DiRT Rally Is Dirt Rally close to RBR's physics/FFB now?
- Thread starter Mike85
- Start date
Happy new year
I would like to finally answer to the question of this thread, but before i do, here's some more data...
After a little research, i found a blog from codemasters stating:
"So we got a new physics programmer in onto Dirt, and he brought fresh eyes to the problem. Starting with a new tire model and a new surface model, he's basically rebuilt our physics from the ground up."
Link for the full article:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-04-27-dirt-rally-could-well-be-codemasters-first-real-sim
Well, even EA's F1 2001 had a tire model but was still a game based on emulation formulas and therefore, these systems are always limited. A tire model on its own cannot work properly without being connected to a physics based system (simulation).
Dirt rally is based on look-up tables for almost everything.
Driving on three different surfaces (tarmac, gravel, snow) requires three different driving techniques. In DR all three feel pretty much the same.
Pendulum effects for Scandinavian flicks? None.
Gyroscopic effects for pitch control over jumps? None.
Active differentials for accuracy on mid-corner speed & exit? None.
Why? Because they are not modeled. The reaction when i use handbrake is always the same. If i try to do a Scandinavian flick, the cars just oversteer always the same way, slowly without any control, regardless of steering input, like racing boats. I want to highlight once again about the breaking points & distances, you can't do anything more than press the pedal and wait to see what happens.
I have very little control for very important things.
Unfortunately i lost most of my information about RBR development and presentation videos, but i found a member from old RSC forums named "Sparrow", who happens to know a little bit about technical stuff (and still has his notes). These quotes are answers from other forum members.
"RBR simulates an actual internal combustion engine, down to each compression stroke. Power is computed on the fly as a real engines is.
RBR does proper turbo modeling, based on actual compressor maps. It calculates the exhaust gas rate in MFR (mass flow rate), based on load and RPM, then uses that information to calculate the manifold pressure (including boost pressure drop across the intercooler, lol!).
From manifold pressure, you then get a direct reading for horsepower at the engine when combined with current RPM and engine load. THEN, it calculates drive line losses through the 4wd system, and you get individual power readings at all 4 tires, which varies in real time based on how the front, middle and rear differentials distribute the power as directed by your setup.
Result? Load affects power. Boost is different in different gears. That's why RBR can model things like a blown turbo, or a hole in your intercooler going over a jump. You can selectively fail anything in the engine and RBR will adjust accordingly, because its calculating everything on the fly, and like a real engine, everything is connected.
Again I reiterate the point that I can fail the turbo in RBR, or the cooler, or the piping. RBR will accurately then simulate this failure and develop power accordingly."
"RBR is unbelievably ahead in terms of SIMULATING complexity. The engine, the suspension geometry, the braking system, the cooling system. The physics engine itself in RBR also helps the tire model. Every single texture has its own grip level, both on low and high slip angle driving. The ability to use camber also adds to the feel of RBR.
RBR features real time active differentials, both front middle and rear. Just have a look at the adjustments that you can make. Different torque adjustments. Differential map adjustments in both throttle position, brake position and speed.
[Q]: I can't see how stuff like reactions to oversteer and understeer could be (FFB)
[Sparrow]: for the force feedback? Easy. G force is easy to calculate. That affects the wheel. The engine is on, rumble the wheel a bit. If the car oversteers, then reduce turning friction on the wheel by x amount, then apply lateral G loads as a function of turning torque to the force feedback engine motor. Bammo, authentic-ish oversteer feel.
RBR does it in real time, they simply connected the suspension geometry to the force feedback engine. The forces you feel are simply the forces computed in real time coming through all the correctly modeled suspension and steering arms. That's what you feel in the real car because that's what is happening...
[Q]: Haven't ISI done a fairly detailed suspension calculation since F1-2001?
[Sparrow]: It's pretty damn good, but again it's an emulation based system. It has preset formulas that you yourself can edit in the HDV file for how different rates affect tire grip and other things. RBR calculates modeling in 3D the full steering and suspension geometry.
