Re: Sim Car Feedback-(Long)

Even better than a meter, simply translating the G-force generated by the car into turning resistance on a FF wheel would do the trick. -- PD Tim Vanhee wrote: > > How about a G-meter?

If you want to see what a reallllly wide view is like, try this: In F12K, go to the \F1 2000\Season00\Tracks\<track>\<track>.scn file, and open it with a text editor. Near the top of the file, under the "View=mainview" section, look for the line: ViewFOV=(77.75, 62.50) The first number controls the view angle in the cockpit view. You can adjust it to whatever you want. I like it at about 90 degrees. You really get a better feel for where you are in the corners, and for where the other cars are at. -- PD Gregor Veble wrote: > > That's why a wide field of view as in GPL is needed. Apex needs not be > in the center of the screen, it only needs to be somewhere on it.

GPL models the aligning torque on the front tires. What you feel through your hands is pretty close to what you would get. A slip angle indicator for the rears might prove useful (I doubt it), but it doesn't substitute properly for the yaw indicator built into our backsides. Michael. "Pat Dotson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Even better than a meter, simply translating the > G-force generated by the car into turning > resistance on a FF wheel would do the trick.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>The corner I speak of looks as though its taken in maybe 4th gear in most ca >rs, just a small lay off the throttle maybe a touch of the rakes and you >throw the car around it flat out. >I was going somewhere into he region of a mid to low 1st gear type of speed >while I was in about 2nd or 3rd gear to keep the revs low. Yet the back flew >out. >Now maybe this can happen on the moon or something but not here!

I haven't had the fortune of playing GPL (yet!), but this scenario is quite possible. I don't know the specifics of the GPL cars, but if the center of gravity is pretty far in the back and you've got tires that are nearly as grippy up front, the rears can keep getting bigger and bigger slip angles until WHOOOP!!!! Round ya go! Forward weight transfer, or lack of rear weight transfer can do this (not in all cars and setups of course, but quite possible in a "well" setup car). :-) Todd Wasson BTW. Where can I get GPL online?

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I think the (by far) best thing to improve sims in the near future would be >a wide screen view. With wide screen HDTV's coming down in price, many of us >will have one in the next year or two. > >I could swear I saw a pic from E3 which showed GP3 on a wide screen TV or >monitor. Anyone know for sure? > >David G Fisher

Someone took pics like that. I had the impression that it was shown on one of those new plasma-screens. Big but also a rather poor resolution and sharpness. Images seemed stretched out because obviously GP3 is not meant for 16/9 aspect ratio. JoH ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- --------------------------------------------------------------

Is it just me or does nobody else think that the car feedback can be improved beyond GPL.I posted this many times here and the common answer was GPL is perfect and you cant get better.I find this very sad and actually believed it until Papyrus's own Randy Cassidy posted that they were trying very hard to improve this part of their sims.With that said,I am a disappointed that not one of the previews I have read on Nascar4 states any improvement on the feedback of the chassis on screen.Recently I read an encouraging point about upcoming sim WSC.The West brothers say that WSC will go into extra detail in relaying what the chassis is doing to the driver--more so than any other sim to date!!!These guys won me over with just that one thing WSC is trying to accomplish not to mention everything else.Im not saying that theyll be better than Papy just that they seem to be trying to move forward with this side of racing simulations. Does anyone have suggestions for improving the feel of future sims??I figure with all the racing sim fans that come here that this could be a great place for ideas. I have one idea so here it is:)))) Hve you ever dove into a corner in GPL and wondered and waited for something to tell you what the car is doing??This is a terrible part of GPL that we must overcome with hundreds of laps on the same corner to start to understand what the chassis will do.But what if we could get a little more info. How about using the bottom unused part of the screen?(future sims could get rid of the top unused part) Starting from the center a graph could move in relation to understeer/oversteer. [how it works]--In a left hander the graph moving to the left indicates understeer and to the right indicates oversteer. Example: Enter a left hander a little to quick and the car understeers for awhile--the line would to the left relative to the amount of slip that the fronts have in relation to the rears. As speed is scrubbed the fronts will start to gain grip--and the line will move back towards center in relation to how much slip the fronts have to the rears. Start to accelerate and actually see the point(pheripheralyyy)in which the car goes from an understeer state to an oversteer state. As it goes now I have no idea when this transition from mild understeer to oversteer occurs until the last minute and then I find Iam jerking the wheel around trying to find the right amount of lock.If the graph moves from left to right very fast I know I should start easing up on the steering lock to prevent a spin. This is just my idea and there could be many ways better to accomplish this lack of feel thing. Comments on my idea or ideas of your own????

Well your understeer/oversteer idea is really good but you can always argue that it doesn't exist in real cars, although it is possible with a good telemtry system such as the one from PI research. On the other hand if you take into account that '67 drivers had to had their telemetry "in the ass" because their ass was the sensor for inline G, lateral G, understeer and oversteer it is clear that they have an advantage over us because my seatis not moving when i play GPL (although) it has wheels so it could move...) Discussion opened. Skeeter <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message : [email hidden]...

