I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...

...now I appear to have got a little bit excited. That's not good for me. It messes with my naturally pessimistic hormone levels. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDyHAoHa1iE&feature=player_embedded All that remains to be seen is how well they can translate this work into that elusive "feel" through your wheel. I think I shall allow myself to be more optimistic than I was before. http://www.virtualr.net/rfactor-2-new-tire-model-preview-video-qa/ Andrew McP PS Visually it's not spectacular, but in another VirtualR post there's talk of the work on post processing still to be done. That should bring it a little more up to date, visually.... though I'm not too bothered as long as they manage to get close to iRacing & NKPro in terms of satisfying ride. PPS Why do F1 cars have to get uglier every year? Those silly-small wings this season are horrible.

http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/682-rFactor-2-Developer-Q-A Lots of good stuff. iRacing style 3 screen support, physics on a separate thread, and much more. Andrew McP

[email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: > http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/682-rFactor-2-Developer-Q-A There's lots of good stuff in that thread (and a few disappointments for many, I suspect). But this is my favourite staff quote so far... "I do NOT underestimate the need for strong AI as I love to just jump in the game, set up a race and go. I can honestly say that I enjoy racing against the AI now--they're at least as good now as a better than average online group" Andrew McP

"Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> ...now I appear to have got a little bit excited. That's not > good for me. It messes > with my naturally pessimistic hormone levels. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDyHAoHa1iE&feature=player_embedded > > All that remains to be seen is how well they can translate this > work into that > elusive "feel" through your wheel. I think I shall allow myself > to be more > optimistic than I was before. > > http://www.virtualr.net/rfactor-2-new-tire-model-preview-video-qa/ > > Andrew McP > > PS Visually it's not spectacular, but in another VirtualR post > there's talk of the > work on post processing still to be done. That should bring it > a little more up to > date, visually.... though I'm not too bothered as long as they > manage to get close > to iRacing & NKPro in terms of satisfying ride. > > PPS Why do F1 cars have to get uglier every year? Those > silly-small wings this > season are horrible.

These days I usually just have time to play a quick game on the PC and don't do multiplayer, so no iRacing. I want a good sim racer (real race car feel) with good AI for single player. I would rather they work on the AI than the visuals. Hopefully rFactor can deliver. Yes the the F1 cars look a bit goofy with their disproportionate wings. I always thought IRL (Indy cars) look odd with their long stretched out pointed noses. The rules on the movable rear wing are goofy also. One rule is that if any car goes on track with intermediate tires, then nobody can put the wing in the up position. Actually a lot of FIA rules are goofy, but that in its self makes F1 entertaining sometimes.

"Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/682-rFactor-2-Developer-Q-A > > Lots of good stuff. iRacing style 3 screen support, physics on > a separate thread, > and much more. > > Andrew McP

Sounds good. I use Eyfinity with three screens.

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 06:36 +0000 (GMT Standard Time), Andrew MacPherson wrote: > PPS Why do F1 cars have to get uglier every year? Those silly-small wings this > season are horrible. Well at least they got rid of that stupid vertical plane behind the cockpit... I've sort of gotten used to that shopping trolley look, but never could bring myself to overlook the this butt ugly fin most teams put on their cars. I'm also quite excited about rF2... Uwe

So since I didn't have time to surf, when is it out? Or is it out? My iRacing sub ends June... trying to prep for cold turkey... Unless there is forthcomming a 30% off for members of course, :> "Uwe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:imsmbi$3oo$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 06:36 +0000 (GMT Standard Time), Andrew MacPherson > wrote: > >> PPS Why do F1 cars have to get uglier every year? Those silly-small wings >> this >> season are horrible. > > Well at least they got rid of that stupid vertical plane behind the > cockpit... I've sort of gotten used to that shopping trolley look, but > never could bring myself to overlook the this butt ugly fin most teams > put on their cars. > > I'm also quite excited about rF2... > > Uwe

On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 09:34:12 -0500, PlowBoy wrote: > So since I didn't have time to surf, when is it out? > > Or is it out? > rF2 isn't out yet. My guess (totally uneducated) would be sometime this year, around summer or early autumn. Hoover

[email hidden] (PlowBoy) wrote: > So since I didn't have time to surf, when is it out? I've been away for a few days so you'll have probably been able to research this already, but my current best guesstimate for rF2's release is some time just after Fukushima becomes a tourist destination. :-> It wouldn't surprise me if they went all the way to next Xmas, because it seems to me that they still have a lot of work to do polishing things for release. They may cut a few corners to lance the boil of impatience, but I'd rather they waited to avoid too many release issues. On the other hand if they want to release it tomorrow I'll happily buy it, especially if the AI's up and running satisfactorily. I was going to buy Shift2, but the early reviews seem to show that -- as we suspected -- it was only ever going to be Shift1 with a bit of spit, polish, and night racing. I want it, I just don't want it at full price. Especially as I have Cliffs of Dover downloading in the background! Speaking of rushed releases, there are some very mixed messages floating around about this long awaited title too. Disappointment appears to be a big theme this week, what with Crysis2, Shift2, and potentially this too. Still, shooting Jerry down into the English Channel is always entertaining, no matter what other problems there may be. Andrew McP

[email hidden] (Uwe) wrote: > Well at least they got rid of that stupid vertical plane behind the > cockpit.. That's an excellent point Uwe. That design feature was so horrific my brain had completely wiped it from my memory to save me from secondary ugliness poisoning. On balance this season may be an improvement after all... but that rear wing still looks like it belongs on a toy car! Andrew McP

"Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (43 lines)

> [email hidden] (PlowBoy) wrote: > >> So since I didn't have time to surf, when is it out? > > I've been away for a few days so you'll have probably been able to > research this > already, but my current best guesstimate for rF2's release is some time > just after > Fukushima becomes a tourist destination. :-> > > It wouldn't surprise me if they went all the way to next Xmas, because it > seems to > me that they still have a lot of work to do polishing things for release. > They may > cut a few corners to lance the boil of impatience, but I'd rather they > waited to > avoid too many release issues. > > On the other hand if they want to release it tomorrow I'll happily buy it, > especially if the AI's up and running satisfactorily. > > I was going to buy Shift2, but the early reviews seem to show that -- as > we > suspected -- it was only ever going to be Shift1 with a bit of spit, > polish, and > night racing. > > I want it, I just don't want it at full price. Especially as I have Cliffs > of Dover > downloading in the background! > > Speaking of rushed releases, there are some very mixed messages floating > around > about this long awaited title too. Disappointment appears to be a big > theme this > week, what with Crysis2, Shift2, and potentially this too. > > Still, shooting Jerry down into the English Channel is always > entertaining, no > matter what other problems there may be. > > Andrew McP >

Sadly, that plant in Russia, IS a tourist destination, apparently doing well with Europeans? kinda explains them as well... lol (Joking) I made a scary mistake 20 years ago, turned down a high paying job at a battery factory, working in a lead smelting process room, thinking life is just too friggin short to get lead poisoning last fking thing I want to do is go visit a freaking leaking f'ing reactor site...

On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 14:08 +0100 (BST), Andrew MacPherson wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> [email hidden] (Uwe) wrote: > >> Well at least they got rid of that stupid vertical plane behind the >> cockpit.. > > That's an excellent point Uwe. That design feature was so horrific my brain had > completely wiped it from my memory to save me from secondary ugliness poisoning. On > balance this season may be an improvement after all... but that rear wing still > looks like it belongs on a toy car! >

Is the vertical fin actually "banned" this season or was it removed for other reasons? Too bad we see this horrific "feature" creeping up in the LMS series now.. just look at the Audi R18. 8.( Uwe

i am excited for sure. vintage stock cars sounded great. I guess tsf will cover modern stock car racing with their program too. rf just is not suited well for them, vhr 2011 is ok and is miles ahead of sce 2011 in graphics and content and a whole lot less bugs and framerate issues. also wish they had better tracks and graphics for them there is no good oval modders. looking forward to all the new rf2 softwares to come out.

On 3/26/2011 1:36 AM, Andrew MacPherson wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

> ...now I appear to have got a little bit excited. That's not good for me. It messes > with my naturally pessimistic hormone levels. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDyHAoHa1iE&feature=player_embedded > > All that remains to be seen is how well they can translate this work into that > elusive "feel" through your wheel. I think I shall allow myself to be more > optimistic than I was before. > > http://www.virtualr.net/rfactor-2-new-tire-model-preview-video-qa/ > > Andrew McP > > PS Visually it's not spectacular, but in another VirtualR post there's talk of the > work on post processing still to be done. That should bring it a little more up to > date, visually.... though I'm not too bothered as long as they manage to get close > to iRacing& NKPro in terms of satisfying ride. > > PPS Why do F1 cars have to get uglier every year? Those silly-small wings this > season are horrible.

As the dev of NSS, I too get excited about the info they're releasing. I'm just hoping that their tire and suspension updates will do sim racing justice. It sucks trying to develop something and then realize the physics just don't support it. Of course, I was excited about NASCAR 2011 as well...then I read the reviews and forums. Talk about deflated expectations. -Will

[email hidden] (William Bradshaw) wrote: > As the dev of NSS Ah, that's very interesting. Having only recently reactivated rF I was a bit short of oval action. Since leaving iRacing (albeit temporarily because iRacing is the Hotel California of simming) I've missed my Silverado... though I haven't missed the occasional 1.5 hour races with a million laps under yellow. You've prompted me to do some downloading. I'll investigate later. > I'm just hoping that their tire and suspension updates will do > sim racing justice. Well, I think it's fair to use iRacing as a modern benchmark in these things, and the rF guys (especially Tim!) must know what they're competing with. So I'm confident we'll be getting something quite impressive. Perhaps not as impressive as many people hope for though. The rF forum seems to be full of folk expecting nothing short of a feature-packed miracle! When it turns out to be similar to iRacing, with lots of stuff on the to-do list, I fear a minor revolt. But then the simming community has always been pretty revolting and stroppy, so there'll be nothing new there. :-) > It sucks trying to develop something > and then realize the physics just don't support it. In the distant past I did some game programming in assembly code, and being in complete control of the code was both frustrating and rewarding at the same time. I can only imagine the frustration associated with trying to make other people's code do what you want! :-) But it's always nice to 'meet' people who've actually given something to the community rather than just taking/complaining. So, er, thanks Will! > Of course, I was excited about NASCAR 2011 as well...then I read > the reviews and forums. Talk about deflated expectations. I have so far managed to resist the temptation to buy a PS3 import on UK's Ebay. Maybe when it's a bit cheaper. Ok, a lot cheaper. :-> It did seem to have potential though, you're right. I just got scared off by the nasty physics in some of the videos, then user reports. Andrew McP

On 4/21/2011 1:36 AM, Andrew MacPherson wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> [email hidden] (William Bradshaw) wrote: > >> As the dev of NSS > > Ah, that's very interesting. Having only recently reactivated rF I was a bit short > of oval action. Since leaving iRacing (albeit temporarily because iRacing is the > Hotel California of simming) I've missed my Silverado... though I haven't missed > the occasional 1.5 hour races with a million laps under yellow. > > You've prompted me to do some downloading. I'll investigate later.

