PC1 Latest Build testing.

[Andy_J]

As you all know, Ian gave me a free pass to test the latest builds and that's what I have been doing for the last week. I will report here as and when I see fit to tell all about my findings.

But I will say that the latest build (296) is quite good. Now lets make some sense of my statement. I used a Lotus 98T in helmet cam using my antique MOMO red wheel and I can honestly report it is coming along much better than I anticipated. The actual feel and immersion is damn fine at this point. The handling is strange at first compared to say...RF2 and FVA, but it grows on you within minutes. At this point in time, this actual car feels good. I like it and I love the Milan circuit. The damage model has come on leaps and bounds.

I am doing some more testing all of next week using a G27 and I will also test some of the other cars that don't interest me as much (I am a F1 nut) and see how the feel in comparison to Shift 2, because that is what I was initially comparing PCars to.

I would like the replay function to have a directors mode though. Something that jumps from action to action and from car to car.

Aside from that, the replay's do crash my PC quite often but I understand that is being looked at.

Watch this space.

 

[Chronus]

but if they can't remove the centre spring feel which leads to the most grotesque feeling oversteer, and weight transfer.

Was wondering, can anyone point me to a video where you believe this "center pivot physics" is most evident?

 

[Kenny Paton]

You may be right, but try as I might, I cannot recall anything similar to TOCA RACE Driver 2/3 in pCARS. It's been more than 6 months, now, so one would expect all sorts of improvements to the physics engine. Really, I dunno.




I understand.

It is a pity I cannot release the work I did for all GT and GT2 cars in GTR EVO, you'd be blown away. Hence why I say, even considering the complexities of these physical models (iRacing, rF2, pCARS, AC), nothing beats Race07/GTR Evo - except rFactor properly modded and GSC. Obviously, that is now. In the future, more powerful hardware will allow even better physical and semi-empirical models, who knows what'll happen then.

The potential (in pCARS) is there, though.

Can I ask why you can't release at least one car so people can compare the differences, or was it a commercial thing with strings attached. I find that POV and FOV are critical to my (admittedly poor) abilities to race (I mean drive) a car. In pCars I like the way they can be adjusted to suit.

 

[Chronus]

Can I ask why you can't release at least one car so people can compare the differences, or was it a commercial thing with strings attached. I find that POV and FOV are critical to my (admittedly poor) abilities to race (I mean drive) a car. In pCars I like the way they can be adjusted to suit.

Not commercial in the sense of purchasing a license from ISI (or SIMBIN) and selling a product (like Simraceway or GSC), but still binding and paid by clients/investors (which means deliverables - tools, models, files - are not distributable).

Maybe in the future, in spite of this new gen of sims, there are enough people still interested in rFactor and Race07 for me to release new tools (for free).

--

Well, this "center pivot physics" has been explained at WMD as being caused by a combination of FOV and POV effects. As I cannot test any racing sim at the moment, I can't verify this - people seem quite certain of this, though.

In any case, as you said, FOV is rather important. I usually drove with a low FOV in cockpit view, it helps a lot in assessing correctly brake points, apexes and trajectories. But people can adapt to pretty much anything and others use a rather high FOV and it suits them.

 

[Kenny Paton]

I just ran the Z4 round Bathurst and once view etc was adjusted it seems fine to me. I find if I'm to far back it feels a bit centre pivoty, I couldn't get to grips with some Codemasters games due to this effect so it is helped by aforementioned FOV & POV.
Thanks Chronus for your answer. I'm looking forward to the future, just don't wait too long I'm cracking on in years.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

Was wondering, can anyone point me to a video where you believe this "center pivot physics" is most evident?

I'll see if I can dig one up, but aren't you a jr over at WMD, if so, are you saying you don't feel this effect?

EDIT...I see that you're not able to drive atm.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

Well, this "center pivot physics" has been explained at WMD as being caused by a combination of FOV and POV effects. - people seem quite certain of this, though.

WMD investors who don't care about a sim are certain of any number of things Chronus.
The funny thing is that the feel keeps moving from build to build, so for example in the latest build, the zonda seemed to drive ok at Bathurst, but poorly at Imola, though it may have been the Audi, either way, pcars doesn't have that microscopic level of detail that GTR 2005 has despite whatever flaws GTR has.

Not sure what the limitation is on you driving the game, but once you get a chance, you'll know that plenty of people at WMD have NFI, and are happy with any ole driving game.

You'd know better than me, but could a NTM remove what seems to be a persistent factor in every car?

 

[Chronus]

WMD investors who don't care about a sim are certain of any number of things Chronus.

Sadly, because I have seen/read which are those, cannot disagree with you.

Fortunately, they're a minority. I have read literally hundreds of posts by members who really care about simracing and making a hardcore sim out of pCARS.

Sadly, some "investors" are too vocal about some elements (money, modding, casual gaming features) and they can hurt the whole process. A (tiny) minority, yes, but...

