Assetto Corsa vs. PCars 2 vs GTS: Physics, FFB

[Cote Dazur]

I tried the lower values for FFB as in the merc video. Did not like it at all. Especially the skid = 0, does not make sense. It's one of the things I love in AC: you can feel your car losing grip with this setting set to something.

That setting is just an amplifier, you can feel the effect even with the amplifier at zero, it depends on your wheel and your setting. If you prefer this to be amplified it is great, but not every one likes it that way, like me, I don”t.

 

[BrandonW77]

That setting is just an amplifier, you can feel the effect even with the amplifier at zero, it depends on your wheel and your setting. If you prefer this to be amplified it is great, but not every one likes it that way, like me, I don”t.

I don't, I have to turn it up a bit to be able to feel anything in the wheel when the tires are slipping.

 

[Cote Dazur]

I don't, I have to turn it up a bit to be able to feel anything in the wheel when the tires are slipping.

Maybe you would if your CSW was working,

 

[panjandrum]

Well, with the Steam refund policy, I guess I could, at some point, purchase a copy of PCARS 2. I consider the original PCARS to be a complete waste of money due to the awful physics and FFB. It's a game I really, really wanted to love, but ultimately couldn't even play because of the poor foundation. It probably won't happen anywhere near game-launch, but if I get a chance I'll definitely come back and put in my 2cents worth... (But, as usual, I'll only be comparing classic-era rear-engine Porsches, because that's all I have extensive IRL experience with. Still, if you can't get the physics and feel of those right, you almost certainly can't get anything right, because those handle an extremely specific, easily "feel-able" and unique way.)

So I finally had a chance to purchase PCars 2 and spend a good amount of time testing it within my Steam return window.

The bottom line for me is that I returned it. I really couldn't give it a proper test vs. real life since they don't have a single digital equivalent to my RL cars (why, why did they remove the YB? That's crazy!) So, I can't give a direct AC vs RL vs PCars2 comparison.

What I did do was use the modern 911 GT3 RS, which I've driven a lot in AC, so at least I would be working with the same car. IMHO both the physics and FFB of PCars2 is vastly, vastly improved over the atrocious PCars1. Still not as good as AC, but certainly pretty decent. If forced to exactly specify why, it's because PCars2 doesn't feel as "connected" or "accurate" as AC, but unlike PCars1 I could at least tell, for example, that I was driving a rear-engined car. I tried all three profiles and many setting adjustments, and in terms of physics/ffb guess I would give PCars2 a good solid "B-" and AC an "A" (in comparison PCars1 was, in my book, a D- if I'm being generous). AC definitely gives me a better sense of what my car is doing, but PCars2 is at least decent. My main complaint about the PCars physics and ffb is the near complete lack of understeer feel through the steering wheel, something AC does very well. In terms of weight-distrubution & transfer, this is far better in PCars2 than it was in PCars1 (where it basically didn't exist), but AC still has a definite edge in my book.

In terms of graphics, obviously PCars2 has a lot of eye-candy that AC lacks. And the different weathers, surfaces, and times of day in PCars2 are things I would love to eventually see in future versions of AC. Interestingly, in terms of overall fidelity I think AC has the edge, probably because it wasn't originally designed with console limitations in mind. Cars retain far more detail in the distance in AC, for example, than in PCars2 where they pretty quickly become lower- polygon blobs (my system can run both games at 2560x1440 with essentially all other quality settings maxed, so I'm not running lower setting on PCars2 or anything like that). I really expected PCars2 to outshine AC in all areas graphically, but of the two, if forced to choose, I prefer the overall fidelity, sharpness, and distant-rendering quality of AC over PCars2's (very fun) eye-candy.

