For those who question F1C physics

Here is my 2 cent regarding complaints about F1C I have been reading these forums and RAS for years years and the most common complaint is that the sims arent realistic enough, whether its the graphics or the physics. I am not intending to take anything away from anyone in this group as many of you have much more knowledge than I. I myself have never driven an F1 car. I do however race karts up here in Canada ,when it isnt freezing..hehe. The skill, Focus/Concentration ability and stamina of an F1 driver is infinately more than I would ever have in 5 lifetimes. The default setups included with this sim are only a starting point. THATS THE WHOLE IDEA. I have had a few good online races at Circuit Gille Villeneuve and after hours of work am running in the high 1:18s. During these races I have witnessed CLEAN laps in the high 1:17s. The Record Lap at this track is 1:15.96 by Montoya in 2002 need I say more? ok I will The sim is as difficult as it can be so that the average hardcore simmer will get some enjoyment out of it. If it were 100% realistic you would not be seeing those laptimes as frequently. As it Stands now...based on my times in F1-C...I may have a chance to test for Minardi. :) As far as the complaints about kerbs being too difficult to run, I disagree. Teams spend millions working on the cars setup to suite the driving style of their drivers. This combined with incredible skill and consistency allows them to manipulate weight transfer through braking,acceleration,and steering thus maintaining grip where we wouldnt have a hope. I race on the same kart track year after year and a beginner can come out and get within 5-6 seconds of a veteran in the first day,. Its the last 1/2 to 3/10s that take years. The biggest Part of real racing....I hate to say...is SETUP For those that don't want to invest the time and laps to develop their own setup for their own driving style, this is not the sim for you. Welcome to semi-real racing

"bengal21" wrote: > The biggest Part of real racing....I hate to say...is SETUP > > For those that don't want to invest the time and laps to develop > their own setup for their own driving style, this is not the sim for > you. > Welcome to semi-real racing Judging by the posts I have seen the biggest part of ISI Sim racing is... config file configuration Lots of hard work sorting out controller delays and reversed controller settings. These need to be fixed way before even thinking about fiddling in the garage... --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.493 / Virus Database: 292 - Release Date: 25/06/2003

"Tony Rickard" wrote...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > <snip> > Judging by the posts I have seen the biggest part of > ISI Sim racing is... config file configuration > > Lots of hard work sorting out controller delays and > reversed controller settings. These need to be fixed > way before even thinking about fiddling in > the garage...

Hey! -I was gonna say that! ;-) Seriously, this sort of stuff detracts from the game's image... not everyone reads RAS or Racesimcentral and has the inclination to edit these files. That said, I've always been a great advocate of making one's own setups. Going fast starts with confidence in the car. It has to fit one's style. Jan. =---

Were you in Windsor this week racing karts by any chance? I had the opportunity to go, and was blown away with the whole thing. It was the first kart race I've ever seen, and those shifter carts FLY! The course they setup was very nice too.. right at our riverfront, with lots of elevation changez and difficult sections.. Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com "bengal21" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (44 lines)

> > > Here is my 2 cent regarding complaints about F1C > I have been reading these forums and RAS for years years and the most > common complaint is that the sims arent realistic enough, whether > its the graphics or the physics. > > I am not intending to take anything away from anyone in this group as > many of you have much more knowledge than I. I myself have never driven > an F1 car. I do however race karts up here in Canada ,when it isnt > freezing..hehe. The skill, Focus/Concentration ability and stamina of an > F1 driver is infinately more than I would ever have in 5 lifetimes. > The default setups included with this sim are only a starting point. > THATS THE WHOLE IDEA. > > I have had a few good online races at Circuit Gille Villeneuve and > after hours of work am running in the high 1:18s. During these races I > have witnessed CLEAN laps in the high 1:17s. > The Record Lap at this track is 1:15.96 by Montoya in 2002 > need I say more? ok I will > > The sim is as difficult as it can be so that the average hardcore > simmer will get some enjoyment out of it. If it were 100% realistic you > would not be seeing those laptimes as frequently. As it Stands > now...based on > my times in F1-C...I may have a chance to test for Minardi. :) > > As far as the complaints about kerbs being too difficult to run, I > disagree. Teams spend millions working on the cars setup to suite the > driving style of their drivers. This combined with incredible skill and > consistency allows them to manipulate weight transfer through > braking,acceleration,and steering thus maintaining grip where we wouldnt > have a hope. > > I race on the same kart track year after year and a beginner can come > out and get within 5-6 seconds of a veteran in the first day,. Its the > last 1/2 to 3/10s that take years. > > The biggest Part of real racing....I hate to say...is SETUP > > For those that don't want to invest the time and laps to develop > their own setup for their own driving style, this is not the sim for > you. > Welcome to semi-real racing

