What is sim racing?

The question whether or not a racing game is a sim is very often at the center of discussions between sim racers on different platforms, be it forums, discords and other social media. Now, I'd like to make clear that I do not distinguish between game and sim, I think it's futile as they're all games at the end of the day.

It appears that fans of popular and well established sim racing titles have been throwing around words like arcade or simcade pretty randomly. iRacing fans have called ACC 'Mario Kart', Assetto Corsa or rF2 fans have called PC2 'arcade' etc. The same has happened to AMS2, people were sharing side-by-side comparisons of the Ultima GTR driving over a verb in AMS and AMS2, and even though you could clearly see there was much more suspension movement in AMS2 people were calling it 'a wobbling crap'. These are just a few examples I've witnessed and I'm pretty sure there's endless examples like that.

I think this is pretty wild stuff, it makes absolutely no sense, and quite frankly, all the SimWars nonsense is pretty tiresome and highly toxic. I think the secondary question that arises, what is realistic or realism, could help shape an answer to the following questions.

What in your opinion makes a sim racing game a sim? What are the criteria and how many criteria have to be met to qualify as one? I know, it's not an easy question but I think it could inspire people to think about it and clear the fog a little bit.

 

A racing simulator is a piece of software simulating racing so even FH5 is a racing sim IMO. Arcade racers is a word used to place a game over another. How I rank sims is what they try to simulate and how well they simulate everything

 

Interesting, I've read that definition a few times. If you add realism to the equation, is FH5 then still a racing sim?

 

Any kind of simulator be it racing or a police simulator , is IMHO a game that tries to simulate the real life workings, situations, rules and laws of whatever its trying to simulate.

Its on the creators of such sims how realistic they want them to be. I am really sick and tired on my sim is more real than yours fights and debates and how arcade or realistic this engine tires feel, reminds me of the console wars, its mostly keyboard warriors that want to appear more knowledgeable than what they really are. I pay no mind anymore and just ignore it mostly, there are so few objective opinions on this matter that you should just play everything you can and stay with what brings you the most enjoyment and fun, which at the end of the day is why we play these "sims".

Almost every RD article on AMS2 is hilarious with the same people spouting the same nonsense, I really don't know why AMS2 creates such fervor on trolls and keyboard warriors, but its hilarious .

 

The reason why AMS2 got so much heat is to a large part tribalism imo. It seems to me that in parts of the sim racing community it has become en vogue to hate on Ian Bell and the Madness Engine, people hating on AMS2 as well is just a logical consequence.

If the group says x, y or z is not cool, you're not going to be part of that group for long if you start arguing that x, y or z is actually a pretty nice guy.

I understand the view that if there's some motor racing going on any game is a simulation, although I think that puts the bar very low.

 

Considering that most people that play games have never driven a racing car I think it's kind of pointless to make dumb arguments like the ones you mentioned, I've seen plenty of those over the years.

For me I distinguish between arcade/simcade/sim based on how cars handle and how races are setup.
Simulators require a certain level of precision with inputs, cars react closer to what we see in real life (eg: kerbs, collisions, going offtrack), and races are closer to what we see in real life (full race weekend, proper race length, rules, pitstops, etc). Arcade games don't require as much precision with inputs, cars react in a more forgiving way (eg: I can bump into other cars, ride walls, cut corners, etc without much punishment), and races are setup in a more casual way (short races, race only with no qualifying, no tyre/fuel wear, no rules or pitstops, etc). Simcades are somewhere in between.

I've never driven a race car and I play racing games using a Xbox 360 controller (with realistic assists and manual gears) so I can't tell which one is more realistic. What I can say is that I find some games more enjoyable than others.
For instance, I find AMS1 & ACC more fun to play than AMS2 (let's see how many dislikes I'll get for this comment ), mainly because controller response is considerably better in those games than in AMS2 and cars feel more predictable (AMS2 has a better car and track selection though). And I find AMS2 more fun to play than the F1 games because AMS2 has better handling, better AI and more options than the F1 games.

