Seems like my vacation expired too early. After being incredibly frustrated how the initial release of DRM mod for AC was "welcomed", then adding big frustration to how XJ13 update was "welcomed", being disappointed even by staff not to mention absolute majority of the community, I have spotted this tendency that it doesn't even surprise me that R1 FFB (or perhaps physics ?) was greeted the similar way.
It is obvious that something has been achieved in AC which made perfect balance between fine level of realism and bits that might be off. Those bits which might be off gives a forgiving nature and reduces the need of proper concentration, some cars more and some less, obviously as you don't need as much or same kind of concentration for Miata as for 98T.
It was different in ACC R1. I admit my first hours wasn't exactly enjoyable, due to unexpected spins, and mostly some other unrelated things that wasn't good impression at very first (but first impression is so often misleading). But there were reasons to that, I just needed to understand and get used to differences. It haven't took long.
So what were the differences ACC vs AC ? Who cares, I have no idea anyway.. but I THINK:
- Never had to mind marbles in AC, yes they are a challenge;
- Never had less grip while trully being off ideal line in AC;
- Never felt tires timing and flexing so well before, however not so immediatly responding tire plus having some flex makes for slightly less "helping" FFB, naturally, but it didn't cause issues, was especially enjoyable when warming tires or through chicanes;
- Self aligning torque felt more natural than AC, way more front end feel, not so saturated rear slip feel as in AC, so you had to rely more on peripheral vison motion cues and do more work yourself, as wheel just wouldn't counterspin early enough to tell you to countersteer while you are half a sleep. This is the main thing and probably most debatable, however seems that we can only say each other how wrong we are and can not put proper arguments (only few guys who actually managed to discuss it properly).
- Perhaps lower sliding friction than AC - drifting enemy, thing that makes slides scary.
Anyway.. perhaps slight modifications for simulation, especially for open market product could be allowed. As there are good arguments about lack for "seat feel", we do miss it, however, IMO peripheral vision is dominating sensor for driving, so it can not be that we miss so much off that, arguably only top athlettes like for example Senna had extremely well developed vestibular and/or proprioception senses, yet the vision must have been absolutely dominating, hard to tell. Also there could be a fine argument of input/output lag, for example if tyre flex and relaxation length gives some tyre response delay, then having some input lag on top would make it too delayed so might be too tricky if someone has too many USB's connected in same socket or for some other reasons input lag is very large.
It is interesting and serious topic, but it appears like most just got their mentality stuck on something particular, something like "it is not like AC", or "it is not like iR", this is a massive failure you subconsciously reveal how messed up and cuffed your perception is where are "it is not like real life", not so easy to tell I guess. Where is critical thinking ?
