TOCA Race Driver?

Sim or game? upgrading my system hopefully in the not too distant future and plan to also buy EA's new F1 sim but wondered what TOCA was like but prefer a sim rather than somethign that plays more like a console game. CMR3 was a complete let down :(

"Revvin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3ef20933$0$72692$[email hidden]... > Sim or game? upgrading my system hopefully in the not too distant futureand > plan to also buy EA's new F1 sim but wondered what TOCA was like butprefer > a sim rather than somethign that plays more like a console game. CMR3 wasa > complete let down :( > Look for people to kill Toca Race Driver on here. Myself, I thought the steering and car handling was too erratic. As far as CMR3 goes, I can't understand the backlash at this title. I like it myself. I think most of the criticism of CMR3 is leveled at the menus, the fact that you can't use anyone but Colin in the championship season and can't use one of the Escorts. As a sim and what I know about Rally cars, I'm not displeased with CMR3. In general, though, folks have argued about some petty stuff when damning CMR3. Alanb

> As a sim and what I know about Rally cars, I'm not displeased with CMR3.In > general, though, folks have argued about some petty stuff when damningCMR3. I wouldn't call 'completely rubbish physics' as being petty. Rally Trophy it ain't.

"Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bcu01t$mjf7h$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > As a sim and what I know about Rally cars, I'm not displeased with CMR3. > In > > general, though, folks have argued about some petty stuff when damning > CMR3. > > I wouldn't call 'completely rubbish physics' as being petty. Rally Trophy > it ain't. > >

Yes, I've heard this. But then that's all I hear-- bad physics. No one has explained just what exactly is bad about CMR3's physics. I'm not saying you're not correct in your assessment; I'm only saying that to say the game has "completely rubbish physics" is one thing. Giving specifics is another. Alanb

"Revvin" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:3ef20933$0$72692$[email hidden]: > Sim or game? upgrading my system hopefully in the not too distant > future and plan to also buy EA's new F1 sim but wondered what TOCA was > like but prefer a sim rather than somethign that plays more like a > console game. CMR3 was a complete let down :( The circuits are nothing short of laughable. All the great attention to detail of layout that existed in TOCA2's british circuits has disappeared. Z. -- Please remove my_pants when replying by email.

that doesnt really matter though - who carers - uve never really driven them "Zonky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> "Revvin" <[email hidden]> wrote in > news:3ef20933$0$72692$[email hidden]: > > > Sim or game? upgrading my system hopefully in the not too distant > > future and plan to also buy EA's new F1 sim but wondered what TOCA was > > like but prefer a sim rather than somethign that plays more like a > > console game. CMR3 was a complete let down :( > > The circuits are nothing short of laughable. All the great attention to > detail of layout that existed in TOCA2's british circuits has disappeared. > > Z. > > -- > Please remove my_pants when replying by email.

"Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> > Yes, I've heard this. But then that's all I hear-- bad physics. No onehas > explained just what exactly is bad about CMR3's physics. Phew did you try CMR2? There is a very great difference in handling etc. and for me that is one of the big let downs in CMR3. It doesnt play as a rally car and being a title with a big name you expect it to be a rally car sim. Simon

"Simon Schiffeleers" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bcvk94$nuhll$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > "Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> > > Yes, I've heard this. But then that's all I hear-- bad physics. No one > has > > explained just what exactly is bad about CMR3's physics. > > Phew did you try CMR2? > There is a very great difference in handling etc. and for me that is one

of > the big let downs in CMR3. > It doesnt play as a rally car and being a title with a big name you expect > it to be a rally car sim. > > Simon >I have raced CMR2, and to tell you the truth, I thought the cars had too much grip. Still, I haven't gotten any straight answers as to what "exactly" is the problem with the physics. Thanks, Alanb

I'll give this one a shot.. The physics in CMR3 seem (just as the first) to not treat the car as something with 4 independent wheels tied into a body with suspension linkage, etc. It seems to treat the car as a single object with one set of forces acting on it, the wheels are then just appendages on the object that hang off of it and make contact with the road and move up and down between a certain range. It doesn't seem to calculate physics for forces acting on each tyre and then figures out what the body should be doing and what forces it is putting on the tyres based on the suspension model. etc.. I'm not an expert on physics, I know a car isn't just a body floating and pivoting around a central point. Heck, even the gravity seems to be wrong when the car takes a jump. It like seems to fly higher than it should, and then suddenly it comes down.. very odd.. and very different than any WRC car I've seen taking a jump, or a turn.. or pretty much anything in the game. Don't get me wrong, the patched demo was fun.. aside from the fact that Tarmac and ICE had the exact same force feedback.. Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com "Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:gYJIa.44673$hz1.113926@sccrnsc01... > > "Simon Schiffeleers" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:bcvk94$nuhll$[email hidden]... > > > > "Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> > > > Yes, I've heard this. But then that's all I hear-- bad physics. Noone

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > has > > > explained just what exactly is bad about CMR3's physics. > > > > Phew did you try CMR2? > > There is a very great difference in handling etc. and for me that is one > of > > the big let downs in CMR3. > > It doesnt play as a rally car and being a title with a big name you

expect

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > it to be a rally car sim. > > > > Simon > > > I have raced CMR2, and to tell you the truth, I thought the cars had too > much grip. Still, I haven't gotten any straight answers as to what > "exactly" is the problem with the physics. > > Thanks, > > Alanb > >

"Mike Beauchamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6jUIa.15849$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I'll give this one a shot.. > The physics in CMR3 seem (just as the first) to not treat the car as > something with 4 independent wheels tied into a body with suspension > linkage, etc. > > It seems to treat the car as a single object with one set of forces acting > on it, the wheels are then just appendages on the object that hang off of

it > and make contact with the road and move up and down between a certainrange. > It doesn't seem to calculate physics for forces acting on each tyre andthen > figures out what the body should be doing and what forces it is putting on > the tyres based on the suspension model. etc.. > Mike, Okay, I see what you mean now. You turn the wheel, and the whole car moves as one. This kind of thing, do you feel it or sense it? Or is there a way to calculate it? Is it that somehow Rally Trophy, which most consider to be the physics' leader of Rally games, feels different? I mean, this is not a scientific, measurable assessment, is it? A person has driven a real Rally car, feels what it is like to drive that type of car, and then compares it to a particular game. That's probably the way it goes. In all, I'm trusting that some of you guys know what you're talking about. I have no experience with Rally cars and have not been exposed long enough to sim racing to feel the difference between a move-as-one and a move-independently type of physics. Thanks for the explanation. I can now sleep at nights. :) Alanb