But despite all the very good things about PCars2 (weathers, time-of-day changes, multiple surfaces, eye-candy, look-to-apex function, etc.) I ended up returning it because a) the physics and ffb, while pretty good now, just aren't up to AC's quality yet b) PCars2 has very, very few cars I'm actually interested in driving (I drive classic-era cars probably 95% of the time in racing sims) and c) the PCars2 AI is like something out of GT4. In AC you can watch the drivers around you actively trying to avoid collisions, both with your car and with each other. AC does a pretty good job of this, and most of the time if there is contact it's because I've done something stupid. PCars2, on the other hand, no matter what AI difficulty and aggressiveness I used, repeatedly rammed me, especially from directly behind, often as if the AI car didn't even bother to slow at all. It really did feel like stepping all the way back to GT4. What a bummer on that front.

I'll definitely revisit PCars2 at some point in the future, either when it's gone on significant sale (If it was a $39 game I would have kept it), or when they add more cars I'm actually interested in driving. I would freaking LOVE cruising around the ring, in the winter, with snow accumulation, at night, in a blizzard, in the Yellowbird, or a Stratos, or an Alpine A110 (either old or new), or any number of other cars which aren't yet part of PCars2...

 

[Fredzy]

A Stratos around a snowy Nordschleife at night. Better carb load the night before, gonna burn 3000 calories in those flailing arms.

Neat write up! If I wasn’t lazy I’d link to all of the review posts like this in the OP. Maybe some day.

 

[ALB123]

Nice write-up @panjandrum. You really shocked me. I had no idea that PCars 2 doesn't have the Yellowbird. That's like a sim racer's must-have car. You know? They're fast as hell and it's just you, the CTR and the road. She'll delight you, but she'll also bite you. That car is so great. 👍

I was just throwing the Ferrari 250 GTO around Lake Louise Freeroam. So much fun...but the 250 GTO isn't exactly a friendly car. Is there anything you guys do to the 250 GTO setup every time you take 'er out? Adjust ARB or Wheel Rate or Ride Height?

 

[OooAhh Cantona]

Nice write-up @panjandrum.
I was just throwing the Ferrari 250 GTO around Lake Louise Freeroam. So much fun...but the 250 GTO isn't exactly a friendly car. Is there anything you guys do to the 250 GTO setup every time you take 'er out? Adjust ARB or Wheel Rate or Ride Height?

What are you experiencing with the 250 GTO? I had not driven it but then hopped into it after your post. 10 test laps on Brands Hatch... nothing out of the ordinary for me. Obviously it’s not a modern GT3 car. The FFB was what I expected from vintage car and tires. I just needed to find the braking zone and throttle control. The car has a large steering degree of rotation. If you open the data file and car.ini, you will see 585 steering lock from center to right... so 1170 total degree of rotation for steering wheel. I had my TM profiler set to 1080 (its max) and the in-game steering degree of rotation to 1170. In-game driver animation matched my hands as I steered.

 

[Scaff]

(why, why did they remove the YB? That's crazy!)

I suspect that its down to the Porsche licence, titles that had the YB (or any Ruf) and then added in Porsche via DLC seem to have been fine. However any title that has launched with Porsche from day one seem to have no Ruf in place at all.

My main complaint about the PCars physics and ffb is the near complete lack of understeer feel through the steering wheel, something AC does very well. In terms of weight-distrubution & transfer, this is far better in PCars2 than it was in PCars1 (where it basically didn't exist), but AC still has a definite edge in my book.

What wheel and settings are you using on both?

While I see AC as still being ahead of PC2 I can't agree that PC2 has a near complete lack of understeer at all.

But despite all the very good things about PCars2 (weathers, time-of-day changes, multiple surfaces, eye-candy, look-to-apex function, etc.) I ended up returning it because a) the physics and ffb, while pretty good now, just aren't up to AC's quality yet b) PCars2 has very, very few cars I'm actually interested in driving (I drive classic-era cars probably 95% of the time in racing sims) and c) the PCars2 AI is like something out of GT4. In AC you can watch the drivers around you actively trying to avoid collisions, both with your car and with each other. AC does a pretty good job of this, and most of the time if there is contact it's because I've done something stupid. PCars2, on the other hand, no matter what AI difficulty and aggressiveness I used, repeatedly rammed me, especially from directly behind, often as if the AI car didn't even bother to slow at all. It really did feel like stepping all the way back to GT4. What a bummer on that front.

