Quote from george_tsiros :

...wtf! do we care about gtr gtl? i don't care one bit. It all sucks. end of story.

Notice the difference.

Ontopic: When I tried the GTR2 demo I had big problems understanding the force feedback. Felt very strange. Later I found out that was because the FF is generated by both the front and rear wheels, which clears up why it feels horrible. Not a game for me.

Vain

This is probably not the best place to say it but I am enjoying GTR2 a lot more than I expected to.

Never having driven any of the cars depicted, I can't speak to its authenticity nor its accuracy but SimBin/Blimey have finally managed to produce a game that isn't plagued with the usual disconnected floating feel I've come to associate with other ISI engined games such as rFactor, the original GTR and GTL. Steering is responsive with none of the lag of the other games, force feedback is intuitive and manages to convey meaningful information about the state of the car, the cars feel as though they are connected to the road and the handling and dynamics also make intuitive sense.

It's not perfect by any means and many of the usual ISI issues are still present (for example, canned effects, cars do not move naturally in external views and so on) but it is a considerable improvement over, say, rFactor (which I don't like).

I do sometimes find myself wondering how the game would have turned out had SimBin/Blimey licensed the LFS engine instead of relying on ISI's. Apparently Blimey will be using their own in-house race sim engine for their next title, Race, which depicts the WTCC series. Race is due to be released this November and I am very much looking forward to seeing how it turns out.

As far as I have seen, they "fixed" the hover-feel by adding more grip. Surely, if the car feels floaty and reacts very nervous, the obvious fix is to add grip. Turns out the cars lap now several seconds faster than their reallife counterparts. Whoops.

Furthermore, they are still using the same slip curves for longitudinal and lateral grip, and while not being that far off on the former, the lateral grip is wrong by about 30% in certain circumstances. The result is too much grip before reaching and at the "limit" and by far not enough after it.

I'm not saying the whole game is crap, but the physics part of it leaves quite much to be desired. That said, I think they even mentioned themselves that they cut down a bit on realism to add drivability, kinda as a replacement for all the cues you miss out by not being in a real car.

the demo version of GTR2 is horrible...it is the reason i didn't pre-order the game...but seeing as my entire team bought it...i went and bought the retail version as well.

There is a HUGE improvement between the demo and the retail versions. The retail version is soooo much better, it makes the demo version look like a totally different game.

Just to let you guys know...so don't base your opinions on the demo version, because you don't know what you're missing.

The new physics patch also helps tremendously

Totally different game? I don't think so. It has been researched that the demo had exactly the same tyre physics than the retail version.

Quote from frokki :

...

maybe the porsche is like one of those wrc cars with an air tank so youve got lots of compressed air in the car even after youve turned it off

Quote from AndroidXP :

The result is too much grip before reaching and at the "limit" and by far not enough after it.

Add Steeringlag / weird FFB model and you get an undriveable "simulation".

And Dave400200, my opinion is based on the retail version, not demo.

Quote from deggis :

Totally different game? I don't think so. It has been researched that the demo had exactly the same tyre physics than the retail version.

I really don't care about research...all i care about it how the game feels...and, to me(along with everyone else i race with), there was a big improvement between the demo and the retail versions.

I did the same thing with rFactor that everyone is doing with GTR2. When i first started playing the game, i hated it...because LFS was all i knew at the time and rFactor was so different. If you give it time though, you will adjust to the new games and realise how much better the immersion factor is. Granted, LFS's physics are awsome...but it just doesn't look like you are actually sitting in the car on the track. That's because it doesn't have the fancy graphics and effects of the other games.

And i know i'm going to get crap for this, but......IN MY OPINION.....the physics in GTR2 feel more realistic than LFS. When the tires break traction...the car behaves as it should...i.e. pushing through the corner and then if you tap the brakes, the car spins around like it should in real life. If you tap the brakes while in a slide in LFS...the car just brakes like it has traction...you don't get the snap oversteer that you should.

I have real world racing experience in both FWD and RWD vehicles, so i have somekind of grasp on how a real life racecar acts.

Everyone has their own preferences when i comes to racing games/sims...that's why there are many different games on the market. It all comes down to personal preference and which one you like better.

