A Cars forum. AutoBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Simulators
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

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



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 20th 11, 05:03 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
jelloshooter69
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 25
Default 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  
Old May 20th 11, 08:08 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Penis Boy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default 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  
Old May 24th 11, 01:21 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
jelloshooter69
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 25
Default 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  
Old July 1st 11, 08:45 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Asgeir Nesoen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default 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  
Old July 1st 11, 08:45 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Asgeir Nesoen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default 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  
Old July 1st 11, 03:51 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default 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  
Old July 12th 11, 07:55 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Tony R
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 207
Default 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  
Old July 12th 11, 11:06 PM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default 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.


  #30  
Old July 13th 11, 07:13 AM posted to rec.autos.simulators
Mario Petrinovic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 253
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 04:54 AM
it can irritate lazy goldsmiths, do you expect them Andrew P. Hancock Technology 0 January 14th 05 11:39 PM
we expect the rich envelope Detestable Netizen Technology 0 January 14th 05 11:24 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.