It's like playing Doom1 vs Doom3. In Doom 1, if you shoot a barrel it falls over. Because there is a preset system that tells the barrel that if you're hit at X rate, you display the animation of falling over at Y rate.
In Doom3, you hit a barrel, the barrel cops a particular momentum (mass x velocity), gravity is constantly pulling on that barrel at 9.8m/s/s and these forces act on the barrel. The result is the same. The barrel falls over, however the way each is computed is fundamentally different."
What the above example means is that in Doom3, every time you hit a barrel at different rate/angle, you 'll get a different reaction from it. In our case, i think is very obvious which approach each developer used.
More info here:
Warthog Sweden's Eero Pittulainen about modeling an internal combustion engine
http://www.simracingworld.com/content/181-richard-burns-rally-an-internal-affair/
Interview with Eero Piitulainen about the loose surfaces complexity
http://issuu.com/autosimsportmediallc/docs/autosimsport_magazine_volume5issue3_r1/103
The conclusion is that DR emulates but not with the success other titles have, based on this system, while RBR simulates everything in real time with very good results, it simulates engine response and actual piston strokes using fuel burn, air flow, turbo and thermodynamic formulas, they simulate full suspensions & steering arms, brakes, cooling system and damage that occurs on and between these systems. Add to this system the constant powers of air pressure, mass, inertia, gravity, varied surface friction based on start order and you have a good approximation. Some of these systems are not visualized, for example tire wall deformation in RBR is calculated but you can only see the tire slightly sink in tarmac.
Codemasters reference point was car behavior & reactions (from real data & videos) and stage times, then tried to match this information through look-up tables.
Warthog did the exact opposite, they modeled everything (they could), then connected all these models with the physics engine, then fire up the equations and they studied the results. If something was off, they were adding a new modeled part until the end result was matched with real data.
Even the sound is implemented very Interestingly, take for example the "blowoffvalve", there is a sample as every game uses but, instead of using just switches, in RBR is controlled by the physics engine, so every time the throttle is depressed, the engine tells to the sample at what pitch and at what rate is going to reproduced, depending on the readings of the air flow of the turbo. The same applies for the exhaust pops, tire skid sounds, both engine & differential transmissions, turbo...
There is a problem though, RBR sound engine is very depended on directX (not EAX), after UAA introduced partly in windows XP sp3 and fully from vista, the sound is awful. If you don't run it under XP sp2, your best bet would be a creative sound card with alchemy enabled (or equivalent system from other manufacturer) and setting the game's exe file with compatibility for XP.
Forum member Steve William from RaceDepartment says about RBR vs DR:
"RBR 9/10 (No such thing 10/10) but as an amateur rally driver, its THE only sim that came close to real life..."
This is exactly what i have experienced, i can only compare the 2 games with real driving in both solid & loose surface tests. I personally find RBR grip levels just a little bit higher but some people characterize it very slippery. At these speeds, always on the limit, on gravel and public tarmac roads it is slippery, these cars are built for absolute control on loose surfaces and the majority of the rally stages are very slippery. On a race track, any car sticks to the road up to its limit and after a critical point it loses traction abruptly (compared to a normal road), If the tarmac stages in RBR were designed like race tracks, you would see the same behavior, but this is not the case here. You can always micro-correct, even on tarmac.
So, my answer to this thread is no, and certainly not by this game. I don't see how DR can get there.
Richard Burns Rally, as a complex simulator, reflects everything you throw at it, different driving techniques & styles, different moods & motivations and different driver abilities.
The Warthog team didn't bring anything new to the table, all of this stuff is common knowledge for every physics software designer, even two decades before RBR, they just made a decision right from the start and they stuck to it. This is why Eero was praised in the first place, not for his genius but for his effort.
