Most realistic racing SIM?

[simsimsheree]

You mean the Ginetta GT5? I've found it very easy and fun to drive. Then there is the Ginetta Jr, which I reckon would be even easier. The entry-level tiers are already there.

They are a tiny fraction of the low level cars you can start out with in GTS. TBH, I found the Formula Rookie quite hard to master when I first came from GTS/GT6, even with the stock tunings. Add that to the puzzling differences in pace of the AI in the Career events (as a newcomer to the game, your skill needs to be decent before you even realize it is AI pace that's at fault in not providing you with even competition across different events) and the average noob to the game generally comes to the conclusion that he's spinning out constantly, or beating the AI in some races and being destroyed by them in others as the game's fault, not his fault. Which some of it is.

Look, I love the game. I want it to grow. I want PS4 numbers to grow. I do not see that being possible with SMS's current focus. Sales numbers bear me out. PD has never been weaker. SMS has never been stronger. But it isn't translating to sales. Why?

Because its player base pooh-pooh any suggestion of doing anything that will attract more players from more successful franchises..? Because whenever the concept is brought up, players rush in to attack it by saying they don't want 'power ups' or engine swaps or cop modes (which don't exist in GTS) rather than address the actual suggestions? Because you get knee-jerk responses like "Off to GT Sport ya go then" rather than consideration of how much better the game would be with a player base closer to GTS?

The whole point is, as long as the game from the more advanced starting point it is in now remains the same, what possible reason could you have to NOT want something added that will completely uneffect you, but possibly vastly expand the pool of players driving the game?

Generally, at almost any time of the day or night, I find it hard to find more than a handful of lobbies open with more than 10 drivers in them. Usually far less. The vast majority of lobbies being GT3, the vast number on a handful of tracks. The vast majority of them at unrated or U level bashfests. I want more than that.

Why don't you? Especially when the path to achieving it doesn't involve you at all?

 

[DesertPenguin]

bashfests. I want more than that.

Why?

 

[simsimsheree]

Because, in GT6, SNAIL and many hosts ran open rooms for spec racing any time of the day and night. My job and schedule prohibit me from joining organized leagues. GT6's huge player base meant that, even if a large majority of the rooms WERE bashfests, the few that weren't were still vastly greater in number than PC2's.

Or have you misquoted the post for a joke?

 

[Scaff]

They are a tiny fraction of the low level cars you can start out with in GTS.

I personally don't have an issue with the balance of cars in PC2 across the entry, intermediate and more advanced levels , that said I'm never going to say no to more cars.

TBH, I found the Formula Rookie quite hard to master when I first came from GTS/GT6, even with the stock tunings.

Arguably that's more of an issue with GTS/GT6 than it is PC2.

Yes the driving a real car isn't as difficult as some sim make out is, to a degree correct. That however doesn't then make the dumbed down and at times plain wrong physics of the GT series the right benchmark.

The best example of this is FWD touring cars, these have to (in reality) be driven in a very specific style to not end up facing the wrong way every corner. PC2 gets this right with the Clio and the rest if the TC class, with the level of strong lift off oversteer they should have. Take a similar car in GT and a mid corner lift will just reduce understeer a bit.

Formula Ford (which the Formula Rookie is based on) is all mechanical grip with no Aero and a short wheelbase. These things will spin if your not quick the moment you step over the limit. I watch them race a good few times a year in a local club series and have been fortunate enough to drive one in the past. Again PC2 is close to how these should be.

Add that to the puzzling differences in pace of the AI in the Career events (as a newcomer to the game, your skill needs to be decent before you even realize it is AI pace that's at fault in not providing you with even competition across different events) and the average noob to the game generally comes to the conclusion that he's spinning out constantly, or beating the AI in some races and being destroyed by them in others as the game's fault, not his fault. Which some of it is.

Quite agree, while the AI consistency has improved, it needs to be better.

Look, I love the game. I want it to grow. I want PS4 numbers to grow. I do not see that being possible with SMS's current focus. Sales numbers bear me out. PD has never been weaker. SMS has never been stronger. But it isn't translating to sales. Why?

It's not as simple as just SMS fixing these areas and they will come.

GT sells based on brand, it's backed by a marketing budget that SMS will never match and has a large purchase base that seem to buy it because it looks great (and then play it very little and abandon it - based on the trophy percentages).