Again would have to ask what settings and car/race combos you ran, as I've had plenty of races without what you have described happening at all.

 

[panjandrum]

I suspect that its down to the Porsche licence, titles that had the YB (or any Ruf) and then added in Porsche via DLC seem to have been fine. However any title that has launched with Porsche from day one seem to have no Ruf in place at all.


What wheel and settings are you using on both?

While I see AC as still being ahead of PC2 I can't agree that PC2 has a near complete lack of understeer at all.



Again would have to ask what settings and car/race combos you ran, as I've had plenty of races without what you have described happening at all.

Well, I guess I'm stuck with PCars2 because I had played it too long (For some reason I never noticed the 2-hour limit on the STEAM return policy - I was working with the 2-day return window which I guess is for something else entirely. It took me 2-hours just to get the options setup! Anyway, I was on the fence about the return in the first place, so I'm going to enjoy tooling around the Ring at night, in the rain, in the very few cars I'll actually enjoy in PCars2).

For the FFB I've tried all three basic modes and a fair amount of tweaking within each mode. Still up-in-the-air about which set I like best. I run a T500 wheel. What I've been doing is bouncing back and forth from AC to PCars2 to try and figure out the differences - running the Ring using the GT3. There is definitely a good, tactile, understeer feel in AC just on entering corners too hot or applying too much steering-angle (and of course when braking too hard and getting lockup). PCars2 does have some feedback relating to understeer, but it's very subtle unless you lock-up under braking. But these are minor complaints - it's nothing like the ghastliness that was PCars1. At least in what I've driven thus far it seems night-and-day better and IHMO very enjoyable. I kind of want to reserve final judgement until it gets a car which is something very close in my RL experience...

As for the rear-ending AI, it seems to happen less when I turn down the AI aggressiveness to the minimum setting. At least that's my initial feeling at this point on the matter.

 

[ALB123]

What are you experiencing with the 250 GTO? I had not driven it but then hopped into it after your post. 10 test laps on Brands Hatch... nothing out of the ordinary for me. Obviously it’s not a modern GT3 car. The FFB was what I expected from vintage car and tires. I just needed to find the braking zone and throttle control. The car has a large steering degree of rotation. If you open the data file and car.ini, you will see 585 steering lock from center to right... so 1170 total degree of rotation for steering wheel. I had my TM profiler set to 1080 (its max) and the in-game steering degree of rotation to 1170. In-game driver animation matched my hands as I steered.

It probably is at least semi-related to the steering of the car. It feels a little floaty at first and due to the age of the car, the suspension seems to make the car roll a fair amount, but also pitch front to back depending on whether you are braking or accelerating. To me, it feels like you can go from understeer to oversteer in the blink of your eye.

I certainly didn't expect the 250 GTO to handle like a modern race car - that would be ridiculous. Still, perhaps I expected a little too much from the car... that is a possibility. Seeing how I am an avg to below avg skilled driver, I have a hard time pushing most cars to the absolute limit and living to tell the tale. I feel like I'm not even close to the limit with this car based on the performances I've seen with other sim racers behind the wheel. I like the challenge...I think that's why I like older cars more than new ones in AC.

When I wrote the post you responded to, I had just finished a session on Lake Louise which is incredibly bumpy and unforgiving itself. While I consider myself a crap tuner...I can often make a small adjustment here or there to at least make the car feel a tiny bit better. There aren't many settings available for adjusting, but I have tried to stiffen the rear a little bit more...small increases of the rear Wheel Rates - I might be heading in the wrong direction, but my aim was to try to keep just a little more load on the front tires because it seems every time I floored it, there would be a lot of load transfer to the rear. Even just half-throttling it...I thought I could get more bite with the front tires.

