Note the reference to LFS fanboys. Where else but at a LFS forum would
you find a thread titled:
Join the "We're glad LFS is harder and more realistic now" club
Note the reference to LFS fanboys. Where else but at a LFS forum would
you find a thread titled:
Join the "We're glad LFS is harder and more realistic now" club
> Join the "We're glad LFS is harder and more realistic now" club
Which was my point about the LFS fanboys.
That's my point: CoH is neither a true single player RTS, nor in any way
simplistic enough
to be called a "kiddy game". Just like with GPL, you're just shutting
yourself off from experiencing what's on offer because you don't want to
face your own weaknesses.
Jan.
=---
>> You know, when most noobs get into the kart they do exactly the same -
>> go too fast and end up in the tyres :) Sensation of speed in sims (or
>> at least in good sims) is very close to real life (meaning that it's
>> very bad in both cases). What makes sims harder is lack of sense of how
>> much grip you have. But unlike real life, the surface in sims provides
>> constant grip, so as soon as you get used to it, it becomes much less
>> of an issue.
> GPL has no grip on any surface.
I think it's more of an issue of underestimation of speed. In GPL, it just
doesn't seem like the cars are going as fast as their speedo's indicate.
The tracks in GPL don't really have any signifcant detail on their surface,
so there's little in the way of visual feedback.
Note I created a seperate GPL thread.
> > The right front tyre is
> > hardcoded to heat up/wear more regardless of how it's being treated/loaded
> > by the particular circuit, making a "real life correct" setup/driving
> > philosophy in NR2003 on ovals unfeasable (i.e. leading to exploits being
> > quicker).
> IIRC, that's actually a bug that's related specifically to the PTA
> physics slot (which, AFAIK, is what GTP uses too). ?I don't believe
> I've experienced that phenomenon in the cup/bgn/cts physics, but it's
> been awhile since I've driven n2003.
pez
What kind of sensory input do you have when out on the RL track? You see
things passing by, you hear your engine sings, you see your rev meter,
you feel the rumble. Of those, I'd choose rev meter and "engine sings"
any day, and both of those can be simulated properly, given a decent
sound system.
You read your speed with your ears, and you use your eyes to place the
car on the track, you use your eyes. Loads and loads of drivers out
there have no feel, or perception of speed whatsoever, and this stems
from a lack of sensitivity in their ears. I always said that a truly
great racing driver must also have a musical sense...
A novice driver with no fear for his life would go too fast in RL too,
because the skill to read speed comes with practice, practice, practice.
Judging speed is one of the key factors of becoming a racing driver, and
it is the key to race simulations well, too.
However, what you *can't* feel is the minute changes of grip, the
details of the racing surface, the tyre response and changes. FFB has
improved this in the front axis area, but this is still the main problem
and shortcoming of a sim. My main gripe right now is the ability to read
what takes place at the rear end of my cars.
All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be
simulated per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull
connector to simulate that.
--A--
>> I found was that GPL was not difficult (IMHO) as long as you were
>> driving it as a real car. One just needed to have realistic
>> expectation - you don't jump in and go fast in those cars. I hope that
>> no one expects to get into a real '67 car and start matching times of
>> F1 drivers right away ;)
> How can one drive it like areal car when there is no feeling as to how
> fast you are going? That's the big issue with most noobs to racing sims.
> They immediately floor it and go too fast in the corners but you can't
> blame them when there is no sensation of real speed in the games.
Wouldn't a simple way be to have some G-meters on the dashboard? Like what the
rev meter does for speed?
And in the sound department, the sqeal of a slipping tire can help to assess
(loss of) grip. I used to turn the relative volume for sqealing up for this
reason in GPx.
Bart
>> All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be simulated
>> per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull connector to simulate
>> that.
> Wouldn't a simple way be to have some G-meters on the dashboard? Like what the
> rev meter does for speed?
> And in the sound department, the sqeal of a slipping tire can help to assess
> (loss of) grip. I used to turn the relative volume for sqealing up for this
> reason in GPx.
