Force feedback working properly in sims yet?

Hi, I've dabbled in auto sims for ages. However, I've been holding off for quite a while as they don't seem to be moving forward. The most disappointing aspect is the "force feedback" that is claimed to be available. A couple of years ago I bought a Logitech force-feedback wheel that was claimed to be really good, but it was clear that people who claimed it was good had never driven a real-life car. Problems with the logitech were that: (i) The amount of resistance given by the wheel was the same irrespective of the angle of the wheel (ie, you would get strong resistance just moving the wheel a few degrees from center, but in a car the wheel is very light as the center, and progressively loads up as you corner harder). (ii) The resistance was only to turning the wheel. Once the wheel was turned, it would give no resistance to be held at that angle - unlike a real car where the resistance is not to the turning of the wheel, but is a force that tries to center the wheel if it is not at the center. Are there any current force-feedback wheels that give a realistic experience?? The iRacing sim looks interesting, but you would have to say it will be an abject failure given that there is so much cynicism even from the diehards in this newsgroup - who should be raving about it over everyone else.

Joseph wrote: > Are there any current force-feedback wheels that give a realistic > experience?? I think a G25 is pretty good, it has two motors to overcome the issues you describe. Race07 and iRacing represent the best FFB sim IMHO > The iRacing sim looks interesting, but you would have to say it will be > an abject failure given that there is so much cynicism even from the > diehards in this newsgroup - who should be raving about it over everyone > else. This group has been too busy with people abusing each other for many to bother posting. FWIW here is my review so far: The sim: Physics: I believe iRacing represents a significant step forward. My personal view is that I haven�t had this feeling of sim racing moving a leap forward since GPL. NKPro is probably the closest but iRacing is far more polished and complete. Graphics: This is a far more subtle improvement. There is no jaw dropping like a GT5:P replay but it is highly detailed with excellent colour and lighting that looks very natural. The improvement is most noticeable going back to another sim which seems a bit rough in comparison. Some will be disappointed that it doesn�t represent a next generation improvement though for those with mega computers that could perhaps manage more. Sound: The sound is great, having said that some of the add ons for GTR2 Power & Glory for instance are equally as good. The use of surround sound for pinpointing where rival cars are is very useful FFB: This can be very personal. For me Race07 represented the best FFB and now iRacing raises the bar again. Be wary the Pontiac Solstice has power steering correctly simulated. For judging the quality of the feedback try the Legends car, better still for road racers buy the Skip Barber, that has amazing FFB! Netcode: Again it seems very good, I haven�t seen a single warping car and contact (I admit I have had some!) behaves as it should. The servers are based in the US and I am in the UK and the quality has been great. I would say on a par with LFS and rFactor although I haven�t seen any feedback on larger than 14 grids. Cars & Tracks: All beautifully modelled, the level of detail, suspension movement, track accuracy are all top rate. Although they are a little too clean! I would love to see some dirt build up throughout a race. Incidents, Licenses and iRatings: The most discussed aspect of the beta, first time users are vary wary of a system that records every incident including dropping wheels off the track. The first races can be a little strange with drivers desperate not to notch up an incident. Once it becomes apparent you are only penalized by the system for being a genuinely bad driver, the confidence increases and the racing really starts. Drivers are aware of the system and if they are having a bad race rather than let it slip further they tend to try to redeem themselves in the stewards eyes. The whole system has taken years of testing to perfect and it works very well in practice . It is easier to demonstrate by running a few races than to explain on paper. The more races you have so the iRating system developes and drivers of similar performance grouped together. The racing seems to get better and better as time progresses. Races and Championships iRacing is like a combination of league and pickup racing. There are organized championships although drivers can race when they like as many times as they like. For drivers used to structured leagues this can take some getting used to. Although password controlled league races will be supported in the future iRacing decides who you race with (although a buddy system will try and put you with friends if licenses and iRatings allow). The convenience is fantastic and pickup racing has never been like this. However, if a regular evening slot with a group of friends is an overriding requirement iRacing in its current form will not deliver that need. The track for the week�s racing is predetermined by iRacing championship for the series Stats Probably more than you will ever need and easy to use. Content Compared with a sim like Race07 or a moddable sim like rFactor the content is light. What you get is of an extremely high quality. If part of the enjoyment is trying out loads of cars on many tracks then prepare to be disappointed, the priority is on providing quality racing at this stage of development. Plus to get more content you will need to pay for it. Features The same applies to features. Things like changeable weather, drying lines, marbles build ups, driver changes, time of day transitions don�t exist yet. Even pitstops and full course cautions in the initial build are yet to be implemented. The initial product is centred around club racing which don�t need the latter features. They will come but early adopters looking for a full blown replacement for a Nascar sim will not find it here at launch, so be aware. The Web Interface Everything runs through a browser, it is all very intuitive and works extremely well. My Conclusion It is the best sim by a significant margin for me. The service formats all work well with the caveat you cannot run closed sessions for private groups. What people will need to decide is whether the content and feature lists are an issue for them and therefore whether iRacing is a worthwhile outlay at this version 1.0 stage. Needless to say all these features will come, but only you can decide what you are looking for in sim racing and what represents value. For me the sim makes it, I don't want to race anything else. Cheers Tony

On Jun 10, 4:08 pm, Joseph <[email hidden]> wrote: > Are there any current force-feedback wheels that give a realistic > experience?? Yes. It's come a long way. For the price I don't think the Logitech G25 can be beat. You didn't say what sims you used when you originally tried FFB. FF effects vary greatly from sim to sim. GPL was really good. If you were using a decent sim then it sounds like you didn't have your old FFB wheel set up properly. Even the first wheels available could give a somewhat realistic feeling far beyond what you describe. RealFeel and LeoFFB plugins for rFactor are good. The FFB experience in iRacing is even better. Part of what makes iRacing FFB so good is simply the complexity of the track surface. There is a lot of texture to the track surface that is relayed through the steering wheel. When I went back to rFactor or ARCA to compare, there really was no comparison. The track surfaces in those sims are mostly just perfectly smooth planes. The FFB experience while driving is comparitively unengaging as should be expected. -- Pat Dotson UltraForce Simulations LLC http://ultraforcesim.com