 

[artem9000]

Did anyone make detailed analysis on GT Sport physics (vs AC, for example)? Because I can't take serious race cars is GT Sport after Assetto Corsa, road cars on standard tires are fine though.

 

[Fredzy]

Did anyone make detailed analysis on GT Sport physics (vs AC, for example)? Because I can't take serious race cars is GT Sport after Assetto Corsa, road cars on standard tires are fine though.

I'll put some notes in the OP where people shared their thoughts. *edit* on second thought... that's too much work

I was tempted back to GTS because of the McLaren F1. I played 3 or 4 hours and probably won't go back often. Absolutely no Sport Mode - I've sworn it off forever. Though I may return if they remove yellow flag penalties. Here are some of my thoughts on GTS physics having gone without it for two months while playing AC exclusively:

- After I started to become accustomed to AC, I felt like GT6's only real deficiency compared to AC was at 9/10 to over the limit. GT was too forgiving (they want to keep you happy) where as AC was simply realistic (sorry, have fun getting back on the track.) This is more true now than ever, as GTS works aggressively to keep people on the track and pointed the right way. There are pros and cons associated with that.

- Cars in GTS behave mostly as I'd expect up to 8 or maybe 9/10 depending on the car and the tires, but driving feels sterile. GTS is no worse than GT6, I just think I've gotten used to the gritty feel of AC and all its FFB information. I miss it badly while playing GT. GT is so beautiful, but without that car and road feel, driving a cool car is like eating my favorite pizza without a sense of taste.

- Sports hard tires are slippery and floaty, as if they are always in a state of dynamic friction. I think the muted, disconnected FFB plays a role there. It is difficult to place cars with these tires and very hard to be consistent. Does not feel natural. The way the all tires break loose on hard acceleration is odd. Doing a burn-out from a standstill is especially bizarre and doesn't amuse me at all.

- Sports soft are like racing slicks

- I don't think you ever really have to worry about whether your tires are too hot or cold. So that it less interesting.

- The only driving aid I used besides ABS was TC, and it was better than I last recall. Less jerky and more effective overall. I no longer believe there are scripted fish-tail events associated with using it

- Also of note, there was a "grip bug" that was recently fixed which had imbued its lucky recipients with Forza Horizon-like physics laws. I definitely did not have it. I had assumed wrongly that this was by design for controller users to make them more competitive against wheel users. It factored into my abandoning the game. I'm happy that it wasn't by design and is now fixed, but it leaves me with a very poor impression of the physics engine in general.

 

[Gregfranklin]

- Cars in GTS behave mostly as I'd expect up to 8 or maybe 9/10 depending on the car and the tires, but driving feels sterile. GTS is no worse than GT6, I just think I've gotten used to the gritty feel of AC and all its FFB information. I miss it badly while playing GT. GT is so beautiful, but without that car and road feel, driving a cool car is like eating my favorite pizza without a sense of taste.

Perfectly said.

 

[Georgeagea]

Did anyone notice that Pcars2 requires more turning/wheel input than AC?!
I noticed that the moment I got my hands on Pcars2.

Yesterday I was doing some testing and ran the AMG GT3 around Nordshlife in AC and PC2.
I was driving it relatively well in AC but I was pretty bad in PC2 and kept sub-turning the car due to my muscle memory and getting outside of the track on the exit.
There's 2 remedies I can think of to adapt in PC2 (since AC doesn't allow any modification on turning/steering on PS4), in order to bring the 2 experiences to match:
-1- Increase "steering sensitivity" option in wheel configuration settings from my default 50% (1to1 movement) to ~55%.
-2- Modify the actual setup of the car, and change the "Steering ratio" in the "center front suspension" setup page.

