My thoughts can only be expressed by a series of emoticons i this instance
Hmm, not the full blown track editor many will have hoped for, but my expectation was that it'd be something far simpler, like our AutoX editor. This seems like it'll satisfy the needs of a lot of people, but its a shame no real locations could be recreated.
Still, just like in the LFS forum, theres always people asking for mountain tracks with elevation change, and it seems like this editor can generate such a location for you.
Should be fun, but i think the relevence of sharing tracks will be fairly trivial because all you've done is tweak a few settings and hit generate, rather than spending time putting thought into corners and layout.
Did a little digging on the karting track, and *THINK* its this place:
http://www.pistainternazionalesiena.com/circuit_english.html
Piazza del Campo gave me Siena, Italy ("Piazza del Campo is the principal public space of the historic center of Siena, Tuscany, Italy"), and Siena Italy Karting gave me them. They've held internation events so its plausable, and their frontpage does have a photo of Mika Hakkinen, so i'd guess its got legs.
Hmm, 'San Galgano' also in the track/location list also comes up as Tuscany, and im sure that close twisty street track in GT4 was Tuscany, so its quite plausable that they've visited the city and moved on to the karting track a short distance away seeing as its a track with international standing.
Ok... i was wrong
http://www.gamersyde.com/strea ... lay_karting-16605_en.html
I hope they have something else better than that as a kart track.
doesnt look very realistic, wheres the red/green shells, banana skins etc
http://www.pistainternazionalesiena.com/circuit_english.html
Piazza del Campo gave me Siena, Italy ("Piazza del Campo is the principal public space of the historic center of Siena, Tuscany, Italy"), and Siena Italy Karting gave me them. They've held internation events so its plausable, and their frontpage does have a photo of Mika Hakkinen, so i'd guess its got legs.
Hmm, 'San Galgano' also in the track/location list also comes up as Tuscany, and im sure that close twisty street track in GT4 was Tuscany, so its quite plausable that they've visited the city and moved on to the karting track a short distance away seeing as its a track with international standing.
Ok... i was wrong
http://www.gamersyde.com/strea ... lay_karting-16605_en.html
I hope they have something else better than that as a kart track.
doesnt look very realistic, wheres the red/green shells, banana skins etc
Last edited by PaulC2K, .
lol, ive often (ok, not that often) wondered what the person who came up with the imperial scales was smoking/drinking.
I would assume it wasnt intentional, 12 inches to a foot, 16oz to a pound/pint etc. Just seems so impractical compared to metric, and i mean that by its fractional values rather than their quantity values. Im sure theres a good reason, i read a while back about something interesting about money (i think it was something like the £1 being the same weight as a different type of lb, and thats where it got its name from.) so im sure theres a decent reason... just might have been easier if they picked a reason that worked like metric
I would assume it wasnt intentional, 12 inches to a foot, 16oz to a pound/pint etc. Just seems so impractical compared to metric, and i mean that by its fractional values rather than their quantity values. Im sure theres a good reason, i read a while back about something interesting about money (i think it was something like the £1 being the same weight as a different type of lb, and thats where it got its name from.) so im sure theres a decent reason... just might have been easier if they picked a reason that worked like metric
You might have tried informing me that there was a thread talking about it
Im still working on the project, and truthfully ive got nowt else going on in my life right now so most of my time is spent working on it, but my health is fairly sh*t and with sod all income and a pile of debt it takes a backseat from time to time, couple that with the fact that its no small task what im doing and I take no pleasure in saying I dont see it being completed before 2011.
I've contemplated leaving out areas i wanted to cover, but its still a huge project for me and theres a ton of work that needs to be done. I'd stopped working on it for a few months because of frustrations (css & non-table layout w/ browser issues thrown in) and really only picked it up when Victor decided he'd had enough with the forum area.
I dont suppose many people will even know or remember the site in its first instance around 2007, I never fully opened it up to leagues, but a couple of series ran using it, and then i created LFSProSeries.net using heavily modified code, and now the LFSEvents.net site im working on is based on that, but a lot of it is rewrote and im designing it to be used by this community.
If you look at the LFSPS website, and basically it'll give league organisers the ability to run their league to the same standard as that site. Its about 90% automated, users sign-up, you approve them, they get emailed the details for the round, turn up and race, you upload the MPR for the site to parse the results and all the points etc are calculated for you, the site reflects those results instantly.
The key to it really is making it so that running a race series, as much of the silly tasks can be automated for you, leaving the organiser to focus on dealing with everything else. It means they have more free time, or can still run a series with minimal spare time rather than having to close it down or have some else take over, it means the people taking part can see things straight away rather than when the admins have the time... its just designed to make running events easier. The only complicated part is building the damn thing! If all we ever had was same format leagues it'd be a doddle, but the good thing about LFS is its flexability and since ~2007 ive had code that can handle 5 types of races, Driver standings, Team Standings, Privateer racing, multi-class racing, multi-division racing... and combinations of that. So a series like MoE with GT1 and GT2 on track it can still parse the result and assign points correctly and ditto the standings (although GT1 FXR scoring more pts than FZR/XRR is an issue).
Im building the site whether people want it or not tbh, its a personal project, and tbh i'd rather there was an official version of what im trying to achieve done by Victor because i do think it'd be a great feature for the community and it'd get far more use them doing it than it will an outsider, but this is the situation we have.
Im working on a seperate domain for all my testing, and once theres areas which need testing i might see if there are volunteers, right now its just a shell with a load of incomplete areas which need filling in (half of which just needs modified code from LFSPS) so theres nothing really to see.
- edit -
Just to be clear, the LFSEvents.net site that *I* am working on isnt a replacement/solution to this subforum, its basically a site for running/overseeing your leagues. I guess i could make it possible for people to add their events to my sites calendar but redirect them to another site to do all the work, but its not just a forum, infact the forum aspect of it is fairly low down on my list of things to do.
Last edited by PaulC2K, .
The damage model is fine, very little undramatic for heavy hits though which is fairly disappointing, but for the stuff your likely to experience it should be fine.
What concerns me comes form 2 aspects shown in that video, theres always wrecker racers in console gaming, and wall-riding and intentional slams are their PITA way of getting around being crap drivers, and that video showed nothing which will deter those sort of tactics and ruin public online racing for people who want to race in a racing game.