Maybe people like Dirt Rally because this is what they expect from a rally game. I find DR very impressive in the graphics department, this is the reason i'm playing DR. Greece, where i live, is represented with good accuracy, especially the far field view, but the driving & sound parts are disappointing. I'm also disappointed for the fact that after twelve years, nobody has ever come close to produce a decent driving / racing game (with the exception of Project cars & iRacing, which i haven't tried).
If someone doesn't agree with the above, my apologies, this is not an attack of any kind, this is just data and my opinion about the "feel" of the games.
I would like to finally answer to the question of this thread, but before i do, here's some more data...
After a little research, i found a blog from codemasters stating:
"So we got a new physics programmer in onto Dirt, and he brought fresh eyes to the problem. Starting with a new tire model and a new surface model, he's basically rebuilt our physics from the ground up."
Link for the full article:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-04-27-dirt-rally-could-well-be-codemasters-first-real-sim
Well, even EA's F1 2001 had a tire model but was still a game based on emulation formulas and therefore, these systems are always limited. A tire model on its own cannot work properly without being connected to a physics based system (simulation).
Dirt rally is based on look-up tables for almost everything.
Driving on three different surfaces (tarmac, gravel, snow) requires three different driving techniques. In DR all three feel pretty much the same.
Pendulum effects for Scandinavian flicks? None.
Gyroscopic effects for pitch control over jumps? None.
Active differentials for accuracy on mid-corner speed & exit? None.
Why? Because they are not modeled. The reaction when i use handbrake is always the same. If i try to do a Scandinavian flick, the cars just oversteer always the same way, slowly without any control, regardless of steering input, like racing boats. I want to highlight once again about the breaking points & distances, you can't do anything more than press the pedal and wait to see what happens.
I have very little control for very important things.
Unfortunately i lost most of my information about RBR development and presentation videos, but i found a member from old RSC forums named "Sparrow", who happens to know a little bit about technical stuff (and still has his notes). These quotes are answers from other forum members.
"RBR simulates an actual internal combustion engine, down to each compression stroke. Power is computed on the fly as a real engines is.
RBR does proper turbo modeling, based on actual compressor maps. It calculates the exhaust gas rate in MFR (mass flow rate), based on load and RPM, then uses that information to calculate the manifold pressure (including boost pressure drop across the intercooler, lol!).
From manifold pressure, you then get a direct reading for horsepower at the engine when combined with current RPM and engine load. THEN, it calculates drive line losses through the 4wd system, and you get individual power readings at all 4 tires, which varies in real time based on how the front, middle and rear differentials distribute the power as directed by your setup.
Result? Load affects power. Boost is different in different gears. That's why RBR can model things like a blown turbo, or a hole in your intercooler going over a jump. You can selectively fail anything in the engine and RBR will adjust accordingly, because its calculating everything on the fly, and like a real engine, everything is connected.
Again I reiterate the point that I can fail the turbo in RBR, or the cooler, or the piping. RBR will accurately then simulate this failure and develop power accordingly."
"RBR is unbelievably ahead in terms of SIMULATING complexity. The engine, the suspension geometry, the braking system, the cooling system. The physics engine itself in RBR also helps the tire model. Every single texture has its own grip level, both on low and high slip angle driving. The ability to use camber also adds to the feel of RBR.
RBR features real time active differentials, both front middle and rear. Just have a look at the adjustments that you can make. Different torque adjustments. Differential map adjustments in both throttle position, brake position and speed.
[Q]: I can't see how stuff like reactions to oversteer and understeer could be (FFB)
[Sparrow]: for the force feedback? Easy. G force is easy to calculate. That affects the wheel. The engine is on, rumble the wheel a bit. If the car oversteers, then reduce turning friction on the wheel by x amount, then apply lateral G loads as a function of turning torque to the force feedback engine motor. Bammo, authentic-ish oversteer feel.
RBR does it in real time, they simply connected the suspension geometry to the force feedback engine. The forces you feel are simply the forces computed in real time coming through all the correctly modeled suspension and steering arms. That's what you feel in the real car because that's what is happening...
[Q]: Haven't ISI done a fairly detailed suspension calculation since F1-2001?