Since I'm kind of a perfectionist/OCD I just cannot accept modifying each setup of each car and possibly ****ing it off or maybe sometimes forgetting to changing it in the 1st place and ruining my race, and since I want a uniform experience across the board out of the box, I adopted the 1st solution.

But I'm curious what's your take on this? Do you notice any difference? Do you simply cope with it or try to rectify it? Feedback

 

[Whitestar]

Did anyone notice that Pcars2 requires more turning/wheel input than AC?!
I noticed that the moment I got my hands on Pcars2.

Yesterday I was doing some testing and ran the AMG GT3 around Nordshlife in AC and PC2.
I was driving it relatively well in AC but I was pretty bad in PC2 and kept sub-turning the car due to my muscle memory and getting outside of the track on the exit.
There's 2 remedies I can think of to adapt in PC2 (since AC doesn't allow any modification on turning/steering on PS4), in order to bring the 2 experiences to match:
-1- Increase "steering sensitivity" option in wheel configuration settings from my default 50% (1to1 movement) to ~55%.
-2- Modify the actual setup of the car, and change the "Steering ratio" in the "center front suspension" setup page.

Since I'm kind of a perfectionist/OCD I just cannot accept modifying each setup of each car and possibly ****ing it off or maybe sometimes forgetting to changing it in the 1st place and ruining my race, and since I want a uniform experience across the board out of the box, I adopted the 1st solution.

But I'm curious what's your take on this? Do you notice any difference? Do you simply cope with it or try to rectify it? Feedback

Yep, I noticed that too. Was driving pretty badly until I realized I simply had to turn the wheel a bit more.

 

[zuqbu]

Did anyone notice that Pcars2 requires more turning/wheel input than AC?!
I noticed that the moment I got my hands on Pcars2.

Yesterday I was doing some testing and ran the AMG GT3 around Nordshlife in AC and PC2.
I was driving it relatively well in AC but I was pretty bad in PC2 and kept sub-turning the car due to my muscle memory and getting outside of the track on the exit.
There's 2 remedies I can think of to adapt in PC2 (since AC doesn't allow any modification on turning/steering on PS4), in order to bring the 2 experiences to match:
-1- Increase "steering sensitivity" option in wheel configuration settings from my default 50% (1to1 movement) to ~55%.
-2- Modify the actual setup of the car, and change the "Steering ratio" in the "center front suspension" setup page.

Since I'm kind of a perfectionist/OCD I just cannot accept modifying each setup of each car and possibly ****ing it off or maybe sometimes forgetting to changing it in the 1st place and ruining my race, and since I want a uniform experience across the board out of the box, I adopted the 1st solution.

But I'm curious what's your take on this? Do you notice any difference? Do you simply cope with it or try to rectify it? Feedback

I had the same problem. Are you using a T300 as well by any chance?

I did find a way to make AC and PC2 very similiar by fiddling around with the degree of rotation in the wheel setup in PC2.
I need to check when I am home later this week.

If you’re on a T300, check which degree of rotation the wheel is in after you load up the game (Press MODE + DPAD LEFT/RIGHT). If I recall correctly, AC defaults the wheel to 1080° while PC sets it to 900°. Set these according to preference and redo the wheel configuration in PC2. I think I got the best results with 900°.

 

[MarcoM]

I notice that too. Especially going back to AC, I tend to give too much input. From AC to PC2 it is an extra safety margin.

 

[Georgeagea]

I had the same problem. Are you using a T300 as well by any chance?

I did find a way to make AC and PC2 very similar by fiddling around with the degree of rotation in the wheel setup in PC2.
I need to check when I am home later this week.

If you’re on a T300, check which degree of rotation the wheel is in after you load up the game (Press MODE + DPAD LEFT/RIGHT). If I recall correctly, AC defaults the wheel to 1080° while PC sets it to 900°. Set these according to preference and redo the wheel configuration in PC2. I think I got the best results with 900°.

Thx for your feedback man.
I am on G29 though and on PS4. I don't recall seeing options regarding degrees of rotation option in the settings, but maybe I should check again.

