So much yes. Besides the way people confuse interpreted physics I'm constantly amazed how simple comparison to real life seems beyond so many people. I haven't found a realistic sim yet, they all have their own issues. But I prefer some based on how I interpret the experience to be more authentic or how I prefer the end result over the end result of another.
Here's something I like. PCARS2 gets talked about a lot for its tyre model but the grip as arcade like in that game so everything the tyre model does is lost due to poor implementation. The tyres go from comically high grip to comically low grip and very rarely represent something realistic, PC2 gets around this ultra grip in the dry with comical handling, the result is something close to the difficulty of driving a real car in the dry but not a realistic driving experience IMO, in the wet with standing water it's just comical. Now GTS on the other hand lacks Longitudinal grip and has tyre heating issues but gets around these with driver aids like traction control. I don't like the grip issues in GTS but the result is a superior driving experience IMO, other people like PC2 better for whatever reason.
Each sim has its own issues but most people don't seem to be aware of the various issues each sim has and still these people argue over which one is more realistic or more Simcade. Much of it comes from people basing their expectations based on their conditioning to other games they have played but physics is based on the real world so any driving experience should be compared to what we find in the real world. At the end of the day no one is getting this right yet so our preference is simply our preference.
Well I wasn't as I'm sure you are aware and I hope no one else does based on my comment.Not a GTS vs any other title thread, don't attempt to turn it into one.
Referring to other titles (or any element of them) as arcade isn't a good way to go about things if that's not you intention.Well I wasn't as I'm sure you are aware and I hope no one else does based on my comment.
Grip is added as we know when looking at car files (which we are not supposed to know about)
.ini files have many lines of hexadecimal code and one is the grip coefficient, which of course can be lowered or raised to match data from the real car
Grip coefficent shouldn't be a fixed value for a car.Grip is added as we know when looking at car files (which we are not supposed to know about)
.ini files have many lines of hexadecimal code and one is the grip coefficient, which of course can be lowered or raised to match data from the real car
Do you mind me asking which other sims you've tried? You mention Gran Turismo Sport and Project Cars 2. Have you driven a car in rFactor 2? Live For Speed? Heck, even Assetto Corsa? I only has because a sample size of 2 doesn't support a good argument, in my eyes.So much yes. Besides the way people confuse interpreted physics I'm constantly amazed how simple comparison to real life seems beyond so many people. I haven't found a realistic sim yet, they all have their own issues. But I prefer some based on how I interpret the experience to be more authentic or how I prefer the end result over the end result of another.
Here's something I like. PCARS2 gets talked about a lot for its tyre model but the grip as arcade like in that game so everything the tyre model does is lost due to poor implementation. The tyres go from comically high grip to comically low grip and very rarely represent something realistic, PC2 gets around this ultra grip in the dry with comical handling, the result is something close to the difficulty of driving a real car in the dry but not a realistic driving experience IMO, in the wet with standing water it's just comical. Now GTS on the other hand lacks Longitudinal grip and has tyre heating issues but gets around these with driver aids like traction control. I don't like the grip issues in GTS but the result is a superior driving experience IMO, other people like PC2 better for whatever reason.
Each sim has its own issues but most people don't seem to be aware of the various issues each sim has and still these people argue over which one is more realistic or more Simcade. Much of it comes from people basing their expectations based on their conditioning to other games they have played but physics is based on the real world so any driving experience should be compared to what we find in the real world. At the end of the day no one is getting this right yet so our preference is simply our preference.
Says the person who has shown themselves to be one of those confused people about physics on numerous occasions.It's not a PD's problem if some people are unsensitive and confused about physics and physics feel in simulators.
Well that's just silly and it is why context is important. Every game has arcade or gamey or unrealistic elements, that's been one of my key arguments against the word Simcade, that word is too vague. Anyone who reads my entire post can easily see that the point of my post is that people wrongly argue one is better based on subjective experience. My point is all sims are flawed and ultimately people are just trying to justify their preferences. I have my preference, I know people disagree, I might find it difficult to understand why they prefer a particular thing I don't really care for but I understand that we all have different taste and taste is neither right or wrong, it is simply a preference.Referring to other titles (or any element of them) as arcade isn't a good way to go about things if that's not you intention.
