Car Physics in Colin McRae Rally (demo)

Hi, Just took a look at the demo for Colin McRae Rally. What are other folks thoughts on the game physics? I thought it was pretty lame (by lame I mean that it seemed more arcade like rather than a "simulation"). I guess it was somewhat challenging, but I didn't find it to be an involving or satisfying computer driving experience. I had a friend of mine drive it... he's driven all-wheel-drive cars off road fast before, and he didn't think the game captured the experience at all. Any thoughts? -Steve

Steve, I tend to agree. It's a lot of fun, and challenging. What struck me (I've been spending most of my time with GPL, and I have a 4X4 in real life that I've done a lot of blasting down logging roads and such) is the amount of grip offered in CMR. I know there's a big difference between 1967 bias ply racing tires and suspension technology and 1998 radial tires and modern suspensions, but not enough to overcome the difference between dry pavement and dirt/gravel/mud. It seems like they modeled the physics based on what it "looks" like on TV or videos rather than how *** tires and weight shift/mass interacts with low traction surfaces. The drivers on TV make it "look" a lot easier than it is. -Mike

Quoted text (15 lines)

>Hi, >Just took a look at the demo for Colin McRae Rally. What are other >folks thoughts on the game physics? I thought it was pretty lame (by >lame I mean that it seemed more arcade like rather than a >"simulation"). I guess it was somewhat challenging, but I didn't find >it to be an involving or satisfying computer driving experience. >I had a friend of mine drive it... he's driven all-wheel-drive cars >off road fast before, and he didn't think the game captured the >experience at all. >Any thoughts? >-Steve

Quoted text (12 lines)

>Steve, >I tend to agree. It's a lot of fun, and challenging. What struck me (I've >been spending most of my time with GPL, and I have a 4X4 in real life that >I've done a lot of blasting down logging roads and such) is the amount of >grip offered in CMR. I know there's a big difference between 1967 bias ply >racing tires and suspension technology and 1998 radial tires and modern >suspensions, but not enough to overcome the difference between dry pavement >and dirt/gravel/mud. It seems like they modeled the physics based on what >it "looks" like on TV or videos rather than how *** tires and weight >shift/mass interacts with low traction surfaces. The drivers on TV make it >"look" a lot easier than it is.

Isn't that the point though, even in the most accurate sim, to make it 'feel' real not be real? If it was totally realistic we wouldn't be able to drive at all, let alone go for lap times and wins. I saw Winfield put 2 of their rally guys in the Williams F1 car as a publicity stunt. These are drivers who know what their doing and one crashed before the first corner whilst the other one crashed on the first corner as the car was so hard to drive. Dean

Quoted text (22 lines)

> >Steve, > >I tend to agree. It's a lot of fun, and challenging. What struck me (I've > >been spending most of my time with GPL, and I have a 4X4 in real life that > >I've done a lot of blasting down logging roads and such) is the amount of > >grip offered in CMR. I know there's a big difference between 1967 bias ply > >racing tires and suspension technology and 1998 radial tires and modern > >suspensions, but not enough to overcome the difference between dry pavement > >and dirt/gravel/mud. It seems like they modeled the physics based on what > >it "looks" like on TV or videos rather than how *** tires and weight > >shift/mass interacts with low traction surfaces. The drivers on TV make it > >"look" a lot easier than it is. > Isn't that the point though, even in the most accurate sim, to make it > 'feel' real not be real? If it was totally realistic we wouldn't be able to > drive at all, let alone go for lap times and wins. I saw Winfield put 2 of > their rally guys in the Williams F1 car as a publicity stunt. These are > drivers who know what their doing and one crashed before the first corner > whilst the other one crashed on the first corner as the car was so hard to > drive. > Dean

I think to a certian extent it depends on the developer's objective. By definition a simulation can never be real. I'm basing my opinion on the driving model in GPL, which seems to have become something of a new standard in physics modeling. After some initial grumbling about GPL's physics model being too hard to drive most seem to accept that it's at least accurate (and some probably don't). I think CMR (and I have the full version, here in the US) is a lot of fun, and I can't get anywhere near the record times for the various stages, but after spending most of an afternoon and evening playing with it (drove most of the stages multiple times)I kept thinking that it seemed like the physics were modeling too much grip for the speeds and horsepower the cars were capable of. What I kept thinking was it sure seems like there's more grip on this dirt, gravel, mud, in the rain, whatever than there was in GPL on clean dry pavement. And to parrallel your antecdote about Winfield and Williams, after driving probably a thousand simulated miles in the rally cars, when I jumped back in the open wheeled roadsters in GPL I "crashed on the first corner as the car was so hard to drive", so maybe CMR models grip just fine. :-) I really don't think so (MHO) and that's why I'm laying off it for a while. It screws up my GPL driving. P.S. Just picked up Viper Racing during lunch. Tonight I'll find out how it compares to GPL's physics model and if it too screws up my GPL driving. -Mike