Could SMS do more? Of course, but I'm not convinced it would make that seismic a difference in terms of taking sales from GT.

 

[Wolfe]

I personally don't have an issue with the balance of cars in PC2 across the entry, intermediate and more advanced levels , that said I'm never going to say no to more cars.

In my opinion the game is sorely lacking for cars with ~200hp or less, and it doesn't have terribly many with even ~300hp or less. Not in the context of challenge or skill required, but just the sort of cars and specific models I would love to enjoy with these physics, features, and tracks. Some of the cars I'd like to see would probably be more demanding than GT3 for lesser-skilled players, actually.

I mean, the 276hp Evolution VI TME is one rung above the lowest road car class, and the Porsche 959 is in the next class up from that. You've got the handful of cars in Road G getting bullied by Funhavers, and only one car in Vintage GT C, VGTD, and Vintage RX...

 

[simsimsheree]

Talk to anyone that came from GT, tried PC and went back. Initial difficulty and lack of controllability of the cars is the #1 excuse. They loved the cars, they loved the tracks, they loved the full time of day/night, but the dearth of well set up and controllable cars gave them little to do bit spin and spin and spin.

Once again, I keep having to point out that making changes to make cars more controllable at first should not be changes to how they drive as you progress. But, for instance, why not stickier tires at this imaginary 'Beginner Mode' level? Why not a select few low power cars tuned to hell and back for specific challenges? Why not an automatic tire pressure adjuster for varying track temperatures? Or even a leaving 'Beginner Mode' off of temperature changes at all? Why not lobby rooms that allow 'Beginner Mode' (and can be filtered so experienced drivers don't find themselves accidentally in them!)?

I completely agree with all the points about what it is that makes PC2 so good for experienced drivers. But so few of them make an effort to remember their first experiences playing a driving game. So few of them acknowledge that their love of driving games might not have gone the same way if PC2 was their first game. So few of them remember their transition from arcade game to serious sim, and the steep learning curve that entailed. They know what they are doing NOW, but rarely remember the path that got them there. So few of them are willing to admit they are the tiny minority of all driving game players. And so few of them want to admit that the game they love is failing badly at growing the player base, with all the advantages that entails.

Gamers will play ANYTHING that is initially easy. They will leave an established franchise in hordes if another franchise offers the same ease but massively better content and features. And they will stay with that new franchise if it offers a seamless path up to full on sim rather than needing to buy an entirely new game.

The list of players I know that played GT6, tried PC1 or PC2, and got turned off by the immensely steep learning curve and poor pad control is long. This shows they were willing to try. It's not just a case of brand loyalty. Particularly when SMS offered free demos, there was basically no reason to NOT try it. Few stayed. I simply feel that a dumbed down 'Beginner Mode' would have kept them, for the car and track list and higher ultimate path. And now, some of them (I believe a lot more than you want to admit) would be playing at the higher levels, and giving us ALL a larger choice in online lobbies.

But that option is shouted down by the very people it would benefit.

 

[Scaff]

In my opinion the game is sorely lacking for cars with ~200hp or less, and it doesn't have terribly many with even ~300hp or less. Not in the context of challenge or skill required, but just the sort of cars and specific models I would love to enjoy with these physics, features, and tracks. Some of the cars I'd like to see would probably be more demanding than GT3 for lesser-skilled players, actually.

I mean, the 276hp Evolution VI TME is one rung above the lowest road car class, and the Porsche 959 is in the next class up from that. You've got the handful of cars in Road G getting bullied by Funhavers, and only one car in Vintage GT C, VGTD, and Vintage RX...

The only car I could honestly say in that kind of range I would love to have would be a Spec Miata/MX-5.

That however is only my view, and I would never say no to more cars or tracks.

 

[Scaff]

Talk to anyone that came from GT, tried PC and went back. Initial difficulty and lack of controllability of the cars is the #1 excuse. They loved the cars, they loved the tracks, they loved the full time of day/night, but the dearth of well set up and controllable cars gave them little to do bit spin and spin and spin.

I utterly disagree that it has a death of well setup or controllable cars.

Once again, I keep having to point out that making changes to make cars more controllable at first should not be changes to how they drive as you progress. But, for instance, why not stickier tires at this imaginary 'Beginner Mode' level? Why not a select few low power cars tuned to hell and back for specific challenges? Why not an automatic tire pressure adjuster for varying track temperatures? Or even a leaving 'Beginner Mode' off of temperature changes at all? Why not lobby rooms that allow 'Beginner Mode' (and can be filtered so experienced drivers don't find themselves accidentally in them!)?

It has a good range of options around this already, they may not be obvious enough, but it has a full range of driver aids, both real and fantasy.

I completely agree with all the points about what it is that makes PC2 so good for experienced drivers. But so few of them make an effort to remember their first experiences playing a driving game. So few of them acknowledge that their love of driving games might not have gone the same way if PC2 was their first game. So few of them remember their transition from arcade game to serious sim, and the steep learning curve that entailed. They know what they are doing NOW, but rarely remember the path that got them there. So few of them are willing to admit they are the tiny minority of all driving game players. And so few of them want to admit that the game they love is failing badly at growing the player base, with all the advantages that entails.

I think why I'm not convinced this will work fully is that at some point you still have to make that transition, all it may do is change the point at which people abandon it.

The truth maybe that the majority don't want a sim regardless of when the transition point is.

Gamers will play ANYTHING that is initially easy. They will leave an established franchise in hordes if another franchise offers the same ease but massively better content and features. And they will stay with that new franchise if it offers a seamless path up to full on sim rather than needing to buy an entirely new game.

The list of players I know that played GT6, tried PC1 or PC2, and got turned off by the immensely steep learning curve and poor pad control is long. This shows they were willing to try. It's not just a case of brand loyalty. Particularly when SMS offered free demos, there was basically no reason to NOT try it. Few stayed. I simply feel that a dumbed down 'Beginner Mode' would have kept them, for the car and track list and higher ultimate path. And now, some of them (I believe a lot more than you want to admit) would be playing at the higher levels, and giving us ALL a larger choice in online lobbies.

The numbers indicate that people abandon both in pretty similar percentages, GT just attracts more initially, which may be down to marketing as much as anything else.

But that option is shouted down by the very people it would benefit.

Disagreement doesn't mean you are being shouted down, it just means others have a different point of view.

 

[jake2013guy]

The numbers indicate that people abandon both in pretty similar percentages, GT just attracts more initially, which may be down to marketing as much as anything else.

I'd say it's more that Gran Turismo has been going for 15-20 years and people played/enjoyed it iterations ago.

 

[Corsa]

Most realistic racing sim.

I assume the OP title was thought of regarding physics, not immersion. Although immersion is a big one for me.

PC2 is a modest contender, it is great when it's good and I've had many hours of fun with it.

I will simply leave an opinion about this as it seems peoples idea of realism is all over the place, especially in regards to sim titles.
Like a lot of you, I have played just about everything on offer to date and my opinion of realistic (physics) is this order.
Yours will be different and that's what makes the world so great. If we were all the same it would be quite boring.

1) Rfactor2
2) Raceroom Racing Experience
3) Assetto Corsa
4) Automobilista
5) Project Cars 2
6) Forza 7 folks, it's actually not that bad believe it or not.

GT Sport is beyond laughable physics wise. It literally feels like I'm a passenger in an autonomous vehicle.

There are also a few indie sims on steam that are very good but graphics/content wise would disappoint.

 

[Wolfe]

The truth maybe that the majority don't want a sim regardless of when the transition point is.

I think this is probably true. Lots of people ask for realism, but when they get it...in @simsimsheree's words, "spin and spin and spin." There's only so much you can do to hold the hand of individuals who have not learned to control proper oversteer, and might write off a game as "driving on ice" when they encounter it.

Having tried out the stability control in PCARS2, I'm surprised if that's not enough to get some of these people around a circuit. Also, I drive with the default setups all the time. Sure, I'm not a beginner, but most of the defaults are not poorly set-up or uncontrollable. Not since SMS re-worked them. I don't think this game is really any more difficult than Live for Speed, my first legit simulator after Gran Turismo 3 and the few late-'90s PC sims I played. Though to be fair, I'm not on the default controller settings...

I'm not sure how much can be done by improving the accessibility of PCARS. I reckon it would be more helpful to add other things that the purists detest, like popular roadcars or customization, to win over some of the crowd who could probably get to grips with PCARS but play GTS or FM7 for those other things.

 

[Gr8_Lakes]

I think this is probably true. Lots of people ask for realism, but when they get it...in @simsimsheree's words, "spin and spin and spin." There's only so much you can do to hold the hand of individuals who have not learned to control proper oversteer, and might write off a game as "driving on ice" when they encounter it.

Having tried out the stability control in PCARS2, I'm surprised if that's not enough to get some of these people around a circuit. Also, I drive with the default setups all the time. Sure, I'm not a beginner, but most of the defaults are not poorly set-up or uncontrollable. Not since SMS re-worked them. I don't think this game is really any more difficult than Live for Speed, my first legit simulator after Gran Turismo 3 and the few late-'90s PC sims I played. Though to be fair, I'm not on the default controller settings...

I'm not sure how much can be done by improving the accessibility of PCARS. I reckon it would be more helpful to add other things that the purists detest, like popular roadcars or customization, to win over some of the crowd who could probably get to grips with PCARS but play GTS or FM7 for those other things.

Good point. To put it simply: I can get any car around any track - if I just slow down. The bandaid isn't stickier tires, it's self control. Give the players a beginner mode with above average traction, and that's the kind of lobbies you're going to be able to join. Case in point: GT3 is still the most popular lobby type. And GT3 has the most forgiving handling in my opinion.

I'd love more of a player base, but I just don't see a beginner's mode making that happen.

 

[Blob_91]

I think that with full assists on, with the exception of steering and braking, almost everyone should be able to drive a car around track after a few laps of practice. Of course not all cars are easy to drive but there are enough combinations that there is something that suits you.

Just this week a friend of mine who visits the 24 hours of Le Mans every year wanted to try it out on my PS4. Yes he spun out a couple of times in his first laps but in 10 laps he came to a 3:39 in the Toyota LMP1, just 12 seconds short of my personal best. This is someone who never touched a playstation or controller before.

For me, Project Cars 2 is the best sim out there at the moment (on PS4). GT Sport has very little to do with a real sim racer although it certainly has its own positive sides and AC just lacks content and atmosphere to me. Besides that I don't understand the hype of AC's physics since I don't favour them over those of Project Cars 2, neither do I think PC2 has much better physics. When I compare the lap times of me and my friends between GT sport and Project Cars 2 I am a lot faster with PC2 but in GT Sport I can hardly make a difference.

 

[Wolfe]

I've been back in the career mode of PCARS2 for the first time since last year, which has forced me into GT3s, a class I rarely play -- specifically, the SLS AMG GT3 and R35 GT-R GT3 (enough sets of three characters? ), each in their respective Manufacturer Drives events.

I felt I should concede a little to @simsimsheree, because the SLS and R35 in Stable form are not especially stable, to an extent that I'd making tuning changes if either were my chosen steed for a GT3 season or multiplayer racing. If GT3 is all the rage, it stands to reason that beginners would try driving those cars.

Still, there are many other cars in the game that don't have that kind of problem out of the box. And I think SMS recognizes that GT3 needs the most attention to keep most of their customers happy, so perhaps tweaks are forthcoming.

 

[simsimsheree]

While I think that maybe you all are correct, and an easier path to car control at first wouldn't change things and grow the franchise, what would be the harm in finding out?

I think my point, just talk to anyone that went back to the arcade games after a very brief try at PC2 holds up. I know there's rather a mob mentality about being hostile to those that complain about the game (or any game, for that matter) and its initially steep learning curve, and a fair amount of disdain for those not willing to grit it out like we did (aren't we great?!) but ultimately, this game rises or falls on its player base, and, on PS4 at least (given that it does have stiff competition from the far easier to enjoy GT Sport), that base is minuscule in comparison. Tiny. Microscopic.

The reason PS4 online is overwhelmingly GT3 (is PC and XB1 the same? I expect so!) is that that is by far the easiest car to jump into and race like an arcade game. I rather feel that it the rest of the cars that urgently need SMS's attention. While there may indeed be some other cars that are controllable OOTB, they are mixed in with many that aren't. It's kind of hard to expect a noob player to know which is which. Which leads to the need for consistency in base tunes...

But, if I came to PC2 today from GTS, looked around online, saw with horror how few people were playing it online, how almost all that are are in one class of car, on very few of the tracks, I'd wonder what all the fuss was about. Then I'd take a few cars out (not those GT3 creampuffs), spin and spin and spin (I would, if I came from GT6, probably have a lot of disdain for aids the real car didn't have other than ABS, leading to those spins!), decide to try a few low power roadcars out as a last resort, look with dismay how pitiful (and badly balanced) their count is... Let's face it, who would blame me for running back to GTS?

Me, I'm not going to do that. But I know a hell of a lot of players that did, or went with AC (I have also heard from a lot of GT6 players how accurate AC is in the handling department, but for some reason had far less trouble adjusting to its sim nature than PC2's). I just wish that not only SMS cared that that had happened, but that the player base cared as well. Which, from most of the comments when I try to bring it up, it's obvious they don't.

But, you want prompt bugfixing? You want new tracks and cars? You want the next game out faster? And its development not curtail work on this game? That takes money. Lots of it...

You want a large selection of open online rooms night and day, in more than a tiny handful of classes, and a handful of tracks? You want enough players that there is a decent number of solid clean drivers? That takes a much larger player base. Lots of them...

There's far too much hubris about our 'sim' status. Bottom line, it's a game. You got cars, you got tracks, you got red lights and a checkered flag. So does GTS. This game pulls from the same base of players PD do. I honestly think, make the first steps in this game little harder than GTS, who wouldn't pick PC2 over GTS? More tracks, more cars, time of day/night, weather, great sound (by comparison), great AI (by comparison), far more customization of FoV and more view choices... Tell me one good reason why anyone would not pick PC2 other than the unnecessarily steep introduction curve..?

Oh, and the unnecessarily hostile player base when any suggestion that their precious 'sim' become easier (at first) to play...

 

[Scaff]

While I think that maybe you all are correct, and an easier path to car control at first wouldn't change things and grow the franchise, what would be the harm in finding out?

I think my point, just talk to anyone that went back to the arcade games after a very brief try at PC2 holds up. I know there's rather a mob mentality about being hostile to those that complain about the game (or any game, for that matter) and its initially steep learning curve, and a fair amount of disdain for those not willing to grit it out like we did (aren't we great?!) but ultimately, this game rises or falls on its player base, and, on PS4 at least (given that it does have stiff competition from the far easier to enjoy GT Sport), that base is minuscule in comparison. Tiny. Microscopic.

The reason PS4 online is overwhelmingly GT3 (is PC and XB1 the same? I expect so!) is that that is by far the easiest car to jump into and race like an arcade game. I rather feel that it the rest of the cars that urgently need SMS's attention. While there may indeed be some other cars that are controllable OOTB, they are mixed in with many that aren't. It's kind of hard to expect a noob player to know which is which. Which leads to the need for consistency in base tunes...

But, if I came to PC2 today from GTS, looked around online, saw with horror how few people were playing it online, how almost all that are are in one class of car, on very few of the tracks, I'd wonder what all the fuss was about. Then I'd take a few cars out (not those GT3 creampuffs), spin and spin and spin (I would, if I came from GT6, probably have a lot of disdain for aids the real car didn't have other than ABS, leading to those spins!), decide to try a few low power roadcars out as a last resort, look with dismay how pitiful (and badly balanced) their count is... Let's face it, who would blame me for running back to GTS?

Me, I'm not going to do that. But I know a hell of a lot of players that did, or went with AC (I have also heard from a lot of GT6 players how accurate AC is in the handling department, but for some reason had far less trouble adjusting to its sim nature than PC2's). I just wish that not only SMS cared that that had happened, but that the player base cared as well. Which, from most of the comments when I try to bring it up, it's obvious they don't.

But, you want prompt bugfixing? You want new tracks and cars? You want the next game out faster? And its development not curtail work on this game? That takes money. Lots of it...

You want a large selection of open online rooms night and day, in more than a tiny handful of classes, and a handful of tracks? You want enough players that there is a decent number of solid clean drivers? That takes a much larger player base. Lots of them...

There's far too much hubris about our 'sim' status. Bottom line, it's a game. You got cars, you got tracks, you got red lights and a checkered flag. So does GTS. This game pulls from the same base of players PD do. I honestly think, make the first steps in this game little harder than GTS, who wouldn't pick PC2 over GTS? More tracks, more cars, time of day/night, weather, great sound (by comparison), great AI (by comparison), far more customization of FoV and more view choices... Tell me one good reason why anyone would not pick PC2 other than the unnecessarily steep introduction curve..?

Oh, and the unnecessarily hostile player base when any suggestion that their precious 'sim' become easier (at first) to play...

The only hubris and hostility seems to stem from your own attitude towards anyone who holds a different opinion to yourself.

The points you raise have already been replied to, yet you repeat the same argument as if they had been ignored!

Nor do you seem to realise that many disagree with the core view you based your argument on. Plenty of people have tried my rig as sim virgins, none to date have spun and spun and spun (unless doing something that should precipitate a spin).

Nor are anything like the number you suggest of set-ups out of the box bad, again for reasons that have been very politely explained.

Nor does a great deal of difference exist between the base setups, handling or FFB of AC and PC2, something that has also been discussed, nor does the online make up of lobbies differ greatly in regard to GT3 / easier track between all three in public lobbies.

Hubris would seem to be ignoring that this has been discussed without hostility, yet simply repeating the same points as if that had not occurred.

 

[Corsa]

While I think that maybe you all are correct, and an easier path to car control at first wouldn't change things and grow the franchise, what would be the harm in finding out?

I think my point, just talk to anyone that went back to the arcade games after a very brief try at PC2 holds up. I know there's rather a mob mentality about being hostile to those that complain about the game (or any game, for that matter) and its initially steep learning curve, and a fair amount of disdain for those not willing to grit it out like we did (aren't we great?!) but ultimately, this game rises or falls on its player base, and, on PS4 at least (given that it does have stiff competition from the far easier to enjoy GT Sport), that base is minuscule in comparison. Tiny. Microscopic.

The reason PS4 online is overwhelmingly GT3 (is PC and XB1 the same? I expect so!) is that that is by far the easiest car to jump into and race like an arcade game. I rather feel that it the rest of the cars that urgently need SMS's attention. While there may indeed be some other cars that are controllable OOTB, they are mixed in with many that aren't. It's kind of hard to expect a noob player to know which is which. Which leads to the need for consistency in base tunes...

But, if I came to PC2 today from GTS, looked around online, saw with horror how few people were playing it online, how almost all that are are in one class of car, on very few of the tracks, I'd wonder what all the fuss was about. Then I'd take a few cars out (not those GT3 creampuffs), spin and spin and spin (I would, if I came from GT6, probably have a lot of disdain for aids the real car didn't have other than ABS, leading to those spins!), decide to try a few low power roadcars out as a last resort, look with dismay how pitiful (and badly balanced) their count is... Let's face it, who would blame me for running back to GTS?

Me, I'm not going to do that. But I know a hell of a lot of players that did, or went with AC (I have also heard from a lot of GT6 players how accurate AC is in the handling department, but for some reason had far less trouble adjusting to its sim nature than PC2's). I just wish that not only SMS cared that that had happened, but that the player base cared as well. Which, from most of the comments when I try to bring it up, it's obvious they don't.

But, you want prompt bugfixing? You want new tracks and cars? You want the next game out faster? And its development not curtail work on this game? That takes money. Lots of it...

You want a large selection of open online rooms night and day, in more than a tiny handful of classes, and a handful of tracks? You want enough players that there is a decent number of solid clean drivers? That takes a much larger player base. Lots of them...

There's far too much hubris about our 'sim' status. Bottom line, it's a game. You got cars, you got tracks, you got red lights and a checkered flag. So does GTS. This game pulls from the same base of players PD do. I honestly think, make the first steps in this game little harder than GTS, who wouldn't pick PC2 over GTS? More tracks, more cars, time of day/night, weather, great sound (by comparison), great AI (by comparison), far more customization of FoV and more view choices... Tell me one good reason why anyone would not pick PC2 other than the unnecessarily steep introduction curve..?

Oh, and the unnecessarily hostile player base when any suggestion that their precious 'sim' become easier (at first) to play...

I never had issues with either Project Cars title.

They are both really good and can't agree with anyone that says there's a learning curve with the driving aspect.

Apply too much fuel at corner exit...Spin.

Let off the fuel too fast on corner entry with not enough downforce...Lift off oversteer and spin.

Then the answer to some instead of adjusting their driving style or heading back to the pits to tune is this game sucks.

This game is awesome and becomes extremely rewarding when you take a small amount of time to control your foot (thumb) work and setup your car.

You think population is horror on PC2, come have a look over here on PC with Rfactor2 or Raceroom.
Both fantastic titles putting very low numbers on the board.

Edit: Why did it quote simsim post under @Scaff name?

 

[Waldorf]

For me personally, both games - PC2 and GTS are awesome. In my opinion however the main reason the players are giving up PC2 for GTS is lack of a real matchmaking system in SMS's title. Making it possible to pair players with similar skills/reward players for clean racing/gain achievements (gamers love achievements no matter how "pro" they think they are) is PD's game changer.

I'm sure that no matter how difficult PC2 is or is considered to be, more players would play it, if they have better chance to meet others with comparable skills, dealing with similar difficulties on the grid and compete as equals.

 

[killerjimbag]

While I think that maybe you all are correct, and an easier path to car control at first wouldn't change things and grow the franchise, what would be the harm in finding out?

I think my point, just talk to anyone that went back to the arcade games after a very brief try at PC2 holds up. I know there's rather a mob mentality about being hostile to those that complain about the game (or any game, for that matter) and its initially steep learning curve, and a fair amount of disdain for those not willing to grit it out like we did (aren't we great?!) but ultimately, this game rises or falls on its player base, and, on PS4 at least (given that it does have stiff competition from the far easier to enjoy GT Sport), that base is minuscule in comparison. Tiny. Microscopic.

The reason PS4 online is overwhelmingly GT3 (is PC and XB1 the same? I expect so!) is that that is by far the easiest car to jump into and race like an arcade game. I rather feel that it the rest of the cars that urgently need SMS's attention. While there may indeed be some other cars that are controllable OOTB, they are mixed in with many that aren't. It's kind of hard to expect a noob player to know which is which. Which leads to the need for consistency in base tunes...

But, if I came to PC2 today from GTS, looked around online, saw with horror how few people were playing it online, how almost all that are are in one class of car, on very few of the tracks, I'd wonder what all the fuss was about. Then I'd take a few cars out (not those GT3 creampuffs), spin and spin and spin (I would, if I came from GT6, probably have a lot of disdain for aids the real car didn't have other than ABS, leading to those spins!), decide to try a few low power roadcars out as a last resort, look with dismay how pitiful (and badly balanced) their count is... Let's face it, who would blame me for running back to GTS?

Me, I'm not going to do that. But I know a hell of a lot of players that did, or went with AC (I have also heard from a lot of GT6 players how accurate AC is in the handling department, but for some reason had far less trouble adjusting to its sim nature than PC2's). I just wish that not only SMS cared that that had happened, but that the player base cared as well. Which, from most of the comments when I try to bring it up, it's obvious they don't.

But, you want prompt bugfixing? You want new tracks and cars? You want the next game out faster? And its development not curtail work on this game? That takes money. Lots of it...

You want a large selection of open online rooms night and day, in more than a tiny handful of classes, and a handful of tracks? You want enough players that there is a decent number of solid clean drivers? That takes a much larger player base. Lots of them...

There's far too much hubris about our 'sim' status. Bottom line, it's a game. You got cars, you got tracks, you got red lights and a checkered flag. So does GTS. This game pulls from the same base of players PD do. I honestly think, make the first steps in this game little harder than GTS, who wouldn't pick PC2 over GTS? More tracks, more cars, time of day/night, weather, great sound (by comparison), great AI (by comparison), far more customization of FoV and more view choices... Tell me one good reason why anyone would not pick PC2 other than the unnecessarily steep introduction curve..?

Oh, and the unnecessarily hostile player base when any suggestion that their precious 'sim' become easier (at first) to play...

Your kidding right? Put your phone down,go play GTS. This game is far to hard for you to play or comprehend.Why waste your time typing the same thing over and over again. If you like arcade/simcade there are other titles to play. Move on and sell this game.

 

[Mr Tree]

Your kidding right? Put your phone down,go play GTS. This game is far to hard for you to play or comprehend.Why waste your time typing the same thing over and over again. If you like arcade/simcade there are other titles to play. Move on and sell this game.

While he has repeatedly used the same arguments and it got old, telling him to sell the game as it's not for him while he said he likes the game kinda drives his point home. He said the pC2 crowd would do this and now you're doing it...

In this case I think it would have been smarter to keep the highground.

 

[killerjimbag]

While he has repeatedly used the same arguments and it got old, telling him to sell the game as it's not for him while he said he likes the game kinda drives his point home. He said the pC2 crowd would do this and now you're doing it...

In this case I think it would have been smarter to keep the highground.

Yes keep posting the same 🤬 till you get the answer you want seems to be what people do today. Not in my books. You also get people who "like" anything that actually dont have the game/games or system. Then they post profile posts about how terrible an update is even though they dont own the 🤬 game or system. That is epic trolling at its finest. My suggestion. Save your money or start a 🤬 gofundme account. Get the games/system or just give it up. Its tiresome and "under your skin"

 

[Mr Tree]

Yes keep posting the same 🤬 till you get the answer you want seems to be what people do today. Not in my books.

True
But wouldn't it be smarter to just ignore from a certain point rather then to give the response they're trying to provoque?
Not saying I don't get your sentiment

 

[killerjimbag]

True
But wouldn't it be smarter to just ignore from a certain point rather then to give the response they're trying to provoque?
Not saying I don't get your sentiment

Here is what is smarter. Don't post in a public forum. You will get a response like mine. I don't care if he doesn't like it. Tough 🤬. Play the game or sell it. Or better yet go play the other game.

 

[Alpha Cipher]

Your kidding right? Put your phone down,go play GTS. This game is far to hard for you to play or comprehend.Why waste your time typing the same thing over and over again. If you like arcade/simcade there are other titles to play. Move on and sell this game.

The funny thing is he also keeps complaining about GTS and its flaws that it's so irritating

I wouldn't be surprised if he'll complain about real world physics and trackday rules should he get a chance lol
--
And just to contribute to this thread I think AC or iRacing is the way to go for realism 👍

 

[Tajima]

They did the driving amazingly well... but there is too much of a lack of content! Especially if you compare with Pc 2 and Gts.

I'm considering PC2 only because of the car list alone. I don't want random cars I want classes of cars and PC2 have GT1 from the 90's which is a huge selling point for me. Assetto Corsa is good but content seems a bit random, I can't one make race all the time!

 

[daan]

Edit: Why did it quote simsim post under @Scaff name?

You had an extra quote in there. I've removed it for you.

 

[Liquid]

>Enter thread
Grand Prix Legends
>Leave thread

I would love that game remastered with modern graphics.

 

[foxymop]

The problem with PC2 is that it has a nice driving feel, but just nice, nice cars and track, but that's it. PC2 is custom racing or private testing and the rest is broken or bland. It's not a finished product if you analyze the bugs and the weirdly broken features.

I think the problem comes from the top, it's bad choices.

What are the selling points of project cars 2? What PC2 has better than any other sim pointed out here? Nothing. It's just another racing game and it's already the second installment. It has a bland career and a amateur multiplayer.

I don't have gts, but if gts has much more people online then PC2, it's not because of the marketing. It's because people don't play PC2.
At this moment in ps4, there's 39 people online in PC2.
Probably gts ends up being more fun even with bad physics.
A broken game gets frustrating quicky. The penalty system and the ranking system does not protects good drivers and bugs kill the mood for racing online and off line with the weird AI.

After so many months, there's still basic bugs that are not fixed.

And that's reputation. Not marketing. You can't fake it.

I bought PC2 cause PC1 was not bad and I though PC2 would be great. I won't buy PC3. And I don't believe they will make a PC3.

 

[pyrates]

What are the selling points of project cars 2? What PC2 has better than any other sim pointed out here? Nothing.

Ehm, how about tire model and live track?
As a game maybe PC2 isn't entertaining for the mass of players. It isn't the best for random casual online racing because of its limitations and the relatively low numbers of players in open lobbies. But as a racing sim for online racing in organized leagues it is by far the best out there (on a console at least).

 

[foxymop]

The best? You even have to check the replay at the end of the league races cause the final leaderboard is all messed up. It gives wrong results.

Wrong results. Lol. The most important thing in a race. Results. They can't even fix that.

But like I said, the cars and tracks feel good. The rest is broken and it will never be fixed. That's why the lobbies are empty.

But they failed in the most basic stuff even in the UI. And that's scary. What the hell happened in SMS?