However, the G29 is at 900 DoR.
If PC2 defaults to that 900 as you mention, then PC2 has the more realistic turning for my G29 while AC is not.
I don't mind that, all I want is to unify a bit that experience. The problem is that AC is not modifiable on PS4 while PC2 is; that's why I opted to modify that one.

Supposing I need to fiddle with the values a bit of "steering sensitivity" in PC2, help me please a bit:
1080/900=1.2 which is an additional 20% of rotation. So AC is internally increasing my rotation input by about 20%.
To get both games on equal grounds, I need to increase the sensitivity from 50% to 60% (which is an increase of 20%)
Right?

 

[zuqbu]

Thx for your feedback man.
I am on G29 though and on PS4. I don't recall seeing options regarding degrees of rotation option in the settings, but maybe I should check again.

However, the G29 is at 900 DoR.
If PC2 defaults to that 900 as you mention, then PC2 has the more realistic turning for my G29 while AC is not.
I don't mind that, all I want is to unify a bit that experience. The problem is that AC is not modifiable on PS4 while PC2 is; that's why I opted to modify that one.

Supposing I need to fiddle with the values a bit of "steering sensitivity" in PC2, help me please a bit:
1080/900=1.2 which is an additional 20% of rotation. So AC is internally increasing my rotation input by about 20%.
To get both games on equal grounds, I need to increase the sensitivity from 50% to 60% (which is an increase of 20%)
Right?

Personally I would not touch steering sensitivity, because it will retain the maximum degree of rotation and if you decide to increase it – make the wheel more sensitive near the center and less sensitive towards maximum turn in.

Instead I would experiment with the Wheel setup under the first tab of the controller settings, where you first turn your wheel to maximum rotation and then set a 90° turn in.

If I remember correctly you should always fully rotate the wheel in the first step, and in the second step you can tell the game what the rotation ratio is (it will tell you with a number while you turn the wheel). Try turning the wheel either more or less than 90° in this step and go on track.

 

[Georgeagea]

Good idea man!
I just never dared to touch that calibration bcz my G29 was perfectly working out of the box and I was afraid to mess it up so I saw no need to go into it.
Can it be reset?!

 

[panjandrum]

OK, so quick semi-off topic question for those of us who also play AC: Which feedback model are you using in PCars 2? Since I turn out to be stuck with the game I'll be playing it more than I expected (stupid me did not read the Steam refund fine-print quite well enough and thought I had a 2-day window, not the 2-HOUR window I actually had - that's absurd with a modern game IMHO - it took me at least 2 hours just to get the settings the way I wanted them. But as usual I digress...)

I've tried various values in all three basic modes, and have played with all of the sub-settings, and am having trouble deciding which one to actually use with my T500:

The RAW mode provides less feedback in terms of understeer feel, and in general feels less dynamic, than the other two modes (surprised me, as I expected this mode to be the most accurate).

The Informative mode provides a bit more accuracy and increases my feel for what the car is doing, but also seems to add a small amount of "fake" continuous road-noise (not audible, I mean tactile-road-noise). It's not too bad though, so I can live with it if I have to.

The Immersive mode definitely seems to tell me a bit more about what the car is doing - especially understeer, but exaggerates some kind of continuous "fake" road noise to the point where the wheel just shakes around all the time at any speed above about 50mph. By the time I turn down the feedback to the point where this goes away it's essentially identical to the Imformative mode. So I think maybe what the Immersive mode is, is simply the Informative mode with the FFB ramped way, way, way up.

Soapbox: I very much dislike they way they did this. They should have ONE model, which should be an accurate model, and simply allow tweaking of strength within that model like AC does. It makes very-little sense for a supposed-sim to have three such different FFB models. Add in seemingly arbitrary controls like "Tone" and that makes it possible to completely change the feedback for a car to the point where it's utterly unlike real-life.

