rec.autos.simulators

I've read several posts now saying : "people who think GP3 has great physics
clearly don't know how a real F1 car feels" and things like that.......

To simply answer to that: NO, we dont know how an F1 car feels, because non
of us has ever driven an F1 car ('cept for the lucky few who paid a lot of
money to drive 3 laps in an old Larousse ;-)

I personally love GP3, and I think the physics are great, especially with
all Steering helps off (F8 ,AND the SH in the advanced controller setting
menu).

Bye,
Raimond

Go read this article to get some insight from someone who does know
how these cars handle.

http://www.simracingnews.com/newscenter/e3/articles/westracing/
--
Nos

    Now hang on. How can *you* think the physics are great? *You've* never
driven an F1 car...

Bendito;

105bhp, 400 Kg, 130mph, average time at Castle Combe - 1.05 (old circuit
'sans chicane!')

I've also driven a TVR Tuscan at the same venue - BOY OH BOY...

450bhp, 800 kg, 175mph, average time at Castle Combe - 58.

And I watched Nigel Greensall do a lap at Castle Combe in his Tyrrell 022
at 130 mph average (something silly like 40-something seconds)

I like GPL physics, but it's too much like hardwork, when you can drive the
physics but can't feel them!

Just about every other racing game makes up for it by taming down the
physics a bit.

I prefer the latter of these two options.

Doug

<snip>

"Error 403: Forbidden". Very insightful...

--
David. (GPLRank handicap: -3.01)
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really."
(Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)

I can think anything I want :-)   I never said it was great because it's
realistic, what I meant was, that I just think it feels great to drive ; I'm
having lots and lots of fun with it :-)

Bye,
Raimond

Oops! Use this link then click on the WSC interview.
http://www.simracingnews.com/
--
Nos

--
Chuck Kandler

Windows is just a virus with a GUI

<snip>

I guess you don't have a ff wheel... ofcourse you don't feel
everything you feel in a real car, but in GPL it helps greatly in
feeling what the car does (or better: what the car is about to do so
you respond in time).

Andre

But does that matter when you evaluate an F1 sim? -No, we all watch F1 which
is, supposedly, the best drivers in the world driving the best cars in the
world. So if they can't do certain things, nobody can, right?

We've all seen F1 drivers overstep the curb on the exit of a fast corner and
either being
spat out by their cars or just managing to control a massive moment. Now try
the same in GP3... you don't even have to lift off the throttle. -Not a good
representation of F1, IMO.

I could go on like this for a while, but I'd just perpetuate the myth of the
GPL fan / other sim basher. The point I'm trying to make is, no simulation
will ever truly emulate the real thing. That's not a problem as far as I'm
concerned, as it's the quality of the illusion that counts. It helps a sim's
credibility when it's not quite as easy to burst the bubble as in GP3
though.

Jan.
=---

   Personally, like you, I feel that his original argument, that you can't
judge a sim if you haven't experienced the exact real thing, is bogus.

Bendito;

Bendito;

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

  On the other hand, when you have a physics model which is fairly accurate,
like in GPL, then the behaviour of the car under practically all
circumstances can be predicted, because we all have an inherent feeling for
Newton's laws, and most of us here know the basics of race car behaviour,
drafting, traction changes under cornering, throttle-steering, trail-braking
etc etc (even if it's only in a theoretical sense).

  But I think JC is wrong when the inaccurate part of the physics model is
at least consistent. Then you can predict it, learn it, and master it. But
you definitely won't get the same satisfaction from it that you would from a
game with a more accurate physics model (at least in my experience).

Bendito;