That could be largely because it was in arcade mode, so realism is dialed down to keep it simple and fun.
The second part comes from the fact that the crash physics (which should really just be physics) are pretty much non-existant. You watch any RL race of a car hitting a wall at >30 degrees and frequently you'll see them bounce of there and turn into a spinning wreck of metal. GT5 just has you grinding along the wall, and that just plain sucks.
Its just a stark reminder that were still dealing with mock physics, and that more often than not these canned effect are required until they can be created in a realistic way naturally. By that i mean a real world physics engine, where putting properly replicated objects into that setting would see them react almost perfectly identical to the real world, whether thats a tennis racket and ball or a pair of racing cars hitting each other head on at 70mph. The current GT5 engine cant create that situation realisticly, and it emphasises the need for canned effects to try and create that (even if it does sometimes create extreme results too).
I also dont really understand what people expect from the 3D experience, i think a few people are expecting a lot from it, simply because thats what they want. The same can be said about all of GT5 infact, its the crazy expectation that goes with it, and its going to disappoint a fair amount of people because of the fact that they're hyping themselves up and expect everything to be 100% perfect in every area, when the reality is nothing ever is. I truely think it'll be a great game, but i think a lot of people will be disappointed because they've let their expectations go OTT, im sure most people with their heads screwed on will see that though.
What concerns me comes form 2 aspects shown in that video, theres always wrecker racers in console gaming, and wall-riding and intentional slams are their PITA way of getting around being crap drivers, and that video showed nothing which will deter those sort of tactics and ruin public online racing for people who want to race in a racing game.
That could be largely because it was in arcade mode, so realism is dialed down to keep it simple and fun.
The second part comes from the fact that the crash physics (which should really just be physics) are pretty much non-existant. You watch any RL race of a car hitting a wall at >30 degrees and frequently you'll see them bounce of there and turn into a spinning wreck of metal. GT5 just has you grinding along the wall, and that just plain sucks.
Its just a stark reminder that were still dealing with mock physics, and that more often than not these canned effect are required until they can be created in a realistic way naturally. By that i mean a real world physics engine, where putting properly replicated objects into that setting would see them react almost perfectly identical to the real world, whether thats a tennis racket and ball or a pair of racing cars hitting each other head on at 70mph. The current GT5 engine cant create that situation realisticly, and it emphasises the need for canned effects to try and create that (even if it does sometimes create extreme results too).
I also dont really understand what people expect from the 3D experience, i think a few people are expecting a lot from it, simply because thats what they want. The same can be said about all of GT5 infact, its the crazy expectation that goes with it, and its going to disappoint a fair amount of people because of the fact that they're hyping themselves up and expect everything to be 100% perfect in every area, when the reality is nothing ever is. I truely think it'll be a great game, but i think a lot of people will be disappointed because they've let their expectations go OTT, im sure most people with their heads screwed on will see that though.
Im pretty sure most people then and now would still refer to his antics as being a c*nts trick, but we'll just skip over the fact that TG were doing a 'wasnt Senna awesome and everyone else shit' peice, and the likes of lard arse clarkson would have been slagging him off no less than any asshat on here has of Schumi.
They were doing nothing more than creating a rememberance peice for someone, they were hardly going to call him a cheating c*nt were they, and how often does someone who's frequently slated in the press all of a sudden become a nations hero when they die in a tragic way? Senna would hardly be the first person who's negatives are brushed under the carpet to be remembered for the positives and have history spun to make a better story.
When Schumi dies he'll get the same treatment, why? because its not particularly popular to slate dead people for their bad things unless they were truely terrible, they'll just say what the masses what to hear, just like its popular to slate schumi for his antics this weekend and throughout his career. Doesnt make what Senna did any less c*ntish though.
I do think its a great idea having indicators to say which way someone is allowed to pass you though, but IMO there should be 3 lights, go left, go right, and your not my teammate so you cant go either side.
Clearly the front wings are passing a static test, with an FIA set weight applied to judge how much flex there is, and these are passing it.
That seems pretty black and white, they've had the thumbs up from the FIA, and the flex test cleared them.
The other rule McLaren are now talking about isthe height difference of >= 85mm from the plank. The wings frequently look like they'd struggle to manage 8.5mm from the ground, let alone 85mm from the plank.
It could well be that the FIA do this from parc ferme and thats their only interest, so just like the flex test is shown to be an useless test of an wings flexability, this minimum distance test could also be about as useful as a ban on team tactics. That wont be a concern for Red Bull or Ferrari, but it does seem pathetic if the way the FIA enforce the rules they set in a way that doesnt meet realistic levels seen in a racing enviroment. Why not just have some odd-job look at it, give it a prod, and come to an uneducated decision?
going ot...
The last couple of seasons more so than many before it seem to be a case of who can abuse a rule without the others knowing or as we've seen at the start of the last 2 seasons, who can pretty much go against verbal agreements between teams (Defusers & Stalled wings) using the classic 'that wasnt what our interpretation of the rule was' as a get out, and the FIA sitting back and in amongst the 'F1 must cut costs' era send 3/4 of the teams back to the drawing board to start prototyping and building almost entirely new cars. Sure they'll always be working on something new, but it seems like they spend 9 month working towards the seasons car, and instead of making the improvements to that which it needs, theyre focusing on copying what they now NEED in order to be competitive.
Theres no perfect solution (carbon copy cars isnt appealing either) but it just seems the biggest gains in F1 are by going around the rules, rather than being innovative within them. RBR had an amazing car last season, only matched by the Honda/Brawn car which blatently ignored the agreed understanding of what the defuser rule meant they could/couldnt do. iirc their car couldnt fit the defuser on there because of how their rear susp was set? F1 design should be about innovation, not whether your legal team can wiggle you round the rules.
That seems pretty black and white, they've had the thumbs up from the FIA, and the flex test cleared them.
The other rule McLaren are now talking about isthe height difference of >= 85mm from the plank. The wings frequently look like they'd struggle to manage 8.5mm from the ground, let alone 85mm from the plank.
It could well be that the FIA do this from parc ferme and thats their only interest, so just like the flex test is shown to be an useless test of an wings flexability, this minimum distance test could also be about as useful as a ban on team tactics. That wont be a concern for Red Bull or Ferrari, but it does seem pathetic if the way the FIA enforce the rules they set in a way that doesnt meet realistic levels seen in a racing enviroment. Why not just have some odd-job look at it, give it a prod, and come to an uneducated decision?
going ot...