Quote from dave4002000 :

ushing through the corner and then if you tap the brakes, the car spins around like it should in real life. If you tap the brakes while in a slide in LFS...the car just brakes like it has traction...you don't get the snap oversteer that you should.

I have real world racing experience in both FWD and RWD vehicles, so i have somekind of grasp on how a real life racecar acts.

Woah, what the hell are you doing to cause that!!! Understeer + dab of brakes shouldn't result in a spin, at least not in normal circumstances. If it did billions would die on the road each day!

Quote from tristancliffe :

Woah, what the hell are you doing to cause that!!! Understeer + dab of brakes shouldn't result in a spin, at least not in normal circumstances. If it did billions would die on the road each day!

if you think about it tristan..it makes sense....you have the wheels turned a good ways to the right to make a corner...car starts understeering(front tires lose traction)...when you hit the brakes...you get weight transfer to the front wheels causing them to suddenly regain traction...creating a quick and fast turn to the right(because that's the way the wheels were pointing)...rear tires cannot keep up with the fast jerky movement and therefore lose traction creating the snap oversteer.

Normal circumstances on public roads and normal circumstances on a race track are two totally different things Not many people go sliding into corners faster than their car can handle on public roads.

But, when it does happen on public roads, it usually ends up with the car spinning(like i said above) and hitting a wall or guard rail(my friend destroyed his car doing this exact thing)

No, they lock up and you go straights as missile.

Adding to that ^ you probably push the brakes much more sudden and with much more force in LFS than you'd ever do in a real car in such a situation. Atleast if you don't have very good pedals, or a squashball mod.

Quote from dave4002000 :

if you think about it tristan..it makes sense....you have the wheels turned a good ways to the right to make a corner...car starts understeering(front tires lose traction)...when you hit the brakes...you get weight transfer to the front wheels causing them to suddenly regain traction...creating a quick and fast turn to the right(because that's the way the wheels were pointing)...rear tires cannot keep up with the fast jerky movement and therefore lose traction creating the snap oversteer.

Yeah, sure.... just one problem.

When you have lateral force and longitudinal force, your lateral force is decreased. Tyres are a complex thing. If you were to lock the rear wheels in the process, yeah, you'd probably spin. If not, chances are you won't.

You might get the car to slide a bit, but you can usually correect it.

if youre front are already losing with you only demanding lateral traction from them adding a longitudinal component will only decrease traction not increase it

Quote from Shotglass :

if youre front are already losing with you only demanding lateral traction from them adding a longitudinal component will only decrease traction not increase it

But there's just soooo much more to consider - there's weight transfer, tyre load sensitivity etc etc. It really depends on the situation.

how are you going to induce a significant weight transfer if the fronts which have to take the most force under braking are already way outside the traction circle ?

...depends on the situation.

I'd say it depends on many factors such as brake balance, tyre properties, speed and force of the "jab" and setup.

For instance we all know that FWD's like to oversteer when lifting off the throttly suddenly. There is no reason why the same thing cannot be achieved using the brake pedal. After all, the tyres don't know if you're using the brakes to apply longitudal force to the tyres or if you only lifted off the throttle quickly. If you hit the brake very suddenly and hard OTOH you will probably go off in a straight line.

In LFS trail-braking seems to be more likely to induce understeer than oversteer, which was for example highlighted by the brake-off-oversteer which was very pronounced in the old S2 Demo version.

Personally I don't think this is quite right but who knows? Without a lot of experience with different types of cars and especially tyres it's hard to tell if this can be realistic or not.

No car I've ever driven, either on roads or tracks, or in sims, will spin from understeer if you brake. The weight transfer CAN bring the tyres 'back into the traction circle' or they can cause more loss of traction, but in either case something must be fubar on your car (or you can't drive very well) if it spins. The most that will happen is the car will 'tuck in' and tighten it's line (assuming the weight transfer helps you not hinders you). I suppose if you didn't move the steering wheel for a good couple of hours you might spin but any normal person would be adjusting the brakes, throttle and steering constantly, and it would be EASY to stop it.

Lift off oversteer is a different matter, and is only compounded by braking.

Perhaps you were just going WAY to fast in a hatchback, understeered because of the hugely excess speed, braked because you've never read about driving, and got extra lift off oversteer. But if you did that (and I'm guessing you didn't because you'd have said) then it shows a complete lack of driving talent. Stamp Collecting might be more suitable.

