Who knows.
Interpretation failure?
Spreadsheet cell failure?
Underlying formula failure?
Interpretation failure?
Spreadsheet cell failure?
Underlying formula failure?
Not necessarily true with two imperfect approaches, it's all about resolution.
Clearly a physical model is better and I am happy they are doing that; but if you do have actual data to work with - you could probably get closer with a very good spreadsheet sim done right that you can with a physical model full of approximations - case in point that the Solstice is far more believable than the XRG, right here, today. It's all varying degrees anyway but iRacing were the first people that at least pulled of a fine attempt at the emperical approach, despite it's flaws.
I think a big part of it is being able to measure results against what is, in fact real - with LFS it was always easy in years past to dismiss it's shortcomings because there was no benchmark, so the flaws were easy to smooth over and justify mentally.
What wheels are more simple than not drawing them?
Kind of agree with Deko (I know you're surprized).
I don't have to guess what the tires are doing in iRacing any more than I do in LFS, both sims are communicative. I never experienced "ripping the wheel from my hand" at LRP, either you're exaggerating beyond words or ... I don't know what else actually. (maybe you just need to work out a little :razz
The skippy is pretty lively for feedback but for example in the Miata or Solstice (since you brought up your own road car which probably has little in common with a Skip Barber) you barely feel those same undulations and bumps at LRP. It really depends on what car you're driving.
And you base this on what? I presume you have something to back that up since baseless statements are historically very un-Shotglass like
I'll snicker a little if LFS' Rockingham feels a bit like iRacing in the FFB department.
I should point out that I'm really 100% willing to be proven wrong on this, but so far it's only hand-waving.
I don't have to guess what the tires are doing in iRacing any more than I do in LFS, both sims are communicative. I never experienced "ripping the wheel from my hand" at LRP, either you're exaggerating beyond words or ... I don't know what else actually. (maybe you just need to work out a little :razz
The skippy is pretty lively for feedback but for example in the Miata or Solstice (since you brought up your own road car which probably has little in common with a Skip Barber) you barely feel those same undulations and bumps at LRP. It really depends on what car you're driving.
And you base this on what? I presume you have something to back that up since baseless statements are historically very un-Shotglass like
I'll snicker a little if LFS' Rockingham feels a bit like iRacing in the FFB department.
I should point out that I'm really 100% willing to be proven wrong on this, but so far it's only hand-waving.
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
I suppose in theory you're right, though a) is not the case based on everything they've ever said about the tracks, and that would still classify as an intentional modification anyway, thus a canned effect at least to me. b) is pretty hard to screw up since it's pretty basic rigid body mechanics.
It could still have to do with the tire model though, which is why I'm very curious to see what effect, if any, the upcoming model has on the FFB in iR
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
ok:
This clearly insinuates that the forces in iRacing are modified beyond their basic generation based on force and geometry.
& Phil, yes you're right of course stupid setups are in both sims. I don't run ovals but I hear they're especially silly on that side of things, though clearly the road setups have issues as well.
I don't know really... DK did mention this fact in the open house interviews. He made a note to mention how "connected" his w.i.p. model feels, so he obviously understands this concept well, and when he finally rolls that shit out the door I can't wait to try it.
I never feel disconnected in iR's Radical for example. Feeling connected, sadly, doesn't keep me on the track any better though
Don't forget that up to the limit, the cars should be pretty much bang on since they do have the data for that. But there seems to be this unidentifiable, yet tangible and perceivable disparity between the two types of models. There are no canned effects in iRacing, it's just that the track isn't made of glass for a change. And it also isn't faked like the goofy "bumps" at South City. It could just be the stupid setups / maybe caster, but in LFS all I find now is 90% self aligning torque with the odd other force if your wheel is dead centre.
The Solstice, for example in iRacing doesn't have a lot of feedback compared to the Skippy due to the power steering etc... What I'm really interested to see is how the upcoming physical tire model in iRacing plays with their force feedback, considering that it's already very good.
I really hear what you're saying there.
I'd love to be proven wrong as well, as the overall feel of the cars is excellent - but the main thing I find is that the feeling of input having an effect is just too far dampened in LFS now for me to enjoy it. iRacing is a lot more knife edge, but with 80% the "correctability" of LFS, which is probably closer to the truth in my limited RL experience.
I like the connected organic feel of LFS' physical model but I find that under most circumstances iRacing is a little more believable in terms of consequence. Even having the Solstice snap into place after an intentional drift puts a smirk on my face after years of LFS' marshmellow brush model responses.
Based on what Scawen has said I know that's going to change, and based on what Kaemmer's stated I can't wait to try their physical model. I kind of thought the time would've come and gone, but here's to hoping for a 2011 comparison of both new models. Debating the old ones is becoming passe :P
This is an interesting thought.
I've pretty much thought this way the last 8 years, but I am willing to question that - finally. It's been a long standing opinion but lately I'm not to sure it's justified anymore.
I fully understand the logic that goes into that opinion - the plain and simple fact is that the RL driver has a ton more input into his carcass. He feels the G forces, he feels the loads, he feels when the car wants to toss his ass into the wind. I get that. Been there, done that, much like you but probably to a lesser extent; and most certainly to a lesser extent than Tristan for example.
That being said, I'm starting to lean towards the idea that even though there's no risk of death and no risk of monetary penalty on "this" side of things, that may not be an advantage beyond a certain, indeterminate amount of track time. Initially when diving into ththings I think there's no question; but I think that gap may close fairly quickly following the "new and fresh" stage.