The last couple of seasons more so than many before it seem to be a case of who can abuse a rule without the others knowing or as we've seen at the start of the last 2 seasons, who can pretty much go against verbal agreements between teams (Defusers & Stalled wings) using the classic 'that wasnt what our interpretation of the rule was' as a get out, and the FIA sitting back and in amongst the 'F1 must cut costs' era send 3/4 of the teams back to the drawing board to start prototyping and building almost entirely new cars. Sure they'll always be working on something new, but it seems like they spend 9 month working towards the seasons car, and instead of making the improvements to that which it needs, theyre focusing on copying what they now NEED in order to be competitive.
Theres no perfect solution (carbon copy cars isnt appealing either) but it just seems the biggest gains in F1 are by going around the rules, rather than being innovative within them. RBR had an amazing car last season, only matched by the Honda/Brawn car which blatently ignored the agreed understanding of what the defuser rule meant they could/couldnt do. iirc their car couldnt fit the defuser on there because of how their rear susp was set? F1 design should be about innovation, not whether your legal team can wiggle you round the rules.
I have to admit im struggling to understand where the issue stems from, the images are fairly clear and appear to be quite obvious in their differences where other circumstances (such as fuel load, braking stage, camera angle... all which have been used to dismiss the initial photos) wouldnt create the extremes shown in those photos.
But what i dont get is that the Red Bull & Ferrari wings are mounted in a significantly lower position to begin with, if you look at the center of the front wing, and compare its distance to the floor, and do the same for the endplates, that difference between teams is probably undetectable from photos that size. So this 'flex' issue surely cant be detectable on them.
The significant difference between the clearance isnt from flex, its the fact that the RBR & SF wing in its entirety is positioned a couple of inches lower than on the McLaren & Mercedes. That instantly makes the images a little misleading at first glance, and harder to see any irregularity between them when trying to account for that difference.
Obviously the location the wings are at is above board, so what is it about these photos that shows something which has Mclaren baffled by how they're achieving such results? All im seeing is wings mounted lower which makes them closer to the track, and that has sod all to do with flex. The endplates seem to be the focus, but are they refering to the amount of bow across the whole wing being unusually large under high speed, or something completely different? The most significant difference in the photos is how high the whole wing is mounted, and for images so small nothing seems to be too obvious.
I genuinely cant quite grasp which specific item the fuss is about, theres obviously something there as Whitmarsh & Lowe arent newbies and they seem stumpt to how its done in a legal capacity.
But what i dont get is that the Red Bull & Ferrari wings are mounted in a significantly lower position to begin with, if you look at the center of the front wing, and compare its distance to the floor, and do the same for the endplates, that difference between teams is probably undetectable from photos that size. So this 'flex' issue surely cant be detectable on them.
The significant difference between the clearance isnt from flex, its the fact that the RBR & SF wing in its entirety is positioned a couple of inches lower than on the McLaren & Mercedes. That instantly makes the images a little misleading at first glance, and harder to see any irregularity between them when trying to account for that difference.
Obviously the location the wings are at is above board, so what is it about these photos that shows something which has Mclaren baffled by how they're achieving such results? All im seeing is wings mounted lower which makes them closer to the track, and that has sod all to do with flex. The endplates seem to be the focus, but are they refering to the amount of bow across the whole wing being unusually large under high speed, or something completely different? The most significant difference in the photos is how high the whole wing is mounted, and for images so small nothing seems to be too obvious.
I genuinely cant quite grasp which specific item the fuss is about, theres obviously something there as Whitmarsh & Lowe arent newbies and they seem stumpt to how its done in a legal capacity.
Distance to the pit is irrelevent, when they hit that pit button they're obviously aware the SC is out, not racing, and should be following SC conditions and your given a time in which to get there which will be based on how long it'd take travelling at something like 100kph. Everyone pitting will get that message. The only way there would be this pile-up you claim would happen is if they IGNORE the time they're given and they race to the pitlane at a higher average speed than they should do. Its that simple.
Interesting comment from Piero Ferrari (Ferrari vice-president):
"For a long time now, I have also followed races in championships in the United States, where the appearance of the safety car is a frequent occurrence, but I have never seen anything similar to what happened today at the Valencia circuit."
Really? Cos ive seen races where the SC is on track and has backed up the grid and a driver around 8-10th pits, leaves the pitlane and joins further up the grid than those who didnt pit, like 3rd iirc.
Pretty sure it was Detroit '07 in IRL, i remember the incident at the end where the lead pair touched, leader hit the wall, 2nd lost his rear on the exit and 180'd it and quite blatently used momentum to roll the car into the path of 3rd & 4th (all 4 were very close) and managed to collect one of the 2. I dont watch many IRL races these days but recall that one quite clearly because of those things, so perhaps Piero shouldnt be such a JCL.
well, after re-reading the statement after you posted the gamestop announcement im doubtful of that tbh
Now that makes me think they're just saying what shop DLC will be available, and the specific details for that (who has what) will be coming soon. Its the first line which convinces me, i thought they were still speaking of the CE, but its talking about the game in general. Nothing seems to suggest the CE will get all of those, only that like the basic some shops will include some pre-order DLC.
The more i think about the CE, the more i wonder whether i really need it. The game, a book, keyring and a scale model... probably looking at twice the cost of the basic edition. If they'd included a decent length docu on the whole process i'd have been interested in seeing it, but i doubt i'd read the book and the model would get put somewhere safe... with only the game being used, and i'd pay twice the price.
Sadly it looks like we've got 5 months to wait and see anyway, so who knows.
Now that makes me think they're just saying what shop DLC will be available, and the specific details for that (who has what) will be coming soon. Its the first line which convinces me, i thought they were still speaking of the CE, but its talking about the game in general. Nothing seems to suggest the CE will get all of those, only that like the basic some shops will include some pre-order DLC.
The more i think about the CE, the more i wonder whether i really need it. The game, a book, keyring and a scale model... probably looking at twice the cost of the basic edition. If they'd included a decent length docu on the whole process i'd have been interested in seeing it, but i doubt i'd read the book and the model would get put somewhere safe... with only the game being used, and i'd pay twice the price.
