If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
On May 10, 4:03*pm, Penis Boy > 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 ****. 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. |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
yo jello ever try that overhyped piece of US Pits dreck called TPSCC?
lol. flamed out within a week |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
On May 20, 3:08*pm, Penis Boy > 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 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
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: > ...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=YDyHA...layer_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-ne...view-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. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
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: > ...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=YDyHA...layer_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-ne...view-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. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
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 |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
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: > 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 > |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
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 >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. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
I was trying not to expect too much from rF2, but...
Mario Petrinovic:
> 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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
rF2 Screenies | Uwe | Simulators | 15 | April 28th 10 05:10 PM |
What to expect | Miss | Ford Explorer | 0 | June 7th 05 11:55 PM |
What can I expect from a 2002 SL1? | janus | Saturn | 5 | February 9th 05 03:54 AM |
it can irritate lazy goldsmiths, do you expect them | Andrew P. Hancock | Technology | 0 | January 14th 05 10:39 PM |
we expect the rich envelope | Detestable Netizen | Technology | 0 | January 14th 05 10:24 PM |