As far as rally racing goes, I think CMR has the best physics ever. A friend of mine who actually was a european rally driver was extremely impressed by the physics. Now having said that, there are a few areas that do need some work. Your car seems to "pop" up and down without much regard for inertia or mass. Traction on asphalt seems way too high. There should be more rocks, roots, and ditches to spin you out or cause a rollover if you get too sloppy, and there needs to be more cues to help the player sense excessive wheelspin. And of course, the damage model and "must place in the top six" stuff still bug me, although that's obviously not physics related. The physics model isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but IMHO it is the first model to be worthy of a sim. Neil M.

Quoted text (15 lines)

>Hi, >Just took a look at the demo for Colin McRae Rally. What are other >folks thoughts on the game physics? I thought it was pretty lame (by >lame I mean that it seemed more arcade like rather than a >"simulation"). I guess it was somewhat challenging, but I didn't find >it to be an involving or satisfying computer driving experience. >I had a friend of mine drive it... he's driven all-wheel-drive cars >off road fast before, and he didn't think the game captured the >experience at all. >Any thoughts? >-Steve

I have the full version and would agree completely with your assessment. Designed to let you drive the way you see the pros on TV do it with only about 30 seconds preparation. Unfortunately, that means after you have played it for an hour, you are really wishing for a more realistic simulation. Other than the lack of powerslide capability, I think the old DOS RAC Network Q Rally Championship from Europress is more realistic than CMR. It is TOCA on grass...for those who have played TOCA just drive the car off the track and you'll pretty much get the idea.. Marc.

Quoted text (32 lines)

>Steve, >I tend to agree. It's a lot of fun, and challenging. What struck me (I've >been spending most of my time with GPL, and I have a 4X4 in real life that >I've done a lot of blasting down logging roads and such) is the amount of >grip offered in CMR. I know there's a big difference between 1967 bias ply >racing tires and suspension technology and 1998 radial tires and modern >suspensions, but not enough to overcome the difference between dry pavement >and dirt/gravel/mud. It seems like they modeled the physics based on what >it "looks" like on TV or videos rather than how *** tires and weight >shift/mass interacts with low traction surfaces. The drivers on TV make it >"look" a lot easier than it is. >-Mike >>Hi, >>Just took a look at the demo for Colin McRae Rally. What are other >>folks thoughts on the game physics? I thought it was pretty lame (by >>lame I mean that it seemed more arcade like rather than a >>"simulation"). I guess it was somewhat challenging, but I didn't find >>it to be an involving or satisfying computer driving experience. >>I had a friend of mine drive it... he's driven all-wheel-drive cars >>off road fast before, and he didn't think the game captured the >>experience at all. >>Any thoughts? >>-Steve

>drive at all, let alone go for lap times and wins. I saw Winfield put 2 of >their rally guys in the Williams F1 car as a publicity stunt. These are >drivers who know what their doing and one crashed before the first corner >whilst the other one crashed on the first corner as the car was so hard to >drive. They were Tommi M?kinen, now 3-time world champion in Rally, and Mick Doohan ... well, we all know who he is :-) Hena

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>drive at all, let alone go for lap times and wins. I saw Winfield put 2 of >>their rally guys in the Williams F1 car as a publicity stunt. These are >>drivers who know what their doing and one crashed before the first corner >>whilst the other one crashed on the first corner as the car was so hard to >>drive. >They were Tommi M?kinen, now 3-time world champion in Rally, and Mick

Doohan >.... well, we all know who he is :-) >Hena hehe Makinen don't get along with the British cops does he, almost cause the championship

Right on, just look at the replay. It make you look like you are the next Tommi Makinen or the next cop that busted Tommi in the final race...

Quoted text (16 lines)

>I have the full version and would agree completely with your assessment. >Designed to let you drive the way you see the pros on TV do it with only >about 30 seconds preparation. Unfortunately, that means after you have >played it for an hour, you are really wishing for a more realistic >simulation. Other than the lack of powerslide capability, I think the old >DOS RAC Network Q Rally Championship from Europress is more realistic than >CMR. It is TOCA on grass...for those who have played TOCA just drive the >car off the track and you'll pretty much get the idea.. >Marc. >>Steve, >>I tend to agree. It's a lot of fun, and challenging. What struck me

(I've >>been spending most of my time with GPL, and I have a 4X4 in real life that >>I've done a lot of blasting down logging roads and such) is the amount of >>grip offered in CMR. I know there's a big difference between 1967 bias ply >>racing tires and suspension technology and 1998 radial tires and modern >>suspensions, but not enough to overcome the difference between dry pavement >>and dirt/gravel/mud. It seems like they modeled the physics based on what >>it "looks" like on TV or videos rather than how *** tires and weight >>shift/mass interacts with low traction surfaces. The drivers on TV make it