I have not tried the Jack Spades FFB files yet, but may do so soon.

EDIT: I had the "shakes a lot" mode and "doesn't shake a lot" modes reversed in my original post. Now corrected. (It is the Immersive mode that causes the apparently fake road-noise to cause the wheel to shake violently back at forth all the time unless I turn the FFB settings so far down that it's then nearly identical to Informative mode).

 

[super_gt]

OK, so quick semi-off topic question for those of us who also play AC: Which feedback model are you using in PCars 2?

Flavour-Raw
Gain-100
Volume-100
Tone-85
FX-85
Wheel Fanatec CSL Elite.

 

[Scaff]

OK, so quick semi-off topic question for those of us who also play AC: Which feedback model are you using in PCars 2? Since I turn out to be stuck with the game I'll be playing it more than I expected (stupid me did not read the Steam refund fine-print quite well enough and thought I had a 2-day window, not the 2-HOUR window I actually had - that's absurd with a modern game IMHO - it took me at least 2 hours just to get the settings the way I wanted them. But as usual I digress...)

I've tried various values in all three basic modes, and have played with all of the sub-settings, and am having trouble deciding which one to actually use with my T500:

The RAW mode provides less feedback in terms of understeer feel, and in general feels less dynamic, than the other two modes (surprised me, as I expected this mode to be the most accurate).

The Immersive mode provides a bit more accuracy and increases my feel for what the car is doing, but also seems to add a small amount of "fake" continuous road-noise (not audible, I mean tactile-road-noise). It's not too bad though, so I can live with it if I have to.

The Informative mode definitely seems to tell me a bit more about what the car is doing - especially understeer, but exaggerates some kind of continuous "fake" road noise to the point where the wheel just shakes around all the time at any speed above about 50mph. By the time I turn down the feedback to the point where this goes away it's essentially identical to the Immersive mode. So I think maybe what the Informative mode is, is simply the Immersive mode with the FFB ramped way, way, way up.

Soapbox: I very much dislike they way they did this. They should have ONE model, which should be an accurate model, and simply allow tweaking of strength within that model like AC does. It makes very-little sense for a supposed-sim to have three such different FFB models. Add in seemingly arbitrary controls like "Tone" and that makes it possible to completely change the feedback for a car to the point where it's utterly unlike real-life.

I have not tried the Jack Spades FFB files yet, but may do so soon.

One of the reasons why you would need multiple options is that not every wheel acts in the same way.

Take the highlighted piece in your post, for my T300 this is quite the opposite, and my current settings (Raw 100/30/50/30) actually feel almost exactly the same as AC for the vast, vast majority of cars.

Unfortunately without a single 'model' for wheels (as in the hardware) some degree of tweaking is always going to be needed to get as close to parity as possible across different hardware.

I would also argue that its perfectly possible to make AC feel unrealistic (for a given wheel) depending on how you set it up.

 

[kartman21]

I use informative with T300RS and lowered volume and gain to around 40%
Lowered spring force to 0.33 too

 

[Johnnypenso]

I've tried various values in all three basic modes, and have played with all of the sub-settings, and am having trouble deciding which one to actually use with my T500:

The RAW mode provides less feedback in terms of understeer feel, and in general feels less dynamic, than the other two modes (surprised me, as I expected this mode to be the most accurate).

The Immersive mode provides a bit more accuracy and increases my feel for what the car is doing, but also seems to add a small amount of "fake" continuous road-noise (not audible, I mean tactile-road-noise). It's not too bad though, so I can live with it if I have to.

The Informative mode definitely seems to tell me a bit more about what the car is doing - especially understeer, but exaggerates some kind of continuous "fake" road noise to the point where the wheel just shakes around all the time at any speed above about 50mph. By the time I turn down the feedback to the point where this goes away it's essentially identical to the Immersive mode. So I think maybe what the Informative mode is, is simply the Immersive mode with the FFB ramped way, way, way up.