[Sparrow]: It's pretty damn good, but again it's an emulation based system. It has preset formulas that you yourself can edit in the HDV file for how different rates affect tire grip and other things. RBR calculates modeling in 3D the full steering and suspension geometry.
It's like playing Doom1 vs Doom3. In Doom 1, if you shoot a barrel it falls over. Because there is a preset system that tells the barrel that if you're hit at X rate, you display the animation of falling over at Y rate.
In Doom3, you hit a barrel, the barrel cops a particular momentum (mass x velocity), gravity is constantly pulling on that barrel at 9.8m/s/s and these forces act on the barrel. The result is the same. The barrel falls over, however the way each is computed is fundamentally different."
What the above example means is that in Doom3, every time you hit a barrel at different rate/angle, you 'll get a different reaction from it. In our case, i think is very obvious which approach each developer used.
More info here:
Warthog Sweden's Eero Pittulainen about modeling an internal combustion engine
http://www.simracingworld.com/content/181-richard-burns-rally-an-internal-affair/
Interview with Eero Piitulainen about the loose surfaces complexity
http://issuu.com/autosimsportmediallc/docs/autosimsport_magazine_volume5issue3_r1/103
The conclusion is that DR emulates but not with the success other titles have, based on this system, while RBR simulates everything in real time with very good results, it simulates engine response and actual piston strokes using fuel burn, air flow, turbo and thermodynamic formulas, they simulate full suspensions & steering arms, brakes, cooling system and damage that occurs on and between these systems. Add to this system the constant powers of air pressure, mass, inertia, gravity, varied surface friction based on start order and you have a good approximation. Some of these systems are not visualized, for example tire wall deformation in RBR is calculated but you can only see the tire slightly sink in tarmac.
Codemasters reference point was car behavior & reactions (from real data & videos) and stage times, then tried to match this information through look-up tables.
Warthog did the exact opposite, they modeled everything (they could), then connected all these models with the physics engine, then fire up the equations and they studied the results. If something was off, they were adding a new modeled part until the end result was matched with real data.
Even the sound is implemented very Interestingly, take for example the "blowoffvalve", there is a sample as every game uses but, instead of using just switches, in RBR is controlled by the physics engine, so every time the throttle is depressed, the engine tells to the sample at what pitch and at what rate is going to reproduced, depending on the readings of the air flow of the turbo. The same applies for the exhaust pops, tire skid sounds, both engine & differential transmissions, turbo...
There is a problem though, RBR sound engine is very depended on directX (not EAX), after UAA introduced partly in windows XP sp3 and fully from vista, the sound is awful. If you don't run it under XP sp2, your best bet would be a creative sound card with alchemy enabled (or equivalent system from other manufacturer) and setting the game's exe file with compatibility for XP.
Forum member Steve William from RaceDepartment says about RBR vs DR:
"RBR 9/10 (No such thing 10/10) but as an amateur rally driver, its THE only sim that came close to real life..."
This is exactly what i have experienced, i can only compare the 2 games with real driving in both solid & loose surface tests. I personally find RBR grip levels just a little bit higher but some people characterize it very slippery. At these speeds, always on the limit, on gravel and public tarmac roads it is slippery, these cars are built for absolute control on loose surfaces and the majority of the rally stages are very slippery. On a race track, any car sticks to the road up to its limit and after a critical point it loses traction abruptly (compared to a normal road), If the tarmac stages in RBR were designed like race tracks, you would see the same behavior, but this is not the case here. You can always micro-correct, even on tarmac.
So, my answer to this thread is no, and certainly not by this game. I don't see how DR can get there.
Richard Burns Rally, as a complex simulator, reflects everything you throw at it, different driving techniques & styles, different moods & motivations and different driver abilities.
The Warthog team didn't bring anything new to the table, all of this stuff is common knowledge for every physics software designer, even two decades before RBR, they just made a decision right from the start and they stuck to it. This is why Eero was praised in the first place, not for his genius but for his effort.
Maybe people like Dirt Rally because this is what they expect from a rally game. I find DR very impressive in the graphics department, this is the reason i'm playing DR. Greece, where i live, is represented with good accuracy, especially the far field view, but the driving & sound parts are disappointing. I'm also disappointed for the fact that after twelve years, nobody has ever come close to produce a decent driving / racing game (with the exception of Project cars & iRacing, which i haven't tried).
If someone doesn't agree with the above, my apologies, this is not an attack of any kind, this is just data and my opinion about the "feel" of the games.
Last edited:
F_B
Premium
I think if you want to experience that kind of realism you have to get in a real car. Not one racing sim we have is like reality, I'd say....however for me it's all about believable ffb, physics and good enough graphics for immersion. Personally, rfactor2, Assetto Corsa and GSCE do a pretty good and "realistic" job in this department. Dirt Rally is also nice and to many extents believable imo.
It's all about profitability. What you want requires more time and dedication than would fit into today's development cycle because you not only need to get the physics accurate, you also need to ensure that it's playable and that enough people will enjoy it and want to buy it.
Let's not forget that RBR was so brutally uncompromising that it was a huge sales disaster. Not enough people wanted to play something so difficult.
Take the "simple" aspect of tyre physics progress in sims which are making enough money/sales:
- Watching pCARS with their complex tyre model during development (on WMD) it was clear that the GT, open wheel, road and vintage basic tyres were iterating between "nice but x, y or z is wrong" to "argh, totally unuseable" on a daily basis during development. At some point they had to lock the development down and tweak the end result to be "good enough". They simply ran out of development time (even on the 3 years between starting pCARS 1 funding and delivering the game).
- iRacing has a more luxurious position with users paying subscription. They will regularly make significant changes to their tyre model between seasons which bring some better and some worse aspects. They are still pursuing the end goal of a tyre model which feels good in all situations.
- Assetto Corsa likewise. They are on v6 but still ongoing development, funded by the DLC packs and AC's very good sales.
Now think about "accessibility". It's no good making a model which is 95% perfect but falls down 5% of the time and destroys the user experience. So you tweak those situations, but that's going to mean lookup tables.
Now factor in that RBR was far from perfect.... and you're left with....
Buy stuff, enjoy the good bits. Keep buying, so that the industry gets encouraged to spend more on race sims. Encourage all your friends to buy so that the industry gets encouraged to compete on realism. Hopefully one day....
I agree, but it's not believable either.
On the other hand, it gave me useful training that i applied in my driving techniques.
@fbs Again you are making much sense, but not having any actual sources on how Codemasters have done it with DiRT Rally. Yes, we know a whole lot about RBR, but for 10 years ago, we didn't know at all that much about it.
And no pendulum effects for Scandinavian flick? I often do it in DiRT, and it feels absolutely like it should.
Also, there are tarmac race circuits made for RBR, I cannot say I feel the circuit-racing grip thing there.
Much of your posts seems to come from a direct comparison view, with RBR as the absolute best in all areas. Instead of a neutral PoV.
Also, the sounds in DiRT being sub-par?
Lastly, on a slightly different note, with all your talk about actual simulation etc. etc. it is somewhat funny to see pCars being mentioned and not ISI's games.
Anyway, we are all free to have our own opinions, but I really liked your earlier posts better than this.
And no pendulum effects for Scandinavian flick? I often do it in DiRT, and it feels absolutely like it should.
Also, there are tarmac race circuits made for RBR, I cannot say I feel the circuit-racing grip thing there.
Much of your posts seems to come from a direct comparison view, with RBR as the absolute best in all areas. Instead of a neutral PoV.
Also, the sounds in DiRT being sub-par?
Lastly, on a slightly different note, with all your talk about actual simulation etc. etc. it is somewhat funny to see pCars being mentioned and not ISI's games.
Anyway, we are all free to have our own opinions, but I really liked your earlier posts better than this.
