Assetto Corsa or Project Cars

Assetto Corsa or Project Cars

  • Assetto Corsa

    Votes: 85 85.0%
  • Project Cars

    Votes: 15 15.0%

  • Total voters
    100
The only way to say for sure that a car IRL and its AC counterpart reacts the same is by having the exact track, weather, car and what not, conditions.
Right? :P

If you're going for pinpoint 100% 1:1 accuracy, then yes, but that's impossible with toy wheels (and complete lack of g-forces/fear of metal crunching death). But that kind of accuracy isn't required to say whether the sim car feels pretty damn close to the real life car. If you're as familiar with a car when it's near the limit as panjandrum is you're going to have some pretty solid muscle memory, and if you use those same inputs in a sim you'll know if the car reactions are close (or way off) to what the real car's reactions would be. It doesn't have to be 100% accurate, it never will be, but if a sim can get to, say, 90-95% accurate feelings I'd say it's doing a pretty damn good job. Based on his comments AC seems to be within that 90-95% window, and while I find that a bit surprising, I'm inclined to take his word on it due to his extensive experience with the real car.
 
If you're going for pinpoint 100% 1:1 accuracy, then yes, but that's impossible with toy wheels (and complete lack of g-forces/fear of metal crunching death). But that kind of accuracy isn't required to say whether the sim car feels pretty damn close to the real life car. If you're as familiar with a car when it's near the limit as panjandrum is you're going to have some pretty solid muscle memory, and if you use those same inputs in a sim you'll know if the car reactions are close (or way off) to what the real car's reactions would be. It doesn't have to be 100% accurate, it never will be, but if a sim can get to, say, 90-95% accurate feelings I'd say it's doing a pretty damn good job. Based on his comments AC seems to be within that 90-95% window, and while I find that a bit surprising, I'm inclined to take his word on it due to his extensive experience with the real car.
I have experience with real cars. :D

10 years experience here and an extensive training of three days in the snow here. If my French was any better, I'd have been an instructor. And I have a little track experience as well.
I definitely know how a car behaves, what you have to do to control a car, when a car goes over it's limits and so on.
 
I have experience with real cars. :D

10 years experience here and an extensive training of three days in the snow here. If my French was any better, I'd have been an instructor. And I have a little track experience as well.
I definitely know how a car behaves, what you have to do to control a car, when a car goes over it's limits and so on.

Cool, you understand the muscle memory then. Do you have much experience with any of the cars in AC, and if so what is your opinion of how they behave compared to the real thing? Obviously no sim will really feel exactly like the real thing, but some do a better approximation than others and it's always interesting to know the opinions of people who have real world experience.
 
Cool, you understand the muscle memory then. Do you have much experience with any of the cars in AC, and if so what is your opinion of how they behave compared to the real thing? Obviously no sim will really feel exactly like the real thing, but some do a better approximation than others and it's always interesting to know the opinions of people who have real world experience.
As I said before, whatever experience I have IRL, I can't say for sure which sim has the best physics engine. How others can is beyond me. I do know that AC feels right in many ways but there is something wrong, something missing with pCars.

Also, a lot depends on the hardware you use. It is my personal opinion and experience that FFB is BS. :D



* steering wheel and brakes. Eventhough insidesimracing onces said that the brake pedal is the most important part of your equipment is IMHO not true. The steering wheel is equally important. I'm using the G27 with a real OMP 35cm (13.8") rim. December 30th, I had the opportunity to try out the AccuForce for almost three hours straight. The difference was subtle and still huge. Strange to say this but it is true. A DD wheel is a wheel to have if you are into simracing and you want to best real life experience.

When I lost the control of a car in AC, I immediately did what I should do IRL with the AF (> steering wheel control and steering wheel techniques). Problem with a sim is that you don't feel the car and you don't have any G-force acting on your body. I have to rely on the visual cues only, in AC. Don't forget that I barely use FFB because when you lose a car in a sim, the FFB makes the the steering wheel heavier and starts to countersteer (or something like that) automatically. IRL, the steering wheel doesn't get heavier when you lose control of the car. You need less FFB to be able to start countersteering fast enough before the car goes over it's slipangle.

I think but I'm not sure but I have this odd feeling that the handling of a car in AC is more sensitive than IRL. I think and again I'm not sure and this can be subjective or I may even be wrong, that in certain conditions you lose control of a car in AC a little bit faster than IRL. But this can be due to the fact that I'm not sitting inside the car and I don't feel the car.
Also, don't forget that the speed in AC is much higher than the speed when I'm doing carcontrol IRL. This is also a factor that has to be reckoned with.

The steering techniques I've learned IRL are the same in AC with the AccuForce. Less with the G27 because the G27 is a simple toy wheel. I lose control much more often in AC than I would IRL though because of the limitations of the G27, playing on only one monitor so I won't be able to look where I want to steer the car at and not feeling the car and having to rely on only visual cues.

I can only comment on the general behaviour of the cars in AC. I drove the Toyota GT86 IRL and in AC but the difference of sitting in a real car and driving it and driving it in a sim is so big, that I can't say if the car feels correct or not.
I also drove the Alfa 4C IRL, on a public road and again this is very difficult to say is it handles the same and the AC's Alfa 4C. IRL the 4C has no powersteering and feels very strange when you are used to drive a car with powersteering. This feels not the same in AC when driving the Alfa 4C. Also, the steering of the 4C IRL also feel strange because when you turn the steering wheel, the car starts to turn faster of slower the more or less degrees you turn the steering wheel. This is not implemented in AC.

I think that the FFB in AC is a general feedback, the same for every car. The feedback (not force feedback), how little IRL, differs from every cars IRL.
I think that the typical steering behaviour of real life cars is not implemented in AC, yet. Again these are my personal feelings.

It is my opinion that the handling of cars in AC feels a lot and very close like the real thing, more than in pCars. pCars is not bad and does at least one thing better than AC and that is this (see my quote below).

AFAIK there is at least one physic's flaw in AC. In AC when you stop a car downhill, put the car in neutral or disengage the clutch, the car doesn't roll downhill, it stays stationary. pCars has got this right.

I mentioned this on the AC forum and other members told me that it is the slow speed physics that is a bit off in AC.
I'm just repeating what they said.

I still prefer AC over pCars. I'm not someone who clames to know which physics engine is more correct but AC feels so much real than pCars. MPHO (my personal humble opinion).

Whatever experience I have in real life, I can't say it AC has a better physics engine than pCars or vice versa.


I don't have to comment on the brake pedal of the G27. We all know that it is, mmmm, crap. :D


Some people are probably not going to agree with certain things I said because some things are subjective and also, I might be wrong with certain things I said.​
 
Last edited:
Normal people get both, weird lonely fanboy types get one and spend the rest of the time trying to prove they are better because of a game choice.....

As i understand PCars on PC is cheap, just get both either at same time or over a period if money is tight, don't pick a side because as a gamer you'll miss out on other good stuff.

cheers. just my 2 peneth.
 
Added AC a week ago because I needed to learn some tracks for upcoming track days.
Tracks that are not present in PCars.
It takes some time to get used to the different approach (menu's - controls - setups).
First impressions are not really overwhelming...
People say FFB and physics in AC are better than in PCars.
Is that because they think that higher difficulty equals more realism ?
It's not.
Race cars are not as difficult to drive as sims want you to believe.
But that is probably another discussion.

Compared to PCars, AC:

- has no dynamic weather
- tracks look lifeless
- AI are worse
- graphics are not really good
- feels slow with correct FOV
- only 14 tracks/layouts ! (I know about mods, but...come on...!)
- poor car choice
- poor "career" mode
- too little controls can be mapped to a button box
- sounds are not bad, but certainly not as good as I have been reading about
- no support for rev lights and gear indicators on Fanatec CSW wheel (even after installing Fanaleds, I only get gear indicator, rev lights only work in the pitlane)
- joysticks on the wheel are not recognized.

The good things:
- triple screen support
- ability to change settings while in game
- ....? .....
Maybe I'll find some more, but nothing comes to mind right now.

I'll keep using AC for hotlapping on some tracks that PCars lacks, but that is about it. Pretty dissapointed in AC so far, but hey, it was on sale on Steam...

So: Project Cars has my vote...
It is supposed to feel slow with correct FOV. That is not a bad thing.
 
Correct FOV does not feel slow, the distorted view in a wide FOV gives an axagerated feeling of speed, if your only driving experience is video game, then it feels normal.
It might feel exhilarated, might even be enjoyable but it is not simulating real life driving.
Gamer hate correct FOV, it only appeal to some one seeking simulation. Nothing wrong with being one or the other, the only importance is to have fun and enjoy the experience.

@kikie, just would like to mention that like you I am always puzzled when someone mention a car in Ac, or even worse in GT or other SIM, are just like driving the real thing. It might be the closest, but still so much not like it that the claim always make me smile. If you had to the mix that most people set up are totally unrealistic it is even more funny. I still enjoy the quest for better immersion and drive my SIM everyday, but 95% like the real thing? Really? Can I try that drug?:lol::lol::lol:
I will give 20% in the best case scenario in a motion rig, but only because it is Saturday morning and I am in a good mood :cheers:
 
Last edited:
For me:

Visually PCARS take the win, it also has dynamic weather and a bigger track selection. FFB however is complicated to dial in, so for many the FFB and subsequently also the physics might feel worse than AC because of that. AI is fast and races you but has the tendency to go 'loco' all out of the blue. Game also suffered from a crapload of bugs, but luckily most of that has been sorted by now.

AC however takes the win for its menus which are quicker and far more intuitive to navigate, default FFB and physics that feel good out of the box and aren't hard to setup and engine sounds which have a bit more character to them, and practically all tracks being laser scanned.

Conclusion get both if you can afford it, but if you really only have money for one sim that ticks all the boxes get Reiza's upcoming Automobilista :D
 
Correct FOV does not feel slow, the distorted view in a wide FOV gives an axagerated feeling of speed, if your only driving experience is video game, then it feels normal.
It might feel exhilarated, might even be enjoyable but it is not simulating real life driving.
Gamer hate correct FOV, it only appeal to some one seeking simulation. Nothing wrong with being one or the other, the only importance is to have fun and enjoy the experience.

@kiki, just would like to mention that like you I am always puzzled when someone mention a car in Ac, or even worse in GT or other SIM, are just like driving the real thing. It might be the closest, but still so much not like it that the claim always make me smile. If you had to the mix that most people set up are totally unrealistic it is even more funny. I still enjoy the quest for better immersion and drive my SIM everyday, but 95% like the real thing? Really? Can I try that drug?:lol::lol::lol:
I will give 20% in the best case scenario in a motion rig, but only because it is Saturday morning and I am in a good mood :cheers:
You tagged the wrong person. :lol:

It's kikie not kiki.

Do you mean that you agree with me that it is very hard to compare a car in a sim with it's real counterpart?
 
Added AC a week ago because I needed to learn some tracks for upcoming track days.
Tracks that are not present in PCars.
It takes some time to get used to the different approach (menu's - controls - setups).
First impressions are not really overwhelming...
People say FFB and physics in AC are better than in PCars.
Is that because they think that higher difficulty equals more realism ?
It's not.
Race cars are not as difficult to drive as sims want you to believe.
But that is probably another discussion.


Compared to PCars, AC:

- has no dynamic weather
- tracks look lifeless
- AI are worse
- graphics are not really good
- feels slow with correct FOV
- only 14 tracks/layouts ! (I know about mods, but...come on...!)
- poor car choice
- poor "career" mode
- too little controls can be mapped to a button box
- sounds are not bad, but certainly not as good as I have been reading about
- no support for rev lights and gear indicators on Fanatec CSW wheel (even after installing Fanaleds, I only get gear indicator, rev lights only work in the pitlane)
- joysticks on the wheel are not recognized.

The good things:
- triple screen support
- ability to change settings while in game
- ....? .....
Maybe I'll find some more, but nothing comes to mind right now.

I'll keep using AC for hotlapping on some tracks that PCars lacks, but that is about it. Pretty dissapointed in AC so far, but hey, it was on sale on Steam...

So: Project Cars has my vote...

In bold, so so true, i find it laughable that some 'sims' or driving games seem to present multi million pound developed race cars engineered by genius's and master minds to be the best they possibly can be, with enough aero that if you turned it upside down it could take OFF!! And massive fat slicks, yet faced with a 40mph corner they slip and skid like its your Grans fiesta on black ice.... actually i've never driven ANY car on any dry surface track or road that wants to just slip away from you let alone a thorough bred race car.... Its DAFT, its wrong, its silly.

Its easy to drive a car, its driving it to its very limits and over that takes skill.... but the limit should not be 40mph first corner.
PCars had that nailed untill patch 7... forza is one of the worst for ice racing.

GT3 class cars have pro driver and gentleman drivers, the pros are generally faster but the gents aren't all slipping around at 30mph nervously taking each corner...daft, driving a car isn't rocket science, alot of people do it everyday.
 
