rec.autos.simulators

Besides, the "tests" to assertain which RL properties are simulated in game
engines have been well documented here.

Jan.
=---

This is, in principle, true, but the sum of parts that are even vaguely out
of touch with reality may result in an overall model that is WILDLY out of
kilter. Tweak every little bit of GPL's physical model just a little, and
I'll bet that you'll end up with a very different sim. Slightly different
"initial conditions" may result in immensely varied final results. Anyway,
ALL cars have pretty much the same basic model of springs, dampers, inertia,
force, torque etc., although an F1 car is very different to, say, a Ford
Fiesta. Who is to say that the designers of GPL have got the parts and their
interactions right?

Ryan

Neither of these apply to sim models, in my opinion. Let's consider an
autonomous coplex system (that we do not interact with), for example an
AI driver in a car in our favourite sim. The theory of chaos may tell
you that, if a certain parameter is only a bit different, the trajectory
of the car after a while can be wildly different from the unperturbed
one. But the behaviour of the car to inputs will remain practically the
same, which is what simulating is all about.

Yet, the system is not complex enough for synergetics to apply (this
works nicely in human brain, for example). A change of individual
components is directly felt on the car behaviour.

The developer then has to set the parameters to be as close to possible
to a real car. The difference between a fiesta and an F1 car is not that
big in terms of components that have to be modelled, but these
components contribute to a much different feel of the two.

-Gregor

Hi David,

It's you again, would have noticed without reading the header anyway. I've got
a suggestion since you're fed up with all those GPL threads: Start some
threads on RC2K, see what happens.
I know it's hard to admit that your favourite sim isn't on par with it's
pre-historic 67-sim brother but face the facts: Why would people keep on
raving on a product if it wasn't good (I don't judge on it being the most
realistic because I too haven't raced the real thing), why would people keep
comparing other products to this one? I don't earn any money in favourising
GPL above other products, really,  believe me. I too long for a proper modern
F1 sim but it simply isn't there at the moment, point!

You claim that no real F1 driver has an opinion on GPL, that may be true but I
think they don't even know the existence of this product (like so many other
people don't) and they do have other things on their mind. In fact I believe
no sim whatsoever will ever be comparable to the real-thing anyway.
I came across a lot of real-world racers in this n.g. who absolutely favour
GPL above anything else, admitted they didn't race the '67 beasts but
nevertheless they know how a car should react to certain inputs!

If GPL really was this bad/moderate threads in this newsgroup would have
vanished long time ago!

J.

--
Jan Hovius

DEUCE!

--
Regards,
Bruce Kennewell,
Canberra, Australia.
---------------------------

Don't let it get into your keyboard; it'll eat it right up!

BB

Well, since Frank won't deign to answer this one, maybe *you* can
enlighten us, Jan: Just what *are* those "real life" properties? By what
path of education, experience, and sub-genius are Frankie and the We's
qualified to judge the respective merits of those game engines, and
could one of you explain, in technical terms, the differences between
the various game engines of which Frank speaks so knowingly?

See, it's one thing to say "I *know* THIS game engine doesn't model
particular "real life" properties (physics) as well as this OTHER game
engine does", but without being able to explain to the densest dummy on
the newsgroup (me) the precise empirical evidence that brought you to
that conclusion, then that conclusion is merely an opinion. No problem
if it's EXPRESSED as an opinion, but Frankie speaks with the "Royal We"
authority of One Who Knows -- so if he and his We DO know, it would be a
great service to the sim racing community (which dedicated service *you*
claim is Frankie's raison d'etre) if Frankie et al would show the rest
of us how he came to his many scientific conclusions, stated as
irrefutable fact. As Werner Heisenberg (or maybe it was Mr. Wizard)
said: "Any scientist who cannot explain his findings to a five-year-old
is a charlatan"

So the question is: are Frankie and the We just blowing smoke up our
respective chuffs, or can they present the evidence behind their
stentorian conclusions and authoritative judgements of the relative
merits of different game engines? Simple question, easily answered.

If it's all just opinion...well, there's an old expression for that
occasion, too. Even my cat has an opinion on GPL.

Don't take this as adversarial, but it's "put up or shut up" time...

BB

Ah!!! -I get it. Sorry, misunderstood your point, my mistake. Let me try and
say this without getting into knots myself.

There are certain things you can do in the simulated car which in some cases
provoke a response which differs from the one you would assume to get in
real life. E.g. jamming on the brakes and locking all fours during a spin
should see you more or less continue at a tangent from your immediate
heading at the time you applied the brakes. In many sims, it doesn't. So we
can do stuff to show "something's wrong" with the model. I now understand
you don't contest that.

You have a problem with the conclusion of "therefore so and so are not
modeled in the game". And, I have to admit, you're right. There is no real
way of backing that up. It's just an assumption based on what we know (i.e.
read about) about how the real world works. I guess you are referring to
another post (the thread escapes me) where it was said the GPL model
calculates certain parameters as an aside to other calculations instead of
modeling them in their own right. If there are properties which are
calculated without being actually modeled, saying (with any authority) that
a certain property is not modeled in a game is hogwash by definition.

I may not agree, but I can't argue the point as it's valid. We don't really
know what's in the code.

I still say the "we-thing" is partly a language issue. It is a nuance but I
have often noticed native French speakers (I, native Flemish, catch myself
doing it a lot as well), when communicating in English, tend to use "we"
where a native English speaker would use "one" (i.e. "we conclude" instead
of "one concludes"). Please note I'm not a linguist, so I can't back up this
theory with fact. It's just something I've *observed*.

Quite aside from all that, Francois was already considered a voice of
authority when I first ventured on RAS now four years ago. Whether, in your
opinion, he deserves to be or not, that's just the way it is.

Jan.
=---

--
* rrev at mindspring dot com *

Hats off to you, Jan.

--
Regards,
Bruce Kennewell,
Canberra, Australia.
---------------------------

Thanks for the explanation. Now I at least semi-understand what all the
nattering is about. You were going along quite nicely, until this:

I have nothing against Frankie, except for his unending grandiose claims
to knowledge he can't back up with facts, but I've been on and off ras
for considerably longer than you, and I can assure the audience that
(until I read this message) the only person I had met or heard of who
considered Frank a "voice of authority" for more than five minutes was
Frank. "Authority" isn't a matter of my opinion, or anyone else's
opinion -- it's a matter of demonstrable fact. I'll cheerfully admit I
know practically nothing when it comes to sim design, or coding in
general, but I *do* know bullshit when I smell it.

Cheers

BB

Just that I've always been able to see past his excentricisms and gain
usefull information from his ramblings. I still respect his opinion (don't
always agree, he's gotten more cynical than I have) and while Francois and I
are not friends in any real sense of the word, he's always treated me as
one.

Call me oldfashioned (and whatever else you can think of), but I still
believe in standing up for my buddies.

If nothing else, he brings character to the group, which is a good thing.

Jan.
=---

Jan. I'm not going into the debate about Frank's standing in various
NG's as of today, but 4 years ago, he was *not* considered a voice of
authority in this NG, trust me, even Frank won't argue that point, that
was around the time of his "theses" and all that other stuff that we
won't go into here, water under the bridge and all that, but it was an
amusing time :-)))

Man I love this place at times, better than TV !!!

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

http://www.theuspits.com
http://www.teammirage.com

"Mountain climbing, auto racing and bullfighting
 are the only true sports...all others are games."  
--Ernest Hemingway--