Hey All,
I was wondering if you guys in-the-know can feed back to me some info on whats missing with the FFB and I will see if I can improve it
I was wondering if you guys in-the-know can feed back to me some info on whats missing with the FFB and I will see if I can improve it
In the first versions of DR you could edit an .xml file for every car changing the grip levels of front or rear wheels (low, high...) but after a lot of people started to mess with settings, they locked the files with the next update. Also have a look at the FFB files (also .xml but unlocked). It is very obvious how they have done it.
We knew a lot from day one, in fact there was a great amount of info even before release. Does anyone remember the tech presentation videos parts of Patrick O'Luanaigh, the guy responsible for the Richard Burns Rally concept?
Based on what? I've already explained what it feels like to me. I would only agree that we have different opinions.
Either they are not made right (incorrect texture grip levels) or you run a modded version, or both.
Isn't this thread about the comparison of these two games in respect of physics & FFB? I only added the real life comparison for... a neutral PoV. And certainly i don't find RBR absolute best in all areas, just better in the critical ones.
I think i've covered this topic but i don't expect everyone to try it. Unless you're willing to listen as RBR developers intended to be listened, you can't really judge. It's night & day.
DR audio has some very good samples, besides that, it's like half of the rally car sounds are missing. Don't take my word for it, drive a car on gravel at some good speed, then try to slide or hit the brakes hard. Then you'll know what is missing (among other things).
What's your point? Where & when did i mentioned pCars?
You can't just tell lies when you make public statements, press releases & interviews. There are some ways to check it for yourself though, the most revealing one is not legal as it would require to decompile the "exe". The easy one is to have a look in the "physics.rbz" which you can open with 7zip, and open "physics.lsp" and "localphysics.lsp" with notepad. Then pick a car and have a look at the various "lsp" files & the "repair.ini". These are only the parameters for the physics engine but they will give you an idea how it works.
You mean the video that he drove on a system with a 20" monitor at 4 feet away? Afterwards he stated that it was hard, over-realistic(?) and unnecessary complicated. This is to be expected.
A race driver in a car has 3 main advantages, a large field of view with a great perception of things to come, a greater sense of speed and... the feedback on his body. Therefore a game driver will always find it harder and more complex than a race driver. Add to this that no game is perfect and you begin to understand why everyone is crashing on their first attempts, even the real drivers. You have to re-adjust your hand-eye coordination and your reflexes are working a little bit faster. That's real training (for reflexes at least), this is why i enjoy these games so much.
Last edited:
Is it? I mean, even Grand Prix 3 is easy to mod in many areas, but it still doesn't show everything that's under the hood.
I'll take your word for it, it's not what I've read from many modders, but I was 13 yo back then and a console player with my first steering wheel ^^,
Based on real life racing
It is, but as I stated, your post reads as a "here is RBR, and DiRT is not the same in X".
I've had it on PS2, I've had the original for a long time on PC, with XP, without all SP's. I don't find it that amazing to be honest. Also, don't assume that I have never driven, or been a passenger in a car at high speed, no matter the surface. It's honestly a bit frustrating to read, and just puts me off the whole discussion.
I'm also disappointed for the fact that after twelve years, nobody has ever come close to produce a decent driving / racing game (with the exception of Project cars & iRacing, which i haven't tried).
My point is - if the only decent driving/racing games are pCars and iRacing, and you base the whole RBR v DiRT Rally on things like your last post, it looks strange.
I'm not sure about this game, is it moddable the same way as DR? This smells look-up tables to me (& also by looking those xml files in DR).
Well, a lot, not everything. I remember the developers were asking directly the users what features they wanted to see in the game and how (stage times, hud, the little details). The serious mods came in 2005. When i was around 13, i was trying to play with a zx spectrum, then i bought an amstrad 128, after that Amiga... you'll get there, being an old fool still trying to go fast.
This is an actual argument, i suggest we move on...