@kikie, just would like to mention that like you I am always puzzled when someone mention a car in Ac, or even worse in GT or other SIM, are just like driving the real thing. It might be the closest, but still so much not like it that the claim always make me smile. If you had to the mix that most people set up are totally unrealistic it is even more funny. I still enjoy the quest for better immersion and drive my SIM everyday, but 95% like the real thing? Really? Can I try that drug?:lol::lol::lol:
I will give 20% in the best case scenario in a motion rig, but only because it is Saturday morning and I am in a good mood :cheers:

I guess I'll clarify. Clearly our toys can't fully replicate the entire experience and sensations of driving a real car and that's not what I what I meant to suggest. I was talking about muscle memory and accuracy of your inputs, meaning if you give the same wheel/pedal inputs you'd use on the real car does the virtual car react in a similar way. Those kind of things can be fairly accurately represented in a good sim (and with good equipment), I think AC does a really good job of it.

There have been many times where I jumped in my real car after a couple hours in the rig and I marvel at how similar my arm/leg movements are. 95% was more of a figurative number than a literal one, but at least between my rig and my car the muscle memory used for the two is very similar and that's really all I was referring to. I'm not fool enough to think any of our toys can fully replicate the entire driving experience, but some do a really good job of making my brain think I'm driving (of course the beer probably helps with that too). Just my opinion, doesn't mean it's fact.
 
@BrandonW77 my comment was not referring one of your post, more aimed at what we say when talking about SIM, many time we can read arguments often from 2 people who have not even drove the car on how one SIM is just like driving the car IRL or not. But even if one of them has drove the car, to me, the experience in game is so different that it makes little difference.
AC in particular, but other SIM also, make my brain think I am driving and I do not even drink!
Some time the immersion is very good and the memory of driving compensate for all that is missing.
But to me the experience we are getting at this point in time with the hardware and software available has never allow me to directly compare driving a particular car IRL and in game. Some trait of some behavior in some situation might feel vaguely familiar but that is as far as it goes. Hence for me 20% is the most I can allow.
Of course I don't know what is going on in someone else brain so I can't judge to what % of similarity the experience should be rated for them, 95% still seem pretty high from my perspective.
 
Last edited:
@BrandonW77 my comment was not referring one of your post, more aimed at what we say when talking about SIM, many time we can read arguments often from 2 people who have not even drove the car on how one SIM is just like driving the car IRL or not. But even if one of them has drove the, to me the experience in game is so different that it makes little difference.
AC in particular, but other SIM also, make my brain think I am driving and I do not even drink!
Some time the immersion is very good and the memory of driving compensate for all that is missing.
But to me the experience we are getting at this point in time with the hardware and software available has never allow me to directly compare driving a particular car IRL and in game. Some trait of some behavior in some situation might feel vaguely familiar but that is as far as it goes. Hence for me 20% is the most I can allow.
Of course I don't know what is going on in someone else brain so I can't judge to what % of similarity the experience should be rated for them, 95% still seem pretty high from my perspective.


Like I said, 95% was just figurative, it's impossible to put a real number on it. But at least for my brain, my rig (especially with my new CSW V2) feels very similar to my real driving experience as far as seating position and the movements of my arms, legs, and hands. I can even shuffle steer just like in my real car and once my pedal inversion kit arrives I should be able to heel/toe just like in my real car. I mean this on the most basic of levels, and I'm sure years of booze and other vices have helped to make my brain easier to convince/fool. :P But I'm enjoying the results! :D
 
One interesting test would be to ask someone to drive a car in game, with no reference to what it is supposed to be, like the standard cockpit view in GT5 and have the driver recognize his own car or any car.
Or just drive the same car with different data files and choose which one is which.

Double blind test in any field, like wine or hifi is often a revelation on how strong autosuggestion is as opposed to what is really happening.
 
Last edited:
I've actually had time to get back into AC and PCars recently, and I'm becoming more and more impressed with the physics and FFB of AC. It's truly uncanny how much the YB feels like RL Porsches of the era (as it should).