Sadly it looks like we've got 5 months to wait and see anyway, so who knows.
hmmm, hadnt entered my mind that the 'exciting pre-order program for Gran Turismo 5' PolyD had mentioned would be your typical exchange of selling that DLC to the highest bidding retailer. For some reason i thought it was a limited edition type thing like BFBC2 where you unlocked a couple of things for being a day1 customer.
Oh well, guess i wont be getting any of those then, i plan (depending on UK pricing) on buying the Collectors Edt at the cheapest price i can find it rather than paying near full retail for the standard. I'll be damned if im paying CE price at near retail, not just because it has a fancy exclusive car.
Oh well, guess i wont be getting any of those then, i plan (depending on UK pricing) on buying the Collectors Edt at the cheapest price i can find it rather than paying near full retail for the standard. I'll be damned if im paying CE price at near retail, not just because it has a fancy exclusive car.
The Track editor, that could be very similar to what MNR has, but replacing the cartoon look with something more photo-realistic. I dont think the question is so much 'You can't create anything serious with a gamepad' because thats fairly obvious, its unlikely that in order to create something thats generated on-the-fly like MNR, but with photo-realistic models, IMO the PS3 cant handle that - its too much data & rendering.
Even if its ultra low res, low poly models in the editor, i dont think we'll see a truely in-depth editor which would allow us to accurately replicate a track to the standard of GT5s other tracks.
All of MNR's disc based tracks are created 100% with their in-game software, theres no way thats the case for GT5. So what we have to accept is that its either a very basic level track editor, or its not the GT5 equivelent of what MNR has, but more incommon with the LFS AutoX editor.
I'd be more than happy with a very basic MNR type editor, i think grumbling that we couldnt create somewhere like the green hell 100% accurately so its rubbish is beyond the point. If it was like MNR, where all you start with is a vast open space of land, you put down a track, shove in grandstands, buildings, run-offs & gravel traps, block trees (not individual trees) and some sort of hilly landscape etc... Im not knocking LFS when i say this, but theres not an awful lot of difference from what ive described above to somewhere like Aston or Westhill.
I dont need an editor which gives me control over every tiny detail, i'd take something that allows me to race on a custom made venue which might not be uber realistic but is certainly recognisable as your driving around. Tracks like A1 Ring, Oulton Park, Zolder, Hockenheim... those sort of locations could be created by individuals to a standard which we'd recognise and be able to race around, without having to have precision on everything. Creating venues like Abu Dhabi & Monaco... thats another matter, and who'd expect to see a tool capable of making a venue like those 2 on a console? Heck, even a PC game (built in) as well as being user friendly too.
I'd love a track editor, MNR have shown its very doable with very little effort on the users side to make something drivable. Those who put in the effort will create something far better, but its managable for everyone. I do think a full on track editor as i've mentioned is still a little unlikely, Kaz always aims for perfection and if he's not happy with something he wont add it. So whatever they'll provide it'll be something they're pleased with... but it could still be an Auto-X arena & track editor.
Even if its ultra low res, low poly models in the editor, i dont think we'll see a truely in-depth editor which would allow us to accurately replicate a track to the standard of GT5s other tracks.
All of MNR's disc based tracks are created 100% with their in-game software, theres no way thats the case for GT5. So what we have to accept is that its either a very basic level track editor, or its not the GT5 equivelent of what MNR has, but more incommon with the LFS AutoX editor.
I'd be more than happy with a very basic MNR type editor, i think grumbling that we couldnt create somewhere like the green hell 100% accurately so its rubbish is beyond the point. If it was like MNR, where all you start with is a vast open space of land, you put down a track, shove in grandstands, buildings, run-offs & gravel traps, block trees (not individual trees) and some sort of hilly landscape etc... Im not knocking LFS when i say this, but theres not an awful lot of difference from what ive described above to somewhere like Aston or Westhill.
I dont need an editor which gives me control over every tiny detail, i'd take something that allows me to race on a custom made venue which might not be uber realistic but is certainly recognisable as your driving around. Tracks like A1 Ring, Oulton Park, Zolder, Hockenheim... those sort of locations could be created by individuals to a standard which we'd recognise and be able to race around, without having to have precision on everything. Creating venues like Abu Dhabi & Monaco... thats another matter, and who'd expect to see a tool capable of making a venue like those 2 on a console? Heck, even a PC game (built in) as well as being user friendly too.
I'd love a track editor, MNR have shown its very doable with very little effort on the users side to make something drivable. Those who put in the effort will create something far better, but its managable for everyone. I do think a full on track editor as i've mentioned is still a little unlikely, Kaz always aims for perfection and if he's not happy with something he wont add it. So whatever they'll provide it'll be something they're pleased with... but it could still be an Auto-X arena & track editor.
Until GTPlanet post it, it aint anything more than weak gossip.
Theres no way PD will go to E3 (June 15-17, so 4wks away) and announce GT5 coming out the same month, no way, not buying that. With 2-6 weeks till this completely fictional Asian release date, it'd be stupid to have not made a song & dance about it coming out then because im sure they'd love to make that announcement as they must be aware of the friction the lack of a release date has on its fans.
They wouldnt make any important announcements right before E3, seeing as its the biggest games expo of the year... it just doesnt add up, not within such a short timeframe and so close to E3. It'd be bizarre to wait for E3 and give nothing away till it was stupidly close to a regions release date, and it'd be very uncharacteristic of Sony to let them announce a Asian release date go when they'd rather hold off 1 surprise they could save for E3, afterall we go to E3 these days with 80% of the information given either already announced, or leaked in the week leading to it, Sony joked about the fact that official video of the PSP Go was out before they'd even announced it at E3.
It'd also be odd given recent comments saying the game is 90% complete, then a month later announce its gone gold and being shipped.
I'd expect mid November (Asia) & late October (US & Europe)... if we've all been good boys & girls for santa, and i'd expect the annoucement to come at E3 or worse the Tokyo game show in mid September and a later launch than above.
Theres no way PD will go to E3 (June 15-17, so 4wks away) and announce GT5 coming out the same month, no way, not buying that. With 2-6 weeks till this completely fictional Asian release date, it'd be stupid to have not made a song & dance about it coming out then because im sure they'd love to make that announcement as they must be aware of the friction the lack of a release date has on its fans.