Quoted text (25 lines)

>From: "Jan Verschueren" [email hidden] >Date: 7/3/03 4:46 PM Central Daylight Time >Message-id: <Hu1Na.5143$[email hidden]> > >"Tony Rickard" wrote... >> > <snip> >> Judging by the posts I have seen the biggest part of >> ISI Sim racing is... config file configuration >> >> Lots of hard work sorting out controller delays and >> reversed controller settings. These need to be fixed >> way before even thinking about fiddling in >> the garage... > >Hey! -I was gonna say that! ;-) > >Seriously, this sort of stuff detracts from the game's image... not everyone >reads RAS or Racesimcentral and has the inclination to edit these files. > >That said, I've always been a great advocate of making one's own setups. >Going fast starts with confidence in the car. It has to fit one's style. > >Jan. >=--- >

My driving style has always been to go really, really fast on the straights, then slow down and turn in the corners. Am I alone on this? :-P Todd Wasson Racing Software http://PerformanceSimulations.com My car sim http://performancesimulations.com/scnshot4.htm

I partly agree with you. Setups should be a factor in race sims and as such, everything else being equal, a driver who spend times trying different setups should gain a competitive edge over one that doesn`t bother. At the same time, I am not sure that one should have to obtain a PhD just to play racing games on your computer. Maybe it`s just me that is too lazy but I don`t want to study car physics and mechanics more than I play. However, I found that, in some games, it is becoming too much of a factor. I know that this group is full of smart race sim enthusiasts and I`m expecting to read a lot of "then, choose a game that doesn`t require so much tweaking!" True, I could. But at the same time, it would frustrate me to be missing out on a game like GPL. I still don`t know much about setups which means that my car/track repair bill (if I had to pay for it) would, by now, be substantially higher than the estimated cost of hosting the 2010 Winter Olympics (which we just won here in Vancouver!!!). Kidding aside, it would be nice one day to be able to finish on the same lap as the winnning AI car (as you can see I am not even dreaming of actually winning a GPL race)! Anyway, not sure why I am writing all this. Probably because I am at work and I don`t feel like working :-) So I guess my 2 options are to lower AI capability and/or learn to better setup my cars! Any suggestions how this can be done with minimum amount of pain and before I die (sorry I don`t have a clear estimate as to when that might happen)? Andre Vancouver, BC "bengal21" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message de news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (44 lines)

