passes per timestep?)
'09 Forza Motorsport 3 - 360 Hz [from gamespot article]
Motorsport - 333 Hz (but still being tuned) [posted by Stenyak on RSC]

UPDATE : ASSETTO CORSA - 250Hz - from Kunos presentation on console port/dev.

AC didn't go much higher than Kunos previous release Netkar Pro if 400Hz is true.
The Automobilista runs upscaled 720 Hz physics and 500 Hz input rates (vs 360 Hz &100 Hz respectively in SCE) ( Reiza own statement )

So, when playing with wheel, make sure it's setup at highest update rate to fully utilized the wheel ability.

In relation to laser scanned track details like bumps to physics tick rate, Iracing has 360Hz, and most drivers average speed on the track would be higher than 100kmh, rarely do driver go below 50kmh when racing or time trialing. Say a driver goes to 100kmh, or 27.77m per second, with physics at 360Hz ( 360 refresh per second ), 27.77x1000/360 = 77.138mm, that's the most detail a driver can feel from the road when driving at that speed, not considering the wheel FFB rate. If wheel FFB is capable of more than 360Hz update rate, than driver can enjoy what the physics provide. What if the driver goes slower at 50kmh ? 13.888x1000/360 = 38.58mm, at slower speed, the driver can hypothetically sense more of the road surface details within 38.58mm distance accuracy ( 4cm ) going at 13.88m/s. The faster the driver goes, the longer the distance for details, 200kmh = 154.27mm. Iracing input rate is 120Hz ( from what I read on other forum ), that means what the wheel FFB can receive is limited to the 120Hz rate, and at 50kmh, that would be 115.73mm ( can a driver accurately sensed 11.5cm FFB detail like little bumps going at 13.88m/s ) , 100kmh = 213.41mm and at 200kmh = 462.95mm ( 46+cm )

I think this is one of the reason why Iracing said to have spaced the physical mesh/vertices to 0.3m / 30cm to balance between physics rate/input rate/system load ( the lower the spacing in physical mesh/vertices, the heavier the calculation ), which should be clear by now, that laser scan mm accuracy is often just marketing/selling point. All of this is based on what I understand from LFS forum discussion and other forum on physics/laser scan and FFB rate, so I may make a mistake, please correct me if I'm wrong

A list of wheel update rates ( old source )

http://www.insidesimracing.tv/forums/viewtopic.php?f=159&t=4327

Code:
Logitec G25 (900 deg)
500 hz update rate (2ms delay)
9-10 ms latency (first move)

Logitec G27 (900 deg)
500 hz update rate (2ms delay)
9-10 ms latency (first move)

Fanatec GT3 (900 deg)
500 hz update rate (2ms delay)
14 ms latency (first move)

Thrustmaster T500RS (tested at 900 deg, 1080 deg total)
120 hz update rate (8ms delay) - Have been updated to 500Hz in 2012, FW V40 and on
20-23 ms latency (first move)

Logitec DFP (Driving Force Pro) (900 deg)
120 hz update rate (8ms delay)
28 ms latency (first move)

Red Momo (240 deg)
120 hz update rate (8ms delay)
44 ms latency (first move)

Black Momo (240 deg)
120 hz update rate (8ms delay)
35 ms latency (first move)

Saitek R660 GT (180 deg)
120 hz update rate (8ms delay)
44 ms latency (first move)

Sidewinder 2 joystick
34-37 ms latency
8 ms update rate

Logitec Force 3D joystick
34 ms latency (67 & 74 with wind up at end of travel)
8 ms update rate

Thrustmaster F430 (270 deg)
60 hz update rate (16 ms delay)
38 ms latency (first move)

ECCI 7000 (900 deg ?)
60 hz update rate (16 ms delay)
43 ms latency (first move)

Microsoft Sidewinder Wheel USB (red) (240 deg)
60 hz update rate (14-16ms delay)
44 ms latency (first move)
***Driver takes 8-16ms just to return from a call to getPosition and

setForce

Logitech Driving Force GT (DFGT) (900 deg)
500 hz update rate (2ms delay)
17 ms latency (first move)

VPP
56 ms latency
8ms update rate (driver takes 24 ms after update!)
calls to getPosition take 8-16 ms to return and up to 56 ms when applying a

force!

Frex
44 ms latency
16 ms update rate

 

[doblocruiser]

Guys guys...I know AC is a simulator but the stuff you are all talking about in here makes my head turn. I already have enough trouble by keeping those 4wheels on the road

I think I am to "casual" to participate

 

[Johnnypenso]

Well turn road feel up to 100% and see at at 100% its enhancing it compared to 20%, otherwise whats the point in a scale?!..... last time i did a track day i don't remember that option, the bumps were just bumps I couldn't turn them up or down?
I have PCars pretty much set up to feel better than this mythical AC, OK its taken a lot of time and messing about but for the most part I've enjoyed fiddling with it.
I like AC and i will play it, but PCars has been a joy for a race fan like myself, if you into drifting and time trials then AC is great.
It's not my loss if people chose to ignore other games and run them down, I take as many as they can throw at me and give time to each one depending on how much they grab me in.

I think I see the issue now if it works the same as on PC. Those sliders at 0% = FFB at 100%. So if you have something at 100% it's actually 200%, in effect. Those sliders only add to the FFB that is naturally there. Most of us that I'm aware of, run them at or very near 0% for that reason, we only want the natural FFB from the game we don't want to enhance it. It's probably not clearly explained in the description or not explained at all. As I said, if it's the same as on the pc version.,

BTW the guy who said PCars is arcade is the guy you were agreeing with...maybe check what he wrote fully before agreeing next time..

