It is, you just compensate for it, just as people do when racing in VR, with triple screens or single screens.
Funny you say this, but in university a friend and I attempted the 24 hour endurance races on GT5 (they couldn't be saved in progress, you had to leave the console on for about a week...) and we used helmets and gloves, just for fun, not to be purists, BUT it added another level to what would have otherwise been a very boring grind.
Don't knock it until you've tried it
Perfect post Rinsky I could not have said it any better. But we have to leave it alone because we can respect the views of others, but somehow they cannot respect our views. Everytime somebody has to say they do not want others to decide how to drive. When only we ask for an extra option. Nobody needs to change anything.
Most funny thing is that I was pretty much “attacked” the same way while the poll that I started clearly proves that the “haters” are a BIG minority while the most clearly would want some changes. I was surprised as well that most people here seem to agree with me.
Not saying that GT Sport cockpit view is perfect but comparing a 4th gen Golf to a modern GT car is apples and oranges. Sitting moved to the rear and down with a HANSS on takes away a lot of your vision which is basically why former F1 drivers often have a hard time competing in GT and touring cars against drivers who weren't talented enough to go to F1 (and were missing the budget, I know that going to F1 isn't all about talent for some drivers ;-)).I do drive a real car, ... since 1975, and have driven on real race tracks since 2004.
I race on PC in triple screens in cockpit view, with a full Fanatec compliment.
I love cockpit view with triples and VR.
When i am driving on track in real life, in my full face helmet ...
my eyeballs' own peripheral vision, plus the ability of my eyes to scan rapidly without moving my head,
plus my ability to move my head, my ability to glance at mirrors, plus my ability to move my head a few inches around in relationship to the car interior, ...
All of these things are continually painting a picture in my brain of my surroundings, the road surface, and other cars around me.
When I am driving GT Sport, I use 'bumper cam', and sometimes cockpit cam for open top cars & kart.
What is being called 'bumper cam' in GTS isn't really bumper view. It is driver's eye view, with the cockpit and car body transparent.
In this game, it is the closest thing to the image I have in my brain as I drive my car on track in real life.
When I'm on track, inside my car I do see my wheel, I see my tachometer, and my temperature gauge,
... but because of all the motion, and because of the task at hand, I don't 'see' the a-pillar and the dashboard.
Just a millisecond ago, I saw that red & white kerbing and the hole in the dirt on the wrong side of it at the apex,
and although the glovebox is now in the way, i still 'see' that apex. My brain makes my car transparent, in a way.
Cockpit view on a single screen monitor is nothing at all like that.
It is not 'more realistic', more 'hardcore', more 'sim minded', less 'arcady'. It's just not. Cut the crap.
My view is never ever that obscured or limited in a real car.
No race driver in the real world, ever, would accept racing with a black curtain covering 75% of their driver's window, and also a quarter of their windshield, and everything else on the other side. Even a prototype is not as limiting as single monitor cockpit view in game.
You cannot properly compensate with FOV in most games, on any size monitor, without seriously compromising the image at the periphery.
Forcing it in competition makes no sense.
Without triple screens or VR, cockpit view is not a good representative view to real life.
Driving from outside the car, third person is fine if you're used to it,
but as a real life driver I cannot relate, and couldn't stay on track in chase cam, or with a controller.
Anyhow, ... boki sez, "All these kids need to stop pretending cockpit cam is some kind of purity."
Ask anyone who's been to the 'ring, that's the reality of the place.
VR will always have the correct FOV. It has the advantage of the screen size and distance from your eyes both being known values.
Static depends on the title, with look to apex and look left and right options is not static. Add in world movement values, head movement, g-force movement and its not static at all (not every title is as limited at GTS is in these regards - not even close). Nor do any of the titles in which I can adjust FOV have half the screen covered in the dashboard (the amount of dash shown actually increases with a wider FOV, lower FOV values reduce it).
As have I, I used to work for Renault, the seats for those drives are not custom fitted and are higher than for competition use.
Human eyes have a total field of vision of upto 220 degrees, but you certainly don't actively see all of that.
As have I, I used to work for Renault, the seats for those drives are not custom fitted and are higher than for competition use.
This is a competitors view in a FR 3.5
Human eyes have a total field of vision of upto 220 degrees, but you certainly don't actively see all of that.
Anything wider than 120 degrees doesn't fully use both eyes and is not focused and will register as movement and not detail as we can't use both eyes past the 120 degree point on either side), the area we can focus on and also see detail in is limited to around 60 degrees, when we actively focus on something its down to around 4 to 8 degrees.
As such we don't 'see' 220 degrees, we actually 'see' around 60 degrees, and can only focus in detail on around 8 degrees at any time.
http://www.newtonsapple.org.uk/human-vision/
This is what you then get when you track that 4 to 8 degrees that we can focus in detail on when driving a car.
As such as long as a single screen is correct in ratio and allows you to see the apex (via look to apex and reading the road well ahead) its perfectly usable and realistic.
Its actually due to the fact that Hulkenburg is absurdly tall for an F1 driver in the modern age (being over 6 foot), and doesn't fit in some cars...
Not with look to apex you don't, and in reality he will be moving his head as well as his eyes as the human eye can only sharply focus on a 4 to 8 degree point in the centre of vision.
Its far more that you are giving it credit for given how the human eye works (which is not 220 degrees, its 60 degrees at its most generous and it reality an 8 degree area of focus).I am not disagreeing that it is realistic. Its as realistic as a static 2D image with minimal field of view (up and down) can be. Which isn’t much
Its actually due to the fact that Hulkenburg is absurdly tall for an F1 driver in the modern age (being over 6 foot), and doesn't fit in some cars...
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/webber-hulkenberg-too-tall-for-ferrari/
...as such he's not the norm for eye level at all. di Grassi on the other hand is 5 cms shorter...
https://www.audi-mediacenter.com/en...ucas-di-grassi-south-americas-great-hope-3782
...however in all the videos I've posted you see the camera placement, and in the FR 3.5 one the driver himself has posted repeatedly in the comments that its accurate to what he sees!
I'm not sure why this always brings such a degree of surprise, having been in touring cars and open wheelers its quite clear that driver placement is as much about lowering and centralizing the centre of gravity as it is about what they can see. DTM cars are notorious for being driven from what would be in the road car the back seat, a side on profile look at F1 drivers shows they would not be able to see much more than the videos posted show. Just about the only time you get a better view is in series that mandate the seat placement (often due to homologation requirements).
Just trace a line from eye-level to the top of the tub and top of the tyre and its quite clear.
Not with look to apex you don't, and in reality he will be moving his head as well as his eyes as the human eye can only sharply focus on a 4 to 8 degree point in the centre of vision.
Its far more that you are giving it credit for given how the human eye works (which is not 220 degrees, its 60 degrees at its most generous and it reality an 8 degree area of focus).
What VR and triples give you is a periphery, which adds to a sense of speed and allows you to see movement (not detail) outside of 60 degrees, and you are still limited to 4 to 8 degrees of clear focus and detail in the centre of your vision. As such you still need to move your eyes to focus on anything within the 60 degrees (which is close to the same limit as a well set-up single) or your head and eyes to see anything within around 120 degrees (as outside of that your helmet and HANS system is going to stop you.
What triples and VR give you more than anything is immersion, rather than an increase in accuracy (as long as they are all set up to ensure the FOV you have is 1:1).