Most of what you would call 'pro' SimRacers don't use FF wheels. -Larry "Joseph" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:484edf4f$0$4253$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (25 lines)

> Hi, > > I've dabbled in auto sims for ages. However, I've been holding off for > quite a while as they don't seem to be moving forward. The most > disappointing aspect is the "force feedback" that is claimed to be > available. A couple of years ago I bought a Logitech force-feedback wheel > that was claimed to be really good, but it was clear that people who > claimed it was good had never driven a real-life car. > > Problems with the logitech were that: > (i) The amount of resistance given by the wheel was the same irrespective > of the angle of the wheel (ie, you would get strong resistance just moving > the wheel a few degrees from center, but in a car the wheel is very light > as the center, and progressively loads up as you corner harder). > (ii) The resistance was only to turning the wheel. Once the wheel was > turned, it would give no resistance to be held at that angle - unlike a > real car where the resistance is not to the turning of the wheel, but is a > force that tries to center the wheel if it is not at the center. > > Are there any current force-feedback wheels that give a realistic > experience?? > > The iRacing sim looks interesting, but you would have to say it will be an > abject failure given that there is so much cynicism even from the diehards > in this newsgroup - who should be raving about it over everyone else.

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:XtC3k.250$[email hidden]... > Most of what you would call 'pro' SimRacers don't use FF wheels. > ...or cockpit view, some of them.

Quoted text (32 lines)

> -Larry > > "Joseph" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:484edf4f$0$4253$[email hidden]... >> Hi, >> >> I've dabbled in auto sims for ages. However, I've been holding off for >> quite a while as they don't seem to be moving forward. The most >> disappointing aspect is the "force feedback" that is claimed to be >> available. A couple of years ago I bought a Logitech force-feedback wheel >> that was claimed to be really good, but it was clear that people who >> claimed it was good had never driven a real-life car. >> >> Problems with the logitech were that: >> (i) The amount of resistance given by the wheel was the same irrespective >> of the angle of the wheel (ie, you would get strong resistance just >> moving the wheel a few degrees from center, but in a car the wheel is >> very light as the center, and progressively loads up as you corner >> harder). >> (ii) The resistance was only to turning the wheel. Once the wheel was >> turned, it would give no resistance to be held at that angle - unlike a >> real car where the resistance is not to the turning of the wheel, but is >> a force that tries to center the wheel if it is not at the center. >> >> Are there any current force-feedback wheels that give a realistic >> experience?? >> >> The iRacing sim looks interesting, but you would have to say it will be >> an abject failure given that there is so much cynicism even from the >> diehards in this newsgroup - who should be raving about it over everyone >> else. >

Yea. IMO a non-FFB wheel is as much a driving aid as a non-cockpit view. <ducks> -- Pat Dotson UltraForce Simulations LLC http://ultraforcesim.com On Jun 10, 6:55 pm, "Norman Ball" <[email hidden]> wrote: > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:XtC3k.250$[email hidden]... > > > Most of what you would call 'pro' SimRacers don't use FF wheels. > > ...or cockpit view, some of them.

Agree Pat No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - near instant opposite lock - etc Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view like" cheat. Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some advantage. --=-- [email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... Yea. IMO a non-FFB wheel is as much a driving aid as a non-cockpit view. <ducks> -- Pat Dotson UltraForce Simulations LLC http://ultraforcesim.com On Jun 10, 6:55 pm, "Norman Ball" <[email hidden]> wrote: > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:XtC3k.250$[email hidden]... > > > Most of what you would call 'pro' SimRacers don't use FF wheels. > > ...or cockpit view, some of them.

<==-==>:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Agree Pat > > No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - near > instant opposite lock - etc > > Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view like" > cheat. > Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some advantage.

Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is FAKE (unlike cockpit view). Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained this in r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich

[email hidden] wrote: > Yea. IMO a non-FFB wheel is as much a driving aid as a non-cockpit > view. > > <ducks> and so you should! I think it depends how you learn sim racing. For those that learnt for many years before FFB the seat of the pants feel is developed from what we see and hear. FFB provides that input to people who learn with it, they can sense what the car is doing through the wheel. For the non FFB learners the variable wheel movements just get in the way and are a distraction. For me the only ones that seem in tune with "feedback" I see and hear are Race07 and iRacing. Reelfeel just never seemed to work for me almost as if the steerin feel and visuals were out of synch in my head. iRacing is the best combination of visual, sound and FFB feel for me personally, they seem to complement each other perfectly, those bought up on FFB wheels from birth may think differently. I have run both FFB and non FFB with no change in lap times, it just feels a lot more immersive with it on. For the fisrt time FFB doesn't get in the way for me. Cheers Tony

"Mario Petrinovich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:g2pivf$gjd$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> <==-==>: >> Agree Pat >> >> No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - near >> instant opposite lock - etc >> >> Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view like" >> cheat. >> Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some advantage. > > Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is FAKE > (unlike cockpit view). > Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained this in > r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich

So one person's view persuaded you and we should all agree?

"Tony R" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:dGY3k.116977$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> [email hidden] wrote: >> Yea. IMO a non-FFB wheel is as much a driving aid as a non-cockpit >> view. >> >> <ducks> > > and so you should! > > I think it depends how you learn sim racing. For those that learnt for > many years before FFB the seat of the pants feel is developed from what we > see and hear. > > FFB provides that input to people who learn with it, they can sense what > the car is doing through the wheel. > > For the non FFB learners the variable wheel movements just get in the way > and are a distraction.