They wouldnt make any important announcements right before E3, seeing as its the biggest games expo of the year... it just doesnt add up, not within such a short timeframe and so close to E3. It'd be bizarre to wait for E3 and give nothing away till it was stupidly close to a regions release date, and it'd be very uncharacteristic of Sony to let them announce a Asian release date go when they'd rather hold off 1 surprise they could save for E3, afterall we go to E3 these days with 80% of the information given either already announced, or leaked in the week leading to it, Sony joked about the fact that official video of the PSP Go was out before they'd even announced it at E3.
It'd also be odd given recent comments saying the game is 90% complete, then a month later announce its gone gold and being shipped.
I'd expect mid November (Asia) & late October (US & Europe)... if we've all been good boys & girls for santa, and i'd expect the annoucement to come at E3 or worse the Tokyo game show in mid September and a later launch than above.
I think Rise is getting stuck on the fact that all these teams employing a stalled wing will be hit when taking high speed corners. Theres a fair few at Catalunya, so it wouldnt make sense.
But as Benji said earlier, and makes perfect sense to me, is that the vents on the cars are on both sides of the car, when its going in a straight line the air flow is 100% effective, however when its cornering the airflow on the outer vent will be very little, so the stalling effect could be say 60% effective and you could set the car up based on that fact.
Lets say a 100% stalled wing removes 2° downforce, they could theoreticly set the car up with 1 degree more on the car than a non-stalled wing would.
They'd be +1° on slow corners, 0° on high speed corners, -1° on straights.
But im fairly sure that the wings need a certain amount of airflow hitting the underside to see results too. So the effect could start at 100mph in a straight line, but with 2 side vents to get the same volume of air stalling the car might need to travel at 150mph before any stalling happens, and that could be minimal impact stalling still. Thats why your seeing side vents on the non-chassis based versions.
You also have to remember theres 1 way of looking at the stalled wing effect, but multiple ways of using that effect. At first it was seen as removing rear downforce making the car faster down straights making it much easier to overtake. However IMO its biggest use will be in allowing teams to run higher downforces and in McLarens case instantly shed that downforce when it suits them.
I highly doubt we'll ever see a team set their car up like an unstallable car, and then be able to unleash the stalled wing and gain 3mph down the straight.
Its doing things in unconventional ways which gains you tenths of seconds, and thats exactly what F1 engineers are paid to come up with.
But as Benji said earlier, and makes perfect sense to me, is that the vents on the cars are on both sides of the car, when its going in a straight line the air flow is 100% effective, however when its cornering the airflow on the outer vent will be very little, so the stalling effect could be say 60% effective and you could set the car up based on that fact.
Lets say a 100% stalled wing removes 2° downforce, they could theoreticly set the car up with 1 degree more on the car than a non-stalled wing would.
They'd be +1° on slow corners, 0° on high speed corners, -1° on straights.
But im fairly sure that the wings need a certain amount of airflow hitting the underside to see results too. So the effect could start at 100mph in a straight line, but with 2 side vents to get the same volume of air stalling the car might need to travel at 150mph before any stalling happens, and that could be minimal impact stalling still. Thats why your seeing side vents on the non-chassis based versions.
You also have to remember theres 1 way of looking at the stalled wing effect, but multiple ways of using that effect. At first it was seen as removing rear downforce making the car faster down straights making it much easier to overtake. However IMO its biggest use will be in allowing teams to run higher downforces and in McLarens case instantly shed that downforce when it suits them.
I highly doubt we'll ever see a team set their car up like an unstallable car, and then be able to unleash the stalled wing and gain 3mph down the straight.
Its doing things in unconventional ways which gains you tenths of seconds, and thats exactly what F1 engineers are paid to come up with.
My understanding was that Mclaren have probably been running at a marginally higher downforce than their rivals in order to make the car easier to drive, and the fact that their F-Duct effectively removes downforce for straights which is a prime reason you'd want lower DF, keeps things kinda balance themselves out. So instead of having this uber straight line speed, they've taken advantage of it to improve other areas while keeping them competitive on the straights.
If thats all being done by blocking and unblocking air by moving the drivers knee on a vent, they effectively have an on/off switch, and something the other teams cant do without a chassis change.
McLaren have taken advantage of what it can do to improve other areas of the car, beyond what it can do at face value. Im pretty sure thats exactly what teams like Sauber and Ferrari have too. Their duct might have a negative effect in high-speed corners, however its possible they've set it up to counter-act this effect.
Mercedes could have something a little smarter, where air flows into one side at a higher rate than the other, thus causing less stalling, and yet going down the straight it would get the full amount.
McLaren can switch theirs on and off as and when they please. The rest of the grid have to make compromises which give the most benefit with the least issues as a byproduct.
If McLaren can increase downforce knowing they can lose it with the F-Duct, im sure Ferrari etc will do similar, add a degree and when it partially stalls on high-speed corners then it'll settle out, still being faster than a non-stalled wing down the straight, and having more DF in slow corners. Its about compromise, exactly what McLaren have been doing so far this season.
edit:
Its also interesting that McLaren dont have to compromise, they could use the F-Duct for its straight line speed, while not having any detromental effect on cornering. No other team can claim that right now, if some air is stalling the wing even 10% its a negative effect McLaren dont suffer from.
If thats all being done by blocking and unblocking air by moving the drivers knee on a vent, they effectively have an on/off switch, and something the other teams cant do without a chassis change.
McLaren have taken advantage of what it can do to improve other areas of the car, beyond what it can do at face value. Im pretty sure thats exactly what teams like Sauber and Ferrari have too. Their duct might have a negative effect in high-speed corners, however its possible they've set it up to counter-act this effect.
Mercedes could have something a little smarter, where air flows into one side at a higher rate than the other, thus causing less stalling, and yet going down the straight it would get the full amount.
McLaren can switch theirs on and off as and when they please. The rest of the grid have to make compromises which give the most benefit with the least issues as a byproduct.
If McLaren can increase downforce knowing they can lose it with the F-Duct, im sure Ferrari etc will do similar, add a degree and when it partially stalls on high-speed corners then it'll settle out, still being faster than a non-stalled wing down the straight, and having more DF in slow corners. Its about compromise, exactly what McLaren have been doing so far this season.
edit:
Its also interesting that McLaren dont have to compromise, they could use the F-Duct for its straight line speed, while not having any detromental effect on cornering. No other team can claim that right now, if some air is stalling the wing even 10% its a negative effect McLaren dont suffer from.
