To Reiza: What physics do you actually want?

CREST2-AMS2 is a SharedMemory API reader. See the attached report.

Slip angles are not present in the list.
TyreSlipSpeed is reported but I don't know at witch (physical) unit nor how to make it useful.
TyreSlip% can be calculated using SimHub + viper4gh Plugin

Suspension forces are not directly passed AFAIK but some telemetry apps report suspension (?) forces.

 

Maybe they won’t do anything now because they are doing something with update 1.5? I still wonder what update 1.5 can change which will drastically change the physics.

 

This is a really interesting post, with some good arguments from either side.

From my point of view regarding the setups, there are a few issues.

1) The set-up screen is abysmal.
Has been from day 1.
Desperately needs refactoring and tidying up, bug fixing etc.

2) I would ignore the ability of the player/driver when crafting a set up.

Why?

With all due respect - f**k the driver.
A good driver takes the car to the limit - the car does not protect the driver.

I'd rather have a car that wants to kill me first, which makes me respect it, then learn what the car wants - what it needs to go fast, then learn it and gradually become faster.

Make the car fast, as in a good race pace (not ALIEN pace, there's a reason why we call those people Aliens after all).

Stop making the car placid or easy to drive.

If I start with the car in a placid state - I have to immediately jump into the set-up to liven it up.

If anything - have at least 2 predefined setups - one Placid and one Aggressive.

The thing I love about simulators is jumping into a car for the first time to learn about it's unique handling, throttle, braking, turn in, corner exit traits etc. If I jump into rF2 and into the Porsche 992 it feels remarkably different to the Ferrari GTE, the BMW BTCC and massively different to an LMP2.

Whereas, with AMS2 I always get a sense that each car handles in a fairly familiar way, exposing the same traits as other cars.

I'm not saying every car in AMS2 feels the same - far from it.

I'm merely saying all cars in AMS2 exhibit familiar traits - which stops each car from feeling unique (again - see above, I'm not saying they all feel the same - I would say 'more unique' but that doesn't make a lot of sense).



This is probably coming across the wrong way - which is inevitable with a written post - there will always be something someone can pick up on and criticise.

As with most people here, I too want the best for AMS2.

 

I think I know what you mean. As an example, Aris from Kunos once mentioned the different characteristics of the GT3 driveline configurations in ACC, where in general due to weight distributions and tire dimensions, a front engine car will tend to be more understeery while a mid engine car will tend to be more oversteery. Of course there are always outliers and extremes and setups can be changed, but in general they tend to these characteristics. In AMS2, the GT3 cars all more or less exhibit an oversteery handling, independent of driveline configuration, which makes them more "samey" to handle than they could/should be. But then again, is this an issue of physics or setup, or simply of overdriving the car?

 

I dont get why you keep mentioning this. This is not what is happening to me, so its totally besides the point, i know very well how to distinguish physics from FFB. Also, people say all sorts of things about any game, that is hardly a measure of anything.

AMS2 is notoriously "numb" to setup changes. This is not only my opinion. The tires dominate so much everything around these cars that almost nothing but the most drastic of setup changes can change the traits that you guys gave these tires. Again, you can get any F1 or CART car sideways in real life and balance it with the throttle. But you can also choose NOT to do it. What AMS2 has is a "sideways switch" attached to the rear throttle. I can bring up countless examples of cars looking twitchy and strange from outside cameras. This then is "helped" by the massive hand of god you guys implemented to keep people from spinning off when this happens, culminating in the lurid slides at indy. If anything feels "canned", its this.

You can disagree all you want, that doesnt change what i am seeing, and i know how to setup the game, and once again, how to separate FFB from physics. I can even see the car squirming over itself as soon as some bump on the road is there, such is the power of this effect over anything else.

I made all the adjustments i could make within the scope of the setup menu. This is not my "unwillingness" for anything, and in fact, i shouldnt have to dwell on setups to "fix" absolutely broken physics. Thats your "job" aparently, not mine. I have fixed all these problems and then some on an older engine. So its time to pick up the slack and do your job properly, because unlike what someone was saying, i am not here to "apply" for any job, i am a paying customer that demands that "professionals" do at least as good of a job as i or other modders do in their free time.

Please quote me where did i say they "didnt matter at all". Strawmen will get you nowhere. And since you are being condescending, let me tell you that i am astonished that someone who has absolutely no credencials, and no background has such an important role in this endeveaour. You seem more interested in attacking me than actually adressing what i am saying, because in YOUR game, no matter the car, they all exibit the same basic handling traits accross the board. So if anything you are shooting YOURSELF in the foot, because if anything you prove what i have been saying all along. People are not dumb, and they can tell by driving, no matter how much gaslighting you do. The truth is you or whoever in the physics team, had the briliant idea of setup up race cars "backwards", and then you claim this is to "optimize" the car? For what? So you cant enter a corner fast enough, and you have to come out of it sideways to be quick? This makes no sense at all, and anybody with a minimum knowledge of race car dynamics can tell you, but you dont need my word for it, the amount of videos of cars locking front wheels and then kicking the rear out is proof enough of this.
So i sugest you read at least SOME books, since aparently not even that is a pre requisite to be a "physics consultant" at reiza.