So 'normal' understeer will never ever result in oversteer after braking if you have even seen a car, and lift-off oversteer recovering from a complete loss of mental ability to judge corner speed might be made worse. But lift off oversteer is only a famous issue in hatchbacks, and normal physics don't apply to them, only Supermarket Physics

Quote from axus :

...depends on the situation.

can we just agree on that its much more likely youll get more understeer rather than snap oversteer ?

Quote from J.B. :

For instance we all know that FWD's like to oversteer when lifting off the throttly suddenly. There is no reason why the same thing cannot be achieved using the brake pedal.

fwds are different though for a couple of resons but for starters let me state that whats basically trailbraking done deliberately wrong is a technique to initiate a drift which is basically the same as the lift off oversteer you get in an fwd

whats different in an fwd though is that most of the times when youre understeering the engine is either braking or throttleing the tyres out of the traction circle (mostly thottleing) so if you just lift off in an understeer situation youre probably going to take away the longitudinal load sometimes suddenly which will lead to lift off oversteer again
but a different kind not the longitudinal weight shift induced type but the suddenly the front wheels are going where theyre pointing at type which is probaly more of a feint/scandinavian flick type of car behaviour

Quote from tristancliffe :

Perhaps you were just going WAY to fast in a hatchback, understeered because of the hugely excess speed, braked because you've never read about driving, and got extra lift off oversteer. But if you did that (and I'm guessing you didn't because you'd have said) then it shows a complete lack of driving talent. Stamp Collecting might be more suitable.

actually that sounds a lot like left foot braking which happens to be an advanced driving technique for f2 (cant remember what theyre called these days wrc junior or something similar)

Well basically whenever you change the longitudal force at the front wheels by either braking or getting on or off the throttle (FWD) two things happen:

1) weight is shifted between front and rear
2) the reduction (or increase) of longitudal force will lead to an increase (or reduction) of lateral force potential.

Now these two phenomena oppose each other: when you brake 1) will increase the potential front cornering force and 2) will decrease it. So the question is how do 1) and 2) relate to each other and does one of them always "win" with real cars and real tyres? After giving it a bit of thought I think that wheelbase, CoG height and load sensitivity of μ should be important factors.

Hmm, maybe I'll do a few simple calculations to try and get a clearer picture. Of course experience would be the most significant information in this case so I trust Tristan may be right, considering he has driven quite a few nice cars.

Quote from J.B. :

Well basically whenever you change the longitudal force at the front wheels by either braking or getting on or off the throttle (FWD) two things happen:

1) weight is shifted between front and rear
2) the reduction (or increase) of longitudal force will lead to an increase (or reduction) of lateral force potential.

Now these two phenomena oppose each other: when you brake 1) will increase the potential front cornering force and 2) will decrease it. So the question is how do 1) and 2) relate to each other and does one of them always "win" with real cars and real tyres? After giving it a bit of thought I think that wheelbase, CoG height and load sensitivity of μ should be important factors.

Hmm, maybe I'll do a few simple calculations to try and get a clearer picture. Of course experience would be the most significant information in this case so I trust Tristan may be right, considering he has driven quite a few nice cars.

It is really far more complex than that. Basically you have got it correct but you are missing a lot of stuff that makes the tires handle like they do in real life.

Quote from Hyperactive :

It is really far more complex than that. Basically you have got it correct but you are missing a lot of stuff that makes the tires handle like they do in real life.

Yes, but maybe we can still get a basic idea of what's going on by makeing some simple assumptions?

Quote from Shotglass :

but a different kind not the longitudinal weight shift induced type but the suddenly the front wheels are going where theyre pointing at type which is probaly more of a feint/scandinavian flick type of car behaviour

Good point.

Back to topic with GTR2, if anyone is keen for a laugh, take a look at the tyre curves from the NAP mod for GTR2 here.

It's like they were torn between

"slip = falloff after peak. Why? Because I say so and because this 30yr old physics book does, too."

and

"hey there guys, I heard from some guy named axus, that maybe there shouldn't be such a falloff. You won't? Why? C'mon, a little bit. Just push it up *there* a little and I'll be quiet. *nudge*nudge*"

Maybe they were drunk and didn't notice afterward? :drunk: