GTRevival: New Name & New Publisher Inbound

MachChouffe said:

Thanks, I was pretty sure I could disregard your opinion on that topic, now I got confirmation

Click to expand...

Sure, i am sure you also can disregard Josef's opinion, and we should all instead listen to you.

pz666 said:

Because both are on crap engines... And more importantly 60FPS is terrible for sim racing... Especially on the pmotor which pC2 uses a merged pmotor and Shift 2 physics engine with some simplified bits like differentials in order to cut corners... You should be aiming for double that...

Click to expand...

Weird, I'm in 30 and 60 fps regularly and have no trouble with driving. No idea where you get that.

mrzimdinamerlina said:

Weird, I'm in 30 and 60 fps regularly and have no trouble with driving. No idea where you get that.

Click to expand...

Been a thing for years with that physics engine... I've been aiming for 120fps to get the maximum out of the calculations since the original rFactor... The cars are sometimes more fun at 60fps, but it isn't how to get the maximum out of the physics engine...

And with mods or poorly optimized content in various forms over the years any drop below 50 fps over the years and cars can turn downright undriveable...

stenovitz said:

Now you wrote it:
"Highest settings".
That cannot be the core sim part, but graphical part. I was solely referring to the first.
Madness Engine is second to none speaking VR performance.
And Reiza have fought any madness speaking the core sim modeling part - still some miles away from their ditto job on the ISI engine with AMS1 (of which with CC VR plugin almost equals the VR performance), but still improving. And myself still racing AMS2 quite frequently on this basis.

I don't expect Bell's team to reach equal core sim levels with Madness. More like a PC4.

Click to expand...

you read the article where Reiza and Mr. " you can tell when im lying, its when my lips move " joined forces on this project right?

pz666 said:

Been a thing for years with that physics engine... I've been aiming for 120fps to get the maximum out of the calculations since the original rFactor... The cars are sometimes more fun at 60fps, but it isn't how to get the maximum out of the physics engine...

And with mods or poorly optimized content in various forms over the years any drop below 50 fps over the years and cars can turn downright undriveable...

Click to expand...

Interesting, i always thought the physics engine ran separately to the graphics you see on screen, so it essentially didnt make any difference whether you ran it at 60 or 120.

F2020 said:

Interesting, i always thought the physics engine ran separately to the graphics you see on screen, so it essentially didnt make any difference whether you ran it at 60 or 120.

Click to expand...

And they usually do. Between 60 and 120 there must be no difference. Bellow that, things might happen or not, depends on the engine.

Richard Wilks said:

And they usually do. Between 60 and 120 there must be no difference. Bellow that, things might happen or not, depends on the engine.

Click to expand...

Idk about ISI sims, but on Madness Engine games fps below 60 means the world starts to run in slow-motion, lap times start getting seconds per lap slower etc. I think something similar happens in AC if you hit 99% CPU occupancy.

Codies' F1 games have also had issues with the physics tick rate depending on the FPS in the past.

Hi all,
I suggest for waiting "Behind the scenes" the amazing pack of Race Sim Studio >> GT Legends Championship - Pack and the GT Legends Championship Aston Martin

Have a good day

-

wolftree said:

Idk about ISI sims, but on Madness Engine games fps below 60 means the world starts to run in slow-motion, lap times start getting seconds per lap slower etc. I think something similar happens in AC if you hit 99% CPU occupancy.

Codies' F1 games have also had issues with the physics tick rate depending on the FPS in the past.

Click to expand...

on the other side.
If you can't stay over 60fps, you need a new PC

wica said:

Hi all,
I suggest for waiting "Behind the scenes" the amazing pack of Race Sim Studio >> GT Legends Championship - Pack and the GT Legends Championship Aston Martin

Have a good day

Click to expand...

Wut?

I am now thoroughly convinced that the names, "Ian Bell" and "GTRevival" are made up characters created only to stir up controversy online.

Havner said:

Actually quite the opposite. Physics are probably the only thing in this whole genre that's objective, not subjective.

Click to expand...

We could argue about this because each person has different levels of perception when it comes to driving dynamics. But that's not what i meant. I meant that it's just software. It's not magic.
A competent coder can use telemetry data to make realistic vehicle dynamics. The same applies to the very basic physics of the world that's created with whatever engine. Even Unity can support realistic physics.
The fact that we have OLD racing games that have really good physics (at least according to most), means that proper physics simulation is well within the capabilities of newer engines.

replicaz1427 said:

Ummmm, and correct me if I'm wrong here - but they developed the engine? Did they not?! So as far as I was aware they didn't really develop it much beyond PC2 - if much before! PC1 and 2 felt remarkably similar, even Reiza are still plugging away at it. Maybe it's because a lot of us here were raised in the gMotor engine but it just feels odd. You can absolutely hurl the car into the apex and make it through in a much better state than you can with, say, AMS1 or RF2 or even AC1. It's got it's special little quirks shall we say, you don't need much in the way of manners.

Click to expand...

The fact that you can't do something in AMS1 or RF2 or AC or whatever, doesn't mean that you can't do it in reality and doesn't make a game in which you can do it, "unrealistic".
There's a misconception in regards to how a car or bike should behave in "simulators" because most have no track experience and therefore no concept of what "realism" really is. From my experience, harder does not mean more realistic.
For example, Casey Stoner described just how difficult it was to make the rear tire lose grip when the tire was fresh and warm, even during cornering. But then you have MotoGP games in which you're sliding all over the place.
Most players would think that this is realistic because the bike has a lot of power and the contact patch is so small etc etc. What most know right? So if you double the grip in the game and make the bike on fresh tires slide only at almost full throttle, most of these players will say "this is unrealistic". This is the case with the majority of racing games.
Now, i'm not defending PC2. I'm not even talking specifically about it. I'm just saying that we don't really know what's trully realistic or not unless we have some form of reliable data. Do you have real data showing that you can't hurl a specific car through a specific apex at X speed and being able to make it through? Then you can easily tell if the game is realistic or not.

F2020 said:

Interesting, i always thought the physics engine ran separately to the graphics you see on screen, so it essentially didnt make any difference whether you ran it at 60 or 120.

Click to expand...

That's above 120fps and I can't feel any difference in most sims until it goes under 80fps... Rennsport, AMS2 (pre 1.5 and post latest patch), LMU, rF2, AMS1 all have this 80fps barrier where I can't eek out that final tenth without spinning a lot easier than I would at above 100fps... Much like anything to do with feel, this number could be very different for a lot of people... But for me anything under 80fps and I'll feel it before I look at the FPS counter...

It's got something to do with how the world is portrayed on your own system and what speed it can be related that at by the system... I can't remember the full explanation... I just remember the fps barriers... It doesn't matter what my monitors refresh rate is, as I can still feel the difference... If I want the physics humming I'll aim for 120 and not drive it if it's under 80...

wolftree said:

Idk about ISI sims, but on Madness Engine games fps below 60 means the world starts to run in slow-motion, lap times start getting seconds per lap slower etc. I think something similar happens in AC if you hit 99% CPU occupancy.

Codies' F1 games have also had issues with the physics tick rate depending on the FPS in the past.

Click to expand...

Madness also runs on that ISI physics code, but a merged version with simplified shift 2 stuff and what SMS and Reiza have added to it over the years...

I did once think the large differences in grip people who have similar subjective views on grip profiles can feel in the Madness was down to the FPS differences people ran at... But have since found that to be incorrect... There's a secondary issue within the Madness code that causes this... I had also blamed the tyre sidewall vibration for this issue, but that also appears to not be a fix for this difference in grip between people who love the same kind of grip out of other titles...

But it's possibly something that forms from the different speeds people's PC's can run the physics at, or simply another issue within the physics code that Reiza hasn't managed to correct...

DC WOLF said:

on the other side.
If you can't stay over 60fps, you need a new PC

Click to expand...

As above, that limit is 80fps for me...

replicaz1427 said:

Ummmm, and correct me if I'm wrong here - but they developed the engine? Did they not?! So as far as I was aware they didn't really develop it much beyond PC2 - if much before! PC1 and 2 felt remarkably similar, even Reiza are still plugging away at it. Maybe it's because a lot of us here were raised in the gMotor engine but it just feels odd. You can absolutely hurl the car into the apex and make it through in a much better state than you can with, say, AMS1 or RF2 or even AC1. It's got it's special little quirks shall we say, you don't need much in the way of manners.