 

They might fix the issues with v1.5

 

If a sim incorporate something called a tire model then all the cars in this sim will in some way or another incorporate some familiarity in the way the tires loose grip/adhesion and (hopefully) regain grip.
That is the reason for the many years critique of iRacings in-famous New Tire Model (NTM).
Nicknamed with the euphemism iceRacing.
So there is nothing wrong in the possible fact that all cars incorporating the Mad SETA tire model does exibit some common characteristics in the way the different cars loose or regain grip.

ByTheWay: But I have to admit that eventhough Im only "driving" formula cars in this sim then there are some of the cars which have so weird/awfull behaviour in the mentioned loose/regain area that I often wonder does this car use a tire model from Super Mario Karts.

 

Well you see, i would be happier with that answer, instead of the usual "everything is fine, YOU are the problem".

Then they backpaddle, like in the famous diff saga, and things DO get fixed, but in the meantime, time was wasted arguing and gaslighting your own customers.

 

Very interesting post.
I am very much on richards side on this one, as i can absolutely see what he is meaning.

It is very confusing to me on the same time, that a staff member is responding in such a way steelreserv is doing in this threat. That really tells a lot.

As i mentioned in other threads here on the forum, some cars we drive (or have driven) IRL on track just seem miles away in the game. As if they have no lateral grip at all and just skating all over the place. The Caterham 620R for example. Also the GT3 cars feel very driveable at first, show the fundamental problem with the current physics. Lateral Grip and Wheel slip.

As for FFB things (though this topic shouldnt be adressed in a "physics" based thread at all!!!) even iRacing is feeling more rich and detailed out of the box to me (without IRFFB) than the current state of default +. It cannot be a "working as intended" feature to have to dig in the forums for custom FFB files, ever! Especially if 1 year ago everything was feeling superb FFB wise.

Throwing content after content at this game wont help much in the long run, if the fundamental flaws arent beeing adressed.

Not only the physics department seem to be a bit lost in the development hell, you can pretty much say this in my opinion to other departments too.
HUD, AI, MP, Physics, FFB, Sound, Race Rule appliance to say some.

There is a good reason (beside netcode) LFE didnt bring AMS2 into their service, despite they won the poll on what game to bring it next on...

Meanwhile the opening posts question,
"What physics do you actually want?"
is still beeing unaswered...

 

Do you want the big bosses to answer?

 

My other question is if Richard and others are comparing to other sims or IRL?

 

Costumer ?

 

I usually only make comparisons with what is knowledge from real life, direct or indirect.

 

By knowledge you mean your knowledge or what other people say?

 

Wasn't direct or indirect clear enough?

 

What is your end goal here Richard?

I think you can assume the Reiza believe the physics are at a baseline they are happy with and are going to improve it incrementally from here.

You obviously disagree with this baseline.

Making claims about developers credentials and other statements only prove to antagonise. If you're at the point where you don't like the game, go an play one you do like. But there must be something you see in it to be here commenting?

 

Well, I try to explain what I can feel different from rfactor2 and AC, speaking about formulas, because GT cars maybe this phenomenon is easier to happen. I'm not technician.

Driving a formula, generally speaking, on a low speed curve, mid corner always tend to slide laterally to the exterior, like if drive a rear drifty car and I change the weight balance to produce this effect, but without doing anything strange. The difference from rfactor are that I have a better feeling of the grip and the throttle can recover the car from this state to a controllable limit of the grip and maneuverability.

In AMS2, only If I carefully balance the weight with correct brake and throttle on the entering of the corner, this behaviour is reduced but still exists and appear, making being on the limit too hard because when entering on the slide, you just can control this slide, but it never ends until the exit of the corner. I mean, what I feel is that once I'm sliding, I'm going to memorize my driving so the next lap I have to manage the entering only, because on mid corner I can't do what I can in rfactor2 or AC.

It's like there are little area where you can control the grip, on rfactor this area is bigger or at least, possible, but in AMS2 you have to control the enter or kill the car to stopping the slide.

Another aspect I don't like so much is the electronics TC/ABS.

I can't say more bad behaviours with room of improvement, because overall I feel super natural and intuitive the handle of the car, the weight and so on (not FFB, but foot play).

 

Lets remember how much time other sims have had

 

The goal is what i stated already in the beginning. I want to know what physics they want, and if indeed things are working as they are supposed to for them. And yes, that includes the lurid slides at indy. Until now, i got nothing but what you claim i did about the "developers" (and i put quotations, because a physics consultant is not a developer). So like other people also say, i never got any answers, except the usual "all is fine, you are the problem". Nobody said that this baseline was good or not, and why it is, and how that connects with the obvious problems stated by me and others, and if anything at all is going to be adressed and in what fashion.