> > > Here is my 2 cent regarding complaints about F1C > I have been reading these forums and RAS for years years and the most > common complaint is that the sims arent realistic enough, whether > its the graphics or the physics. > > I am not intending to take anything away from anyone in this group as > many of you have much more knowledge than I. I myself have never driven > an F1 car. I do however race karts up here in Canada ,when it isnt > freezing..hehe. The skill, Focus/Concentration ability and stamina of an > F1 driver is infinately more than I would ever have in 5 lifetimes. > The default setups included with this sim are only a starting point. > THATS THE WHOLE IDEA. > > I have had a few good online races at Circuit Gille Villeneuve and > after hours of work am running in the high 1:18s. During these races I > have witnessed CLEAN laps in the high 1:17s. > The Record Lap at this track is 1:15.96 by Montoya in 2002 > need I say more? ok I will > > The sim is as difficult as it can be so that the average hardcore > simmer will get some enjoyment out of it. If it were 100% realistic you > would not be seeing those laptimes as frequently. As it Stands > now...based on > my times in F1-C...I may have a chance to test for Minardi. :) > > As far as the complaints about kerbs being too difficult to run, I > disagree. Teams spend millions working on the cars setup to suite the > driving style of their drivers. This combined with incredible skill and > consistency allows them to manipulate weight transfer through > braking,acceleration,and steering thus maintaining grip where we wouldnt > have a hope. > > I race on the same kart track year after year and a beginner can come > out and get within 5-6 seconds of a veteran in the first day,. Its the > last 1/2 to 3/10s that take years. > > The biggest Part of real racing....I hate to say...is SETUP > > For those that don't want to invest the time and laps to develop > their own setup for their own driving style, this is not the sim for > you. > Welcome to semi-real racing

"Andre G." wrote: > Anyway, not sure why I am writing all this. Probably because I am atwork > and I don`t feel like working :-) So I guess my 2 options are to lowerAI > capability and/or learn to better setup my cars! Any suggestions howthis > can be done with minimum amount of pain and before I die (sorry I don`thave > a clear estimate as to when that might happen)? I wouldn't get too hung up about setups. Sure they will help for the odd tenth, but for consistent running just get the brake bias set just far enough to the rear so you still have confidence to brake without spinning and roll bars set to a balance you feel comfortable with and just get some track time. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.493 / Virus Database: 292 - Release Date: 25/06/2003

"J. Todd Wasson" wrote... > > <snip> > My driving style has always been to go really, really > fast on the straights, then slow down and turn in the > corners. Am I alone on this? :-P No, a style like that, if combined with the required amount of talent and fitness would get you a long way in today's F1. Even in the simworld, you're not alone. There's a guy in one of the GPL leagues I run in who makes going in deep, pivot and accellerate out hard an artform. Due to the "non-stop-start" nature of most of the tracks of the era, his lap times are a bit off the mark, but he's ***SO*** hard to pass if one happens to drop behind him for whatever reason. Jan. =---

Yeah, there's been a lot of noobs complaining about aspects of the handling which are easily corrected by setup changes and so far most problems encountered are corrected much the same way they are in real life racing. I think the problem is that it's not immediately apparent just how much more realistic the physics are compared to F1 2002 - the same setup tricks just don't work. I guess we're all still learning otherwise we wouldn't be here......

>"bengal21" <[email hidden]> wrote > I have had a few good online races at Circuit Gille Villeneuve and > after hours of work am running in the high 1:18s. During these races I > have witnessed CLEAN laps in the high 1:17s. > The Record Lap at this track is 1:15.96 by Montoya in 2002 > need I say more? ok I will You absolutely cannot compare the track times of real-life Formula One drivers to the laptimes that you do in the racing sim called F1C as the track accuracy is so off and so out of reality that it's almost two different tracks. There are too many little differences to even compare both tracks (real life vs. virtual). Everything is different, from the gears, speeds, apex, camber, etc... Even if they are just 2% off, it's still a possible 2% difference in the laptimes remember! (cornering at 200mph versus 196 makes a large difference if you understand it happens possibly on every corner) Only compare the track times to other tracks times set on the virtual race-track. Heck I'm not even comparing all the non-track-accuracies differences and variables. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

> You absolutely cannot compare the track times of real-life Formula One > drivers to the laptimes that you do in the racing sim called F1C as the > track accuracy is so off and so out of reality that it's almost two > different tracks. Gotta agree with that. Unless you've got survey-accurate tracks it's not even worth thinking about comparing the track times to real-life.

"Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:be30sh$ld4f$[email hidden]... > Yeah, there's been a lot of noobs complaining about aspects of thehandling > which are easily corrected by setup changes and so far most problems > encountered are corrected much the same way they are in real life racing.I > think the problem is that it's not immediately apparent just how much more > realistic the physics are compared to F1 2002 - the same setup tricks just > don't work. I guess we're all still learning otherwise we wouldn't be > here...... Can't imagine you think we're less informed here than the likes of Adrian Newey. ;-) Nonetheless, I have a short replay of a rollover that suggests all is not quite kosher down in the bowels of F1C. I like it anyway and it's certainly much better than before, but I'd say they still have a little tweaking to do.

In article <Hu1Na.5143$[email hidden]>, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> writes: >That said, I've always been a great advocate of making one's own setups. >Going fast starts with confidence in the car. It has to fit one's style. > Some of us have never been able to do that... Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

> >That said, I've always been a great advocate of making one's own setups. > >Going fast starts with confidence in the car. It has to fit one's style. > Some of us have never been able to do that... I've always been crap at setups, but this time it seems different. With F1C, I've been able to get a car that I can drive happily, and consistently. Maybe this is down to the better physics? I don't know, but I really can feel the changes better and see the improvements this time. My setup has put me 20th on the grid, with the AI at 100%, so I've decided not to download anything that may put me on pole, because I'm having great races where I am. OK they're with Jags, Minardis, etc, rather than Ferraris and Mcs... ;-) Thinking that this sim is going to be the last of its kind for a while, I see nothing wrong with doing a season where I'm near the back, as it gives me much more room for improvement over the coming years. Hell, I may even learn something ;-) R.

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4H7Na.6611$[email hidden]... > > You absolutely cannot compare the track times of real-life Formula One > drivers to the laptimes that you do in the racing sim called F1C... He just did, didn't he? > ...as the > track accuracy is so off and so out of reality that it's almost two > different tracks. Holy crap this is getting tiresome. You have never forgiven ISI for F1 2000, have you? I have watched every single F1 race this year and jumped into F1 2002 afterwards to try and drive the track the way I saw on TV. Other than the track changes that were made this year and background details that I don't care about I have yet to see any serious inaccuracies in any track and I have yet to encounter a track that couldn't be driven like they are in real life. Granted there may be serious problems in the ones that I haven't had the opportunity to compare yet, but we are over half way through the season and they are still hitting home runs as far as I am concerned. OTOH within minutes of watching the NASCAR race at Sears Point I could clearly see that Papy got turn 7 wrong and that it can't be driven realistically, so it's not like I'm not paying attention. Turn 1 also cannot be driven realistically. I'm sorry I don't mean this as a personal attack but I honestly think there is a contingent of people here who are still pissed about F1 2000 and are never going to give ISI a break. Meanwhile thanks to GPL those people think everything Papy does is golden despite flaws that are obvious to everybody else. To you and anyone else who feels that way I have to say - lighten up, unclench your aresehole, and get real - ISI and Papy are both GAME developers, they both have some flaws in their products, but both make GAMES that are a lot of fun for those of us who don't have a pole jammed up our ass. I play ISI games and enjoy them. I play Papy games and enjoy them. I know of flaws in both, but neither are flawed enough to ruin my fun. Life is a lot more fun if you don't insist on being anal about every little detail.

ymenard wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > You absolutely cannot compare the track times of real-life Formula One > drivers to the laptimes that you do in the racing sim called F1C as the > track accuracy is so off and so out of reality that it's almost two > different tracks.

Point taken and I must say i agree, however, if JPM were sitting beside me as I set up my car and telling me at what corner I should finesse the car and at what corner I should throw it into the turn, my laptimes would definately improve. I also agree that working on setup is not something we like to do. hell, its frustrating and unfortunately I dont believe any of us would pay to have someone setup our cars...(well maybe a few would) This is the first sim I have actually spent time working on my own setups and that is because it seems the car is responding accordingly to the changes i make. its actually becoming fun to work on them. I also notice that my setup always needs work when I join another race as weather (temperature) seems to have a drastic effect on the car and its not just a matter of changing tire presures anymore. My main point is that the more realistic these sims get, the more frustrating its going to get for a lot of people. It would be interesting to see if 20 hardcore simmers were taken from this group and told to tell the F1 crews how to setup their cars and then set on the grid for a race. Man that would be scary but it wouldnt surprise me if a few actually ran not to bad after a few laps and actually brought the cars home. hehe

Just to say that while most of the F12002 tracks are... okay... for racing sims, wait until Silverstone and Monza. It seems ISI have cunningly replaced the corner formerly known as Stowe with something very strange indeed...

