Automobilista 2 V1.5 Physics Development Update

The other thing to bear in mind is that people over-praise mods, and over-analyse official releases, generally speaking. I haven't tried the Thunderflash mods so I have no idea, they could be outstanding

 

Cute car!!!

Of course we are all relying on our most common experience with road cars, but let's be honest. There are comments on this board constantly that reveal people have no idea why a FWD race car feels so bizarre compared to their own vehicle. Most people would not even be able to withstand being a passenger in a modern F1 car--the g-forces would be more than they could tolerate jut sitting and hanging on for dear life, not having to actually control the car. Any of my road cars then or since could easily out-accelerate my F2000 race car, so why did driving it feel like I had been in a boxing ring (from the braking forces and the five-point belt)? I have driven many, many go-karts in my life, but only once have been able to spend a whole day in a full race shifter cart equipped with top-quality racing slicks. My neck is still sore

The general physics we perceive from driving normal cars is of course the foundation for judging sim physics. But race cars and race tires are a long way away from anything that is street-legal...for obvious reasons. Then, think about loose surfaces, ice/snow, hot versus cold tarmac, rain, etc. So few people have experience pushing a car to the limit in all those combinations across multiple vehicles to be able to assess. I have more experience than most on here, but it is still just scratching the surface. I have to extrapolate the limited real-world situations to imagine how far would a Rallycross car actually jump if it was going over this crazy mound or exactly when does this slick turn into a hockey puck or into irretrievable aquaplane mode due to water build-up on the track? And then, what does it actually do/feel like when it happens?

It's much easier to just program stuff that is plausibly realistic and fun. Reiza is one of the very few devs who tries to build the sim from a basis of real-world physics and then deal with the gameplay issues afterwards. Using the identical engine, it is immediately apparent to anyone who has played PC 2 that SMS either ran out of time (forced from publisher) or chose to use the sophisticated sim engine as a great base, but fall back on gameplay-based decisions for many elements of the title. Sometimes it worked, but often it did not. The payoff of the torturous process Reiza follows is that in the end, you get physics sophistication consistency across all vehicles and tracks, and, the best attempt at using the simulation engine at the most realistic end of its spectrum.

My original comment was just that even with a $100K motion rig, etc., I am not leaving a heavy session with the F-Inter (closest car to the F2000 in the game) feeling bruised and beaten. Nor, even if I wore a full race helmet, would my neck give out after a few hours in the race kart. There just isn't anything that replicates the real forces (or dangers) of racing, including the sims the F1 teams use!!

 

I guess you are sharp enough to understand that Im not talking about being able to withstand the forces of as example a F1 car.
Im only talking about the possibility to assess how realistic a racing game is able to replicate the basic behaviour of different cars.
Does this feel realistic or not.

ByTheWay: While you are describing how extremely hard it must be to survive the forces of a F1 car then I suddenly begin to think about how many RL F1 cars any of the devs in the Reiza team have been driven. But without questioning this then we all take for granted that they (ofcourse) will be able to get the game to simulate such an F1 beast. Hehe ofcourse soonⒸ

 

That's why devs use data from real cars, races and manufacturers to calibrate performance. Even if they had their own sample of every car in the game and a race track to themselves, it still wouldn't be enough to model the performance. Need real-world data from vehicles operating in various real-world conditions while being driven by competent pilots. Then, triangulate

 

I bet you that very few people in here have ever driven all drive types in real life (FWD, 4WD or RWD) Or ever used a manual transmission or driven cars without ABS or without TC. Not to mention ever sports cars or even real racing cars on race tracks. And yet a simulation is a completely different matter and cannot be compared with reality. Other senses and methods are used to make it as real as possible and copy it as best as possible. Then there are the various immersion enhancers to simulate it even more intensively and realistically. In the end it will always remain a simulated game and one can discuss it ad infinitum. For me personally, it just has to be fun and meet my expectations. Reiza definitely does that for me with Ams2

 

Some of us old farts have. LOL

 

Hehe, true....
My first car didn't even have a safety belt and i was allowed to drive motorbikes without helmet.
Good old times...

 

You forgot sitting in the bed of a pick up truck.

 

LOL - Not even down in the bed! On top of the wheel wells.

 

Hehe why did I know that would be the answer?
Real data from RL is a buzz word marketing departments of gaming studios love to use.
How many years have iRacing told us that they (or rather their TM guru Kaemmer) use Real data to feed the different incarnations of their tire model?
10 years or something.
Real data is absolutely no garantee that a simulation does behave as RL.
Or even close to RL.
Because if the physics and/or tire model the data is feed into is not exactly replicating RL then sometimes its better to use partly "tweaked" data from RL to get more realistic behaviour outcome from the game.

Dave Kaemmer measuring real date

 

You are right that real world data does not automatically translate into a good physics model or something that feels good from a gameplay perspective. But it is necessary and better than just using "seat-of-the-pants" impressions to tune things.

 

the opening scene of famous animation in korea, 1987



and its last scene also.

this is 1980's safety lol

 

Indeed, and still do. Albeit I beginn to appreciate the advantages of AWD cars with Dual-clutch automatic transmission, adaptive chassis the 300+hp class a lot lately.

All of that was out of reach in the 90's of course when we started to tune our BMW E3 325i "****boxes".

 

With all the latest physics update.. how do they work on mods? Do they also apply on these cars? Or only at the official "in-game" cars.

 

My 2-cents as someone who does really like Thunderflashes mods. It really depends on the mod, the GT3's are great fun and probably my favorite of the whole bunch. But for the prototype cars (especially LMP2) or Formula Renault 3.5, I find them more frustrating than anything else.

When there is a choice between Reza content and Thunderflash content I almost always go to Reiza and use the Thunderflash cars as field fillers, with the exception of maybe GT3 and that may be because I find them easier to drive. There is a weird feeling I get with all of the cars (including GT3) that I can't shake off, I have a really hard time describing it. Honestly, kinda remindes me of pre 1.4 AMS 2 but with slides that are harder to maintain? Maybe? I don't think it's exactly what I'm feeling but that's my approximation.

 

It's the end of Motorsport Games

 

It may be the end for them, but this wouldn't be the reason. They already faced this issue in the past and resolved with a reverse split of their stock. They can do the same again or move to another exchange with fewer restrictions--neither affects the operating reality of the company. The real issue is whether their actual finances will continue to bleed faster than they have any ability to repair their many troubles.

Also, I realized this is incredibly off-topic after looking at which thread it was posted in! Sorry for continuing it.

 

You also need to maintain a minimum total value of assets. After selling/losing licenses and shares dropping they need another 2M to have the minimum asset value needed or de-list.
They will probably find someone who gives them 2M but I would not give it for granted until I see it.

 

The point I was making was that they can just go to another exchange...where all the rest of the failed NASDAQ companies go. The issue is their operations. Will the LeMans game see the light of day? If so, they MIGHT have a chance at survival. If it does not, given that they had to sell everything else just to stay afloat, then they are probably dead. Their status on the NASDAQ is far down the list of things that matter as to whether they can survive as an operating entity with a future.

 

I dont know if you are aware of it but you are trying to turn this into some kind of dichotomic either or discussion. Either use RL data or "seat-of-the-pants" impressions.
Was I wrong to suppose that you are sharp enough to avoid this kind of fallacy?

ByTheWay: I used the wording partly "tweaked" data from RL. To avoid such false discussion - OK?