Last edited by PaulC2K, .
Button:
R1| Qualified 8th, Finished 7th, overtook nobody when he needed to
R2| Qualified 4th, Finished 1st, fortunate enough not to need to pass anyone
R3| Qualified 17th, Finished 8th, overtook Alonsos struggling Ferrari and the rest in pits or mech failures
R4| Qualified 5th, Finished 1st, fortunate enough not to need to pass anyone but Rosberg
Hamilton:
R1| Qualified 4th, Finished 3rd, passed Vettels struggling Red Bull
R2| Qualified 11th, Finished 6th, passed Button, Webber, Massa before being wrecked by Webber when in 5th.
R3| Qualified 20th, Finished 6th, passed 5 people on track, plus 7 on grid straight incl Button & Alonso
R4| Qualified 6th, Finished 2nd, passed approx 10+ people (midpack folks)
This isnt intended as a Hamilton is better than Button and heres the proof (though FTR IMO anyone who doesnt recognise that as being true anyway is blind) but just a bizarre observation from the first 4 races of the season. Its quite easy to say bloody hell Jensons doing well at the moment, 2 race wins, tops the driver standings etc. But when you analyse what he's done what he's actually done is actually just make 2 very good decisions which have won him races, and the other 2 races he's spent his time following others unable to pass them. The 2 races he'd won, its hard to judge as he found himself in the that position in the first few laps so didnt have the chance to prove he COULD have passed people, but in the other races he proved he COULDNT pass people.
Im sure the fact that they're having to compromise on the setup to give it better balancing and this isnt making them as fast as they could be is a factor which could soon be solved in Barcelona, they could both be overtaking with relative ease if DF is equal to the rest of the grid and the F-Duct gives them a straight line speed advantage as you'd expect (currently they're adding extra DF, which the F-Duct neutralises down the straight, meaning no speed advantage but hi-DF with no speed loss like all other cars would experience).
As for the 'yeah, well he did it last year'.... its quite easy to overtake people when you have one of the fastest cars on the grid, and thats my point. He's having to fight for passes, and he's struggling. Hamilton is too, but the difference is he has made a dozen, including Button, Massa, Alonso & Webber (+ Vettel, but in a struggling state) and thats what you expect from world champions. The likes of Senna, Prost, Schumi, Alonso... they can hussle a pass with witt & cunning maneuvers. Button showed last year he could win from the front in a dominant car, and win when a faster car (RBR) appeared and had a dozen mechanical issues... he rarely took a race by the scruff of the neck and faught for it (Brazil is the only occasion which springs to mind). Maybe thats not his fault, but it doesnt disprove my point either.
Also regarding someones 'one of a few to pass a KERS car' pull the other one, half the grid passed a KERS car at some stage. Their extra weight compromised them around 80% of the lap, so made them vulnerable where most equal cars wouldnt be, and while they're hard to defend against, it wasnt as hard to pass one because there was more opportunities (due to more defensive lines being used around the track) and being slower on the corner exit if you were still close when the KERS was deployed you'd probably be able to stick with them in the slipstream. It certainly wouldnt be like comparing single & double deck defusers, KERS was removed from many cars frequently, only McLaren ran them regularly and still removed it for a couple of rounds (Silverstone i recall, due to not enough brake points to recover energy) so many teams removing it showed it wasnt all that.
Jenson is a very good driver, many will say he's one of the best in F1, but IMO his racing ability isnt of the standard you'd expect from a WDC and he's done little to prove that. Many people were saying this at the latter stages of last season, Brazil surprised many people, but its the exception and not the norm. Vettel was a far better racer, but had mechincal issues. Jenson got the WDC exactly how you're meant to, winning races and picking up pts... you cant knock that, but IMO its the weakest WDC winner i can recall for a long time (i've watched since late 80's) but again... not his fault, he raced, won, and did so without controversy.
I havent seen this mentioned anywhere on here, but its something that ive had in my mind the last 2 races and seeing as were 4 races in now, wondered if anyone else has recognised this little tidbit about 1 driver this season....
Midrace Overtakes*
R1| Bahrain = 0
R2| Australia = 0
R3| Malaysia = 1
R4| China = 1
2010 Total = 2
* Passes from Lap 2 onwards (simply because the grid start isnt quite the same thing, and i can better vouch for/verify passes after T1), excluding pit lane passes, mechanical failure, crashes, or moves which dont stick (eg throwing it down the inside and looking a tit)... basically anything i can verify on the FIA website or by memory.
Theres only 1 driver ive noticed who can claim such pathetic statistics, whilst also being able to say he's completed every single lap of every GP this season, he cant blame reliability, a lack of competitiveness of his car, a lack of experience, or anything other than modern F1 cars being hopeless for overtaking (though this hasnt stopped his teammate).
For those of you who are unaware of who im refering to, i'd like to introduce to you to.... the current drivers standings leader, the reigning WDC champion wearing the 1 on his car and 2 race wins so far, Mr Jenson Button MBE!
Crazy really, certainly wouldnt think it looking at the standings or just going off race results alone. He's been passed by Hamilton twice, both in the opening 2 laps of the race when he's started at least 3 places behind him (Lap 2 @ Melbourne 11th passing 4th, and T1 @ Sepang 20th passing 17th) and Hamilton has made around 10 successful passes this season showing the car is quite capable.
It highlights how significant some of the decisions Button has made, but also how utterly incapable he is of RACING. Last season he had combo of fastest & most reliable car of the season, and for the most part won races without much effort or need to overtake people. He might be a good driver, but he's a rubbish racer compared to many world champions of years gone by. FTR im not a Button hater, i just think he was a very lucky chap last season and who's now out of his depth when he needs to make something happen with the modern F1 car's lack of overtaking opportunities. I'd hope he'd improve, and with the updates to the car to hopefully address the aero/df issues it might give him something he's happier with and able to pass people with, afterall with the 'F-Duct' it should be easier as long as they have a car that allows them to use it for speed rather than balancing out their high DF setting to make it evenly balanced... but i dont think he has that streak in him like Alonso, Hamilton or Schumi (circa 2000).
Anyone interested in first lap stats Button is at +/-0 (0, -2, +2, 0) compared to Hamiltons +10 (-1, +4, +7, 0) in the opening lap alone, so im not removing compelling stats in his favour.