If you are interested in feeling what a Porsche 911 of that era feels like, just crank the YB's turbo down to 10% in AC. You don't even have to change anything else; it's all very close "right out of the box". All of a sudden the crazy madness of the YB becomes a tame pussy-cat (the primary difference is the YB's massive power. Just like the turbo Porsches of the day; adding turbos to the 911 made it a vastly more difficult car to manage because it allowed the driver to compromise rear-grip by getting tire-spin under throttle, which the NA machines simply don't do on dry tarmac in anything above 1st gear, and you have to really try even to get that. The normally aspirated Porsches of that time are incredibly predictable and easy to drive hard as long as you understand what you are doing and are certainly one of the best drive-by-throttle machines of all time).

With the YB's turbo at only 10% in AC, you can really be brutal with the go-pedal in corners. Practice going into corner just a bit too hot in this configuration, and then doing the so-called "no-no" of lifting your right foot... Now put it back down, immediately, all the way. Just blip up and blip back down. That fast. After you master that (you should need zero, or nearly zero counter-steering up to this point) begin lifting just a little longer before you put the pedal back down. Or, put the pedal back-down part way instead of all the way (you'll start to need more counter-steering as you increase off-throttle time). Notice how you can "rotate" the chassis to exactly where you want it, and then just stomp the pedal back down to "catch" it,and be off in a new direction? You can really feel the rear of the car squat and the weight transfer back, reinstating rear-end grip and halting the chassis rotation. That's key to classic RR handling (and, physics dictates, also classic MR and modern RR and MR handling, to greater or lesser degrees, but I've never driven anything that could be considered a modern RR or MR car IRL).

But in all ways, the physics and FFB of AC in this puppy are simply the best I've ever felt in a sim. It's absolutely brilliant.

So if you want physics, AC, if you want more other stuff, PCars, if you want both, cry like I do.
 
Last edited:
assetto corsa is more stable compare to PCars. I play AC on my PC with the DS4 (the pedals on my t300 doesn't work on Assetto) and PCars on my ps4 with the t300. Drifting is also much better.
 
assetto corsa is more stable compare to PCars. I play AC on my PC with the DS4 (the pedals on my t300 doesn't work on Assetto) and PCars on my ps4 with the t300. Drifting is also much better.
If you are using Thrustmaster pedals they really should work in AC.... I've run my T300 with the stock pedals, T3PA and Fanatec Clubsports (via separate USB) in AC and all combinations work fine.
 
If you are using Thrustmaster pedals they really should work in AC.... I've run my T300 with the stock pedals, T3PA and Fanatec Clubsports (via separate USB) in AC and all combinations work fine.
I found the reason why my wheel calibrated. I have to install the latest driver for my wheel. Now it is set.
 
Or if a lack of content doesn't bother you; try RF2.
RFactor 2 doesn't have much content? That surprises me! Isn't it one of the older sims? I just got into the Sim world, so my only experience is with Assetto Corsa at the moment. I noticed there isn't an RF2 forum here on GTPlanet, but there is a forum for RaceRoom Racing Experience. So, perhaps I am very wrong about the popularity of RF2. I always thought it was one of the most popular sims available. I know it's "older" and the graphics aren't the best, but I was under the impression RF2 had incredible physics and an insane tire model, etc...
 
RFactor 2 doesn't have much content? That surprises me! Isn't it one of the older sims? I just got into the Sim world, so my only experience is with Assetto Corsa at the moment. I noticed there isn't an RF2 forum here on GTPlanet, but there is a forum for RaceRoom Racing Experience. So, perhaps I am very wrong about the popularity of RF2. I always thought it was one of the most popular sims available. I know it's "older" and the graphics aren't the best, but I was under the impression RF2 had incredible physics and an insane tire model, etc...
rF2 went through a "lean" period, because modders who were used to rFactor 1 discovered that rF2 requires a lot more work and complexity to producing models. In fact, modders jumped over in large numbers to Assetto Corsa from rF1 because that was an easier transition.

More recently rF2 modding has started becoming more popular, some big modding groups have released excellent content. And rF2 is now on Steam and integrates with Steam Workshop, which makes using mods a LOT easier.

These things together mean that rF2 is entering a new phase where more content is coming, and starting to put up a bigger fight against AC.
 
RFactor 2 doesn't have much content? That surprises me! Isn't it one of the older sims? I just got into the Sim world, so my only experience is with Assetto Corsa at the moment. I noticed there isn't an RF2 forum here on GTPlanet, but there is a forum for RaceRoom Racing Experience. So, perhaps I am very wrong about the popularity of RF2. I always thought it was one of the most popular sims available. I know it's "older" and the graphics aren't the best, but I was under the impression RF2 had incredible physics and an insane tire model, etc...