And that's the same for everyone one, is it?

Quoted text (14 lines)

> For me the only ones that seem in tune with "feedback" I see and hear are > Race07 and iRacing. Reelfeel just never seemed to work for me almost as if > the steerin feel and visuals were out of synch in my head. > > iRacing is the best combination of visual, sound and FFB feel for me > personally, they seem to complement each other perfectly, those bought up > on FFB wheels from birth may think differently. > > I have run both FFB and non FFB with no change in lap times, it just feels > a lot more immersive with it on. For the fisrt time FFB doesn't get in the > way for me. > > Cheers > Tony

Norman Ball:

Quoted text (17 lines)

>Mario Petrinovich: >> <==-==>: >>> Agree Pat >>> >>> No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - near >>> instant opposite lock - etc >>> >>> Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view like" >>> cheat. >>> Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some advantage. >> >> Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is FAKE >> (unlike cockpit view). >> Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained this >> in r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich > > So one person's view persuaded you and we should all agree?

Yes, : ). Ffb has latency, which distructs "the reality" in sims. This discussion took place around the New Year 2003/4. The name of discussion is "What would be better", and it started Dec.28.2003. 8:30pm (it could be that this is european time). Excellent discussion. -- Mario Petrinovich

"Mario Petrinovich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:g2qk6u$9ra$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (25 lines)

> Norman Ball: >>Mario Petrinovich: >>> <==-==>: >>>> Agree Pat >>>> >>>> No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - near >>>> instant opposite lock - etc >>>> >>>> Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view like" >>>> cheat. >>>> Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some advantage. >>> >>> Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is FAKE >>> (unlike cockpit view). >>> Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained this >>> in r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich >> >> So one person's view persuaded you and we should all agree? > > Yes, : ). Ffb has latency, which distructs "the reality" in sims. > This discussion took place around the New Year 2003/4. The name of > discussion is "What would be better", and it started Dec.28.2003. 8:30pm > (it > could be that this is european time). Excellent discussion. > -- Mario Petrinovich

Joysticks in general have latency. So what do you suggest, the keyboard? Anyway, technology has moved and you might want to too.

On Jun 11, 6:18 pm, "Mario Petrinovich" <[email hidden]> wrote: >         Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is FAKE There is nothing realistic about a spring loaded wheel. There is no vehicle that gives zero feedback the way that a spring loaded wheel. If you don't believe me, try this in any car - even one with power steering. While the car is at a stop turn the steering wheel to full lock. Now apply throttle so the car starts moving forward. What does the steering wheel do? As for FFB, it can be good or bad, realistic or unrealisic. It depends on the application of the technology. There can be no argument that good FFB is more realistic than no FFB. >         Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained this in > r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich Sure they did. Most likely someone from ECCI, TSW, or Hyperstim. They have no axe to grind, do they? :) -- Pat Dotson

On Jun 11, 6:51 pm, Tony R <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> [email hidden] wrote: > > Yea.  IMO a non-FFB wheel is as much a driving aid as a non-cockpit > > view. > > > <ducks> > > and so you should! > > I think it depends how you learn sim racing. For those that learnt for > many years before FFB the seat of the pants feel is developed from what > we see and hear.

I drove sims for eight years before that first ACT Labs FFB wheel showed up on my door step. Indy 500, WC, ICR1, GP2, ICR2, N1, N2... I had plenty of non-FFB experience in the old days. To me there was no going back, even in 1998. FFB is so much better now it's not even funny. Of course that's just my opinion. I wouldn't criticize someone using a spring loaded wheel. In a lot of ways I think FFB is an advantage over non-FFB. For flat-out hotlapping I think non-FFB is probably the best way to go. As for me, I have zero interest in driving without FFB now. -- Pat Dotson

Mario Petrinovich wrote:

Quoted text (22 lines)

> Norman Ball: >> Mario Petrinovich: >>> <==-==>: >>>> Agree Pat >>>> >>>> No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - near >>>> instant opposite lock - etc >>>> >>>> Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view like" >>>> cheat. >>>> Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some advantage. >>> Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is FAKE >>> (unlike cockpit view). >>> Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained this >>> in r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich >> So one person's view persuaded you and we should all agree? > > Yes, : ). Ffb has latency, which distructs "the reality" in sims. > This discussion took place around the New Year 2003/4. The name of > discussion is "What would be better", and it started Dec.28.2003. 8:30pm (it > could be that this is european time). Excellent discussion. > -- Mario Petrinovich

As soon as someone invents a car with a steering wheel that's completely disconnected from what's happening to the car, I'll stop using FFB. Race-by-wire, YIKES!

Norman Ball:

Quoted text (27 lines)

>Mario Petrinovich: >> Norman Ball: >>>Mario Petrinovich: >>>> <==-==>: >>>>> Agree Pat >>>>> >>>>> No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - near >>>>> instant opposite lock - etc >>>>> >>>>> Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view >>>>> like" cheat. >>>>> Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some advantage. >>>> >>>> Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is >>>> FAKE (unlike cockpit view). >>>> Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained this >>>> in r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich >>> >>> So one person's view persuaded you and we should all agree? >> >> Yes, : ). Ffb has latency, which distructs "the reality" in sims. >> This discussion took place around the New Year 2003/4. The name of >> discussion is "What would be better", and it started Dec.28.2003. 8:30pm >> (it could be that this is european time). Excellent discussion. > > Joysticks in general have latency. So what do you suggest, the keyboard? > Anyway, technology has moved and you might want to too.