I think it's universally agreed among the guys at FMS that NSS 4.0 was probably the best mod version. I took the reigns after NSS 2010 was released by John Alley, which is a higher gripped version of NASCAR. I believe his idea at the time was to challenge VHR in popularity and ease of use. NSS 7.0, what I'm working on, is going back to roots in reality. Basically, I ask that you don't judge the mod based off of NSS 2010. haha. What I'm working on is vastly different. That said, I should probably get in touch with the guys at Sim Racing Tonight and ask 'em not to review what is currently out for Top Sim Car. ;)

Quoted text (14 lines)

>> I'm just hoping that their tire and suspension updates will do >> sim racing justice. > > Well, I think it's fair to use iRacing as a modern benchmark in these things, and > the rF guys (especially Tim!) must know what they're competing with. So I'm > confident we'll be getting something quite impressive. > > Perhaps not as impressive as many people hope for though. The rF forum seems to be > full of folk expecting nothing short of a feature-packed miracle! When it turns out > to be similar to iRacing, with lots of stuff on the to-do list, I fear a minor > revolt. > > But then the simming community has always been pretty revolting and stroppy, so > there'll be nothing new there. :-)

I think most people (AKA sim racers) can agree that graphics doesn't define a sim, but the physics in the background. So far, it's been promising from their updates.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> It sucks trying to develop something >> and then realize the physics just don't support it. > > In the distant past I did some game programming in assembly code, and being in > complete control of the code was both frustrating and rewarding at the same time. I > can only imagine the frustration associated with trying to make other people's code > do what you want! :-) But it's always nice to 'meet' people who've actually given > something to the community rather than just taking/complaining. So, er, thanks > Will!

Well, I haven't given anything yet. Still a long WIP, but at least the core suspension and aero is in place at the moment. But at least you're aware of the challenges involved. I remember trying my hand at C++ and giving up after a month. :) Frankly, I got tired of the NSS cars not reacting as the real life counterparts do! That, and I'm tired of seeing huge numbers of VHR servers on the in-game server listing. lol. So, indeed, it's definitely a mountain climb when getting into ISI modding.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>> Of course, I was excited about NASCAR 2011 as well...then I read >> the reviews and forums. Talk about deflated expectations. > > I have so far managed to resist the temptation to buy a PS3 import on UK's Ebay. > Maybe when it's a bit cheaper. Ok, a lot cheaper. :-> > > It did seem to have potential though, you're right. I just got scared off by the > nasty physics in some of the videos, then user reports.

Agreed. It's kind of strange of them to hype up the great damage modeling and graphics, but not care about the physics so much. Reminds me of the EA debacle all over again. On the plus side, at least they're going to patch the thing up. Of course, that doesn't exactly help the folks who don't have their PS3's online. Also heard they outright cancelled release in Europe. I'm sure that'll go over well. -Will

[email hidden] (William Bradshaw) wrote: > I should probably get in touch with the guys at Sim Racing Tonight > and ask 'em not to review what is currently out for Top Sim Car. ;) :-) To be harsh but fair, I'm not sure many people pay much attention to SRT. I kind of appreciate their efforts without actually finding them very useful. They fall into the same category as all other kinds of 'official' reviewing, where they can't afford to bite the hand that feeds them. And as the community feeds them zero in this instance that's fair enough! My own review of the mod goes something along the lines of... "good grief! I can't believe how much easier to drive these are than iRacing's cars!" This may or may not be a good thing. :-) > I think most people (AKA sim racers) can agree that graphics > doesn't define a sim, but the physics in the background. So far, > it's been promising from their updates. Oh absolutely. iRacing have proved, among other things, that you certainly don't have to have flash-bang-whizzy graphics effects to be satisfyingly immersive. Having said that, in the long, lonely races I tended to have I would have appreciated a helicopter flying over occasionally to break the monotony. :-> > Frankly, I got tired of the NSS cars not reacting as the real > life counterparts do! Which is a very good reason to lack motivation. > That, and I'm tired of seeing huge numbers of VHR > servers on the in-game server listing. lol. :-) I can imagine that must be pretty demoralising. As a past master of wasted time on under-appreciated projects I can feel a little of your pain. > Agreed. It's kind of strange of them to hype up the great damage > modeling and graphics, but not care about the physics so much. The same mystery applies to so many projects, including my current experience of Shift2. You'd think by now, with so much processor power available, even on consoles (compared to early sims), it would be relatively "easy" to approximate some kind of reality. Not iRacing standards, but good enough. I really do think those darned hand-held game controllers are to blame. If we were serious about improving sim racing we'd develop the very best, cheapest handheld controller, boosting the analogue stick controls in some clever way so that much better car control was possible, meaning devs had to work a little harder at car control... which, being realistic, would probably mean they'd just boost the aids. But a man can dream! > Also heard they outright cancelled release in Europe. Well, oval racing really *is* completely unknown to and ignored by most Europeans, so it was probably never going to sell. However the PS3 version isn't region locked, so we can at least import it if we want. I just don't want at current prices. Which I guess is where the NSS mod comes in. Mmm... enough gossip from me I think. Time to go explore Shift2 a little more. Andrew McP