Click to expand...

In a lot of areas it wasn't developed much more than what was in Shift 2...

Thenextinline said:

The fact that you can't do something in AMS1 or RF2 or AC or whatever, doesn't mean that you can't do it in reality and doesn't make a game in which you can do it, "unrealistic".

Click to expand...

Whilst that is very true, the onboards and how slidey they are compared to the real life onboards are a big telling point...


For me though it's always been about simulating mistakes that the madness had failed at until AMS2 1.4 and Reiza started pulling a thread on that... However that changed after 1.5 when everything went very slidey and the flat curve was so forgiving that pC2 fans were saying it was too easy and turning to iRacing...

pz666 said:

That's above 120fps and I can't feel any difference in most sims until it goes under 80fps... Rennsport, AMS2 (pre 1.5 and post latest patch), LMU, rF2, AMS1 all have this 80fps barrier where I can't eek out that final tenth without spinning a lot easier than I would at above 100fps... Much like anything to do with feel, this number could be very different for a lot of people... But for me anything under 80fps and I'll feel it before I look at the FPS counter...

It's got something to do with how the world is portrayed on your own system and what speed it can related that... I can't remember the full explanation... I just remember the fps barriers... It doesn't matter what my monitors refresh rate is, as I can still feel the difference... If I want the physics humming I'll aim for 120 and not drive it if it's under 80...



Madness also runs on that ISI physics code, but a merged version with simplified shift 2 stuff and what SMS and Reiza have added to it over the years...

I did once think the large differences in grip people who have similar subjective views on grip profiles can feel in the Madness was down to the FPS differences people ran at... But have since found that to be incorrect... There's a secondary issue within the Madness code that causes this... I had also blamed the tyre sidewall vibration for this issue, but that also appears to not be a fix for this difference in grip between people who love the same kind of grip out of other titles...

But it's possibly something that forms from the different speeds people's PC's can run the physics at, or simply another issue within the physics code that Reiza hasn't managed to correct...



As above, that limit is 80fps for me...



In a lot of areas it wasn't developed much more than what was in Shift 2...



Whilst that is very true, the onboards and how slidey they are compared to the real life onboards are a big telling point...

For me though it's always been about simulating mistakes that the madness had failed at until AMS2 1.4 and Reiza started pulling a thread on that... However that changed after 1.5 when everything went very slidey and the flat curve was so forgiving that pC2 fans were saying it was too easy and turning to iRacing...

Click to expand...

As a virtually exclusive VR user I have mainly been running my sims at 45fps with asw, guessing this has been effecting the physics then, will see if I can feel anything different on lower settings and running at 80fps

Ian Bell nailed it with that statement about VR and Unreal Engine. Just look at ACC and EA WRC, horrible blurry mess that you need a super computer or a deep understanding of how things work just to approach a good experience in Unreal Engine and VR racing.

The Madness engine seems almost built for it. If Reiza can keep improving the physics then perhaps a partnership will be announced

F2020 said:

As a virtually exclusive VR user I have mainly been running my sims at 45fps with asw, guessing this has been effecting the physics then, will see if I can feel anything different on lower settings and running at 80fps

Click to expand...

At 45fps I expect you to feel something... But over 60 it's a lot more subtle... Some swear they feel differences under 100fps...

dtdman420 said:

Ian Bell nailed it with that statement about VR and Unreal Engine. Just look at ACC and EA WRC, horrible blurry mess that you need a super computer or a deep understanding of how things work just to approach a good experience in Unreal Engine and VR racing.

The Madness engine seems almost built for it. If Reiza can keep improving the physics then perhaps a partnership will be announced

Click to expand...

Given Bell's history Unreal 5 is going to be the best racing simulation for VR when it's implemented for it and Rennsport has the keys to it... It already drives better than the best cars on the Madness engine, even with a weakly constructed tyre...

As anything he says you can expect the complete opposite to be true... Like "Running over something in the ISI engine doesn't send you skyward" from the GTR2 days or "pCARS will be a simulation"...

The Madness engine was built for Need for Speed type games... Reiza have done magical work to get it this far, but they still have a long way to go... They've only just announced that a class will have proper fuel maps for it in the first time in that engines entire existence...

Press release - Nothing to see here, and also nothing to see here.