Sorry Norman, I didn't have free time to answer. This is also answer to Pat and Ronald. First Norman, I was talking about FFB latency (so, it doesn't matter if it is a joystick or wheel ffb). Ffb latency is much greater than brain latency, this is the problem, and non'ffb joystick or wheel latency is lower than brain latency. Now, the answer to you all, please take a look at this discussion: http://tinyurl.com/5q38td Especially the posts by Tom Pabst. Tom isn't associated to companies mentioned by Pat. But he is heavily into simulation bussines by owning the company that runs realistic simulations at Infineon raceway (if I understood that correctly). Here is the link for it: http://www.pabst-racing.com/ He is interested in reality in simulation (of course). Here it is the most interesting part of what Tom said about ffb: "G-Force is another issue that is mostly over-rated by non race car driving sim racers. Yes, there is some "back of the seat" feel....that is provided by g-force in a real race car that is missing in a sim. But it is not something that is tough for the brain to deal with when its missing from the simulation experience. What I mean is, it doesn't cause our brains to "discount" the whole experience as unrealistic. Here's why (and this comes primarily from some research that NASA did early on in training the astronauts in simulators): Our brains are very good a creating a simulated environment for us.....when we do tasks in a simulator (fly, race, etc.). Let's say there are 10 elements, or "inputs" of data.....that we receive when racing in a real race car. 10 categories of data/input to our brains, like: Sight (visuals), sound, smell, g-force, vibration, etc. If you put the brain into a simulated environment that does 5 to 7 of those really well (does them well enough to be believable by our brain as real), then the brain helps us out and starts filling in the missing items! However, if we put our brain into a simulator environment that does 5 to 7 things really well, but it does the 8th thing really badly (like g-forces that are not timed properly to the visual event...and I mean the timing has to be dead on perfect....not off by a milli-second because our brains can tell when it is), then the brain will actually discount and discard all the really good things and say...."Nope, this whole experience is not realistic!" This is why we don't use force feedback controllers. They are fun, but the timing is off....in even the best of them. This "timing" is not a function of the FF controller, but more of the sim software that triggers the FF events. I would love to use it.....show me a sim program that does the timing right....and we'll start using them. In the meantime, we use "sound generated vibration" to accomplish something of the same thing." IOW, ffb is destructive to sense of reality, while spring loaded wheel is less destructive. There is a reason why top companies associated with car racing simulation doesn't use ffb, and the reason is the destructivness this brings to reality. I didn't try the newest games, though (I just came back to simulations to follow the iRacing progress, : )), but I doubt that something has changed in that thing. -- Mario Petrinovich

In article <g2ved2$27r$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... <snipped>

Quoted text (10 lines)

> This is why we don't use force feedback controllers. They are fun, but the > timing is off....in even the best of them. This "timing" is not a function > of the FF controller, but more of the sim software that triggers the FF > events. I would love to use it.....show me a sim program that does the > timing right....and we'll start using them. In the meantime, we use "sound > generated vibration" to accomplish something of the same thing." > IOW, ffb is destructive to sense of reality, while spring loaded > wheel is less destructive. There is a reason why top companies associated > with car racing simulation doesn't use ffb, and the reason is the > destructivness this brings to reality.

But what's the difference between the software having to create a "sound generated vibration" and being used to create FFB? Surely both are going to have some form of latency. And according to his argument, anything that is off, even by a millisecond, is going to upset our feeling of realism. -- Pete Ives Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email

No latency with the G25 in rFactor, from what I can tell. I can actually feel the grip level decreasing as I reach the limit. Turn the FFB off, and the whole experience feel dead to me. Things have moved on since 2003. My Master also agrees. "Mario Petrinovich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:g2ved2$27r$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (99 lines)

> Norman Ball: >>Mario Petrinovich: >>> Norman Ball: >>>>Mario Petrinovich: >>>>> <==-==>: >>>>>> Agree Pat >>>>>> >>>>>> No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - >>>>>> near >>>>>> instant opposite lock - etc >>>>>> >>>>>> Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view >>>>>> like" cheat. >>>>>> Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some advantage. >>>>> >>>>> Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is >>>>> FAKE (unlike cockpit view). >>>>> Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained >>>>> this >>>>> in r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich >>>> >>>> So one person's view persuaded you and we should all agree? >>> >>> Yes, : ). Ffb has latency, which distructs "the reality" in sims. >>> This discussion took place around the New Year 2003/4. The name >>> of >>> discussion is "What would be better", and it started Dec.28.2003. 8:30pm >>> (it could be that this is european time). Excellent discussion. >> >> Joysticks in general have latency. So what do you suggest, the keyboard? >> Anyway, technology has moved and you might want to too. > > Sorry Norman, I didn't have free time to answer. This is also > answer > to Pat and Ronald. > First Norman, I was talking about FFB latency (so, it doesn't > matter > if it is a joystick or wheel ffb). Ffb latency is much greater than brain > latency, this is the problem, and non'ffb joystick or wheel latency is > lower > than brain latency. > Now, the answer to you all, please take a look at this discussion: > http://tinyurl.com/5q38td > Especially the posts by Tom Pabst. Tom isn't associated to > companies > mentioned by Pat. But he is heavily into simulation bussines by owning the > company that runs realistic simulations at Infineon raceway (if I > understood > that correctly). Here is the link for it: > http://www.pabst-racing.com/ > He is interested in reality in simulation (of course). > Here it is the most interesting part of what Tom said about ffb: > "G-Force is another issue that is mostly over-rated by non race car > driving sim racers. Yes, there is some "back of the seat" feel....that is > provided by g-force in a real race car that is missing in a sim. But it > is not something that is tough for the brain to deal with when its missing > from the simulation experience. What I mean is, it doesn't cause our > brains to "discount" the whole experience as unrealistic. Here's why (and > this comes primarily from some research that NASA did early on in training > the astronauts in simulators): > Our brains are very good a creating a simulated environment for > us.....when > we do tasks in a simulator (fly, race, etc.). Let's say there are 10 > elements, or "inputs" of data.....that we receive when racing in a real > race > car. 10 categories of data/input to our brains, like: Sight (visuals), > sound, smell, g-force, vibration, etc. If you put the brain into a > simulated environment that does 5 to 7 of those really well (does them > well > enough to be believable by our brain as real), then the brain helps us out > and starts filling in the missing items! However, if we put our brain > into > a simulator environment that does 5 to 7 things really well, but it does > the > 8th thing really badly (like g-forces that are not timed properly to the > visual event...and I mean the timing has to be dead on perfect....not off > by > a milli-second because our brains can tell when it is), then the brain > will > actually discount and discard all the really good things and say...."Nope, > this whole experience is not realistic!" > This is why we don't use force feedback controllers. They are fun, but > the > timing is off....in even the best of them. This "timing" is not a > function > of the FF controller, but more of the sim software that triggers the FF > events. I would love to use it.....show me a sim program that does the > timing right....and we'll start using them. In the meantime, we use > "sound > generated vibration" to accomplish something of the same thing." > IOW, ffb is destructive to sense of reality, while spring loaded > wheel is less destructive. There is a reason why top companies associated > with car racing simulation doesn't use ffb, and the reason is the > destructivness this brings to reality. > I didn't try the newest games, though (I just came back to > simulations to follow the iRacing progress, : )), but I doubt that > something > has changed in that thing. -- Mario Petrinovich >