We have threads to discuss 'vs', please use them. The staff have already had to spend a considerable amount of time cleaning up this thread ans we would rather not have to do so again.
why they dont implement physics in gts insteed of talking about it? gt-s is poor like all other gt´s.
It's not a PD's problem if some people are unsensitive and confused about physics and physics feel in simulators.
So much yes. Besides the way people confuse interpreted physics I'm constantly amazed how simple comparison to real life seems beyond so many people. I haven't found a realistic sim yet, they all have their own issues. But I prefer some based on how I interpret the experience to be more authentic or how I prefer the end result over the end result of another.
Here's something I like. PCARS2 gets talked about a lot for its tyre model but the grip as arcade like in that game so everything the tyre model does is lost due to poor implementation. The tyres go from comically high grip to comically low grip and very rarely represent something realistic, PC2 gets around this ultra grip in the dry with comical handling, the result is something close to the difficulty of driving a real car in the dry but not a realistic driving experience IMO, in the wet with standing water it's just comical. Now GTS on the other hand lacks Longitudinal grip and has tyre heating issues but gets around these with driver aids like traction control. I don't like the grip issues in GTS but the result is a superior driving experience IMO, other people like PC2 better for whatever reason.
Each sim has its own issues but most people don't seem to be aware of the various issues each sim has and still these people argue over which one is more realistic or more Simcade. Much of it comes from people basing their expectations based on their conditioning to other games they have played but physics is based on the real world so any driving experience should be compared to what we find in the real world. At the end of the day no one is getting this right yet so our preference is simply our preference.
Do you mind me asking which other sims you've tried? You mention Gran Turismo Sport and Project Cars 2. Have you driving a car in rFactor 2? Live For Speed? Heck, even Assetto Corsa? I only has because a sample size of 2 doesn't support a good argument, in my eyes.
I sort of agree with the second passage I highlighted. Each sim does have it's own issues, however, I believe the issues GTSport has are much more significant than the issues rFactor 2 has when it comes to simulating the driving experience on a consumer grade computer. Remember what the great George Orwell told us. “All sims are equal, but some sims are more equal than others.”
Says the person who has shown themselves to be one of those confused people about physics on numerous occasions.
Or how about the oversteer of the RWD cars? Of course a FWD car is going to understeer when the tyres lack longitudinal grip, that's the real issue.Kaz should've given a demo of the 2015 Honda Civic Type R at Brands Hatch Indy to demonstrate the superior physics simulation of GT Sport such as extreme understeer etc.
No FWD car that is worth its salt (besides a Point A to Point B car like a Yugo) would understeer like that as such low speeds. Not one.Or how about the oversteer of the RWD cars? Of course a FWD car is going to understeer when the tyres lack longitudinal grip, that's the real issue.
I had a Nissan Exa Turbo years ago that in the rain drove pretty much like that.No FWD car that is worth its salt (besides a Point A to Point B car like a Yugo) would understeer like that as such low speeds. Not one.
I think that's a far cry from a 2015 Honda Civic Type R in the dry though lolI had a Nissan Exa Turbo years ago that in the rain drove pretty much like that.
I think that's a far cry from a 2015 Honda Civic Type R in the dry though lol
It is just a usual sign of japanese perfectionism. Even if one knows english good, he/she never uses it in any serious or professional appearances. At least without _good_ reason.IIRC, Kaz knows English, but he prefers to speak in his main language. He might not be as comfortable speaking English, or something.
I worked for the Renault Nissan alliance, all of my Japanese colleagues who could speak English did so when addressing native English speakers or in situations when English was the predominant language in the room.It is just a usual sign of japanese perfectionism. Even if one knows english good, he/she never uses it in any serious or professional appearances. At least without _good_ reason.
A lecture should not be affected by the lecturer’s language skills, and there are professionals to do the translation.
I worked for the Renault Nissan alliance, all of my Japanese colleagues who could speak English did so when addressing native English speakers or in situations when English was the predominant language in the room.