The audio adds to the sensation of speed but again for me this is
primarily graphically fed. That "woah" feeling as you go that bit faster
through a corner. Bumps help to add to the speed sensation.
It needs to be feeling too fast to look at g-force meters in my view...
Cheers
Tony
> What kind of sensory input do you have when out on the RL track? You see
> things passing by, you hear your engine sings, you see your rev meter,
> you feel the rumble. Of those, I'd choose rev meter and "engine sings"
> any day, and both of those can be simulated properly, given a decent
> sound system.
> You read your speed with your ears, and you use your eyes to place the
> car on the track, you use your eyes. Loads and loads of drivers out
> there have no feel, or perception of speed whatsoever, and this stems
> from a lack of sensitivity in their ears. I always said that a truly
> great racing driver must also have a musical sense...
In a sense, I'm not sure that feeling the speed is even important. It's
not like it's written at every corner at what speed it should be taken. I
think it's more of a judgement of the rate of change of the angle of your
viewpoint in comparison to the curvature of the turn. It sounds kind of
weird, but one can drive the track he has never seen quite fast and in
this case knowing one's speed doesn't help one much.
And in real live you don't even know how much traction will be in the
coming corner (and by the time you arrive there it may be too late) - it
mostly comes from experience in recognising what you see (probably it's
more applicable to rallying than to track racing, where the traction
rarely changes dramatically).
I wonder how much one feels G directly and how much through the pressure
on the body parts. The latter can probably simulated relatively easily -
it's not necessary to have 1:1 pressure scale.
I play several instruments, and I'd say I would be able to "hear", or
"regocnize" a change of a 20th of a seminote, or 10 times more sensitive
than you presume. If you're trained (piano tuners, organ tuners) or with
"perfect pitch" sense, you'll be able to recognize maybe a change of a
50th of a seminote.
You would, in a race care hear the "rate of change" in pitch more than
"aboslute pitch", and a normally musical ear will draw massive info from
a changing engine "tone". You would not translate pitch to speed, but
you'd translate rate of change to speed.
It is difficult to describe engine noise as frequency, since you hear
overtones of the base frequency. An engine with 12000 revs/min equals a
base frequency of 200hz, 20 hz lower than the "little a" of 220 hz. This
area is by far the most sensitive area of an ear, and we would have the
most resolution in this area. Our ears are most sensitive in the
"speech" frequencies.
If you make these assumptions, you'd come up with a hugely effective
instrument for speed reading. If you don't go faster with sound than
without, you need to practice your ear. One way to do this is to stick a
piece of carton over your in-car rev meter, so that the only input in
the speed dept would be the sound, and you would HAVE to use your ear.
With practice you will be able to judge your speed accurately to 1 or 2
km/h, and this would be a perfect tool for racing. You would not be able
to say "I'm now running down the straight at 301km/h", but you would be
able to say "I'm now running at 3kmh slower than my target speed at this
point". Again, not an absolute reading of speed, but a very good
relative reading of your speed.
And you're right: Grip is changing all the time, and this is where a
real car would give you heaps of info, but the sim gives you very
little. This is probably why it is hard to push very *** a sim car,
because you only get sound from tires, and no G-pull, no vibration. In
real life you would also get much more info from the tyre screech than
in a sim, since the sound will accurately describe what happens with a tyre.
---A---
>> I disagree; I would say that the sensation of speed actually *is* one of
>> the aspects of racing that may be simulated properly.
>> What kind of sensory input do you have when out on the RL track? You see
>> things passing by, you hear your engine sings, you see your rev meter,
>> you feel the rumble. Of those, I'd choose rev meter and "engine sings"
>> any day, and both of those can be simulated properly, given a decent
>> sound system.
>> You read your speed with your ears, and you use your eyes to place the
>> car on the track, you use your eyes. Loads and loads of drivers out
>> there have no feel, or perception of speed whatsoever, and this stems
>> from a lack of sensitivity in their ears. I always said that a truly
>> great racing driver must also have a musical sense...
> I wonder how well you can really judge the speed by the sound. It seems
> to work well at low speeds, but at high speeds it's much more difficult.
> Human ear apparently has logarithmic sensitivity to the frequency, but
> the speed depends on revs linearly. For example, there's about 1000
> difference between C# and D in 11th octave. That's about 6%. Considering
> that good musician can likely tell about half of variation, that 3%. At
> 300km/h it's 9km/h. Not too bad, but probably not good enough for driving
> at the top level. And that's assuming that one is in perfect environment
> for listening. Driving sim without sound is kind of strange, I felt
> uncomfortable without it, but I could go at practically the same speed as
> with the sound.
> In a sense, I'm not sure that feeling the speed is even important. It's
> not like it's written at every corner at what speed it should be taken. I
> think it's more of a judgement of the rate of change of the angle of your
> viewpoint in comparison to the curvature of the turn. It sounds kind of
> weird, but one can drive the track he has never seen quite fast and in
> this case knowing one's speed doesn't help one much.
>> A novice driver with no fear for his life would go too fast in RL too,
>> because the skill to read speed comes with practice, practice, practice.
>> Judging speed is one of the key factors of becoming a racing driver, and
>> it is the key to race simulations well, too.
>> However, what you *can't* feel is the minute changes of grip, the
>> details of the racing surface, the tyre response and changes. FFB has
>> improved this in the front axis area, but this is still the main problem
>> and shortcoming of a sim. My main gripe right now is the ability to read
>> what takes place at the rear end of my cars.
> And in real live you don't even know how much traction will be in the
> coming corner (and by the time you arrive there it may be too late) - it
> mostly comes from experience in recognising what you see (probably it's
> more applicable to rallying than to track racing, where the traction
> rarely changes dramatically).
>> All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be
>> simulated per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull
>> connector to simulate that.
> I wonder how much one feels G directly and how much through the pressure
> on the body parts. The latter can probably simulated relatively easily -
> it's not necessary to have 1:1 pressure scale.
> > All this comes from reading the Gs you pull, and this can never be
> > simulated per se; we'll have to wait for that back-of-your-skull
> > connector to simulate that.
> I wonder how much one feels G directly and how much through the pressure
> on the body parts. The latter can probably simulated relatively easily -
> it's not necessary to have 1:1 pressure scale.
You can test it yourself next time you are driving your street car.
Pay attention to how much you feel small changes in lateral G's on
your body. I can feel changes in body sensations well below where I
think my inner sense of balance comes into play.
In fact, though, it's not always 'seat-of-the-pants' feedback that you
are getting. At low G's you actually get more sensation in your back
as your upper body is pulled sideways. In my experience I don't start
feeling much sensation in the seat until reaching higher G's. This
concept is integrated into the response curves of my GS-3 motion seat.
Pat Dotson
UltraForce Simulations LLC
http://www.ultraforcesim.com
http://www.iracing.com/news.htm
>> I wouldn't dream of BS'ing you. Jackie Stewart indeed didn't like GPL '67
>> when he tried it. People who're used to driving real racecars are missing a
>His dislike may have been influenced by the fact that he tried it using
>a gamepad and not a decent set of wheel and pedals as I seem to recall,
>so all kinds of driving aids would have influenced the experience.
>Cheers, uwe
> I play several instruments, and I'd say I would be able to "hear", or
> "regocnize" a change of a 20th of a seminote, or 10 times more sensitive
> than you presume. If you're trained (piano tuners, organ tuners) or with
> "perfect pitch" sense, you'll be able to recognize maybe a change of a
> 50th of a seminote.
> You would, in a race care hear the "rate of change" in pitch more than
> "aboslute pitch", and a normally musical ear will draw massive info from
> a changing engine "tone". You would not translate pitch to speed, but
> you'd translate rate of change to speed.
> It is difficult to describe engine noise as frequency, since you hear
> overtones of the base frequency. An engine with 12000 revs/min equals a
> base frequency of 200hz, 20 hz lower than the "little a" of 220 hz. This
> area is by far the most sensitive area of an ear, and we would have the
> most resolution in this area. Our ears are most sensitive in the
> "speech" frequencies.
I wonder if you can hear tyre screech in something like F1 car. That
engine must be making a lot of noise...