Soapbox: I very much dislike they way they did this. They should have ONE model, which should be an accurate model, and simply allow tweaking of strength within that model like AC does. It makes very-little sense for a supposed-sim to have three such different FFB models. Add in seemingly arbitrary controls like "Tone" and that makes it possible to completely change the feedback for a car to the point where it's utterly unlike real-life.

I have not tried the Jack Spades FFB files yet, but may do so soon.

I started with @Scaff's settings (Raw 100/30/50/30) and then tweaked them a little to my personal taste. T300RS.

 

[panjandrum]

Thanks for the quick responses. Those RAW settings from Scaff are very close to what I ended up with myself when using RAW, so maybe the T500 and T300 respond similarly. I'll give those exact settings a try and see where it gets me.

 

[BrandonW77]

Thanks for the quick responses. Those RAW settings from Scaff are very close to what I ended up with myself when using RAW, so maybe the T500 and T300 respond similarly. I'll give those exact settings a try and see where it gets me.

According to the devs RAW is generally intended to be for higher end wheels like DD wheels, not for the low/mid range wheels. On my T300 Raw felt awful, like half the information was missing. Immersive was slightly worse, everything was pretty flat and dull. Informative was the best feeling on my end.

One of the reasons why you would need multiple options is that not every wheel acts in the same way.

Take the highlighted piece in your post, for my T300 this is quite the opposite, and my current settings (Raw 100/30/50/30) actually feel almost exactly the same as AC for the vast, vast majority of cars.

Unfortunately without a single 'model' for wheels (as in the hardware) some degree of tweaking is always going to be needed to get as close to parity as possible across different hardware.

I would also argue that its perfectly possible to make AC feel unrealistic (for a given wheel) depending on how you set it up.

Yet plenty of other games like AMS and rF2 and iRacing manage to do quite well across all wheels with no more than a couple basic FFB settings. Sorry, tend to agree with @panjandrum on this one.

 

[Scaff]

According to the devs RAW is generally intended to be for higher end wheels like DD wheels, not for the low/mid range wheels. On my T300 Raw felt awful, like half the information was missing. Immersive was slightly worse, everything was pretty flat and dull. Informative was the best feeling on my end.

I find a different result, good job we have the options to keep everyone happy.

If I recall Raw was for higher torque wheels, rather than any specific price point.

Yet plenty of other games like AMS and rF2 and iRacing manage to do quite well across all wheels with no more than a couple basic FFB settings. Sorry, tend to agree with @panjandrum on this one.

PC titles that allow you to then also use the wheel manufacturers software to further tweak the settings, an option that doesn't exist on PS4.

 

[BrandonW77]

If I recall Raw was for higher torque wheels, rather than any specific price point.

That's what I meant by higher-end (and specified DD wheels which are high torque but the CSW V2 also was included in that list by the devs).

PC titles that allow you to then also use the wheel manufacturers software to further tweak the settings, an option that doesn't exist on PS4.

Not really the case at all. In the Fanatec driver all you can adjust is degrees of rotation and dampening and I set them once during initial setup and never touch them again. Pretty much the same with the Thrustmaster profiler, it also has spring (which is unnecessary in modern sims) a couple other settings (periodic and something else I can't recall) but again you set them once when you first setup your wheel and never touch them again and everyone pretty much sets them to exactly the same settings. Some people like having a lot of FFB settings to fiddle with and that's fine, I prefer fewer settings that you set once and forget. Both opinions are valid. But it is possible to have the game work across all wheels without requiring a slew of FFB settings, IIRC GT5/6 had FFB strength and that was about it and they worked fine for me on three different brands/models of wheels.

 

[Gregfranklin]

PJC 2 settings
Tr300

Raw 75/60/65/70

Occasionally raise the weight, I find this setup the most tasty. It does take a while to dial in settings to your liking that work for the majority of cars. Assetto is dialed right out the box.