On 4/21/2011 10:44 PM, Andrew MacPherson wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> [email hidden] (William Bradshaw) wrote: > >> I should probably get in touch with the guys at Sim Racing Tonight >> and ask 'em not to review what is currently out for Top Sim Car. ;) > > :-) To be harsh but fair, I'm not sure many people pay much attention to SRT. I > kind of appreciate their efforts without actually finding them very useful. They > fall into the same category as all other kinds of 'official' reviewing, where they > can't afford to bite the hand that feeds them. And as the community feeds them zero > in this instance that's fair enough! > > My own review of the mod goes something along the lines of... "good grief! I can't > believe how much easier to drive these are than iRacing's cars!" This may or may > not be a good thing. :-)

Truth be told, I've recently renewed my iRacing for a month and bought their NASCAR Cup car...the Impala A or whatever they call it. Granted, I'm still using a Momo wheel and Act Labs pedals, but no damn way is that car realistic in regards to wheel input. With the Momo, the damn thing is just way too twitchy to handle. A pal of mine works for NASCAR and has given me some info about what range the current springs are used in real life Cup series. Tried to use those numbers and had zero success with a stable car. Those stiff front springs are not used this day in age, and that has been an issue with their software since NR2003 came out. Personally, I hate to pay for that kind of inaccuracy. I'm hedging bets on the new tire model. Sounds good, can't wait to try it.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> I think most people (AKA sim racers) can agree that graphics >> doesn't define a sim, but the physics in the background. So far, >> it's been promising from their updates. > > Oh absolutely. iRacing have proved, among other things, that you certainly don't > have to have flash-bang-whizzy graphics effects to be satisfyingly immersive. > > Having said that, in the long, lonely races I tended to have I would have > appreciated a helicopter flying over occasionally to break the monotony. :->

I know the feeling! :)

Quoted text (10 lines)

>> Frankly, I got tired of the NSS cars not reacting as the real >> life counterparts do! > > Which is a very good reason to lack motivation. > >> That, and I'm tired of seeing huge numbers of VHR >> servers on the in-game server listing. lol. > > :-) I can imagine that must be pretty demoralising. As a past master of wasted time > on under-appreciated projects I can feel a little of your pain.

It has been in the past, as far as I've heard from Alley. I'm just focused on releasing as close to a 1:1 mod as I can and let the chips fall where they may. NSS seems to be quite the underdog, though. Accepted in some groups, but never really gained the hold like SCE or VHR.

Quoted text (14 lines)

>> Agreed. It's kind of strange of them to hype up the great damage >> modeling and graphics, but not care about the physics so much. > > The same mystery applies to so many projects, including my current experience of > Shift2. You'd think by now, with so much processor power available, even on > consoles (compared to early sims), it would be relatively "easy" to approximate > some kind of reality. Not iRacing standards, but good enough. > > I really do think those darned hand-held game controllers are to blame. If we were > serious about improving sim racing we'd develop the very best, cheapest handheld > controller, boosting the analogue stick controls in some clever way so that much > better car control was possible, meaning devs had to work a little harder at car > control... which, being realistic, would probably mean they'd just boost the aids. > But a man can dream!

Even with consoles, it's easy to properly port over from PC to console if they do the input correctly. But nobody does. But yeah, I feel like a lot of 'em today are more focused on the eye candy and would prefer to ease up on the realism factor. Granted, kids today are spoiled by high rez textures. So I doubt they would accept solid physics and graphics from 2005. I still find it hard to believe that Gran Turismo 5 is hailed as the kind of console sim racers. >> Also heard they outright cancelled release in Europe. > > Well, oval racing really *is* completely unknown to and ignored by most Europeans, > so it was probably never going to sell. However the PS3 version isn't region locked, > so we can at least import it if we want. I just don't want at current prices. Agreed, at least it isn't region locked...like you said. I've seen a number of posts where folks over there were quite upset over the announcement. IMO, that company needs all the support they can get. Especially since the dev's themselves are based in Europe. -Will

