Scaff
Moderator
- 29,588
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
I understand where you are coming from. My main contention however, is that no matter how realistic physics get, control of the game will still be lacking.
Say you test the physics engine parameters of a game. Input A command, B happens. Turn 32 degrees under heavy breaking, Z happens. If all the parameters match a real car 100%, what's the point? Your not in a real car, so why should your data match that of a real car?
Take oversteer for example. In a real car, you can almost predict when it's coming and counter-steer accordingly. In a game however, it never feels quite so intuitive.
I don't believe anything I've posted disagrees with what you have said here, however I was not the one who said that "Unless you are sitting in a real car, on a real track, with real feedback, the quality of the physics is irrelevant."
If that is true then why both with sims?
The issue I have with the post you made is it comes across as incredibly narrow in its view, simply because true reality on a sim is almost impossible to achieve (however 7 post shakers comes very close) does not means its not worth trying to find a good balance.
A point on that scale from 0 (say Burnout) to 100 (7 post shaker the closest you can get to simulating the real thing) at which a console sim can sit and still be accessible.
Now every point on the scale above physics are being modeled, so regardless of the lack of physical input and forces, unless you are happy to just play Burnout then the quality of the physics is very relevant.
Scaff