For me it's not so much about arcade/simcade/sim, it's more about what the game has to offer, how consistent is the car handling (regardless of being sim/simcade/arcade), and how much fun I'm having with that game. Although I'm more into sims such as AMS, ACC, rFactor, GTR2, I also enjoy simcades like Grid Autosport and arcade racers like Forza Horizon and Need for Speed.

That's why the arcade/simcade/sim argument doesn't work with me, if I like a game I'll keep playing it regardless of other people's opinion.

 

"What is sim racing?"

Baby don't punt me. Don't punt me. No more.

 

I just decided to sign up for Iracing again after more than 8 years and instantly regretted it, people ramming you because you overtake them, divebombing, refusing to yield, etc.Though to be fair its probably the same on any racing game, definitely the reason why I don't enjoy online racing.

 

Btw, congratulations man on your new journey with Reiza. ^^

 

That's roughly as I see it as well, but where's the line between sim and simcade and arcade? I've also read quite a few times people talking about full sim, and hardcore sim. What does all that mean and where does realism fit into all these categories?

 

Probably the most famous 'Arcade' racing game would be Sega's Outrun, so seeing the word thrown at any kind of PC racer is somewhat amusing I first heard 'Simcade' when the Codemasters F1 games came in 2010, but it mostly seems to be used as 'the game isn't 100% simulation so we put part of 'arcade' in its description as some weird sort of punishment'...

 

That's a good point. Outrun is literally an arcade game. I think when people use words like arcade they mean there's no real life physics coded, just a simple game with no depth of simulation. That's my understanding of this term.

 

A game which plays a serious role

 

Racing sims are (at the end of the day) a genre of video game that is marketed towards those who are looking for an experience that tries to replicate real life racing. Even if a sim does a bad job of simulating certain aspects or even every aspect it still is a racing sim because the quality of the game and the genre that game belongs in are two very different things.

 

I'll just add real life motorsports are also a game, as is professional football and tennis and every other sport.

 

The reason why I chose What is sim racing as a title was that esports championships in GT Sport but also Forza were characterised as sim racing, I remember people complaining that it has to be a sim/true sim/full sim if you want to call it sim racing.

 

My personal definition of a sim would be that whatever the car is doing is a result of physics calculations under the hood, finally calculating what the contact patches of the tyres are doing. There´s more about it, but that would be my first approach.

An arcade game is probably coded like "when the car reaches an angular velocity of x then we´ll open up the the yaw angle by y". Makes for some great drifts but is way off from reality.

If defining a sim as easy as this was right, then I had to admit though that pretty much every racing game on the market currently is a sim.

 

If I've learned anything, it's the fact that everyone has different ideas about a simulation. It's very tiring to hear all the discussions about physics over and over again. The forums are full of them and everywhere there are arguments and comparisons about what the best simulation should be. Complete nonsense, I sometimes wonder if people have nothing better to do. The “so-called big YouTubers” also contribute to this disharmony. Don't forget that these people partly make a living from it and have completely different backgrounds. Everyone wants a piece of this cake and the channels are springing up like mushrooms. Back to your question. For me personally, a simulation is available when it feels good to me and I personally have the feeling that I am driving and simulating a real car. Even with different hardware there are completely new ways to simulate something. When I use VR I immediately have a visual simulation that is unique. When I use motion, butt kicker, vibration mat, belt tensioner I immediately have a tactile simulation that is unique. But in the end it will always remain a game and will never replace a real car on a real track. For me it's a nice and exciting hobby that every now and then puts me in a virtual car and a virtual track and I can have a lot of fun doing it

 

I really cant find those discussions. Just one on the general forum comparing AMS2 to AMS1 physics. I am a terrible driver myself and in any other sim I immediately know what I did wrong. But in ASM2 if I lose control always get this "What happened?" feeling. It is like the front and rear axis are not defined clearly. Then it self corrects and I wonder again... "what happened?" why did I get the control back?

And then my question is , why does this feeling only happens with AMS2? ACC, AC, iRacing, RF2, (and apparently AMS1) All sims are tuned differently but under the same basic physics rules. But AMS2 is like another world.
If I try to play AMS2 as any other sim I get some sort of disphoria feeling.

Are there youtubers that love AMS2 but that also are really good in any other sim? I am just curious.