[email hidden] (William Bradshaw) wrote: > no damn way is that car realistic in regards to wheel input. With > the Momo, the damn thing is just way too twitchy to handle. The ImpA has always had handling issues which I've put down to too much power and too little grip (like the V8 on the road side). That may be realistic, but it's never been a popular drive on iRacing, when it's supposed to be the pinnacle of achievement. That's why iRacing "2" (oh how I laughed) is changing that car first. It's important for their marketing and sporting pretensions that this car is popular ASAP. I enjoyed the ImpB fixed races, but only because they were shorter and gave me an easy $7 participation discount. :-) > Personally, I hate to pay for that kind of inaccuracy. I'm hedging > bets on the new tire model. Sounds good, can't wait to try it. It'll be interesting. But Kaemmer has said in the past that it's not revolutionary. And to be fair, most vehicles handle pretty darned well. At the edges of the performance envelope there will always be issues because there's only so far code can realistically replicate reality. > NSS seems to be quite the underdog, though. Accepted in some > groups, but never really gained the hold like SCE or VHR. I think the problem is that we sim racers get fixed in our ways. We learn to handle particular cars & tracks and they become our "home" where we feel most comfortable. It takes something significantly, and obviously better (in some important way) to persuade us to shift away from the community associated with the previous code were were using. That's why iRacing still feels like home to me even after four months away. The cars, tracks, and concentration of people I've known in simming for many years, is a tough combination to ignore. Which is why many people stay there even though they don't particularly enjoy the service wrapped around that package. It's also why iRacing always have to resort to clever tactics to try and persuade people to join/rejoin/participate/stay. Someone there has been reading that book about "nudge" psychology. Anyway, for people in your position (and rFactor has so many mods there must be many, many people in your position!) finding a compelling "USP" is very tough. Your code may prove to be better in many ways, but it has to be superior in an obvious way before it'll bounce people out of their existing rut and into yours. Good luck. :-) Andrew McP... currently rutless, unless lapping Brands Hatch too much in NKPro counts as a rut.

NSS blew moose cock. Thats why noone ran it. Started off bad with that weirdo Joe and kept getting worse. VHR is much more real

On May 10, 4:03 pm, Penis Boy <[email hidden]> wrote: > NSS blew moose cock. Thats why noone ran it. Started off bad with that > weirdo Joe and kept getting worse. VHR is much more real Agree, nss is was nasty - none of the rfactor stock car mods are worth a shit. vhr is as real as some goofy dude in nova scotia says it is, heart of nascar huh? asr2 should have everything needed to be competitive for stock car simming hopefully and much cheaper than iracing. also tsf had no issues with making things realistic in asr1 its been mentioned many times, so the argument isi engine is no good is laid to rest.

yo jello ever try that overhyped piece of US Pits dreck called TPSCC? lol. flamed out within a week

On May 20, 3:08 pm, Penis Boy <[email hidden]> wrote: > yo jello ever try that overhyped piece of US Pits dreck called TPSCC? > lol. flamed out within a week none of the rf stock car mods are worth a crap

I got the very same feeling from seing that video. It seems like they're working on something of value: Simulating contact patch/surface interaction like they seem to be doing is the way to go. At least if you want to come up with a formula that simulates racing... I haven't been paying attention lately; have they said anything about when it's supposed to be released? -A- BTW: Seing the througput in here is sad: it once was such a thriving community... What happened? Seems like an existential crisis for racing sim... On 26.03.2011 07:36, * Andrew MacPherson wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

> ...now I appear to have got a little bit excited. That's not good for me. It messes > with my naturally pessimistic hormone levels. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDyHAoHa1iE&feature=player_embedded > > All that remains to be seen is how well they can translate this work into that > elusive "feel" through your wheel. I think I shall allow myself to be more > optimistic than I was before. > > http://www.virtualr.net/rfactor-2-new-tire-model-preview-video-qa/ > > Andrew McP > > PS Visually it's not spectacular, but in another VirtualR post there's talk of the > work on post processing still to be done. That should bring it a little more up to > date, visually.... though I'm not too bothered as long as they manage to get close > to iRacing & NKPro in terms of satisfying ride. > > PPS Why do F1 cars have to get uglier every year? Those silly-small wings this > season are horrible.

I got the very same feeling from seing that video. It seems like they're working on something of value: Simulating contact patch/surface interaction like they seem to be doing is the way to go. At least if you want to come up with a formula that simulates racing... I haven't been paying attention lately; have they said anything about when it's supposed to be released? -A- BTW: Seing the througput in here is sad: it once was such a thriving community... What happened? Seems like an existential crisis for racing sim... On 26.03.2011 07:36, * Andrew MacPherson wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

> ...now I appear to have got a little bit excited. That's not good for me. It messes > with my naturally pessimistic hormone levels. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDyHAoHa1iE&feature=player_embedded > > All that remains to be seen is how well they can translate this work into that > elusive "feel" through your wheel. I think I shall allow myself to be more > optimistic than I was before. > > http://www.virtualr.net/rfactor-2-new-tire-model-preview-video-qa/ > > Andrew McP > > PS Visually it's not spectacular, but in another VirtualR post there's talk of the > work on post processing still to be done. That should bring it a little more up to > date, visually.... though I'm not too bothered as long as they manage to get close > to iRacing & NKPro in terms of satisfying ride. > > PPS Why do F1 cars have to get uglier every year? Those silly-small wings this > season are horrible.

IMO, any simulation is about "authenticity". So, these days, if you don't have laser scanned cars and tracks, you don't have nothing. Kaemmer went the right way once again, and again is few years infront of anybody. No weather model, or anything else is a replacement for laser scanning. Unfortunatelly, it looks like laser scanning costs money. And money you can get through mass subscription. The help of racing industry is very welcome. So, this really is the only step forward. We have all this in iRacing. Simulating racing OTOH is actually all about FFB. Until they don't make the right steps into this direction (and do it RIGHTLY), they will always have big problems. This is the thing that *must* be done. And done rightly. So, somebody has to put a REAL effort into this field. This, and only this, can give you a mass subscription, which can push mass market, and more subscription money. Also, the standardization of the hardware is needed (somebody has to research the ergonomy of racing position, the positioning of multimonitors, standardize racing pods and monitor stands, etc.), and this has to be done the scientifical way. You CANNOT go to the market and say, everything what you have is ok with us (becuase you are just everyday common people, you don't go into details), just give us your money, and then (common, busy, everyday) people spread their dissatisfasction all around. Laser scanning is nice, but you have to put more effort, more science into all this, something like audio industry puts into their products. Ok, it could be that with the "New Tire Model" Kaemmer wants to start from the scratch, and build on it. This could be ok. We'll see. Mario

I guess if the "New Tire Model" creates a good platform for heavy FFB development, I could always accept a few minor flaws... But like you say: Creating a good FFB platform for every thinkable combo is next to impossible: There are just too many factors and variables out there to ensure a good customer experience. Racing simmers are technically inclined, sure, but endless tweaking and tinkering will make sales numbers dwindle... :-/ It'd be nice to be able to force every customer to have a force dynamics (http://www.force-dynamics.com/), and the racing would have been better, absolutely, but nobody'd make money from it! Hey, maybe *that's* what I need: In order to convince the missus I could refer to Dave Kaemmer: "I need one of these, love, sorry, but a hobby is a hobby, and i just need this one to be able to do it. Look, 'ere is what the boss says...." -A- On 01.07.2011 16:51, * Mario Petrinovic wrote: <snip> > Ok, it could be that with the "New Tire Model" Kaemmer wants to > start from the scratch, and build on it. This could be ok. We'll see. > > Mario

Asgeir Nesoen:

Quoted text (12 lines)

>I guess if the "New Tire Model" creates a good platform for heavy FFB > development, I could always accept a few minor flaws... > > But like you say: Creating a good FFB platform for every thinkable combo > is next to impossible: There are just too many factors and variables out > there to ensure a good customer experience. Racing simmers are > technically inclined, sure, but endless tweaking and tinkering will make > sales numbers dwindle... :-/ > > It'd be nice to be able to force every customer to have a force dynamics > (http://www.force-dynamics.com/), and the racing would have been better, > absolutely, but nobody'd make money from it!

Exactly (BTW, I don't think those waving chairs simulate anything but the ride in a boat on a bad weather). But, this exact situation exists in all consumer electronics (audio, video, cell phones, etc.). First you have to do GOOD research of this problem. Then you got to make standards. Then you'll have good customer experience, and then you'll see business boost. Not before that. FFB experience can be much better, if somebody (simulation industry) actually works to make it better. What we see from Papy/iRacing is relying on graphics and sound. So, you have things like, there is a school of thought that good graphics (fps) can replace what is missing, then good sound (tire squirel) can replace some other things. But everybody keeps the most important thing at the mere basics. It needs MORE research than just to go aroung and laser scan. It needs real scientific research (just like other consumer electronics, audio and similar). Somebody needs to make an effort. Then, after research, if you apply some standards, the equipment will be easy to adjust. Only if somebody starts to write the truth about all this, can be of much help. Instead, of course, those who are selling sims are afraid that they will lose money by talking truth, so they try to mudy things, so at this moment we are in the state of complete confusion regarding FFB. Look at completly non standard FFB settings iRacing is recommending, 100/0/0/100, and in-game 20. No damper. Jesus, what sense does this have. No sense at all. This isn't a way forward. Instead to make instant money, they need to turn into the right direction, and make some real progress in this field. This isn't Mario Cart anymore. If they want to make a real thing, then they have to make some real effort. Like you said, I hope that the new tire model will be a good platform. FFB is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing in this business. Without FFB, this is like audio without speakers. You cannot make a picture do a sound for you. We'll see. Mario

I would completely disagree. Real drivers feel car movement through their inner ear which matches up with what they see. Check out reserch on simulator sickness to understand why some people simply can't deal with when the two are mismatched. FFB is a relatively poor way of trying to substitute for inner ear inputs. I would believe the "swaying seats" are actually a much more promising method of replacing such a key input. For a non driver FFB may provide a means of learning to drive in a sim environment but for the vast majority who actually drive real cars it is an aid not a substitute. The graphical cues represent far closer to what a real driver uses and many real world drivers are very successful with zero or very low FFB becuase it just represents noise. For others it adds immersion. Speaking of immersion the company Immersion has patented force feedback in the devices we use and hardware development as such is potentially hampered by that fact. I believe you fit into the category with no real world driving experience (.i.e. never held a driving licence), Mario? So have no experience of how the feel of the pants sensation of car rotation translates into the sim racing world. On 07/07/2011 06:46, Mario Petrinovic wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> FFB is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing in this business. Without FFB, > this is like audio without speakers. You cannot make a picture do a sound > for you. > We'll see. > > Mario >

Tony R:

Quoted text (24 lines)

>I would completely disagree. Real drivers feel car movement through their >inner ear which matches up with what they see. Check out reserch on >simulator sickness to understand why some people simply can't deal with >when the two are mismatched. > > FFB is a relatively poor way of trying to substitute for inner ear inputs. > I would believe the "swaying seats" are actually a much more promising > method of replacing such a key input. > > For a non driver FFB may provide a means of learning to drive in a sim > environment but for the vast majority who actually drive real cars it is > an aid not a substitute. The graphical cues represent far closer to what a > real driver uses and many real world drivers are very successful with zero > or very low FFB becuase it just represents noise. For others it adds > immersion. > > Speaking of immersion the company Immersion has patented force feedback in > the devices we use and hardware development as such is potentially > hampered by that fact. > > I believe you fit into the category with no real world driving experience > (.i.e. never held a driving licence), Mario? So have no experience of how > the feel of the pants sensation of car rotation translates into the sim > racing world.

I drive maxy scooter, and have bike driving licence (not car). I did drive a car few times. I do feel the grip on bike as well, and drive this bike whole year, even in winter. The thing is simple, and is written below (a citation from my previous post). Second thing, the FFB we have isn't applied rightly by simracers (on a [wrong] recommendation of some FFB "gurus", and iRacing). As you know, I am researching this. I found out "the right" way to apply FFB, and this (RIGHT) way can help people much better than the wrong way they are doing it right now. Third thing, "the wrong" way works by creating a (FALSE) tension (by the mean of Centering Spring, and by that way keeping the car under control). This isn't that bad idea, the only thing is, as much this is good in some situations, that much it is bad in some other situations, because this is all false. The further porblem is if you are trying to develop sim further, on the basis of this BIASED sensation. This becames worse and futher away from the reality with every new step you do. The fourth thing, if people apply FFB the way it was intended, they could develop it further. For example, it looks like things overheat after some time (I was using overal 113%). Now, if you know that this AFFECTS the FFB sensation, then you can develop further in the way of applying some cooling to wheel. But, if you are applying FFB the false way, you will never realize what is actually happening within the wheel, and within the FFB. People, you are all wrong. Instead of chasing who-knows-what (the thing you will never catch, doing things wrongly), you should do this RIGHTLY, from the very bottom, up. Now you all think you are very smart, because everybody is like that, and you shut the mouth to whoever disagrees, the only problem is, this will lead you nowhere. I know a guy (you know who), who is world fames FFB guru, but he even doesn't know that Centering Spring works even if unchecked. THIS is the level of understanding of FFB that is acceptable, both, by sim community, and by iRacing. Pitiful. Mario >Mario Petrinovic: >> FFB is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing in this business. Without FFB, >> this is like audio without speakers. You cannot make a picture do a sound >> for you. >> We'll see.

In article <JM0Tp.36547$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > > > Speaking of immersion the company Immersion has patented force feedback > in the devices we use and hardware development as such is potentially > hampered by that fact. > I recall discussions of this years and years ago... Does the patent just last forever? How long do we have to wait for it to run out? Does anyone know if there are people waiting to jump on this technology, once given the chance? MRSisson

Mario Petrinovic:

Quoted text (74 lines)

> Tony R: >>I would completely disagree. Real drivers feel car movement through their >>inner ear which matches up with what they see. Check out reserch on >>simulator sickness to understand why some people simply can't deal with >>when the two are mismatched. >> >> FFB is a relatively poor way of trying to substitute for inner ear >> inputs. >> I would believe the "swaying seats" are actually a much more promising >> method of replacing such a key input. >> >> For a non driver FFB may provide a means of learning to drive in a sim >> environment but for the vast majority who actually drive real cars it is >> an aid not a substitute. The graphical cues represent far closer to what >> a >> real driver uses and many real world drivers are very successful with >> zero >> or very low FFB becuase it just represents noise. For others it adds >> immersion. >> >> Speaking of immersion the company Immersion has patented force feedback >> in >> the devices we use and hardware development as such is potentially >> hampered by that fact. >> >> I believe you fit into the category with no real world driving experience >> (.i.e. never held a driving licence), Mario? So have no experience of how >> the feel of the pants sensation of car rotation translates into the sim >> racing world. > > I drive maxy scooter, and have bike driving licence (not car). I > did > drive a car few times. I do feel the grip on bike as well, and drive this > bike whole year, even in winter. > The thing is simple, and is written below (a citation from my > previous post). > Second thing, the FFB we have isn't applied rightly by simracers > (on a [wrong] recommendation of some FFB "gurus", and iRacing). As you > know, > I am researching this. I found out "the right" way to apply FFB, and this > (RIGHT) way can help people much better than the wrong way they are doing > it right now. > Third thing, "the wrong" way works by creating a (FALSE) tension > (by > the mean of Centering Spring, and by that way keeping the car under > control). This isn't that bad idea, the only thing is, as much this is > good > in some situations, that much it is bad in some other situations, because > this is all false. The further porblem is if you are trying to develop sim > further, on the basis of this BIASED sensation. This becames worse and > futher away from the reality with every new step you do. > The fourth thing, if people apply FFB the way it was intended, they > could develop it further. For example, it looks like things overheat after > some time (I was using overal 113%). Now, if you know that this AFFECTS > the > FFB sensation, then you can develop further in the way of applying some > cooling to wheel. But, if you are applying FFB the false way, you will > never realize what is actually happening within the wheel, and within the > FFB. People, you are all wrong. Instead of chasing who-knows-what (the > thing > you will never catch, doing things wrongly), you should do this RIGHTLY, > from the very bottom, up. Now you all think you are very smart, because > everybody is like that, and you shut the mouth to whoever disagrees, the > only problem is, this will lead you nowhere. I know a guy (you know who), > who is world fames FFB guru, but he even doesn't know that Centering > Spring > works even if unchecked. THIS is the level of understanding of FFB that is > acceptable, both, by sim community, and by iRacing. Pitiful. > >>Mario Petrinovic: >>> FFB is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing in this business. Without FFB, >>> this is like audio without speakers. You cannot make a picture do a >>> sound for you. >>> We'll see.

BTW Tony, I am claiming that for good FFB you have to adjust latency ("cockpitLookDeadZone", I have it at 0.000715, while the default iRacing is 0.050000). I am claiming that this setting affects FFB very much. I am claiming that the hight of screen affects FFB very much. Didn't anybody tell you that this is so? Didn't iRacing tell you that this is so. Well, I am telling you that this is so. But, you are telling me that this isn't important for FFB because you have driver's licence. And you are not the only one. Exactly the same thing is telling me the whole sim community. Exactly the same thing is telling me the iRacing. I am THE ONLY one who is telling that latency and hight of screen affects the FFB very much. Am I crazy, or the whole world is crazy. Now, what do you think. And look now, I will not stop to talk about latency and the hight of screen, because I am NOT crazy. Get it. Now, you will not stop to talk about your driver's licence. Why, I don't. You say that you think that FFB isn't important, because middle ear is important. So, why do you interfere into the discussion about FFB, then. Let the people who think that FFB is important help themselves to adjust FFB PROPERLY. Ok? And if you think that it isn't important, well, good for you. Mario

On 13/07/2011 07:13, Mario Petrinovic wrote: > So, why do you > interfere into the discussion about FFB, then. Let the people who think > that FFB is important help themselves to adjust FFB PROPERLY. Ok? And if > you think that it isn't important, well, good for you. That is a different topic to the one I was disagreeing with, i.e. "FFB is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing in this business. Without FFB, this is like audio without speakers. You cannot make a picture do a sound for you. " Drivers aren't reliant on feeling everything the car is doing through the feedback in the steering wheel. The sensation of rotation, the feeling in the butt as a rear tire scrabbles for grip or locks up, the feeling through the brake pedal of anti lock brakes engaging, the list goes on. Steering feel aids a driver but it doesn't stop Vettel and Hamilton wringing the best out of a crap Chevrolet Lacetti which is described as having "lifeless" steering. FFB provides some input but the way we interpret motion in a static simulation environment relies on other factors which are of far greater importance IMHO. For me personally I can relate simulations far better to what are one to one relationships with driving a real car. Having sensations put through an alternative feedback mechanism takes sim racing further away from a simulation in my view. That is why I compare those people who have only simulated racing experience and those that do both and have a real reference point. FFB can be switched off for many drivers and make no difference other than immersion. How the car appears to react in relation to the virtual world is absolutely key to translating what it feels like driving a car. FFB may help but I would completely refute the phrase "is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing in this business"

Tony R: > FFB can be switched off for many drivers and make no difference other than > immersion. How the car appears to react in relation to the virtual world > is absolutely key to translating what it feels like driving a car. FFB may > help but I would completely refute the phrase "is THE MOST IMPORTANT thing > in this business" Ok. The thing is that FFB relies on latency, and heavely depends on how high is your screen. Mario

On 14/07/2011 23:27, Mario Petrinovic wrote: > Ok. The thing is that FFB relies on latency, and heavely depends on how > high is your screen. What makes it hard for developers is the variability of PC systems. Anything that puts a load on CPU can cause latency with FFB. So various settings can appear to resolve the issue simply by reducing the load. This will vary from machine to machine. Also our ability to cope with latency (visual or FFB) varies from human to human. There is some interesting research on this if you are interested. I am sensitive to visual lag and find vysnc affects me, whereas many find it makes no difference.

Tony R:

Quoted text (14 lines)

>Mario Petrinovic: >> Ok. The thing is that FFB relies on latency, and heavely depends on how >> high is your screen. > > What makes it hard for developers is the variability of PC systems. > Anything that puts a load on CPU can cause latency with FFB. So various > settings can appear to resolve the issue simply by reducing the load. This > will vary from machine to machine. > > Also our ability to cope with latency (visual or FFB) varies from human to > human. There is some interesting research on this if you are interested. > > I am sensitive to visual lag and find vysnc affects me, whereas many find > it makes no difference.

Well, I don't know, yet. For now I set my system pretty correct (I have to fine-adjsut some things), but I am yet to research on how much different graphyc settings affect latency. It could be that the majority of latency can be from wheel. I'll see. One way or the other, NOBODY talks about that, and when I talk about that, I am pissed all over in iRacing community, INCLUDING iRacing company as well. Well, if you ask me, this ISN'T a way forward, just the opposite. Now, NOBODY will discuss ANYTHING regarding FFB, except STRICTLY if it is in the line of using only Centering Spring, because of the fear of being EXPELLED out from the community. I mean, Middle Adges is a little baby compared to this situation. Lol, terrible. One way or the other, it is on sim developers (not on ME) to DEVELOP tools to overcome this situation. If everybody can set their systems the way I have it set, it will be much more satisfying to them, and with little further development (standardization, and things like that), this can be done even much better. INSTEAD, we have a JOKE of FFB existing in sim communty. Well, I've been beaten by this community, and this can make me laugh, but I am not a bad pearson, and I really enjoy sim racing, and this makes me feeling bad. I mean, did ANYBODY even dare to write something in the line that hight of screen affects FFB, in iRacing forum. Maybe some people are aware of that, but they are affraid to be burned on a torch there, and they simply stay quiet. Otherwise, who knows what can happen. iRacing can even shut down their account if they talk too much, who knows, lol. Terrible. Mario