I'd submit to you that the closer one gets to "the limit" (tm) the more valuable real experience becomes. And I would suggest that Huutu's run with iRacing does support that. A (good) sim can teach you pretty severely what a car will and will not do, it will teach you the dynamics of a track to the point, in iRacing's case, of what surface issues to look out for - but once the top few positions are in question I think track time trumps a sim simply because of the feel.
Mind you, I think the gap is far smaller than the general public has a clue about, and the sim community's real motivation seems simply to argue. There's no question that iRacing (for example because of their passion to replicate real track experiences) DOES have a tangible impact on driving ability. No doubt that LFS does in a generic facet as well.
Point being that realistic sims DO help, but for that last little bit I don't think we can use sims in the last % at this point simply because of physics and brain chemistry. Nonetheless, I think it's fairly obvious that the racing skill set is very very obviously complemented, honed, and kept sharp in sim racing to a degree that is not generally accepted yet. Maybe Hutuu can get into 95% without driving a real car, and that in itself is an serious endeavour imo. Wyatt winning a couple of races running in a real Jetta series as in iRacing, that's good stuff. I'm not sure what the sim community has left to prove at this point.
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
That "point of view" is getting so old; eat out for lunch 2 less times a month (heck, a 12" sub at Subway costs a month's subscription) and you'll break even pretty quick even with some extra start up content.
I understand your argument that it's not worth it to you because of the time (or lack thereof) you'd have to race, but 99.99% of people who say that "they can't afford it" really mean "I won't afford it". It's probably relatively impossible to own a PC capable of running it, have a wheel/pedal setup (a G25/27 costs way more than a year's sub), pay for high-speed internet, and not "be able" to afford iRacing - that's such a joke. Anyone who really "can't" afford to run iRacing if they want to, should probably sell their hardware to make ends meet for a while.
I do understand why it's not a priority for you personally though.
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
no
I must not be understanding what you're saying...
The centre-line of the car must be off of the racing surface to incur a 1x. Hopefully you're basically parallel with the track anyway, so... ?
You can test it out (sort of) in anaglyph mode using typical red/blue glasses just to see (sort) what the effect would be; otherwise you would need the 3D vision kit (active LCD shutter glasses) and a supported 120Hz monitor.
You can do practice sessions alone, or time trials alone, or you can race as a ghost (invisible to others) in official races. So you don't have to be competing with others all the time if you don't want. But you still need an active account and internet access to do those things and start the sim.
Nobody answered that yet for you.
Also from you first post, if you let your subscription run out you don't "lose" anything, it'll all be waiting for when you resubscribe.
The rookies series' have some wrecks, but by and large you'll find the caliber of competition and sportsmanship much much higher at iRacing.
I laugh in the face of those who's claim to fame is superiority over 12 year olds! 
(j/k, it was just a setup begging for a response)
(j/k, it was just a setup begging for a response)
I really can't wait to get home and drive that tonight!
3D vision + laser-scanned spa ftw!
3D vision + laser-scanned spa ftw!
I assume that covers airfare and accommodations, therefore count me in!
Holy shit, it's the first typo I've ever seen you commit!
I made it nice and big so it stands out
.Smartass :P
Besides what about two blue lines? And icing is technically an "offside play" for some reason, so take that
It's also toned down so that "real" rookies (I.E., no sim experience) can get used to the tracks and focus on improving instead of learning a new track every week.
They're a little pedantic about that over there.
I guess they have their reasons
I guess they have their reasons
That's a "software tire tester" that he's had for years AFAIK. From what he's revealed in years past, it's a virtual machine that lets him test his formulae under sim conditions. Not to be confused with actually wrecking real tires on a real machine recording real values under a vast array of conditions.
Unless I missed something somewhere along the way, which is entirely possible.
Unless I missed something somewhere along the way, which is entirely possible.
They're not, but in any sport there is protocol, and it isn't changed dynamically based on feelings or circumstances. In fact fundamentally that's what "rules" do is take out the grey areas of conduct. You don't play hockey and decide that all of a sudden an offside pass is OK because the circumstances made it "more fair" for some arbitrary reason right?
I realise you're trying to stop people's feelings getting hurt (hell hath no fury like a woman scorned!), but the better approach is to make people actually aware of what genuine racecraft entails on both sides, rather than trying to bend accepted protocol in "certain circumstances" because then you're just inviting people's faulty interpretation of said circumstances, and that will end in more tears than the very situations you're trying to alleviate.
Well, honestly you pretty much did make it sound like the slower car has some specific responsibility to go off line, insofar as calling it "respectful" to move over. I'm not sure what sort of deal you're running, or why you're attacking the Aussie fellow back there, but in any level of motorsport in any series that I can think of that involves mutliclass racing, if you move off of your line in a slower vehicle you're basically looked at as a dangerous idiot.
That's not an exaggeration, or directed at you personally, it's just basically common racecraft knowledge (someone correct me if there's any real life exception to that). It's not actually a matter of opinion in the real world
. The reason being that the person behind (assuming they have any racing competence) is planning their move and they need to do so under the premise that they have a clue what slower car's plans are. This is why it is actually the responsibility of the car in front to *not* do anything unusual (like pulling off line); so the passing vehicle can safely and effectively plan their strats.
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG