i don't really understand what it is that ppl feel in certain games that qualifies them to be "sim" compared to others. and idk why Codemasters gets bashed so much.
ive played iRacing, ive played AC, ive played PC2, ive played GT Sport, ive played Forza Motorsport, ive played F1 series, ive played DiRT Rally 2.0, DiRT 4, Nascar Heat, you name it ive played it.
every game has certain cars that they do better than other cars or other games, but for the most part, all the dick measuring over which game is most "sim" is a load of BS.
it all depends on how many assists you put on and ...honestly? difficult =/= realistic
i think people confuse those two words quite a bit. it's not necessarily realistic to have a car spin the tires to ridiculous amounts or snap oversteer out of control at the slightest touch of a curb.
the f1 series in particular gets bashed a ton recently since the f1 pros got on it and said it wasn't the best simulation experience. but then ppl immediately jump to saying "it's a joke, arcade game" which isn't true at all.
from what I've heard, the f1 drivers don't like the position you sit in more than anything else. the way you look into the mirrors amd such. the handling is maybe a bit too grippy, but they are professionals... their opinion is a bit different than it is for the regular Joe gamer who having offs and spins and such far more often and isn't running lap times that can realistically be compared to the real thing anyway. ppl act like certain games are worthless and that playing them is hindering their future motorsports career or something.
sorry, but that's just a pet peeve of mine that seems relevant with all the sim/arcade discussion in response to pc3
While I agree with you on some of the points that you have raised (such as bashing on an arcade title simply because its an arcade title), I disagree that comparisons between titles and how well they recreate reality are worthless, quite the opposite, it's a natural and perfectly valid comparison to make. It's the tribal ******** that follows that which is the toxic part.
As an example, it's objectively provable that AC has a more realistic physics engine and tyre model that GTS has, the same is true for PC2. Just as it objectively provable that GTS has a more realistic physics engine than Driveclub has.
Now does that make GTS better than Driveclub and PC2 and AC better than GTS?
No not at all, that depends on what the individual player is looking for, at that time out of a title. It's at this point that it becomes utterly subjective, and it is also perfectly possible to enjoy all of these titles, as they can cater to different needs at different times.
Now on your point about difficultly =/= reality, while this is true its also been massively misused. I say that following as someone who has hundreds of hours of track and proving ground time in a variety of road and race cars (I've worked in the motor industry for 25 years and am currently doing a Masters in Automotive Management). Driving a car at up to eight or nine-tenths, with practice is not that difficult, I know because I've lost count of the number of people I personally trained to do so or managed the training of people training people to do it. However driving a car at the limit (and in fact just over as it as the tyres are slipping that they generate the most lateral grip) and doing so consistently, not just for a single lap, but for multiple laps or even hours, that is not easy. In fact, that level of skill and consistency is bloody difficult, it's certainly not something that even with my experience I would even come close to claiming to have. It also does vary from car to car, its significantly easier to push a 60's mini to the limit and control it consistently than it is a Radical SR-1, as an example.
Finally, in regard to Codemasters, they get quite a lot of, quite valid, criticism for a number of reasons. One is that they are still using the Ego engine, which does have a number of well known and limiting traits. The main one being its centre point rotation model (which I will come back to shortly), however, most of the issues people raise about them are in regard to business practices, such as reselling most of the content from Dirt Rally back to people as DLC in Dirt Rally 2, or the content devoid mess that was and is the new Grid.
Now about that centre-point model the Ego engine get so much stick for, this again is an area people often miss-represent, as a body in motion will rotate around an axis. In that much Ego (and any physics engine) should recreate this, the issue with the ego engine is that in reality, the axis of rotation (technically this is actually the yaw axis) will move around. How much wit will move around depends on the car itself and the motion it's undergoing, the issue in my view with the ego engine is that the movement of the yaw axis is far too limited. Which gives the feeling of a car rotating around a point almost fixed to the centre of the car, varying very little, when in reality the yaw axis location, even when static may not be central to the car (in fact it rarely is). However, I have seen some people take this to the extreme and try and pass any yaw based rotation of a simulated car or vehicle as being unrealistic, which anyone who has ever spent any time in a go-kart knows is quite, quite wrong.
Love the wide selection of classic and historic race cars and circuits. I'm a bit concerned on what I'm seeing with Pcars3. It's looking very teenage boy arcadee hope they don't tone down the sim aspect of It.