Out of the box the rF2 content is pretty weak IMO, a bunch of open wheel cars, a few other random cars, a few tracks you've heard of, a bunch of fantasy tracks, and a few ovals. But over the last few months it seems the mod content is starting to come on strong. I just got into rF2 about a month ago and already have several great mod cars/tracks installed which really increased the value of rF2 to me. For the most part, the mod contents I've tried are nearly as good as the stock content which is impressive (in AC it's a real hodge-podge of quality with top-notch mods being buried in a sea of mediocrity). Also, installing mods in rF2 is brilliant and simple, far better than any other sim I've used. I'm still figuring it all out but what I've seen so far I quite enjoy. (IMO the graphics are more than fine)
 
Re: RF2 content. If it was only the Historic Formula cars and the Historic tracks ( Monaco, Spa , and Monza) I would buy it again in a heartbeat.
 
RFactor 2 doesn't have much content? That surprises me! Isn't it one of the older sims? I just got into the Sim world, so my only experience is with Assetto Corsa at the moment. I noticed there isn't an RF2 forum here on GTPlanet, but there is a forum for RaceRoom Racing Experience. So, perhaps I am very wrong about the popularity of RF2. I always thought it was one of the most popular sims available. I know it's "older" and the graphics aren't the best, but I was under the impression RF2 had incredible physics and an insane tire model, etc...

You are indeed very wrong about the popularity of RF2.
http://steamcharts.com/cmp/244210,365960
although this chart does not show all of the player actually playing RF2, it is still very representative. RF2 is not the most popular, actually it is not very popular.
Apparently it has made a lot of progress in 2015, so RF2 popularity might be on the rise.
It is said by some ( just a few but they spend a lot of time on the forums) to be the best SIM out there. There is no reason to doubt them or believe them, since ISI is kind enough to provide a demo and let you be the judge of how great it is.
This is the Assetto Corsa section, maybe you will get good info in the RF2 section, but not in this forum, they do not even have one, this alone tell you also about their popularity.
 
Yes, AC is using a Vertical FOV angle calculation and PCars is using a Horizontal FOV angle calculation, but if you are using the proper calculation for each, the result will be the same, you will see an identical FOV but the value of the angle will be different.
You can go there for a more in depth explanation: http://www.projectimmersion.com/fov/howto.php?g=pCARS

A narrower FOV will always appear at first, coming from a distorted FOV as if the speed is not right. It is actually, it is the distorted FOV who gives a fake sense of speed. Just like Bumper cam, because it is so close to the ground also give a distorted sense of speed.

Once you get use to a closer to reality FOV, the distorted sense of speed of wide FOV will make you shake your head and you will not believe you use to play like that.
 
Yes, AC is using a Vertical FOV angle calculation and PCars is using a Horizontal FOV angle calculation, but if you are using the proper calculation for each, the result will be the same, you will see an identical FOV but the value of the angle will be different.
You can go there for a more in depth explanation: http://www.projectimmersion.com/fov/howto.php?g=pCARS

A narrower FOV will always appear at first, coming from a distorted FOV as if the speed is not right. It is actually, it is the distorted FOV who gives a fake sense of speed. Just like Bumper cam, because it is so close to the ground also give a distorted sense of speed.

Once you get use to a closer to reality FOV, the distorted sense of speed of wide FOV will make you shake your head and you will not believe you use to play like that.
So true, that is exactly what happened when I switched from GT5 to AC.
In GT5 I never used the cockpit cam and in AC I always use cockpit cam. I still can't believe I use to play GT5 without cockpit cam. It is so much immersive and realistic (cockpit cam).
 
So true, that is exactly what happened when I switched from GT5 to AC.
In GT5 I never used the cockpit cam and in AC I always use cockpit cam. I still can't believe I use to play GT5 without cockpit cam. It is so much immersive and realistic (cockpit cam).
I think most of us who played GT5/GT6 rarely used cockpit cam, because it was really bad. I remember the Citroën Race car cockpit, where you could hardly see the road because of some digital screen being in the way.
Maybe you should try GT again in cockpit to compare. I think you still would not like it and switch to bumper cam... ;)

In PCars and AC I only use cockpit cam, but they are different in both sims. AC is clearly better for triple screen view (because it has the support PCars lacks), but on one screen it is easier to find the right view in PCars, because of all the possible seat settings, even while driving.
 

Latest Posts

Back