Quoted text (58 lines)

> Is it just me or does nobody else think that the car feedback > can be improved beyond GPL.I posted this many times here and the > common answer was GPL is perfect and you cant get better.I find this > very sad and actually believed it until Papyrus's own Randy Cassidy > posted that they were trying very hard to improve this part of their > sims.With that said,I am a disappointed that not one of the previews I > have read on Nascar4 states any improvement on the feedback of the > chassis on screen.Recently I read an encouraging point about upcoming > sim WSC.The West brothers say that WSC will go into extra detail in > relaying what the chassis is doing to the driver--more so than any > other sim to date!!!These guys won me over with just that one thing > WSC is trying to accomplish not to mention everything else.Im not > saying that theyll be better than Papy just that they seem to be > trying to move forward with this side of racing simulations. > > Does anyone have suggestions for improving the feel of future > sims??I figure with all the racing sim fans that come here that this > could be a great place for ideas. > > I have one idea so here it is:)))) > > Hve you ever dove into a corner in GPL and wondered and waited for > something to tell you what the car is doing??This is a terrible part > of GPL that we must overcome with hundreds of laps on the same corner > to start to understand what the chassis will do.But what if we could > get a little more info. > > How about using the bottom unused part of the screen?(future sims > could get rid of the top unused part) > > Starting from the center a graph could move in relation to > understeer/oversteer. > > [how it works]--In a left hander the graph moving to the left > indicates understeer and to the right indicates oversteer. > > Example: > Enter a left hander a little to quick and the car understeers for > awhile--the line would to the left relative to the amount of slip that > the fronts have in relation to the rears. > > As speed is scrubbed the fronts will start to gain grip--and the line > will move back towards center in relation to how much slip the fronts > have to the rears. > > Start to accelerate and actually see the point(pheripheralyyy)in which > the car goes from an understeer state to an oversteer state. > > As it goes now I have no idea when this transition from mild > understeer to oversteer occurs until the last minute and then I find > Iam jerking the wheel around trying to find the right amount of > lock.If the graph moves from left to right very fast I know I should > start easing up on the steering lock to prevent a spin. > > This is just my idea and there could be many ways better to accomplish > this lack of feel thing. > > Comments on my idea or ideas of your own????

Skeeter wrote: > > Does anyone have suggestions for improving the feel of future > sims??I figure with all the racing sim fans that come here that this > could be a great place for ideas. > Actually, I've been toying with this idea for quite some time, and I think I've found a rather good solution. I don't think any additional sensors are needed. The problem with GPL and all other racing sims is that the viewing direction is always fixed along a specific axis with respect to the car. What would make it much easier to have a good grasp on the slip angle (the over-understeer) is if the view was pointed in the direction of the velocity vector instead, at least for higher velocities. That way when the car acquires a slip angle in a, say, right hand turn, the view remains looking into the direction where the car is going, but the whole cockpit rotates slightly towards the right due to the chassis slip angle. If an oversteer condition occurs, the chassis would start rotating even further to the right due to the increasing slip angle making it very easy for the driver to notice it. In GPL one needs to concentrate on a point far away on horizon to determine the changes in car attitude which is far less intuitive to observe, although it is always a good idea to look further ahead when driving. With the viewing system I suggest, however, the peripheral vision (you usually do not look at your cockpit when driving), which is very good in determining the motion anyway, would mostly contribute to the feel of what the car is doing. What do you think? -Gregor

Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> Skeeter wrote: > > > > Does anyone have suggestions for improving the feel of future > > sims??I figure with all the racing sim fans that come here that this > > could be a great place for ideas. > > > > Actually, I've been toying with this idea for quite some time, and I > think I've found a rather good solution. > > I don't think any additional sensors are needed. The problem with GPL > and all other racing sims is that the viewing direction is always fixed > along a specific axis with respect to the car. > > What would make it much easier to have a good grasp on the slip angle > (the over-understeer) is if the view was pointed in the direction of the > velocity vector instead, at least for higher velocities. That way when > the car acquires a slip angle in a, say, right hand turn, the view > remains looking into the direction where the car is going, but the whole > cockpit rotates slightly towards the right due to the chassis slip > angle. If an oversteer condition occurs, the chassis would start > rotating even further to the right due to the increasing slip angle > making it very easy for the driver to notice it. > > In GPL one needs to concentrate on a point far away on horizon to > determine the changes in car attitude which is far less intuitive to > observe, although it is always a good idea to look further ahead when > driving. With the viewing system I suggest, however, the peripheral > vision (you usually do not look at your cockpit when driving), which is > very good in determining the motion anyway, would mostly contribute to > the feel of what the car is doing. > > What do you think?

Excellent idea, but I see some problems. In a turn you want to look at the inside first for the middle apex and the to the outside for the exit apex. The car will always have a velocity vector to the outside, so you will be looking to the outside all the turn. But with some tweaking it might work. I actually found the idea in CART Precision Racing very good, but the scrolling cockpit didn't do it justice. The direction of view was first focused on the turn-in point, and the the apex and then the exit. The problem was that it sometimes was a bit messy if you spun the car. The movements was also to hard so you got a bit disoriented after a spin. -- Olav K. Malmin remove spam when replying

"Olav K. Malmin" wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > Excellent idea, but I see some problems. > > In a turn you want to look at the inside first for the middle apex and > the to the outside for the exit apex. The car will always have a > velocity vector to the outside, so you will be looking to the outside > all the turn. But with some tweaking it might work. > > I actually found the idea in CART Precision Racing very good, but the > scrolling cockpit didn't do it justice. The direction of view was > first focused on the turn-in point, and the the apex and then the > exit. The problem was that it sometimes was a bit messy if you spun > the car. The movements was also to hard so you got a bit disoriented > after a spin. > > -- > Olav K. Malmin > remove spam when replying

That's why a wide field of view as in GPL is needed. Apex needs not be in the center of the screen, it only needs to be somewhere on it. On the other hands, the slip angles present are really not that big, especially with more modern types of tyres. A few degrees to the outside cause almost no loss of visibility while greatly adding to the feel. -Gregor