The funny thing is that the feel keeps moving from build to build, so for example in the latest build, the zonda seemed to drive ok at Bathurst, but poorly at Imola, though it may have been the Audi, either way, pcars doesn't have that microscopic level of detail that GTR 2005 has despite whatever flaws GTR has.

Objectively, honestly speaking:

the little that has been conveyed to us about Eero's tire model implies that his model is potentially as good as ISIMotor2 (i.e., tire model in pMotor2).

I don't know why that model shows the perceived flaws some are discussing here and elsewhere. I emphasize, though, I cannot prove or disprove this as I can't test pCARS atm.

Not sure what the limitation is on you driving the game, but once you get a chance, you'll know that plenty of people at WMD have NFI, and are happy with any ole driving game.

Easy, David. New company, new project, 2500 kms away from home (family + rig&wheels&pedals), and little time to do much more than post msgs at my favourite forums. And,. obviously, a rather rigorous (spartan) use of money.

You'd know better than me, but could a NTM remove what seems to be a persistent factor in every car?

Considering (sorry for repeating myself, but it is better this way) I have no way to prove or disprove the CPPP issue (Central Pivot Point Physics issue):

no. The STM is just a part (albeit vital) of the whole physics engine. Example would be TOCA 3, which features an enhanced tire model still "ruled" by CPPP - i.e., they added four contact patches to the whole physics, but still the cars display that behaviour we hardcore detest: the center of the car acting as an axis of rotation. Which means in TOCA 3, the input given by the tire forces is submerged by the CPPP.

It is very hard for me to understand how ISIMotor2/iRacing/LFS/NKP era simulations (imo, we're still living that Era) can work with CPPP based physics - useful, no doubt for NFS titles (prior to Shift 1/2) but a total fail in terms of physical realism of car behaviour.

I am not saying it doesn't have or that it is impossible, but I see no reason for that - moreover, it would be a full waste of resources and competence to work in a Brush-type tire model (Eero's), with all its tweaks, corrections, adaptations, "hacks" and have CPPP physics.

So, if pCARS had a CPPP physics, not even the STM would solve this unless the four contact patches were really vital to determine rotation/movement.

 

[Kazumi]

You'd know better than me, but could a NTM remove what seems to be a persistent factor in every car?

It could, but the same goes for the current physics assets, if they are not worse or worse implemented then what they had 2 years ago. It all depends on what the developers builds. Look at all ISI based sims and mods. Sometimes it's like there are different philosophies on how cars should handle. In terms of performance though there is only one philosophy in simulations - which is the performance and feel of real cars.

It is very hard for me to understand how ISIMotor2/iRacing/LFS/NKP era simulations (imo, we're still living that Era) can work with CPPP based physics - useful, no doubt for NFS titles (prior to Shift 1/2) but a total fail in terms of physical realism of car behaviour.

It's not that hard to remove in the Shifts but of course you have to look at all things, not just tire performance. There's a narrow area where things in sims really work perfectly. One of the things that LfS and NkP do very well even out of the box

I know you know that but in a broader sense there are no limits on what people can do with sim engines. If you like TOCA 3 you could probably modify ISI motor or NkP to behave in a similar fashion, with a bit more car feel (then TOCA) on one side, but also (unwanted?) side effects on the other.


Edit: I don't think the 2 should be compared though. For obvious reasons the feel of center point physics should be different then what TOCA or older racing games did. As David said it may change depending on track for example even with the same car performance, while in the former it is pretty consistent.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

- moreover, it would be a full waste of resources and competence to work in a Brush-type tire model (Eero's), with all its tweaks, corrections, adaptations, "hacks" and have CPPP physics.
.

It could be just marketing, ie, pronounce the use of a more advanced physics model but build Shift3 sans the horrid steering imprecision.
If they do end up with Shift3, it could quite easily be the best simcade racing game, but I can't endorse a CPPP model as a sim under any circumstance, and as I said, I'd be happy with GTR 2005 physics with pcars GFX etc.

And if the engine is governing each car, can a modder realistically re-write the physics engine itself?....

 

[David Ignjatovic]

Look at all ISI based sims and mods. Sometimes it's like there are different philosophies on how cars should handle. In terms of performance though there is only one philosophy in simulations - which is the performance and feel of real cars.
t.

One thing I find with the best cars is that they handle sharp change of direction well, and also live up to their spec sheet, ie, 440hp RWD etc should force some degree of control on throttle use, especially when the car isn't in maximum grip positions.

Also, with the best sim cars, if you go beyond the limit, you suffer, but with pcars, it can often be a matter of turning the wheel sharply and letting it bite, no understeer, just crazy grip levels and unsatisfying FFB that isn't totally connected to the conditions.

The good news from a Simbin owners POV, is there's so many cars, that a few misses here or there don't matter....I don't have rf1, but I might cave in and buy it at xmas time, then I can create my own 60gig mod folder hahahahaha.

 

[Peter]

SMS locked Eifelwald in the latest build for every body lower than Senior. It's another way to force upgrades.
I'm a full member and I'm really getting screwed.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

SMS locked Eifelwald in the latest build for every body lower than Senior. It's another way to force upgrades.
I'm a full member and I'm really getting screwed.