Midrace Overtakes*
R1| Bahrain = 0
R2| Australia = 0
R3| Malaysia = 1
R4| China = 1
2010 Total = 2
* Passes from Lap 2 onwards (simply because the grid start isnt quite the same thing, and i can better vouch for/verify passes after T1), excluding pit lane passes, mechanical failure, crashes, or moves which dont stick (eg throwing it down the inside and looking a tit)... basically anything i can verify on the FIA website or by memory.
Theres only 1 driver ive noticed who can claim such pathetic statistics, whilst also being able to say he's completed every single lap of every GP this season, he cant blame reliability, a lack of competitiveness of his car, a lack of experience, or anything other than modern F1 cars being hopeless for overtaking (though this hasnt stopped his teammate).
For those of you who are unaware of who im refering to, i'd like to introduce to you to.... the current drivers standings leader, the reigning WDC champion wearing the 1 on his car and 2 race wins so far, Mr Jenson Button MBE!
Crazy really, certainly wouldnt think it looking at the standings or just going off race results alone. He's been passed by Hamilton twice, both in the opening 2 laps of the race when he's started at least 3 places behind him (Lap 2 @ Melbourne 11th passing 4th, and T1 @ Sepang 20th passing 17th) and Hamilton has made around 10 successful passes this season showing the car is quite capable.
It highlights how significant some of the decisions Button has made, but also how utterly incapable he is of RACING. Last season he had combo of fastest & most reliable car of the season, and for the most part won races without much effort or need to overtake people. He might be a good driver, but he's a rubbish racer compared to many world champions of years gone by. FTR im not a Button hater, i just think he was a very lucky chap last season and who's now out of his depth when he needs to make something happen with the modern F1 car's lack of overtaking opportunities. I'd hope he'd improve, and with the updates to the car to hopefully address the aero/df issues it might give him something he's happier with and able to pass people with, afterall with the 'F-Duct' it should be easier as long as they have a car that allows them to use it for speed rather than balancing out their high DF setting to make it evenly balanced... but i dont think he has that streak in him like Alonso, Hamilton or Schumi (circa 2000).
Anyone interested in first lap stats Button is at +/-0 (0, -2, +2, 0) compared to Hamiltons +10 (-1, +4, +7, 0) in the opening lap alone, so im not removing compelling stats in his favour.
Considering all the GT5P cars have interior models, i think its pretty safe to say thats mis-quoted or been mis-translated for him.
They've said for a long time now that there will be 170 cars fully modelled with damage, and ~800 with interiors but no deformation damage, only scratches and mechanical failures.
I'd take it with a pinch of salt until its said in an official statement which has been prepared and double checked, rather than an impromptu comment.
Considering the comment was almost certainly taken from his UK trip to see the GT school folks and nothing else has come from things he's said, this wasnt a planned announcement or update, he's just answered questions with answers we already know but people still insist on asking cos they're morons who think if they ask when it'll be released they'll be the first he tells, as if nobody had thought to ask him and thats the only reason its not on shelves.
I can live without it, but im not buying into it. We've also heard that GT5 will have a track editor, that it'll be a launch day title amongst a dozen other dates, we've had legit PD screenshots with bikes in it, official sony mags stating that Indycar would be in there.... tons of things, none made as official statements by PD (except one Asian launch date) only tidbits of info thrown around, and misquoted or misunderstood like chinese whispers.
Until they make an official statement, then i'll take it with a pinch of salt.
Plato is the biggest cheat in BTCC by a country mile, and im sure Rob Collard will be saying the same when it suits him to. Year after year Plato does the same things, usually he's one of the frontrunners in the 'lets cut the Thrux chicane to catch up' charts, and just like he showed when Neal was lined up to pass him he'll do whatever he cant to try and stop you passing, and if that means shoving you off he'll do that.
Neal is heavy handed and agressive with his moves, but he's not a blatent cheater like Plato. Neal will stick his nose into the inside of the corner and use the weight to force his way through. No, its not gentlemanly, but its certainly not downright cheating nor a single-minded intent to shove you off the track nowever blatent it looks and then pass it off as perfectly normal when asked, yet Plato cries like a little girl when someone does the same thing to him!
I also find it quite ironic that if anyone in here had done the same thing that Neal did at the chicane, people here would be in outrage at the fact that they werent given room, and that Collard just turned in despite Neal being there.
Collard actually had the cheek to brake early for the chicane to allow Neal to get a meaningful overlap with Kane because he was looking fast and likely to pass him, and if anything he braked too much because Neal had a good 50% alongside him midway through the chicane even before they were close to turning left for the middle which resulted in contact. He tried to create something to distract Kane and get him off his tail, and i guess he didnt realise he had Matt there with a decent overlap, he certainly didnt drive like he knew there was a car there.
Now, i'll admit i dont mind Matt Neal, i have no particular favouritism to him, but i have a hatred of Plato's cheating ass, especially the fact that he does it and acts so innocent and screams blue murder when someone does something to him (Chilton @ Knockhill in '98 iirc), so anyone who annoys Plato and employs the same tactics on him to get past is alright in my book.
My loyalty is to Gio though, anyone who's had a meaningful stint in the Vaux car since John Cleland in the very late 80s, Neal hasnt (i'd count meaningful as 2yrs+ or had a decent impact in those mid-pack years between Cleland, Muller & Gio).
Im sure everyone's seen it, but this is the difference between the 2 drivers:
Plato: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqNtQsIa2Nw
Neal is a cheeky c*nt, Plato is a cheating c*nt. Anyone who believes Neal is worse than Plato wants their eyes testing, and that includes Collard.
Neal is heavy handed and agressive with his moves, but he's not a blatent cheater like Plato. Neal will stick his nose into the inside of the corner and use the weight to force his way through. No, its not gentlemanly, but its certainly not downright cheating nor a single-minded intent to shove you off the track nowever blatent it looks and then pass it off as perfectly normal when asked, yet Plato cries like a little girl when someone does the same thing to him!
I also find it quite ironic that if anyone in here had done the same thing that Neal did at the chicane, people here would be in outrage at the fact that they werent given room, and that Collard just turned in despite Neal being there.
