- 616
Why can't the in-game wheel/driver still not turn 900 degrees?
- Thread starter Kalax3
- 50 comments
- 9,113 views
- 4,089
- Utah
Yes, try it! Also the Tank Car, BMW Z4, Nissan 350Z Roadster, TVR Griffith, Honda S2000, MGF, and other open top cars that I can't remember at the moment.
- 1,130
- Mexico City
- ppmike921
- MikeB0ssMan
- 378
- Genk
- Krizzay
The fact that the wheel doesn't turn the same amount as my fysical wheel is a bit disorientating, specially when you need to catch a slide. I love driving in cockpit view, but when you're online Racing on the edge, it kinda distracts a bit not matching the real movement of tour wheel.
I use a g27, and in the redbull junior races (just to give an example), I set my wheel to 400 and something degrees. Suddenly the movement on screen and physicly match perfect. That a whole other experience, suddenly everything just adds up.
It's hard to drive on the edge when your visual cues don't match the real movement of your hands. I would love to see them fix this so that I don't have to switch to bumper cam online anymore.
I use a g27, and in the redbull junior races (just to give an example), I set my wheel to 400 and something degrees. Suddenly the movement on screen and physicly match perfect. That a whole other experience, suddenly everything just adds up.
It's hard to drive on the edge when your visual cues don't match the real movement of your hands. I would love to see them fix this so that I don't have to switch to bumper cam online anymore.
- 8,704
- 2,822
- Espoo
- GTP_Raitzi
Well they could move the animation up in the priority list of doing things to get it match better the input. I remember LFS had non-existent input lag or delay of animation.
- 184
- Mr_Bungle83
- HaHaHa as if JESUS no WAY
I think PD are going in a new direction, just leaving out what isn't perfect, GT7 will be a silent game then.
- 605
- 17,086
- United Kingdom
I think you need to consider this at a more practical level:
If you want real, then steering racks should be correctly modeled with correct number of turns lock to lock. They are not, so ... unrealistic. Not to mention getting FFB wheels to stop at virtual lock stops.
Say they did animate the full range... how do you animate the arm movement of a DS3/6A user going from lock to lock in 0.2 of a second? Probably not that hard, but it would look ridiculous and very unrealistic. It would probably highlight how much the game smooths inputs from DS3/6A.
Given the other issues the game has, this isn't high up the list for... cockpit view is flawed enough when it comes to realistic perspective!
If you want real, then steering racks should be correctly modeled with correct number of turns lock to lock. They are not, so ... unrealistic. Not to mention getting FFB wheels to stop at virtual lock stops.
Say they did animate the full range... how do you animate the arm movement of a DS3/6A user going from lock to lock in 0.2 of a second? Probably not that hard, but it would look ridiculous and very unrealistic. It would probably highlight how much the game smooths inputs from DS3/6A.
Given the other issues the game has, this isn't high up the list for... cockpit view is flawed enough when it comes to realistic perspective!
- 503
- Germany
Simple answer to topic question:
Because PD.
Because PD.
- 8,704
They wouldn't use the mocap file, they'd use a key-framed, bone-rigged animation derived from that at most. It's more likely to be procedural in this case, anyway (GT4's certainly looks it). That implies processing power rather than RAM, but the two are functionally interchangeable (or rather, trade-able) at a very high level in terms of design.
Yeah, maybe, I don't use cockpit view, but I remember the delay well enough; it is distracting. LFS doesn't animate gear changes, though. Might be that the whole animation is delayed just for the sake of the gear changes in GT5 / GT6, but that doesn't make much sense for ordinary blended animations - if it's procedural, it might be a frame or two of processing delay (sub-sampled and smoothed, e.g. at 30 Hz). Perhaps it's for "recording" purposes, so it looks right in the replay (by removing the delay), but I've not looked closely enough there.
It still is not the same thing as control latency, necessarily. That's a bit harder to quantify, I think, and the FFB delay is different again (smoothing is a major issue in introducing FFB latency, because causality, but it's "necessary" with low-res physics simulations, although I've experience non-filtered, raw-physics FFB on my G25, and it was fine.)
Yeah, maybe, I don't use cockpit view, but I remember the delay well enough; it is distracting. LFS doesn't animate gear changes, though. Might be that the whole animation is delayed just for the sake of the gear changes in GT5 / GT6, but that doesn't make much sense for ordinary blended animations - if it's procedural, it might be a frame or two of processing delay (sub-sampled and smoothed, e.g. at 30 Hz). Perhaps it's for "recording" purposes, so it looks right in the replay (by removing the delay), but I've not looked closely enough there.
It still is not the same thing as control latency, necessarily. That's a bit harder to quantify, I think, and the FFB delay is different again (smoothing is a major issue in introducing FFB latency, because causality, but it's "necessary" with low-res physics simulations, although I've experience non-filtered, raw-physics FFB on my G25, and it was fine.)
Similar threads