Please let me explain... this is not 100% my fault. Since Dirt Rally first appear as early access, the internet filled with youtube videos named like "RBR 2.0" and article titles with the words "first real sim, new rally king, RBR successor" etc. I think it started (or got worst) when Codemasters themselves referred to RBR as something that did not satisfied them. I got curious and i tried it only to find out that it was not up to the hyperbolic hype, completely different priorities in design. Then i found this thread and some members were expressing the same opinions on this matter very strongly (as i would) and i decided to get involved.
Sound-wise, between PS2/PC is also night & day, Unfortunately it needs the same treatment & tweaking as other parts of the game (controller setup, wide screen setup...). If you get it right, combined with some sound mods, you have very good results. I wonder which sound card you were using with the PC version.
I didn't assume that you have never driven, but you didn't mentioned it either. Now that you have mentioned it... let's call it argument No 2.
This is clearly a misunderstanding. My sentence ends with the phrase "which i haven't tried", meaning that i have no opinion about these games.
Yes you do. From your post, your opinion is that these are the only decent driving/racing games in 12 years but I'd really like to know how you can come to that opinion when, by your own admission, you've never tried them. How do you know they are so good? It kinda undermines your whole critique of Dirt Rally just in that one sentence.
Andy_J
I hate Race cheats ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Hey Mr fbs,
You should try Pcars. It is the holy grail of racing simulators. Made be a dedicated team of sim racing developers with a spotless pedigree in the field. With 80,000 backers from the sim racing community all colluding together with one goal, to make the race sim of sims, the sim of the gods.
Try it and give us your very expert opinion. I for one would be interested to see what you think.
Just a random observation. Something I have noticed on many 'How does this Game compare to this Game/Real life' threads is that the majority of people who claim one sim is better physics/more realistic are all sim racers and only sim racers, yet then a few people come along who actually have real experience in the area IRL and their opinion is disregarded. This makes no sense as they have the most reputable information. Just a small rant about a troubling occurrence.
Its getting better but the FFB, Physics and AI still have some way to goHey Mr fbs,
You should try Pcars. It is the holy grail of racing simulators. Made be a dedicated team of sim racing developers with a spotless pedigree in the field. With 80,000 backers from the sim racing community all colluding together with one goal, to make the race sim of sims, the sim of the gods.
Try it and give us your very expert opinion. I for one would be interested to see what you think.
Ok so having now been able to play both games and not having the religious fervour of nostalgia for either game, I have to agree with the comments that the realistic ideal physics are somewhere between the two. DR does seem to have too much grip while RBR has far too little. Ultimately WRC cars feel like they should in DR where-as they feel like whales in RBR. Also DR has a more immersive atmosphere.
Im going to have to try the RSRBR though I am not sure how accurate the physics will be given it, like most mods, has been developed by a bunch of computer guys with no actual real life motorsport experience.
Im going to have to try the RSRBR though I am not sure how accurate the physics will be given it, like most mods, has been developed by a bunch of computer guys with no actual real life motorsport experience.
Forget about default RSRBR physics. Go for NGP.
For me personally immersion is also somewhere in between the two titles. DR still feels a bit arcade-y with its flying finish simplicity, whereas RBR makes you think twice before going over the line at full power (Stop Finish further ahead). Points for audiovisual content goes to DR, hands down. I can't really comment on handling as I have never been in (never mind driven) a proper rally car.
When it comes to rally atmosphere RBR-World mod is my winner, for telling me to wait for my turn before starting a stage or entering a service area, as I would receive a time penalty for not doing so.
For me personally immersion is also somewhere in between the two titles. DR still feels a bit arcade-y with its flying finish simplicity, whereas RBR makes you think twice before going over the line at full power (Stop Finish further ahead). Points for audiovisual content goes to DR, hands down. I can't really comment on handling as I have never been in (never mind driven) a proper rally car.
When it comes to rally atmosphere RBR-World mod is my winner, for telling me to wait for my turn before starting a stage or entering a service area, as I would receive a time penalty for not doing so.