Collard actually had the cheek to brake early for the chicane to allow Neal to get a meaningful overlap with Kane because he was looking fast and likely to pass him, and if anything he braked too much because Neal had a good 50% alongside him midway through the chicane even before they were close to turning left for the middle which resulted in contact. He tried to create something to distract Kane and get him off his tail, and i guess he didnt realise he had Matt there with a decent overlap, he certainly didnt drive like he knew there was a car there.
Now, i'll admit i dont mind Matt Neal, i have no particular favouritism to him, but i have a hatred of Plato's cheating ass, especially the fact that he does it and acts so innocent and screams blue murder when someone does something to him (Chilton @ Knockhill in '98 iirc), so anyone who annoys Plato and employs the same tactics on him to get past is alright in my book.
My loyalty is to Gio though, anyone who's had a meaningful stint in the Vaux car since John Cleland in the very late 80s, Neal hasnt (i'd count meaningful as 2yrs+ or had a decent impact in those mid-pack years between Cleland, Muller & Gio).
Im sure everyone's seen it, but this is the difference between the 2 drivers:
Plato: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqNtQsIa2Nw
Neal is a cheeky c*nt, Plato is a cheating c*nt. Anyone who believes Neal is worse than Plato wants their eyes testing, and that includes Collard.
Its Arrows series to revive if he wanted to, over xmas i had considered asking him if he fancied doing it again but he's distanced himself from LFS (and nfinity) so i doubt he'd be interested in getting involved, and being in Aus the times arent ideal for him to be involved during the event either.
I given up on LFS for the time being, i'll jump on from time to time but with a racing community quickly going down the plughole and the first season getting tons of interest and then people giving up after a couple of rounds (as is very typical of most leagues) i cant say i have much faith in bringing it back. I havent bothered with a 2nd season of LFSPS for the same reasons.
LFSWorld Username: jonathon.provost
I would like to run for the position of nation's manager: no
Skills: reviving 2yr old threads on a series which is long gone
I would like to run for the position of nation's manager: no
Skills: reviving 2yr old threads on a series which is long gone
Yeah, thats Bernie, the attention seeking moron.
The thing that gets me is that even though this is most likely just Bernie looking for some new newspaper cuttings for his scrapbooking, it wouldnt make an ounce of difference if it was implemented anyway.
If your 13th on a 26 car grid, and you believe your faster than a load of those people ahead of you, the obvious thing to do is take a shortcut ASAP, you get ahead of them and start pulling away. Fantastic.
However, isnt that the optimum solution for pretty much everyone? Pole, second, third.....
Whoever doesnt shortcut at the earliest opportunity, potentially finds themself behind a slower car, potentially killing your chances of a decent result.
End result being that all 26 cars take the shortcut at the earliest opportunity the rules allow it, to avoid allowing someone else to jump them and slow them down.
About the only person who'd benefit is someone at the very back who'd have an empty track to themself to do clean laps and use their shortcut later on.
I think the new points are completely irrelevent personally. Its nice that more people get rewarded for their efforts, rather than just 6 drivers like it used to be, but apparently these significant increases in points are whats needed to make drivers go for the win rather than settling for what they've got.
Rubbish!
10pts for 1st, 8pts for 2nd place, 0pts for crashing out
25pts for 1st, 18pts for 2nd place, 0pts for crashing out
They can stretch that gap as much as they like, but no driver is going to SETTLE for a position they believe they can get (special circumstances omitting, such as only needing 4th or higher to win WDC or technical problems) because just like before, the cost of settling for 2nd place is far greater than the cost of getting a DNF.
I just cant believe that there are drivers who would believe they could safely pass someone for the race victory, taking the glory of the win as well as pulling off a race winning pass, because 2pts wasnt enough of an incentive for them to do it, however now theres a 7pts gain its worth it.
Theres a far bigger gain, and potentially a FAR greater loss if it goes wrong, thats is what stops drivers from pushing themselves for the win.
Ask Hamilton after Monza, having spun and DNF'd on the last lap in the persuit of 2nd place when 3rd was a certainty. Drivers make risks based on what they believe they can pull off, he wasnt pushing as hard as he could because there was an extra 2pts on offer, but because he believed he could do it even on the last lap and thats as simple as it gets.
Yup, racing used to be about the combination of best driver, car & team.
Apparently thats boring, and it needs messing with to make it entertaining for the viewers... just like it did the first 30 years when everyone called the sport boring, and now fondly recall the last 15 years as the best F1's ever known....
06-09 have been entertaining seasons IMO, but not because of silly qualifying rules, and not specificly because the racing has been far more entertaining, its just been competitive in the standings rather than having a dominant team and the WDC won by round 14.
F1 is more about the entertainment value over the last 10-15 or so years, because entertainment pays better than straight up honest results, honest competition comes further down the list
.Boris, you do realise those videos are intended to be 100% identical, right? The GT video is generated from the GPS data logged from this new device, its not a comparison of a pro driving round Fuji IRL vs in GT5.
Could be wrong, but it sounds like your impressed that the driver had to make the same counter-steer correction IRL and in game (as if to prove its accuracy), when really the GT output is an auto-generated replay which you can race against as a ghost car n stuff.
As i say, thats the impression im getting from that comment anyway.
The first time i watched the video i thought they'd somehow missed a fair bit of feedback, cos just on the apex of T1 the hand movement is clearly different. On closer expection, its only hand movement, not wheel movement, Kaz (i'm guessing) just moves his hand location for a moment, threw me off hehe.
Its certainly very impressive technology, but i cant help but say... so?
As a real world device, well unless were going round tracks which are in GT5 with a car thats in GT5 and this fancy GPS device, it means squat to >99.99% of people.
As a GT5 feature, it'll only mean something to us if they have capable drivers armed with this tech who'll go out and provide real world data as a challenge. If the Super-GT series (or nascar) threw this tech into a car for qualifying, and made the lap available in GT5 ... THEN im interested, or even better, if they gave it to The Stig for laps around the TG test track. Even then, a lot of GT5 cars wont feature in future TG eps on the lap chart, most which would be suitable have probably already been around already, and in 2 seasons time it'd be cars which arent in GT5 unless theres DLC of it.
So im kinda dubious of this feature, really it needs them to do a lot of legwork to make use of a feature they've added (ie agreements with race drivers). Theres not much help the average person can offer because its dependant on a lot of unlikely scenarios (car, track, GPS device & person wanting to offer it to GT community).
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG