Project CARS General Discussion Thread

  • Thread starter Terronium-12
  • 20,825 comments
  • 1,565,147 views
I'm not tech savvy so please tell me why GT5/6 struggles with more than 12 online but in MAG you could get 256 online. Is it crappy servers? Is it because it's P2P and not a dedicated server? Is it the amount of information being relayed? What's the difference between the 2 that the number of people online could be so dramatically different?

I ain't exactly tech savvy either. But I do know some things from experience. I've done GT5 online with a close to full lobby without any lag or vehciles jumping about. All it requires is that everyone has a good and stable connection.

MAG, as far as I remember, used dedicated servers, which will have helped as one person couldn't ruin it for everyone.
I only played the beta myself, which was restricted to 64 players. No lag to speak of at all. I know the net-coding is important, which might explain why Gran Turismos online experience is less than stellar (it is, afterall, a PD game we're talking about). As stated earlier, you don't need dedicated serves to run 64 people (for an example) without lag, but it is superior. Primarily because you aren't relying on the connection of the host, and I suppose the actual distance between the server and the players is less important than the distance between the host and players in p2p (I might be wrong on that).

I can't give you specific reasons why one game can succesfully host that many people in a lobby without lag, while another game has problems with far fewer people. 'Cause I don't have the technical knowledge. But I can tell you that there's several games on consoles that literally disproves any of the 16 player online limit garbage that a couple of users on here are talking about. I'd be very interested in hearing SMS's reason for any 16 player limit, if this is even the case. Which I really doubt it is.
 
Last edited:
MAG had dedicated servers indeed, and also used a clever trick to split up the battlefield in different platoons battling each other on different parts on the map. So you actually had 4 32vs32 battles going on at once.

It worked really well and it's a shame they shut it down.
 
So can we safely conclude that there are some technical differences between having many cars on track at the same time online with full next gen physics, graphics etc, relative to other games that may be less demanding in many ways?
 
I don't understand why many compare multiplayer numbers of a shooter, for example, to a racing sim - two completely different resource consumers. A big part of resource consumption (CPU) of a racing sim gets eaten up with physics calculations to name just one variable. I run an i7 quad core @ 4GHz, much of which gets eaten up the more AI I add. SMS is "aiming" for a complete sim with detailed car setup options, livery editor, pit stops, weather, time of day cycles, mechanical/visual damage, shared memory for third-party add-ons, pace cars, robust career, ... and much more. It's a very ambitious undertaking and while I can see progress I still have my doubts on how close they will come to their planned target (fingers crossed!).
Now, if you are a game developer you can shoot holes in my assessment, if not, you are making assumptions same as I may be doing. But, if you look at this logically, there isn't any reason a developer would reduce the multiplayer count unless they have good reason, I give them the benefit of the doubt. I would stick to an apples to apples comparison, racing sim to racing sim, and compared to other racing sims with the same scope.
 
So can we safely conclude that there are some technical differences between having many cars on track at the same time online with full next gen physics, graphics etc, relative to other games that may be less demanding in many ways?
Yes, of course.
Netcode is a complicated thing...
 
MAG had dedicated servers indeed, and also used a clever trick to split up the battlefield in different platoons battling each other on different parts on the map. So you actually had 4 32vs32 battles going on at once.

It worked really well and it's a shame they shut it down.

Yeah but nothing stopt you from going with your platoon/squad to a different part of the map though.
 
I don't understand why many compare multiplayer numbers of a shooter, for example, to a racing sim - two completely different resource consumers. A big part of resource consumption (CPU) of a racing sim gets eaten up with physics calculations to name just one variable. I run an i7 quad core @ 4GHz, much of which gets eaten up the more AI I add. SMS is "aiming" for a complete sim with detailed car setup options, livery editor, pit stops, weather, time of day cycles, mechanical/visual damage, shared memory for third-party add-ons, pace cars, robust career, ... and much more. It's a very ambitious undertaking and while I can see progress I still have my doubts on how close they will come to their planned target (fingers crossed!).
Now, if you are a game developer you can shoot holes in my assessment, if not, you are making assumptions same as I may be doing. But, if you look at this logically, there isn't any reason a developer would reduce the multiplayer count unless they have good reason, I give them the benefit of the doubt. I would stick to an apples to apples comparison, racing sim to racing sim, and compared to other racing sims with the same scope.

Let's hope in 5-10 years we'll have quantum computers at our homes :D
 
All I'm saying is don't act surprised when there's only 16 online.

EDIT: What @TheMinority does not mention is whether or not that's online or off.

Had I known we were allowed to share such details from the developer I would simply stated that from the start and we could've avoided a page of debates and comparisons.
 
Last edited:
A thought I had regarding the Bandai Namco distribution deal: maybe they'll make an effort to keep Project CARS U from getting flattened by advertising for Super Smash Bros. U, since they're involved with the development of SSBU and both games are scheduled to arrive this winter. It could be the best thing to happen to PCARS U in terms of how much exposure it gets.
I really hope that joke of a console the Wii U doesn't limit the abilities of the console version for PS4 and Xbox One which are far superior. If it does then they should have never made it for the Wii u.
Each of the three console versions is derived from the PC pre-alpha/alpha that WMD members get to play.
 
Last edited:
All I'm saying is don't act surprised when there's only 16 online.

EDIT: What @TheMinority does not mention is whether or not that's online or off.

Had I known we were allowed to share such details from the developer I would simply stated that from the start and we could've avoided a page of debates and comparisons.
I know off line it will be more than 16 (56 said for LeMans, 32 said for Solo Mode or something like that).
 
I know off line it will be more than 16 (56 said for LeMans, 32 said for Solo Mode or something like that).
breakingnews.jpg

If @TheMinority is correct for the consoles.................... EVERYBODY PARTY!!!!!!

1254334927_celebration-dance.gif


I just noticed the Indy 500 license on the WMD portal thing, that and the 56 car grid at Le Mans has sealed the deal to me, I'm getting Project Cars!!!
 
Last edited:
I really hope that joke of a console the Wii U doesn't limit the abilities of the console version for PS4 and Xbox One which are far superior.

Likewise, I hope they don't dumb down the PS4 version just to make it more cohesive with the XB1, we all know what console is the better performer. I wanna see the game fully optimized for each individual console.


:nervous:
 
VBR
Likewise, I hope they don't dumb down the PS4 version just to make it more cohesive with the XB1, we all know what console is the better performer. I wanna see the game fully optimized for each individual console.


:nervous:
After the June SDK update the X1 is pretty much level with the PS4, about 1-3% difference in the PS4's favor. Hence why currently all future multiplatform games are running the same frame rates on both consoles. The Wii U however...
 
A thought I had regarding the Bandai Namco distribution deal: maybe they'll make an effort to keep Project CARS U from getting flattened by advertising for Super Smash Bros. U, since they're involved with the development of SSBU and both games are scheduled to arrive this winter. It could be the best thing to happen to PCARS U in terms of how much exposure it gets.

Each of the three console versions is derived from the PC pre-alpha/alpha that WMD members get to play.
Nice thought, I still think pCARS could do very well on the U as long as it's appearance is made known enough. Maybe we will get a pCARS item to use in-game. :P

I really hope that joke of a console the Wii U doesn't limit the abilities of the console version for PS4 and Xbox One which are far superior. If it does then they should have never made it for the Wii u.
:lol: Hey, it can do 1080p and 60FPS. Can't be that much of a joke.
 
After the June SDK update the X1 is pretty much level with the PS4, about 1-3% difference in the PS4's favor. Hence why currently all future multiplatform games are running the same frame rates on both consoles. The Wii U however...

ahahah
1.84TF vs 1.31TF, it's not 1-3% difference, it's 50% and it will never change, before June SDK the gap was greater because of the 10% gpu power reserved for the kinect

even with the same resolution and frame rate, multiplatform are the best on ps4 because they have a better anti-aliasing or greater effects, less tearing, ect., if they are equal the reason is that the developers didn't want to take advantage of the greater power of ps4

:lol: Hey, it can do 1080p and 60FPS. Can't be that much of a joke.

Only one game run at native 1080p60 on wiiu, it's Rayman Legedens
 
ahahah
1.84TF vs 1.31TF, it's not 1-3% difference, it's 50% and it will never change, before June SDK the gap was greater because of the 10% gpu power reserved for the kinect

even with the same resolution and frame rate, multiplatform are the best on ps4 because they have a better anti-aliasing or greater effects, less tearing, ect., if they are equal the reason is that the developers didn't want to take advantage of the greater power of ps4



Only one game run at native 1080p60 on wiiu, it's Rayman Legedens
The actual power of the PS4 is around 1.41 TF
 
GPU on PS4 has 18 Compute Units (CU) with the GPU have a theoretical power of 1.81 TF but after 12 CU there are diminishing returns as the power does not scale linearly. To achieve balance Sony recommends the use of 14 CU, with the remaining 4 supposedly there for future GPGPU. The actual power is closer to 1.41 TF. CPU on PS4 is bottlenecked
 
GPU on PS4 has 18 Compute Units (CU) with the GPU have a theoretical power of 1.81 TF but after 12 CU there are diminishing returns as the power does not scale linearly. To achieve balance Sony recommends the use of 14 CU, with the remaining 4 supposedly there for future GPGPU. The actual power is closer to 1.41 TF.

it can use all of the CU indipendently
 
Meh, I don't care if it does or doesn't I'm not here to argue over what everyother console fanboy argues about. If the PS4 was 50% more powerful its got a funny way of showing it.
 
After the June SDK update the X1 is pretty much level with the PS4, about 1-3% difference in the PS4's favor. Hence why currently all future multiplatform games are running the same frame rates on both consoles. The Wii U however...

Xbox fanboys believe this but in fact ms messed a lot of things up with the xbone. Especially the none support for x360 wheels is a shame but fanboys find always excuses... On ps4 it's at least only a driver problem...

Konami confirmed 1080p 60fps for pes2015 on ps4 and no word about the xbone version.
 
Back