Hi Mario That article is circa 2003 -- I might point out ;) Times change - have you noticed any improvements in computer hardware (cpu, mem, fsb, etc.) since 2003? There have been improvements in performance and timing. Software development has also improved a bit <wink> It may be time to revisit this issue.... afterall.... my racing wheel doesn't have bungie-cord in it anymore! 0-0-0-0-0 -==- "Mario Petrinovich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:g2ved2$27r$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (99 lines)

> Norman Ball: >>Mario Petrinovich: >>> Norman Ball: >>>>Mario Petrinovich: >>>>> <==-==>: >>>>>> Agree Pat >>>>>> >>>>>> No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - >>>>>> near >>>>>> instant opposite lock - etc >>>>>> >>>>>> Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view >>>>>> like" cheat. >>>>>> Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some advantage. >>>>> >>>>> Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is >>>>> FAKE (unlike cockpit view). >>>>> Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained >>>>> this >>>>> in r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich >>>> >>>> So one person's view persuaded you and we should all agree? >>> >>> Yes, : ). Ffb has latency, which distructs "the reality" in sims. >>> This discussion took place around the New Year 2003/4. The name >>> of >>> discussion is "What would be better", and it started Dec.28.2003. 8:30pm >>> (it could be that this is european time). Excellent discussion. >> >> Joysticks in general have latency. So what do you suggest, the keyboard? >> Anyway, technology has moved and you might want to too. > > Sorry Norman, I didn't have free time to answer. This is also > answer > to Pat and Ronald. > First Norman, I was talking about FFB latency (so, it doesn't > matter > if it is a joystick or wheel ffb). Ffb latency is much greater than brain > latency, this is the problem, and non'ffb joystick or wheel latency is > lower > than brain latency. > Now, the answer to you all, please take a look at this discussion: > http://tinyurl.com/5q38td > Especially the posts by Tom Pabst. Tom isn't associated to > companies > mentioned by Pat. But he is heavily into simulation bussines by owning the > company that runs realistic simulations at Infineon raceway (if I > understood > that correctly). Here is the link for it: > http://www.pabst-racing.com/ > He is interested in reality in simulation (of course). > Here it is the most interesting part of what Tom said about ffb: > "G-Force is another issue that is mostly over-rated by non race car > driving sim racers. Yes, there is some "back of the seat" feel....that is > provided by g-force in a real race car that is missing in a sim. But it > is not something that is tough for the brain to deal with when its missing > from the simulation experience. What I mean is, it doesn't cause our > brains to "discount" the whole experience as unrealistic. Here's why (and > this comes primarily from some research that NASA did early on in training > the astronauts in simulators): > Our brains are very good a creating a simulated environment for > us.....when > we do tasks in a simulator (fly, race, etc.). Let's say there are 10 > elements, or "inputs" of data.....that we receive when racing in a real > race > car. 10 categories of data/input to our brains, like: Sight (visuals), > sound, smell, g-force, vibration, etc. If you put the brain into a > simulated environment that does 5 to 7 of those really well (does them > well > enough to be believable by our brain as real), then the brain helps us out > and starts filling in the missing items! However, if we put our brain > into > a simulator environment that does 5 to 7 things really well, but it does > the > 8th thing really badly (like g-forces that are not timed properly to the > visual event...and I mean the timing has to be dead on perfect....not off > by > a milli-second because our brains can tell when it is), then the brain > will > actually discount and discard all the really good things and say...."Nope, > this whole experience is not realistic!" > This is why we don't use force feedback controllers. They are fun, but > the > timing is off....in even the best of them. This "timing" is not a > function > of the FF controller, but more of the sim software that triggers the FF > events. I would love to use it.....show me a sim program that does the > timing right....and we'll start using them. In the meantime, we use > "sound > generated vibration" to accomplish something of the same thing." > IOW, ffb is destructive to sense of reality, while spring loaded > wheel is less destructive. There is a reason why top companies associated > with car racing simulation doesn't use ffb, and the reason is the > destructivness this brings to reality. > I didn't try the newest games, though (I just came back to > simulations to follow the iRacing progress, : )), but I doubt that > something > has changed in that thing. -- Mario Petrinovich >

And check out Pabst's website: http://www.pabst-racing.com/forums.shtml Still under construction! "0-0-0-0-0" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:0XN4k.5298$kx.553@pd7urf3no...