Quoted text (21 lines)

>>"look" a lot easier than it is. >>-Mike >>>Hi, >>>Just took a look at the demo for Colin McRae Rally. What are other >>>folks thoughts on the game physics? I thought it was pretty lame (by >>>lame I mean that it seemed more arcade like rather than a >>>"simulation"). I guess it was somewhat challenging, but I didn't find >>>it to be an involving or satisfying computer driving experience. >>>I had a friend of mine drive it... he's driven all-wheel-drive cars >>>off road fast before, and he didn't think the game captured the >>>experience at all. >>>Any thoughts? >>>-Steve

Network Q. Oh, that would be the rally "simulator" where your car grinds to a halt within one car length when you spin it sideways. That would also be the one that lets you crank the ride height down, the gears up and get over 300kph out of an Escort. The one with canned 4 wheel drifts, and super-sticky snow. Oh, and those lovely invisible walls. Er... no thanks. I'll stick with CMR. Stephen

Well, I've not driven a 4WD car off road but I have driven a RWD MK2 RS2000 at a rally school. I was amazed how much grip there was on gravel/mud! I was also amazed at how easy it was to pick up the basic techniques. In no more than 10 minutes in the car I was able to steer on the throttle like a pro. (well, almost like a pro :-) (apparently the works spec fully floating rear axle made a big difference here) My opinion is the CMR has got it *roughly* right. The weakest part is probably the way it reacts to the throttle and brakes when sliding. I also have great difficultly adjusting to the different road surfaces and levels of grip. I didn't have anything like the same problem with in a real car. It'll never match real life but it's an order of magnitude better than any other rally sim! Toby On Tue, 1 Dec 1998 04:18:32 -0800, "Mike Vanlandingham"

Quoted text (32 lines)

>Steve, >I tend to agree. It's a lot of fun, and challenging. What struck me (I've >been spending most of my time with GPL, and I have a 4X4 in real life that >I've done a lot of blasting down logging roads and such) is the amount of >grip offered in CMR. I know there's a big difference between 1967 bias ply >racing tires and suspension technology and 1998 radial tires and modern >suspensions, but not enough to overcome the difference between dry pavement >and dirt/gravel/mud. It seems like they modeled the physics based on what >it "looks" like on TV or videos rather than how *** tires and weight >shift/mass interacts with low traction surfaces. The drivers on TV make it >"look" a lot easier than it is. >-Mike >>Hi, >>Just took a look at the demo for Colin McRae Rally. What are other >>folks thoughts on the game physics? I thought it was pretty lame (by >>lame I mean that it seemed more arcade like rather than a >>"simulation"). I guess it was somewhat challenging, but I didn't find >>it to be an involving or satisfying computer driving experience. >>I had a friend of mine drive it... he's driven all-wheel-drive cars >>off road fast before, and he didn't think the game captured the >>experience at all. >>Any thoughts? >>-Steve

It felt like driving a hovercraft rather than a car! I thought Network Q was better by a long way. (even considering the 'invisible walls') And what's with the in-car view? It looks terrible! Bottom line: "arcade racer". Regards,

Quoted text (15 lines)

>> simulation. Other than the lack of powerslide capability, I think the >old >> DOS RAC Network Q Rally Championship from Europress is more realistic >than >> CMR. It is TOCA on grass...for those who have played TOCA just drive the >> car off the track and you'll pretty much get the idea.. >Network Q. Oh, that would be the rally "simulator" where your car grinds >to a halt within one car length when you spin it sideways. That would also >be the one that lets you crank the ride height down, the gears up and get >over 300kph out of an Escort. The one with canned 4 wheel drifts, and >super-sticky snow. Oh, and those lovely invisible walls. Er... no thanks. > I'll stick with CMR. >Stephen

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Hi, > Just took a look at the demo for Colin McRae Rally. What are other > folks thoughts on the game physics? I thought it was pretty lame (by > lame I mean that it seemed more arcade like rather than a > "simulation"). I guess it was somewhat challenging, but I didn't find > it to be an involving or satisfying computer driving experience. > I had a friend of mine drive it... he's driven all-wheel-drive cars > off road fast before, and he didn't think the game captured the > experience at all. > Any thoughts?

I've only tried the Playstation version of the game with a Dualshock (a gamepad with a pair of analogue thumb controllers, if somebody doesn't know), so I won't comment on the physics model. What I'd like to know is the differences between the PC and the Playstation versions, apart from graphics which obviously are better in the PC version with a decent 3D card. Are there any other notable differences in physics (surely not?), difficulty or gameplay options? My PC is getting hopelessly old and I don't feel like investing $1000 into new hardware right now. Antti Salonen