>"Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote > Holy crap this is getting tiresome. You have never forgiven ISI for F1 > 2000, have you? I have watched every single F1 race this year and jumped > into F1 2002 afterwards to try and drive the track the way I saw on TV. ISI admitted the tracks are fucking crappy. They wanted to change the tracks but could not because of budgetary reason from EA. I guess that's enough to tell'ya how crappy they are, even in F1C. Oh ok sorry, they are "average". They still don't have the atmosphere of what you find in several other developpers. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 10:36:26 -0400, "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Holy crap this is getting tiresome. You have never forgiven ISI for F1 >2000, have you? I have watched every single F1 race this year and jumped >into F1 2002 afterwards to try and drive the track the way I saw on TV. >Other than the track changes that were made this year and background details >that I don't care about I have yet to see any serious inaccuracies in any >track and I have yet to encounter a track that couldn't be driven like they >are in real life.

Well, the tracks go left when they go left in real life, and right when the go right in real life, for the most part (the pit complex to Magny Cours for 99-02 being an exception to this of course). Now up and down is another issue I won't get into. It is interesting that the missing hills from Magny Cours and the rollercoaster from Suzuka seem to have found their way into the Silverstone and Monza track models, however. I'm not going to speculate on the accuracy of the camber except to say that the 2-3 turns that I'm aware of having serious banking at Magny Cours are completely flat/banked the wrong way in the ISI series. Again, the chicane that was removed for the race this year as well as the short blast to the pits and the final turn are horrible in the F1 series. The second last chicane is practically flat in the ISI game when in real life there is a pretty sharp hill there. Monza? Last time I checked while there is a small hill between Lesmo 2 and Variant Ascari that resembles more of a slight downhill run towards the old banking then uphill to the Vialone chicane rather than some strange up and down rollercoaster ride that totally obscures the entrance to Ascari. Silvertsone's elevation and camber inaccuracy has been covered elsewhere so no point in going on about that, as it's a shitty track anyway. Really in the end who cares. I hate the tracks and wish there were some GP4 track editing tools out by now so we could work on converting those, but the tracks are good enough until then, and you can always drive the excellent simbin tracks converted from Superbike 2001 if need be. I converted Brand's Hatch, Donington, and Laguna Seca to F1C and all 3 are amazing to drive with the new physics model. I'm probably going to just replace the Euro GP at Nurby with Donington, the Brit GP at Silver with Brand's, and the US GP at Indy with Laguna since that will get rid of 3 tracks that are horrible both in terms of real life and in-game modelling and replace them with 3 classics that should be on the real F1 calendar anyway. Jason

Regarding Magny Cours, here I again I am not seeing the problem. Yes some curbs and runoffs are inaccurate, and that is a bit of a problem regarding the line you have to take, but not major. But as far as the elevation changes and banking, drive through the Imola esses and then hit the instant replay button. From the new "realistic" replay cameras it looks just like what I was seeing on TV (<cough> except for the curbs). Same for the right hander that follows it. You don't necessarily see these details from the cockpit view, but they are there. I won't argue that some of the tracks are inaccurate, maybe even majorly inaccurate, but I think the majority are fine and I think it is silly that people downgrade the game for a few inaccuracies in the tracks. That's all I'm really trying to get across here - of course we should want accurate tracks but this game is just not the major disaster that everybody makes it out to be, at least not as far as I can tell. If people think I'm being biased or a fanboy then let me say this - I thought Watkins Glen in NT 2003 was horrible. Does that sound like a fanboy? The thing is, that's not the reason I didn't buy the game, I didn't buy the game because I think one NASCAR game a year is enough for me, and I already had the Papy NASCAR game for that year. I probably will get NT 2004, even if Watkins Glen still sucks. Why? Because I think ISI has achieved something unique and laudable with their game engine. The physics, the moddability, the high frame rates, the FF quality are all things that I think they do extremely well and one or two inaccurate tracks doesn't ruin that for me. And again, it's just a freaking GAME. "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (32 lines)