Quoted text (124 lines)

> Hi Mario > > That article is circa 2003 -- I might point out ;) > > Times change - have you noticed any improvements in computer hardware > (cpu, mem, fsb, etc.) since 2003? There have been improvements in > performance and timing. Software development has also improved a bit > <wink> > > It may be time to revisit this issue.... afterall.... my racing wheel > doesn't have bungie-cord in it anymore! > > 0-0-0-0-0 > -==- > > "Mario Petrinovich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:g2ved2$27r$[email hidden]... >> Norman Ball: >>>Mario Petrinovich: >>>> Norman Ball: >>>>>Mario Petrinovich: >>>>>> <==-==>: >>>>>>> Agree Pat >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No forces to deal with - light loose steering - no kerb effects - >>>>>>> near >>>>>>> instant opposite lock - etc >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yup - non-ffb is actually faster and should be considered a "view >>>>>>> like" cheat. >>>>>>> Not to say an "overwhelming" advantage, but certainly some >>>>>>> advantage. >>>>>> >>>>>> Non-ffb isn't a cheat. Non-ffb is MORE real than ffb. Ffb is >>>>>> FAKE (unlike cockpit view). >>>>>> Somebody who is in simulation bussines excelently explained >>>>>> this >>>>>> in r.a.s. (to me) some time ago. -- Mario Petrinovich >>>>> >>>>> So one person's view persuaded you and we should all agree? >>>> >>>> Yes, : ). Ffb has latency, which distructs "the reality" in >>>> sims. >>>> This discussion took place around the New Year 2003/4. The name >>>> of >>>> discussion is "What would be better", and it started Dec.28.2003. >>>> 8:30pm >>>> (it could be that this is european time). Excellent discussion. >>> >>> Joysticks in general have latency. So what do you suggest, the keyboard? >>> Anyway, technology has moved and you might want to too. >> >> Sorry Norman, I didn't have free time to answer. This is also >> answer >> to Pat and Ronald. >> First Norman, I was talking about FFB latency (so, it doesn't >> matter >> if it is a joystick or wheel ffb). Ffb latency is much greater than brain >> latency, this is the problem, and non'ffb joystick or wheel latency is >> lower >> than brain latency. >> Now, the answer to you all, please take a look at this discussion: >> http://tinyurl.com/5q38td >> Especially the posts by Tom Pabst. Tom isn't associated to >> companies >> mentioned by Pat. But he is heavily into simulation bussines by owning >> the >> company that runs realistic simulations at Infineon raceway (if I >> understood >> that correctly). Here is the link for it: >> http://www.pabst-racing.com/ >> He is interested in reality in simulation (of course). >> Here it is the most interesting part of what Tom said about ffb: >> "G-Force is another issue that is mostly over-rated by non race >> car >> driving sim racers. Yes, there is some "back of the seat" feel....that >> is provided by g-force in a real race car that is missing in a sim. But >> it is not something that is tough for the brain to deal with when its >> missing from the simulation experience. What I mean is, it doesn't cause >> our brains to "discount" the whole experience as unrealistic. Here's why >> (and this comes primarily from some research that NASA did early on in >> training the astronauts in simulators): >> Our brains are very good a creating a simulated environment for >> us.....when >> we do tasks in a simulator (fly, race, etc.). Let's say there are 10 >> elements, or "inputs" of data.....that we receive when racing in a real >> race >> car. 10 categories of data/input to our brains, like: Sight (visuals), >> sound, smell, g-force, vibration, etc. If you put the brain into a >> simulated environment that does 5 to 7 of those really well (does them >> well >> enough to be believable by our brain as real), then the brain helps us >> out >> and starts filling in the missing items! However, if we put our brain >> into >> a simulator environment that does 5 to 7 things really well, but it does >> the >> 8th thing really badly (like g-forces that are not timed properly to the >> visual event...and I mean the timing has to be dead on perfect....not off >> by >> a milli-second because our brains can tell when it is), then the brain >> will >> actually discount and discard all the really good things and >> say...."Nope, >> this whole experience is not realistic!" >> This is why we don't use force feedback controllers. They are fun, but >> the >> timing is off....in even the best of them. This "timing" is not a >> function >> of the FF controller, but more of the sim software that triggers the FF >> events. I would love to use it.....show me a sim program that does the >> timing right....and we'll start using them. In the meantime, we use >> "sound >> generated vibration" to accomplish something of the same thing." >> IOW, ffb is destructive to sense of reality, while spring loaded >> wheel is less destructive. There is a reason why top companies associated >> with car racing simulation doesn't use ffb, and the reason is the >> destructivness this brings to reality. >> I didn't try the newest games, though (I just came back to >> simulations to follow the iRacing progress, : )), but I doubt that >> something >> has changed in that thing. -- Mario Petrinovich >> >

Peter:

Quoted text (20 lines)

>[email hidden]: >> This is why we don't use force feedback controllers. They are fun, but >> the >> timing is off....in even the best of them. This "timing" is not a >> function >> of the FF controller, but more of the sim software that triggers the FF >> events. I would love to use it.....show me a sim program that does the >> timing right....and we'll start using them. In the meantime, we use >> "sound >> generated vibration" to accomplish something of the same thing." >> IOW, ffb is destructive to sense of reality, while spring loaded >> wheel is less destructive. There is a reason why top companies associated >> with car racing simulation doesn't use ffb, and the reason is the >> destructivness this brings to reality. > > But what's the difference between the software having to create a "sound > generated vibration" and being used to create FFB? Surely both are > going to have some form of latency. And according to his argument, > anything that is off, even by a millisecond, is going to upset our > feeling of realism.