Skeeter <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Is it just me or does nobody else think that the car feedback > can be improved beyond GPL.I posted this many times here and the > common answer was GPL is perfect and you cant get better. No, its not just you really, most of this group tent to have this impression but it is wrong IMO. I've had GPL almost since it came out but its only real in the last year that I've really gotten into it. Now what I find is that the deeper you get into the game the flaws just start jumping out at you on every corner. Many characteristics of the physics are terribly reconstructed and exaggerated. For example, I find it very difficult to complete a full opening lap in GPL, every 6 out of 10 are most likely ruined by an AI driver. However what I find extra ordinary is that fact hat when they nudge you from behind, you have no hope at all of recovering the car, and the car is NOT pushed off the track probably sideways as it should be, the slightest nudge from behind sends your car many hundreds of feet into the air summer saulting and flipping and twisting. For another example, As an experiment to see how exaggerated the physics are, I drove around Silverstone. When I came to that last left kink (Bridge corner? Now a chicane.)I decided to ease off the throttle well before the corner to I would be taking it very slow indeed but did not brake to unsettle the car. I dropped to a lower gear and kept the revs very low. Now without snapping the wheel I gently eased it into the turn. Of course, if this were realistic, I would gently roll around the corner, infact the back spun out and I was left without a rear end on the car. Example no.3, The most ridiculous one of all. It works great at Monza. In most sims and of course real life you try to keep the brakes from looking as it prolongs your braking distance, oh,no, not in GPL! Down to Parabolica, stomp on the brakes, no you can't turn but since you can leave the braking so late you gain plenty time. Locking the brakes as hard as possible actually reduces braking distance in GPL! Now these are my 3 biggest gripes with GPL, but I've got more. If you think GPL has the most highly advanced physics out there and it can never be eaten then you've got a lot to learn. All GPL has is a great game engines which allows it to run 20 cars around fairly detailed tracks without too much of a stutter on a good machine. Nobody takes into account however that the games tents to scrimp on trackside objects and the ones that are there have a very low polygon counts. The graphics are all 256 colours only! If you look at a replay you'll notice the grass and other textures are so small and are repeated infinitely over and over, not at all looking real. Thats is the reason for GPL running so well. And I suppose I should;t mention the amount of braking points I know marked by scenery flaws instead of actual track detail.

GraDee wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > For example, I find it very difficult to complete a full opening lap in GPL, > every 6 out of 10 are most likely ruined by an AI driver. However what I > find extra ordinary is that fact hat when they nudge you from behind, you > have no hope at all of recovering the car, and the car is NOT pushed off the > track probably sideways as it should be, the slightest nudge from behind > sends your car many hundreds of feet into the air summer saulting and > flipping and twisting.

This experience I only had in online racing due to warping that is present. I've never, ever seen it when running with AI drivers.

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > For another example, > As an experiment to see how exaggerated the physics are, I drove around > Silverstone. When I came to that last left kink (Bridge corner? Now a > chicane.)I decided to ease off the throttle well before the corner to I > would be taking it very slow indeed but did not brake to unsettle the car. I > dropped to a lower gear and kept the revs very low. Now without snapping the > wheel I gently eased it into the turn. Of course, if this were realistic, I > would gently roll around the corner, infact the back spun out and I was left > without a rear end on the car.

And why do you expect the behaviour you describe to be realistic? I can speak from my personal experience, driving a mere 75BHP front wheel drive Renault Clio that going through a 60km/h 90 degree corner with throttle lifted in second while doing a smooth turn will just send you into a spin under the slightest provocation. And this is a FWD understeering car. The RWD cars are even much more sensitive about this.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > Example no.3, > The most ridiculous one of all. > It works great at Monza. In most sims and of course real life you try to > keep the brakes from looking as it prolongs your braking distance, oh,no, > not in GPL! > Down to Parabolica, stomp on the brakes, no you can't turn but since you can > leave the braking so late you gain plenty time. Locking the brakes as hard > as possible actually reduces braking distance in GPL!

That is simply very far from my observation. It's true that for very flecible tyres the difference between locked and maximum grip is smaller, but in GPL and especially the corner you mention, any locking will invariablly make me overshoot the corner and going into the gravel. I have a feeling that you are not braking sufficiently when your brakes are not locked in the first place. > > Now these are my 3 biggest gripes with GPL, but I've got more. > > If you think GPL has the most highly advanced physics out there and it can > never be eaten then you've got a lot to learn. It can be, with lost of ketchup (sorry, couldn' resist it :) ). Actually, it can be beaten, but not in many ways. Still, for certain WSC will have features in its physics model that GPL does not.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> All GPL has is a great game engines which allows it to run 20 cars around > fairly detailed tracks without too much of a stutter on a good machine. > Nobody takes into account however that the games tents to scrimp on > trackside objects and the ones that are there have a very low polygon > counts. The graphics are all 256 colours only! If you look at a replay > you'll notice the grass and other textures are so small and are repeated > infinitely over and over, not at all looking real. Thats is the reason for > GPL running so well. And I suppose I should;t mention the amount of braking > points I know marked by scenery flaws instead of actual track detail.