> > Now up and down is another issue I won't get into. It is interesting > that the missing hills from Magny Cours and the rollercoaster from > Suzuka seem to have found their way into the Silverstone and Monza > track models, however. I'm not going to speculate on the accuracy of > the camber except to say that the 2-3 turns that I'm aware of having > serious banking at Magny Cours are completely flat/banked the wrong > way in the ISI series. Again, the chicane that was removed for the > race this year as well as the short blast to the pits and the final > turn are horrible in the F1 series. The second last chicane is > practically flat in the ISI game when in real life there is a pretty > sharp hill there. Monza? Last time I checked while there is a small > hill between Lesmo 2 and Variant Ascari that resembles more of a > slight downhill run towards the old banking then uphill to the Vialone > chicane rather than some strange up and down rollercoaster ride that > totally obscures the entrance to Ascari. Silvertsone's elevation and > camber inaccuracy has been covered elsewhere so no point in going on > about that, as it's a shitty track anyway. > > Really in the end who cares. I hate the tracks and wish there were > some GP4 track editing tools out by now so we could work on converting > those, but the tracks are good enough until then, and you can always > drive the excellent simbin tracks converted from Superbike 2001 if > need be. I converted Brand's Hatch, Donington, and Laguna Seca to F1C > and all 3 are amazing to drive with the new physics model. I'm > probably going to just replace the Euro GP at Nurby with Donington, > the Brit GP at Silver with Brand's, and the US GP at Indy with Laguna > since that will get rid of 3 tracks that are horrible both in terms of > real life and in-game modelling and replace them with 3 classics that > should be on the real F1 calendar anyway. > > Jason

"Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:be83in$253mq$[email hidden]... > Regarding Magny Cours, here I again I am not seeing the problem. Yes some > curbs and runoffs are inaccurate, and that is a bit of a problem regarding > the line you have to take, but not major. But as far as the elevation > changes and banking, drive through the Imola esses and then hit theinstant > replay button. From the new "realistic" replay cameras it looks just like > what I was seeing on TV (<cough> except for the curbs). Same for theright > hander that follows it. You don't necessarily see these details from the > cockpit view, but they are there. > > I won't argue that some of the tracks are inaccurate, maybe even majorly > inaccurate, but I think the majority are fine and I think it is silly that > people downgrade the game for a few inaccuracies in the tracks. That'sall > I'm really trying to get across here - of course we should want accurate > tracks but this game is just not the major disaster that everybody makesit > out to be, at least not as far as I can tell. > > If people think I'm being biased or a fanboy then let me say this - I > thought Watkins Glen in NT 2003 was horrible. Does that sound like a > fanboy? The thing is, that's not the reason I didn't buy the game, Ididn't > buy the game because I think one NASCAR game a year is enough for me, andI > already had the Papy NASCAR game for that year. I probably will get NT > 2004, even if Watkins Glen still sucks. Why? Because I think ISI has > achieved something unique and laudable with their game engine. Thephysics, > the moddability, the high frame rates, the FF quality are all things thatI > think they do extremely well and one or two inaccurate tracks doesn't ruin > that for me. And again, it's just a freaking GAME. AMEN

"Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Silvertsone's elevation and > camber inaccuracy has been covered elsewhere so no point in going on > about that, as it's a shitty track anyway. It's no Brands Hatch, granted, but I love the way the track really flows from S/F right through to the bottom of the Vale, always easily above 100mph from Copse, through Maggots, Becketts, Chapel, Stowe and down (not *up*, ISI) into the Vale. If you spectate anywhere along the opening half of the lap, you will be amazed at the cornering abilities of modern F1 cars.