It is the sound of engine, you not use this to judge grip level. -- Mario Petrinovich

David Fisher's Left Testicle: > No latency with the G25 in rFactor, from what I can tell. I can actually > feel the grip level decreasing as I reach the limit. Turn the FFB off, and > the whole experience feel dead to me. > > Things have moved on since 2003. You could feel the level of grip back in 2003, also. But at the *wrong* TIME. Time is the problem, not the feel of grip. Moving from ffb to non-ffb worked for me beautifully. I have BETTER feeling of grip *without* ffb. I JUDGE it by visual clues. I felt grip with ffb, but it was all messed up, this grip that I felt wasn't real, this is the problem. The latency comes from motor inside wheel (AFAIK). I mean, don't today's games have the latency setting? I would say that they have. -- Mario Petrinovich

David Fisher's Left Testicle: > And check out Pabst's website: http://www.pabst-racing.com/forums.shtml > > Still under construction! Yes. I hope that it isn't like that back from 2003, ; ).

Quoted text (12 lines)

>0-0-0-0-0: >> That article is circa 2003 -- I might point out ;) >> >> Times change - have you noticed any improvements in computer hardware >> (cpu, mem, fsb, etc.) since 2003? There have been improvements in >> performance and timing. Software development has also improved a bit >> <wink> >> >> It may be time to revisit this issue.... afterall.... my racing wheel >> doesn't have bungie-cord in it anymore! >> >> 0-0-0-0-0

Hm, I believe that I had 2.4Mhz processor back then. What is the frequency of today's processors, ; )? Graphic cards improved a lot, though. And yes, today wheels have three pedals. Now, THAT is an improvement, not two, but three pedals, yes! : ). I'll try to revisit the issue, never-the-less, just for you guys. As soon as Kaemmer is back in bussines, : ). -- Mario Petrinovich

"Mario Petrinovich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:g30oni$q5j$[email hidden]... > David Fisher's Left Testicle: >> And check out Pabst's website: http://www.pabst-racing.com/forums.shtml >> >> Still under construction! > > Yes. I hope that it isn't like that back from 2003, ; ). Yes, it's been like that since about 2003.

"Mario Petrinovich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:g30onh$q5j$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> David Fisher's Left Testicle: >> No latency with the G25 in rFactor, from what I can tell. I can actually >> feel the grip level decreasing as I reach the limit. Turn the FFB off, >> and >> the whole experience feel dead to me. >> >> Things have moved on since 2003. > > You could feel the level of grip back in 2003, also. But at the > *wrong* TIME. Time is the problem, not the feel of grip. Moving from ffb > to > non-ffb worked for me beautifully. I have BETTER feeling of grip *without* > ffb. I JUDGE it by visual clues. I felt grip with ffb, but it was all > messed > up, this grip that I felt wasn't real, this is the problem. > The latency comes from motor inside wheel (AFAIK). I mean, don't > today's games have the latency setting? I would say that they have. > -- Mario Petrinovich

Sounds like you didn't have you wheel setup properly. If there really was much of a latency issue, it was bearly noticeable back then.

David Fisher's Left Testicle:

Quoted text (21 lines)

>Mario Petrinovich: >> David Fisher's Left Testicle: >>> No latency with the G25 in rFactor, from what I can tell. I can actually >>> feel the grip level decreasing as I reach the limit. Turn the FFB off, >>> and the whole experience feel dead to me. >>> >>> Things have moved on since 2003. >> >> You could feel the level of grip back in 2003, also. But at the >> *wrong* TIME. Time is the problem, not the feel of grip. Moving from ffb >> to >> non-ffb worked for me beautifully. I have BETTER feeling of grip >> *without* >> ffb. I JUDGE it by visual clues. I felt grip with ffb, but it was all >> messed >> up, this grip that I felt wasn't real, this is the problem. >> The latency comes from motor inside wheel (AFAIK). I mean, don't >> today's games have the latency setting? I would say that they have. > > Sounds like you didn't have you wheel setup properly. If there really was > much of a latency issue, it was bearly noticeable back then.

It could be. When iRacing starts, I'll come here to see if somebody can help me to setup it properly, : ). -- Mario Petrinovich

David Fisher's Left Testicle wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> No latency with the G25 in rFactor, from what I can tell. I can actually > feel the grip level decreasing as I reach the limit. Turn the FFB off, > and the whole experience feel dead to me. > > Things have moved on since 2003. > > My Master also agrees. > > >

As the other guy was trying to explain, it is suggested that it is the latency that is the problem - not that grip level does not decrease as you reach the limit. It is a valid concern. In a car or a non-force feedback wheel, turning the wheel immediately results in resistance (due to either the tyre acting on the road, or stretching a bungie cord). On the other hand, in force feedback, the wheel is turned, the sensor in the wheel detects this, sends this message to the computer, the computer processes the information and determines what the correct load should be, sends the message back to the wheel, and then the motor in the wheel needs to generate that force. I'm not familiar with how the motors in the force feedback wheels work, but typically there is a lag from when current is applied in a motor to when it generates the appropriate level of force. Even if computers have improved in speed, this whole train of communication and potential lag in generating force still exists. My concern is that it seems as though those who advocate the use of force feedback wheels do not know what the forces in a real race car feels like - so they don't know what is good or bad, or how it should feel. Further, given that they have often invested a lot of money in something like a G25, they are unlikely to then say it is rubbish (well known psychological phenomenon that when someone makes a major investment in something, they are unable to critically evaluate it and rather delude themselves into thinking how wonderful it is). I'm not surprised by the claims that many serious racers do not use force feedback as it is unrealistic. Does anyone who is a real racer think that force feedback is worthwhile?

"Joseph" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:485420a3$0$7065$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> David Fisher's Left Testicle wrote: >> No latency with the G25 in rFactor, from what I can tell. I can actually >> feel the grip level decreasing as I reach the limit. Turn the FFB off, >> and the whole experience feel dead to me. >> >> Things have moved on since 2003. >> >> My Master also agrees. >> >> >> > > As the other guy was trying to explain, it is suggested that it is the > latency that is the problem - not that grip level does not decrease as you > reach the limit. > > It is a valid concern. In a car or a non-force feedback wheel, turning the > wheel immediately results in resistance (due to either the tyre acting on > the road, or stretching a bungie cord). On the other hand, in force > feedback, the wheel is turned, the sensor in the wheel detects this, sends > this message to the computer, the computer processes the information and > determines what the correct load should be, sends the message back to the > wheel, and then the motor in the wheel needs to generate that force. I'm > not familiar with how the motors in the force feedback wheels work, but > typically there is a lag from when current is applied in a motor to when > it generates the appropriate level of force. Even if computers have > improved in speed, this whole train of communication and potential lag in > generating force still exists. >

Well there is lag in the time it takes light to travel any distance - could you measure that time? Would you be sensitive in to the difference in time for light to travel 200m as opposed to 2000m. 10 x fuck all = fuck all!

Quoted text (12 lines)

> My concern is that it seems as though those who advocate the use of force > feedback wheels do not know what the forces in a real race car feels > like - so they don't know what is good or bad, or how it should feel. > Further, given that they have often invested a lot of money in something > like a G25, they are unlikely to then say it is rubbish (well known > psychological phenomenon that when someone makes a major investment in > something, they are unable to critically evaluate it and rather delude > themselves into thinking how wonderful it is). > > I'm not surprised by the claims that many serious racers do not use force > feedback as it is unrealistic. Does anyone who is a real racer think that > force feedback is worthwhile?

I can tell you that Greg Stewart used FF way back............remember him saying the main difference was he was more consistent with FF which makes perfect sense since you have extra "feedback" from the sim! I remember when I first got FF - it took a few weeks to get out of the old habbits - hated it at first. But after getting accustomed to it the feel of a sim without it is very dead and feels completely wrong. I too found I was more consistent with FF and perhaps a tad quicker - it just makes sims more of a proper sim ultimately. If anyone is concerned about any bad habbits that one may take from a sim into a ral race car then I can't see how it would be any worse than using a crude non FF wheel.

Completely agree, Byron. I'm not seeing any latency issues with my G25. Didn't see any with the Momo Force either, or the Wingman Formula Force. If there were any, it would be like watching a movie with the sound track out of sync. You would think none of us had driven a fast car at a track day the way some people go on! "Byron Forbes" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4854b076$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (64 lines)

> > "Joseph" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:485420a3$0$7065$[email hidden]... >> David Fisher's Left Testicle wrote: >>> No latency with the G25 in rFactor, from what I can tell. I can actually >>> feel the grip level decreasing as I reach the limit. Turn the FFB off, >>> and the whole experience feel dead to me. >>> >>> Things have moved on since 2003. >>> >>> My Master also agrees. >>> >>> >>> >> >> As the other guy was trying to explain, it is suggested that it is the >> latency that is the problem - not that grip level does not decrease as >> you reach the limit. >> >> It is a valid concern. In a car or a non-force feedback wheel, turning >> the wheel immediately results in resistance (due to either the tyre >> acting on the road, or stretching a bungie cord). On the other hand, in >> force feedback, the wheel is turned, the sensor in the wheel detects >> this, sends this message to the computer, the computer processes the >> information and determines what the correct load should be, sends the >> message back to the wheel, and then the motor in the wheel needs to >> generate that force. I'm not familiar with how the motors in the force >> feedback wheels work, but typically there is a lag from when current is >> applied in a motor to when it generates the appropriate level of force. >> Even if computers have improved in speed, this whole train of >> communication and potential lag in generating force still exists. >> > > Well there is lag in the time it takes light to travel any distance - > could you measure that time? Would you be sensitive in to the difference > in time for light to travel 200m as opposed to 2000m. > > 10 x fuck all = fuck all! > > >> My concern is that it seems as though those who advocate the use of force >> feedback wheels do not know what the forces in a real race car feels >> like - so they don't know what is good or bad, or how it should feel. >> Further, given that they have often invested a lot of money in something >> like a G25, they are unlikely to then say it is rubbish (well known >> psychological phenomenon that when someone makes a major investment in >> something, they are unable to critically evaluate it and rather delude >> themselves into thinking how wonderful it is). >> >> I'm not surprised by the claims that many serious racers do not use force >> feedback as it is unrealistic. Does anyone who is a real racer think that >> force feedback is worthwhile? > > I can tell you that Greg Stewart used FF way back............remember > him saying the main difference was he was more consistent with FF which > makes perfect sense since you have extra "feedback" from the sim! I > remember when I first got FF - it took a few weeks to get out of the old > habbits - hated it at first. But after getting accustomed to it the feel > of a sim without it is very dead and feels completely wrong. I too found I > was more consistent with FF and perhaps a tad quicker - it just makes sims > more of a proper sim ultimately. If anyone is concerned about any bad > habbits that one may take from a sim into a ral race car then I can't see > how it would be any worse than using a crude non FF wheel. >

"David Fisher's Left Testicle" <dfg.myass@aol> wrote in message news:uU95k.79405$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Completely agree, Byron. I'm not seeing any latency issues with my G25. > Didn't see any with the Momo Force either, or the Wingman Formula Force. > If there were any, it would be like watching a movie with the sound track > out of sync. > > You would think none of us had driven a fast car at a track day the way > some people go on! >

I know I can feel understeer very easily on my G25 and that is really important. On road courses I might want a bit of understeer, but on ovals I might want a bit of oversteer on some tracks. I still have an old TM non-force wheel that I can't even drive with anymore. To each his own I guess. Ed