It's not the size that matters but what you do with those textures :). So there are very little polys. However, the artists at Papy are obviously that far ahead of most competition that with even small poly counts and tiny textures they are able to present some of the most realistic looking tracks *when looked from the cockpit while racing*, as this is the only thing that matters. -Gregor

Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> wrote: : GraDee wrote: :> :> For example, I find it very difficult to complete a full opening lap in GPL, :> every 6 out of 10 are most likely ruined by an AI driver. However what I :> find extra ordinary is that fact hat when they nudge you from behind, you :> have no hope at all of recovering the car, and the car is NOT pushed off the :> track probably sideways as it should be, the slightest nudge from behind :> sends your car many hundreds of feet into the air summer saulting and :> flipping and twisting. : This experience I only had in online racing due to warping that is : present. I've never, ever seen it when running with AI drivers. It does happen - I've managed an online crash at relatively low speed which left the car in the air for 10 seconds. : It's not the size that matters but what you do with those textures :). : So there are very little polys. However, the artists at Papy are : obviously that far ahead of most competition that with even small poly : counts and tiny textures they are able to present some of the most : realistic looking tracks *when looked from the cockpit while racing*, as : this is the only thing that matters. Disagreed. For me one of the weaknesses of GPL is the graphics. Compared with most modern games, GPL looks a bit primitive in that region. That's why I was so pleased with the GPLEA add on ferrari and brabham textures. The inside of the car then looked so NICE. (I spent a few laps locking up deliberately so I could see my tyres better). Hard working amateurs have hugely improved on the graphics there. I love GPL but I don't love the attitude that no sim can be better than GPL and that no current sim has better points than GPL. (Most current sims have better graphics). -- Richard G. Clegg Only the mind is waving Networks and Non-Linear Dynamics Group Dept. of Mathematics, Uni. of York UPDATED WWW: http://manor.york.ac.uk/

LL <[email hidden]> schreef in berichtnieuws 8hfpqb$fu$[email hidden]... > Well your understeer/oversteer idea is really good but you can alwaysargue > that it doesn't exist in real cars, although it is possible with a good > telemtry system such as the one from PI research. > > On the other hand if you take into account that '67 drivers had to hadtheir > telemetry "in the ass" because their ass was the sensor for inline G, > lateral G, understeer and oversteer it is clear that they have anadvantage > over us because my seatis not moving when i play GPL (although) it has > wheels so it could move...) > > Discussion opened. > I didn't know they had such high-tech asses in '67.

Richard G Clegg wrote: > > : This experience I only had in online racing due to warping that is > : present. I've never, ever seen it when running with AI drivers. > > It does happen - I've managed an online crash at relatively low speed > which left the car in the air for 10 seconds. And that's exactly what I said. Online only, not with AI drivers as stated by the original poster.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Disagreed. For me one of the weaknesses of GPL is the graphics. > Compared with most modern games, GPL looks a bit primitive in that > region. That's why I was so pleased with the GPLEA add on ferrari and > brabham textures. The inside of the car then looked so NICE. (I spent > a few laps locking up deliberately so I could see my tyres better). > Hard working amateurs have hugely improved on the graphics there.

The beauty is in the eye of the simmer, they say. I love the way GPL looks, even though the complexity of the scenes is much lower than what the never sims offer. The colors look real, although eye candy is perhaps lesser. > I love GPL but I don't love the attitude that no sim can be better > than GPL and that no current sim has better points than GPL. (Most > current sims have better graphics). Which was never my attitude in the post. F1 2000, for example, has just as complex a physics model, while Rally Championship sports better graphics for this simmer, for example. Of course the game must move on. It's just that GPL raised it so much in almost all ways that only recently the move has started to really happen, and I have yet to see a sim that will better GPL an *all* fronts (GP3 and WSC, don't get delayed any longer !). -Gregor

I didn't know they had such high-tech asses in '67.

How about a G-meter? A graphic with a reference point wich indicates zero G and a moving point wich indicates G-forces. When you accelerate the moving point will move back, when you turn left it'll move to the right. Itwould be easier to learn the all important weight transfer. If I remember correctly the Nissan Skyline GTR has a multifunctional screen that can show this graph. OTOH, when I race my car I won't have time to look at such graphics, as they are mostly usefull when turning, and that's just the moment I don't want to look away from the road.

For me that lack of feeling is just what sim racing is all about. By practise you learn to overcome it and I certainly am never surprised by the back end. You use your vision and hearing to make up for the lack of feel. The good sim drivers are so good at this that it can be considered a natural gift equal to the golden bottom of a real racing driver. I don't ever want graphs to look at during a corner, I understand your intentions but just consider how daft it would be to be following the graphs in order to set a decent time.

How about dual "slip" meters? If you've ever seen a slip meter in an airplane, you know what I'm talking about. My idea is to have something like this, with a moving "ball"; the bars could be placed at the top or bottom of the screen and you really only need your peripheral vision to see the markers... For racing sims, you could have two bars and two markers, like this: * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels the illustration above shows a cars with no lateral acceleration. * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels the illustration above shows a medium-g right turn with no drift. * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels the illustration above shows a strong right turn with front wheels gripping and rear wheels beginning a shallow drift. * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels the illustration above shows a drifting right turn. * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels * ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels the illustration above shows a car entering a spin... and so on. Hopefully these don't get mangled by your news reader! So there it is, Driftmeter(tm) technology. Andrew Skeeter wrote:

Quoted text (58 lines)