Its a preference he has; well either that or the Japanese First Lady shouldn't be considered serious or professional in this appearance.
that sentence grab my intention too like: oh! Kaz seems to mean that if PD uses the realistic tyre model they managed to get, the game would be too hard for most of the customers so let's make it less " simulation like " to have an understandable game
#the real sweetened simulator
Why can't they use it in a game?Interesting to speak about 100% simulation or not.
Even if they’ve got a nearly perfect model of each subsystem, they can’t use it in a game. It is sold to the wide public, and not for those (37 ) individuals, who can handle the fact of setting up and tweeking for a month before the car runs its first meter on track. On a TV screen.
Which is why no title (interestingly, apart from RBR) uses 1:1 controller mapping for steering input.Just remember Richard Burns Rally. It was awesome, but easily get lost in parameters if you don’t know what they are.
Another question is that why we are speaking about simulation if the users’ huge percent uses the controller? What car is that, in everyday life, that is controlled by a d-pad and a few buttons...
No one has said that a perfect sim exists, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be the aim, as the argument that it would not be usable for most of use is simply not true.Don’t get me wrong, I hate that “rally” feels like having fun with a hovercraft. But compromises always needed. A game is not simulating perfectly - a perfect simulation is not usable by most of us. And not fun. If you just struggling with simulated parameters, you will not think you are better than S.Vettel, W.Röhrl or S.Blomquist in 2 minutes.
Again that depends on the input device you are using and the rig you have.If we have a 100% simulation, and a champions exact setup, we will get 2mins on a 1.5min track. Because of lack of feedbacks. No pressures and hits on our back - just to mention one.
You said no FWD car drives like that and I'm pointing out that you are incorrect and when there is no grip any FWD car with decent power drives just like that. As I keep saying the main problem with the physics is the lack of longitudinal grip. The wheels spin too easily.I think that's a far cry from a 2015 Honda Civic Type R in the dry though lol
Kaz should've given a demo of the 2015 Honda Civic Type R at Brands Hatch Indy to demonstrate the superior physics simulation of GT Sport such as extreme understeer etc.
In this video this Lemans driver says that he is very dissapointed because of terrible understeer in that car (sorry it's in french, I'll try to find another in english, but we can see the poor handling of the Civic specially at 3'48" and his face is not happy at all ) Maybe it should be drive with a little less understeering in GTS but it has a lot of understeering in fact.
And all of the other FWD cars in GTS?
I've driven the Type-R, Megane and the ST and none of them understeer to the degree that they do in GTS.
No is the issue just around the understeer, but the physics engine slow reaction in regard to correcting it, with even the most severe lift-off returning grip ti the front end and getting these cars to start rotating in the way they should.
You are quite right. I think mostly the same, maybe my english is not food enough to summarize with the proper expressionsWhy can't they use it in a game?
Driving a car is not difficult, millions do it daily. Driving a car up to the limit is not difficult, finding the limit is not difficult, with some basic training correcting minor issues at the limit is not difficult. I've taught all of these things.
The difficult part is finding the limit for every corner, in changing conditions and balancing the car at the point just over that limit, where the last vestiges of grip reside, consistently over a lap. For lap after lap.
Which is why no title (interestingly, apart from RBR) uses 1:1 controller mapping for steering input.
Its quite possible to have input filters that 'smooth' rough inputs for controller users, and remove them for those that use a wheel.
That was you get the best physics engine you can, with the appropriate level of support for the input device being used.
No one has said that a perfect sim exists, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be the aim, as the argument that it would not be usable for most of use is simply not true.
Personally a title that allows you to be as quite as the worlds best in 2 minutes is neither fun, nor doing its job as a sim very well (well unless you are that person).
Again that depends on the input device you are using and the rig you have.
As already said you can have input filters to allow for controller users and quite a bit can be done with rumble, as well as audio and visual cues to let you know whats going on (why do you think that many titles have exaggerated tyre squeal) .
Those fortunate to have wheels, etc can then still have FFB, tactile feedback and in some cases motion.
No good reason exists to not aim for the highest level of fidelity on a sim if your aim is a true sim. Now that's not to say that the market doesn't have a place for the 'hero fulfillment' titles, but it also doesn't mean that aiming to be the most accurate recreation of reality you can isn't fun. As fun is utterly subjective.