How much is senior...$1000?

 

[Peter]

€1000,- is Manager, €100,- is Senior.
That's a lot money for a game that I can only drive to the firtst corner.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

bah, 3 updates and it's worse than b207 or whenever the audi used to drive well.

 

[Chronus]

It could, but the same goes for the current physics assets, if they are not worse or worse implemented then what they had 2 years ago.

Assuming that as David says pCARS is CPPP based, no, it could not.

With CPPP physics (much easier to simulate that the complex interactions of 4 contact patches), the world turns around that single point set in the middle of the car. The car itself has only one axis of rotation because forces (collisions, tire forces, inertial forces) only serve to cause changes in the direction of movement (left, right), as opposed to forces causing many different things: weight transfer, traction loss or gain, axis of rotation changes (not just a simple rotation and a simple CoM motion). In that case (as with TOCA3), no matter the "tweaks" modders do or even a new tire model will force the physics engine to take into account tire forces.

It's not that hard to remove in the Shifts but of course you have to look at all things, not just tire performance. There's a narrow area where things in sims really work perfectly. One of the things that LfS and NkP do very well even out of the box

I wasn't referring to Shift 1 & 2.

IIRC, all pre-Shift titles had this CPPP physics. Shift generation NFS didn't or it could be dialed out because of wrong tire design.

I know you know that but in a broader sense there are no limits on what people can do with sim engines. If you like TOCA 3 you could probably modify ISI motor or NkP to behave in a similar fashion, with a bit more car feel (then TOCA) on one side, but also (unwanted?) side effects on the other.

You can dial in a certain type of tires that will result in pure ice skating near the limit of adhesion, which in turn mimics CPPP physics.

But you cannot dial out CPPP from TOCA3 and TOCA2. Not gonna happen.

To my knowledge, good physics engines and CPPP based physics engines are worlds apart in regards to complexity and possibilities. Due to that, I could never endorse a racing game with CPPP physics as a sim. Never.

I do have to look back to TOCA3 and TOCA2 to find titles that had this kind of physics - though others say the same applies to EA's F1 series prior to 2012.

 

[Kazumi]

Assuming that as David says pCARS is CPPP based, no, it could not.

True. That's why I said if their current engine is as good as 2 years ago (at the time of S2U development)

 

[Chronus]

Well, unless SMS abandoned all rights to hopes and claims on realism for their sims (it would be the beginning of the end for them if they did), I repeat, mate, no it could not. And no, this is not simple semantics differences.

CPPP based sims and all others (GTR/GTR2/rFactor/RACE07/NKP/XMR/Racer/iRacing/Shift x) are worlds apart. You can sort of "mimic" CPPP with those other sims, but you cannot transform (via modding or the introduction of a new Tyre Model) a CPPP based sim into a realistic racing simulation.

The claim by David and others is that pCARS is CPPP based. So, looking at pCARS from THAT perspective, the introduction of the STM will not change that.

I don't see SMS coding a physics engine with such primitive/arcade "mechanics", though.

-----

Some of you regard with some suspicion comments or reviews done by RL pro drivers about a sim they are somehow connected to. I feel the same.

I suggest to any WMD member to peruse the thread dedicated to the feedback by Ben Collins. This is not a typical appreciative or endorsement thread/feedback, Ben was very detailed in regards to what he saw could be improved or was not correct. He raised significant issues, tough questions, in technically detailed posts - this in my opinion validates their (SMS) position that what they're after is what I am also after.

My opinion, for sure, but one last time: from the technical point of view, all things considered (all the feedback, issues, explanations, technical details unveiled) pCARS being based on CPPP doesn't make any sense.

 

[Nepa]

SMS locked Eifelwald in the latest build for every body lower than Senior. It's another way to force upgrades.
I'm a full member and I'm really getting screwed.

They locked the new Eifelwald GP track not Nordschleife.

 

[Kazumi]

I don't think we are discussing the same issue. If they can remove any issue with the assets from 2 years ago, it automatically means they could remove any issues with newer assets in theory.

Not really much more I tried to say there!?

One thing I find with the best cars is that they handle sharp change of direction well, and also live up to their spec sheet, ie, 440hp RWD etc should force some degree of control on throttle use, especially when the car isn't in maximum grip positions.

That's they joy of RWD (and some AWD) cars! Must say I compared the Corvette Z06 road car in both rFactor 1 (you should really get it ) and S2U (modified) and on throttle they are actually quite similar. Just a bit more powerful then 440 hp. Of course in extreme situations there are differences but the oversteer / understeer situations are quite similar.

Of course on a pure race car you try to minimize these situations, and as you said that requires some level of precision to begin with, and you don't want too much under- or oversteer.

 

[Peter]

They locked the new Eifelwald GP track not Nordschleife.

But I payed for a full game.
First they locked content for juniors, now members and full members.
Next they lock Seniors.