> Is it just me or does nobody else think that the car feedback > can be improved beyond GPL.I posted this many times here and the > common answer was GPL is perfect and you cant get better.I find this > very sad and actually believed it until Papyrus's own Randy Cassidy > posted that they were trying very hard to improve this part of their > sims.With that said,I am a disappointed that not one of the previews I > have read on Nascar4 states any improvement on the feedback of the > chassis on screen.Recently I read an encouraging point about upcoming > sim WSC.The West brothers say that WSC will go into extra detail in > relaying what the chassis is doing to the driver--more so than any > other sim to date!!!These guys won me over with just that one thing > WSC is trying to accomplish not to mention everything else.Im not > saying that theyll be better than Papy just that they seem to be > trying to move forward with this side of racing simulations. > > Does anyone have suggestions for improving the feel of future > sims??I figure with all the racing sim fans that come here that this > could be a great place for ideas. > > I have one idea so here it is:)))) > > Hve you ever dove into a corner in GPL and wondered and waited for > something to tell you what the car is doing??This is a terrible part > of GPL that we must overcome with hundreds of laps on the same corner > to start to understand what the chassis will do.But what if we could > get a little more info. > > How about using the bottom unused part of the screen?(future sims > could get rid of the top unused part) > > Starting from the center a graph could move in relation to > understeer/oversteer. > > [how it works]--In a left hander the graph moving to the left > indicates understeer and to the right indicates oversteer. > > Example: > Enter a left hander a little to quick and the car understeers for > awhile--the line would to the left relative to the amount of slip that > the fronts have in relation to the rears. > > As speed is scrubbed the fronts will start to gain grip--and the line > will move back towards center in relation to how much slip the fronts > have to the rears. > > Start to accelerate and actually see the point(pheripheralyyy)in which > the car goes from an understeer state to an oversteer state. > > As it goes now I have no idea when this transition from mild > understeer to oversteer occurs until the last minute and then I find > Iam jerking the wheel around trying to find the right amount of > lock.If the graph moves from left to right very fast I know I should > start easing up on the steering lock to prevent a spin. > > This is just my idea and there could be many ways better to accomplish > this lack of feel thing. > > Comments on my idea or ideas of your own????

My previous post got all messed up, naturally... The illustrations don't look right. I will try to post a graphic example on a web page.. Andrew Andrew Turner wrote:

Quoted text (118 lines)

> How about dual "slip" meters? > > If you've ever seen a slip meter in an airplane, you know what I'm > talking about. My idea is to have something like this, with a moving > "ball"; the bars could be placed at the top or bottom of the screen and > you really only need your peripheral vision to see the markers... > > For racing sims, you could have two bars and two markers, like this: > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels > > the illustration above shows a cars with no lateral acceleration. > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels > > the illustration above shows a medium-g right turn with no drift. > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels > > the illustration above shows a strong right turn with front wheels > gripping and rear wheels beginning a shallow drift. > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels > > the illustration above shows a drifting right turn. > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Front wheels > > * > ++++)+++++++()+++++++(++++ Rear wheels > > the illustration above shows a car entering a spin... > > and so on. > > Hopefully these don't get mangled by your news reader! > > So there it is, Driftmeter(tm) technology. > > Andrew > > Skeeter wrote: > > > Is it just me or does nobody else think that the car feedback > > can be improved beyond GPL.I posted this many times here and the > > common answer was GPL is perfect and you cant get better.I find this > > very sad and actually believed it until Papyrus's own Randy Cassidy > > posted that they were trying very hard to improve this part of their > > sims.With that said,I am a disappointed that not one of the previews I > > have read on Nascar4 states any improvement on the feedback of the > > chassis on screen.Recently I read an encouraging point about upcoming > > sim WSC.The West brothers say that WSC will go into extra detail in > > relaying what the chassis is doing to the driver--more so than any > > other sim to date!!!These guys won me over with just that one thing > > WSC is trying to accomplish not to mention everything else.Im not > > saying that theyll be better than Papy just that they seem to be > > trying to move forward with this side of racing simulations. > > > > Does anyone have suggestions for improving the feel of future > > sims??I figure with all the racing sim fans that come here that this > > could be a great place for ideas. > > > > I have one idea so here it is:)))) > > > > Hve you ever dove into a corner in GPL and wondered and waited for > > something to tell you what the car is doing??This is a terrible part > > of GPL that we must overcome with hundreds of laps on the same corner > > to start to understand what the chassis will do.But what if we could > > get a little more info. > > > > How about using the bottom unused part of the screen?(future sims > > could get rid of the top unused part) > > > > Starting from the center a graph could move in relation to > > understeer/oversteer. > > > > [how it works]--In a left hander the graph moving to the left > > indicates understeer and to the right indicates oversteer. > > > > Example: > > Enter a left hander a little to quick and the car understeers for > > awhile--the line would to the left relative to the amount of slip that > > the fronts have in relation to the rears. > > > > As speed is scrubbed the fronts will start to gain grip--and the line > > will move back towards center in relation to how much slip the fronts > > have to the rears. > > > > Start to accelerate and actually see the point(pheripheralyyy)in which > > the car goes from an understeer state to an oversteer state. > > > > As it goes now I have no idea when this transition from mild > > understeer to oversteer occurs until the last minute and then I find > > Iam jerking the wheel around trying to find the right amount of > > lock.If the graph moves from left to right very fast I know I should > > start easing up on the steering lock to prevent a spin. > > > > This is just my idea and there could be many ways better to accomplish > > this lack of feel thing. > > > > Comments on my idea or ideas of your own????

Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > GraDee wrote: > > > > For example, I find it very difficult to complete a full opening lap inGPL, > > every 6 out of 10 are most likely ruined by an AI driver. However what I > > find extra ordinary is that fact hat when they nudge you from behind,you > > have no hope at all of recovering the car, and the car is NOT pushed offthe > > track probably sideways as it should be, the slightest nudge from behind > > sends your car many hundreds of feet into the air summer saulting and > > flipping and twisting. > > This experience I only had in online racing due to warping that is > present. I've never, ever seen it when running with AI drivers. Nope, I don't think so, Like I said, 6 or 7 out of every 10 races are ruined by the first corner if not the first couple of corners when I play. > > For another example, > > As an experiment to see how exaggerated the physics are, I drove around > > Silverstone. When I came to that last left kink (Bridge corner? Now a > > chicane.)I decided to ease off the throttle well before the corner to I > > would be taking it very slow indeed but did not brake to unsettle thecar. I > > dropped to a lower gear and kept the revs very low. Now without snappingthe > > wheel I gently eased it into the turn. Of course, if this wererealistic, I > > would gently roll around the corner, infact the back spun out and I wasleft

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > without a rear end on the car. > > And why do you expect the behaviour you describe to be realistic? I can > speak from my personal experience, driving a mere 75BHP front wheel > drive Renault Clio that going through a 60km/h 90 degree corner with > throttle lifted in second while doing a smooth turn will just send you > into a spin under the slightest provocation. And this is a FWD > understeering car. The RWD cars are even much more sensitive about this.

The corner I speak of looks as though its taken in maybe 4th gear in most ca rs, just a small lay off the throttle maybe a touch of the rakes and you throw the car around it flat out. I was going somewhere into he region of a mid to low 1st gear type of speed while I was in about 2nd or 3rd gear to keep the revs low. Yet the back flew out. Now maybe this can happen on the moon or something but not here! > > Example no.3, > > The most ridiculous one of all. > > It works great at Monza. In most sims and of course real life you try to > > keep the brakes from looking as it prolongs your braking distance,oh,no, > > not in GPL! > > Down to Parabolica, stomp on the brakes, no you can't turn but since youcan > > leave the braking so late you gain plenty time. Locking the brakes ashard

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > as possible actually reduces braking distance in GPL! > > That is simply very far from my observation. It's true that for very > flecible tyres the difference between locked and maximum grip is > smaller, but in GPL and especially the corner you mention, any locking > will invariablly make me overshoot the corner and going into the gravel. > I have a feeling that you are not braking sufficiently when your brakes > are not locked in the first place.

I've had this conversation before. When you try as hard as you can not to lock the brakes you can get to a point where you will lock them and than wipe out.... ...if you quickly stomp on the brakes, at any track, you stop much quicker in my experience. > > Now these are my 3 biggest gripes with GPL, but I've got more. > > > > If you think GPL has the most highly advanced physics out there and itcan > > never be eaten then you've got a lot to learn. > > It can be, with lost of ketchup (sorry, couldn' resist it :) ). Tasty:-) > > All GPL has is a great game engines which allows it to run 20 carsaround > > fairly detailed tracks without too much of a stutter on a good machine. > > Nobody takes into account however that the games tents to scrimp on > > trackside objects and the ones that are there have a very low polygon > > counts. The graphics are all 256 colours only! If you look at a replay > > you'll notice the grass and other textures are so small and are repeated > > infinitely over and over, not at all looking real. Thats is the reasonfor > > GPL running so well. And I suppose I should;t mention the amount ofbraking

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > points I know marked by scenery flaws instead of actual track detail. > > It's not the size that matters but what you do with those textures :). > So there are very little polys. However, the artists at Papy are > obviously that far ahead of most competition that with even small poly > counts and tiny textures they are able to present some of the most > realistic looking tracks *when looked from the cockpit while racing*, as > this is the only thing that matters.

I'm the first to admit that GPL used the little that they used to great effect (if that makes any sense). But if the truth be told they could have used a lot more and made things look much better, in the current state it look like a very good early windows game, you know, when the DOS games started to fade out, there were still low count polygon objects but they just added nicer textures to them. In the age of 3D cards and PIII, this just doesn't cut it.

I think the (by far) best thing to improve sims in the near future would be a wide screen view. With wide screen HDTV's coming down in price, many of us will have one in the next year or two. I could swear I saw a pic from E3 which showed GP3 on a wide screen TV or monitor. Anyone know for sure? David G Fisher "Skeeter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (58 lines)

> Is it just me or does nobody else think that the car feedback > can be improved beyond GPL.I posted this many times here and the > common answer was GPL is perfect and you cant get better.I find this > very sad and actually believed it until Papyrus's own Randy Cassidy > posted that they were trying very hard to improve this part of their > sims.With that said,I am a disappointed that not one of the previews I > have read on Nascar4 states any improvement on the feedback of the > chassis on screen.Recently I read an encouraging point about upcoming > sim WSC.The West brothers say that WSC will go into extra detail in > relaying what the chassis is doing to the driver--more so than any > other sim to date!!!These guys won me over with just that one thing > WSC is trying to accomplish not to mention everything else.Im not > saying that theyll be better than Papy just that they seem to be > trying to move forward with this side of racing simulations. > > Does anyone have suggestions for improving the feel of future > sims??I figure with all the racing sim fans that come here that this > could be a great place for ideas. > > I have one idea so here it is:)))) > > Hve you ever dove into a corner in GPL and wondered and waited for > something to tell you what the car is doing??This is a terrible part > of GPL that we must overcome with hundreds of laps on the same corner > to start to understand what the chassis will do.But what if we could > get a little more info. > > How about using the bottom unused part of the screen?(future sims > could get rid of the top unused part) > > Starting from the center a graph could move in relation to > understeer/oversteer. > > [how it works]--In a left hander the graph moving to the left > indicates understeer and to the right indicates oversteer. > > Example: > Enter a left hander a little to quick and the car understeers for > awhile--the line would to the left relative to the amount of slip that > the fronts have in relation to the rears. > > As speed is scrubbed the fronts will start to gain grip--and the line > will move back towards center in relation to how much slip the fronts > have to the rears. > > Start to accelerate and actually see the point(pheripheralyyy)in which > the car goes from an understeer state to an oversteer state. > > As it goes now I have no idea when this transition from mild > understeer to oversteer occurs until the last minute and then I find > Iam jerking the wheel around trying to find the right amount of > lock.If the graph moves from left to right very fast I know I should > start easing up on the steering lock to prevent a spin. > > This is just my idea and there could be many ways better to accomplish > this lack of feel thing. > > Comments on my idea or ideas of your own????

Hopefully they developers will start programming soon for the 16/9 aspect. The monitor doesn't have to be big since we sit so close. Just wide. The tunnel vision we have now is very unrealistic. David G Fisher "Jo Helsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I think the (by far) best thing to improve sims in the near future wouldbe > >a wide screen view. With wide screen HDTV's coming down in price, many ofus

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >will have one in the next year or two. > > > >I could swear I saw a pic from E3 which showed GP3 on a wide screen TV or > >monitor. Anyone know for sure? > > > >David G Fisher > > Someone took pics like that. I had the impression that it was shown on one

of > those new plasma-screens. Big but also a rather poor resolution andsharpness. > Images seemed stretched out because obviously GP3 is not meant for 16/9aspect > ratio. > > JoH > > ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- > --------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 11:07:34 +0200, Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (23 lines)

>Skeeter wrote: >> >> Does anyone have suggestions for improving the feel of future >> sims??I figure with all the racing sim fans that come here that this >> could be a great place for ideas. >> > >Actually, I've been toying with this idea for quite some time, and I >think I've found a rather good solution. > >I don't think any additional sensors are needed. The problem with GPL >and all other racing sims is that the viewing direction is always fixed >along a specific axis with respect to the car. > >What would make it much easier to have a good grasp on the slip angle >(the over-understeer) is if the view was pointed in the direction of the >velocity vector instead, at least for higher velocities. That way when >the car acquires a slip angle in a, say, right hand turn, the view >remains looking into the direction where the car is going, but the whole >cockpit rotates slightly towards the right due to the chassis slip >angle. If an oversteer condition occurs, the chassis would start >rotating even further to the right due to the increasing slip angle >making it very easy for the driver to notice it.

I too have thought this would be a great way for more feel.When I steer into a turn I want to get some feedback as to wether the car is turning in or washing out.Now if the cockpit moved in a clockwise/counterclockwise plane in relation to the drivers head it would give more feel.Enter a turn alittle to fast and the cockpit will look the way it does now to signal no turning force at the front.As the car slows and the fronts start to grab youll see the inside front wheelmove more towards the inside of the turn.It doesnt have to be drastic and the maximum movement could be just whee the inside tire hits the edge of the screen at which point you know that your about to lose it.I totally feel that this would give sooo much more feel to GPL and future sims but once again Randy Cassidy had posted a reply that took away my confidence in this theory.He stated that they tried it in GPL but it made the car feel like it was wallowing about.I hope he and Papy are wrong but there most likely right:((((

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >In GPL one needs to concentrate on a point far away on horizon to >determine the changes in car attitude which is far less intuitive to >observe, although it is always a good idea to look further ahead when >driving. With the viewing system I suggest, however, the peripheral >vision (you usually do not look at your cockpit when driving), which is >very good in determining the motion anyway, would mostly contribute to >the feel of what the car is doing. > >What do you think? > >-Gregor

Although I feel that ultimate realism in the underlying math is the way to go, when it comes to giving sensory cues to the sim- driver (whether it's visual, auditory, or force feedback), I"m not sure ultimate realism is the way to go. Michael Young wrote: > > GPL models the aligning torque on the front tires. What you feel through > your hands is pretty close to what you would get. Great, but don't we need more than that? I think that F12K seems to use the lateral-G- force=FF-wheel-resistance method, and it works almost as well as GPL. I think the perfect simulation of FF should be a combination of the two forces. > A slip angle indicator for > the rears might prove useful (I doubt it), but it doesn't substitute > properly for the yaw indicator built into our backsides. I agree - it would be much better to have FF effects than a visual indicator on the screen.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Michael. > > "Pat Dotson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Even better than a meter, simply translating the > > G-force generated by the car into turning > > resistance on a FF wheel would do the trick.

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4IT_4.234535$[email hidden]... > Hopefully they developers will start programming soon for the 16/9 aspect. > The monitor doesn't have to be big since we sit so close. Just wide. The > tunnel vision we have now is very unrealistic. > > David G Fisher It's already been done ... by the king of sims: GPL! :))) Hena

I think more could be done with sound. If there were many more variations of the skid sound, say 10 .wav files instead of one, it could provide valuable additional feedback. Many other good ideas in this thread as well. Heaven forbid we should think that simulating the driving experience will never be done better than GPL, as great as it is. Cheers, wtonsmann ================================== In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Skeeter) wrote: > Is it just me or does nobody else think that the car feedback > can be improved beyond GPL. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

when GPL was introduced NOV **1998** (im sure someone will correct me if im wrong:) the graphics were spectacular, assuming your top of the line p2 333 could handle it... I think that in an industry where most games look dated the day after release, the fact that people are *still* buying and playing (sorry, *driving* :)) GPL says a lot for how far ahead of its time it was, and is. Moaning about the graphics on a 1.5 year old game is, if not petty, uninteresting to say the least.. Of course GPL is not perfect, but when every other "sim" i try feels dead and uninspired in comparison, i gotta say that papy did something very right in creating GPL. One other thing that i've seen mentioned here, about gpl's lack of sales.. I can't imagine that anyone at papy really expected a game based on a year of racing before the majority of computer "gamers" was born, would really do well at the Comp Usa's and EB's of the world.. My feeling has always kinda been that Kaemmer and crew were allowed to make gpl as a sort of "payback" for the high volume nascar sims, while using the new physics engine as bait.. It really seems like a labor of love, and almost deliberately uninviting to the average gamer. Not something you'd expect from a commercially directed sim.. with sierra's lack of marketing really backing up my argument IMO Hmm. Ok, offa the soapbox! Big thank you to papy for making GPL... ddunk * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

[email hidden] (Skeeter) wrote: >Hve you ever dove into a corner in GPL and wondered and waited for >something to tell you what the car is doing? Not since the FF patch, no. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

Skeeter wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > I totally feel that this would give sooo much more feel to GPL > and future sims but once again Randy Cassidy had posted a reply that > took away my confidence in this theory.He stated that they tried it in > GPL but it made the car feel like it was wallowing about.I hope he and > Papy are wrong but there most likely right:(((( >

Well, I STILL have the feeling in GPL that the cars are wallowing about :). Seriously, I didn't know that they tried it. Thanks for the info. But they could have left it as an option, couldn't they? It might look that way in GPL, but with more modern racing series the idea might just be worth trying out again as the slip angles are much smaller there. -Gregor

[email hidden] wrote: > > I think more could be done with sound. If there were many more > variations of the skid sound, say 10 .wav files instead of one, it > could provide valuable additional feedback. > Actually, F1 2000 has this implemented, as the pitch of the squeal is different if you are close to the limit or far beyond it. It really does have an impact. -Gregor

[email hidden] (Tim Vanhee) wrote in <mMK_4.81246$[email hidden]>:

Quoted text (22 lines)

> >LL <[email hidden]> schreef in berichtnieuws >8hfpqb$fu$[email hidden]... >> Well your understeer/oversteer idea is really good but you can always >argue >> that it doesn't exist in real cars, although it is possible with a good >> telemtry system such as the one from PI research. >> >> On the other hand if you take into account that '67 drivers had to had >their >> telemetry "in the ass" because their ass was the sensor for inline G, >> lateral G, understeer and oversteer it is clear that they have an >advantage >> over us because my seatis not moving when i play GPL (although) it has >> wheels so it could move...) >> >> Discussion opened. >> > >I didn't know they had such high-tech asses in '67. > >

Well, lateral G, Inline G is not so high tech, here's the way to recognize them. 1)Have your girlfriend kick you in the ass next time you play GPL for hours, that's INLINE G 2)Being angry after step 1 go into your real car, and in the middle of the first roundabout you pass strongly pull the handbrake, at first you will feel POSITIVE LATERAL G, when you hit the curb af the side of the road you will fell a very short but strong NEGATIVE LATERAL G. There you go with a unexpensive high tech G sensor....

"Pat Dotson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Michael Young wrote: > > > > GPL models the aligning torque on the front tires. What you feel through > > your hands is pretty close to what you would get. > > Great, but don't we need more than that? I > think that F12K seems to use the lateral-G- > force=FF-wheel-resistance method, and it > works almost as well as GPL. I think the > perfect simulation of FF should be a > combination of the two forces.

Aligning torque is what you feel in your hands when driving a real car. Lateral-G's would peak at optimum slip and then fall off beyond, similar to what you feel now in GPL, but perhaps not as sharply. This would be modeling the effect, not the cause, as is the case with aligning torque. At best, I think it would lag behind enough to make car control difficult. But, I've never driven anything built that way. Well, maybe I have, with CPR. If that's the case, I can say unreservedly that it truly truly sucks. With all that said, the FF in GPL works for me. Modeling reality is important; the lessons we learned elsewhere in life apply. Michael.

On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 06:03:34 GMT, [email hidden] (Skeeter) wrote: > Is it just me or does nobody else think that the car feedback >can be improved beyond GPL.I posted this many times here and thesnip >Comments on my idea or ideas of your own???? The WWI flight sim Flying Corps (Gold) has a "stall-o-meter" in the upper corner of the screen. It works very well, and shows you with green-yellow-red colours if you are going to stall. I can easily see something like that implemented in a racing sim. Stalling in a flight sim is more or less the same thing as losing grip in a racing sim. Dolle Dolf

In article <[email hidden]>, Pat Dotson <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>Even better than a meter, simply translating the >G-force generated by the car into turning >resistance on a FF wheel would do the trick. > >-- >PD > >Tim Vanhee wrote: >> >> How about a G-meter?

What about the rest of us who don't HAVE force feedback?<g> Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Own Grand Prix Legends? http://www.vroc.net Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

On 09 Jun 2000 05:57:07 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: >What about the rest of us who don't HAVE force feedback?<g> You don't know what you're missing Eldred... I drive a lot more consistent since the FF patch for GPL. You feel when the car is about to lose it, so you can react before this happens. Without FF you notice it when it's allready too late... Seriously Eldred, buy a ff wheel, you won't regret it! I read that Logitech will come up with a new FF wheel in a couple of months, perhaps you should wait for that one. Andre

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >Eldred >-- >Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 >Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett >Own Grand Prix Legends? http://www.vroc.net > >Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you >with experience... >Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.