In my response in agreeing with him, I specified exactly which part I agreed with and said it in plain english which, apparently, you seem to have issues with. Which parts of it are you having trouble understanding?

 

[ynot]

Not at all happy with this game. The cars drive OK. Cars look good but the track graphics are about the same as GT6. Cars in the rear view mirror look like GT1, horrible. The interface is what kills this game. It's so bad. Was that the best they could do with the end of the race? You cross the finish line and instantly snap back to pit lane. I though I had a disconnect the first time it happened. Carrer mode seems like they did not know what to do with it. No private lobbies. What the... It has so much potential and I hope they do something with it. I wish I had not spent $50.00 dollars on it. PCars and Driveclub way better overall in my opinion. Let's see if they do anything with it. My bet is they don't.

 

[Tired Tyres]

You couldn't be more wrong with your bet. I bought AC on PC in early access. They have updated it regularly since then. They will do the same with the console version.

By the way, it's in a lot better shape now that Driveclub was when it first came out. As for PCars when that first came out....

 

[PzR Slim]

Bought the PS4 game and the season pass. Mostly disappointed, as there's nothing 'new' here for me (playing many different racing titles). It feels like 'so what' to me. I think a big part is the weak career mode/playability, low car selection (although the season pass will improve on that), cheesy AI, and poor graphics. I'm doubly upset that PCars 2 is at least 2 years off, and GTSport or GT7 (PD is proving to be special anymore) is pushed back to next year earliest. Maybe it's my fault for expecting something 'better' or an improvement over what already exists out there in the racing genre.

What do you think of the physics?

 

[dopedog]

I said that compared to Assetto Corsa's feel PCars feels more like an arcade. I love PCars, but I felt the gap between the two gaps was significant and that is what I was stating. It's not an arcade game by any means, I felt the handling in comparison to AC, it felt way more loose and forgiving, much like the gap between PCars and Driveclub.

Jon, you liked the above. I don't agree PCars is anywhere near arcade so am simply disagreeing with that sentiment as its a bit childish and i think we need to move on from branding games arcade just because we like another game more.
When OutRun is arcade please explain how PCars is similar to it?

 

[boxster233]

Jon, you liked the above. I don't agree PCars is anywhere near arcade so am simply disagreeing with that sentiment as its a bit childish and i think we need to move on from branding games arcade just because we like another game more.
When OutRun is arcade please explain how PCars is similar to it?

In the handling, PCars is closer to arcade than AC. Pcars is a better game.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Jon, you liked the above. I don't agree PCars is anywhere near arcade so am simply disagreeing with that sentiment as its a bit childish and i think we need to move on from branding games arcade just because we like another game more.
When OutRun is arcade please explain how PCars is similar to it?

Again, your reading comprehension fails you. Pointless to explain because you won't comprehend the explanation either.

 

[Tired Tyres]

In the handling, PCars is closer to arcade than AC. Pcars is a better game.

Then call it less realistic then. Using the word Arcade in context to a Sim is like a red rag to a bull to some people.

 

[avilab]

Agreed, just say PCars is less realistic than AC (which I disagree with), and you won't piss everyone off. None of the games we're comparing is arcade-ish (although they all have their faults).

 

[Tvensky]

well since I have T300 integral alcantara this game is a blast (in physics area).. but I have to admit, it feels unfinished in every way...

most disappointing thing is lack of custom button settings for wheel users, how do I use handbrake on rotating wheel.. lmao.. what a simulator that is

they didnt include most simple features from PC... every other game has it on consoles!

and where is the tuning? this much limited tuning I have never seen in any video sim game.. for years.. and no options to make more HP for cars.. even a simple HP slider would do.. but no.. pure emptiness in every form (except physics, it is almost like Gran turismo.. im loving it..) hope they will update and patch the game..

edit: PS. for a record.. Project cars physics is worse than AC and GT6, and that is a fact.. try to slide a car and then save it

 

[unv412]

tuning cars has always been a bit of waste of time to me. I like to drive the cars the way they left the factory, as that is how i would have imagined they would perform in the fist place. the sim gives you a chance to replicate this because short of winning the lottery...... i would never be able to gauge the speed of a F40 for example. Tune that F40 to 1000hp and stick a body kit on it ?????? to do what, beat a bmw M4 with 1000hp and a body kit? i have raced online (PC) in a Countach (no tc or abs) against an m4 and it was some of the best racing ever.....and if it wasnt close racing , most lobbies match the cars up with Ballast.

as far as Pcars goes the physics is below AC.......always has been

 

[bleeder]

tuning cars has always been a bit of waste of time to me. I like to drive the cars the way they left the factory, as that is how i would have imagined they would perform in the fist place. the sim gives you a chance to replicate this because short of winning the lottery...... i would never be able to gauge the speed of a F40 for example. Tune that F40 to 1000hp and stick a body kit on it ?????? to do what, beat a bmw M4 with 1000hp and a body kit? i have raced online (PC) in a Countach (no tc or abs) against an m4 and it was some of the best racing ever.....and if it wasnt close racing , most lobbies match the cars up with Ballast.

as far as Pcars goes the physics is below AC.......always has been

Yes, I've come to quite like tuning because of pCARS as I disliked the stock setups. I'm looking forward to running some stock setups in AC to see how much better they are but will probably still tune them anyway.