Thank you for the infos (not the degrees of rotation of your wheels, not very helpful :arge
.
After a few thousands of km on a cruise server, i'm certainly not mastering the MRT, but i have a very good feeling with it
Now i switched to the RAC car, which is a total pain after so many hours of slalom between cars with the MRT
. After a few thousands of km on a cruise server, i'm certainly not mastering the MRT, but i have a very good feeling with it
Now i switched to the RAC car, which is a total pain after so many hours of slalom between cars with the MRT
- ferrari F40 / F50
- ferrari 250 GTO / Ferrari 250 GT Breadvan
- ferrari Testarossa
- ferrari 599 GTO
- ferarri 288 GTO
A special mention to a prototype : Ferrari Mythos
edit : nice to see that i'm not the only one to put the 288 GTO in the top list
- ferrari 250 GTO / Ferrari 250 GT Breadvan
- ferrari Testarossa
- ferrari 599 GTO
- ferarri 288 GTO
A special mention to a prototype : Ferrari Mythos
edit : nice to see that i'm not the only one to put the 288 GTO in the top list
Last edited by ker2x, .
[PIC] best DRIFT ever !
See attached pic 
MRT driving guide ?
Hello !
I have some troubles to safely drive the MRT.
Usually, most car give some kind of warning "you reached the physical limit of the car and you're going to crash if you push harder" (usually one of the tyre start to slip, or the car doesn't turn, etc).
But on the MRT, i feel "glued" to the road and then, suddenly, i find myself flying, looping, crashing in a wall, etc ... without notice.
Do you have any link/page/guide/whatever that explain the basis of the MRT, please ?
Or any advice ?
Thank you.
I have some troubles to safely drive the MRT.
Usually, most car give some kind of warning "you reached the physical limit of the car and you're going to crash if you push harder" (usually one of the tyre start to slip, or the car doesn't turn, etc).
But on the MRT, i feel "glued" to the road and then, suddenly, i find myself flying, looping, crashing in a wall, etc ... without notice.
Do you have any link/page/guide/whatever that explain the basis of the MRT, please ?
Or any advice ?
Thank you.
Well, maybe i'm a little outdated
My informations come from a time when havok released "havok FX".
It's fun to see how something can become "completely and utterly wrong" in just a few years
GPUs support non-interactive Physics.
Exemple :
- A particle emitters with particles subjects to a physical environment. They are subject to gravity, they bounces, the follow the wind, ... The GPU know the properties of the particles, it compute the physic then render them directly.
- Or : you blew up something, it throw lil' polygon all over the screen, thoses lil' polygon are subjects to physics, but they have ABSOLUTLY nothing to do with the gameplay and they will not interact with other object, players, or npc, ...
In fact, the cpu never know the result of the physical computation made by the GPU. Because it don't need it. It's physics computing for direct rendering.
In LFS, as you all know, there is a lot of physic computation. Steering, acceleration, aerodynamic, ...A lot of computation of little things interacting eachothers to make our car running... The GPU is 100% useless for that. The CPU need to know the result of all the physic computation ... that's something a GPU can't do (or if it can, it's very ineficient).
The physX can do that, it's made for that. The CPU send something to compute to the PPU (joints, motors, vectors, gravity, collision, ...), it does something else while waiting for the result, the PPU send the result to the CPU and it can act accordingly.
The bad news with the PhysX is that it's not an open standard.
To use the PhysX you have to use a specific physic engine, won't work with any other engine. So LFS should be rewritten to use the physX.
Imagine a GFX card that ONLY work with the CryTech Engine (used in Crysis), or only the unreal engine... that's the problem of the physX.
Anyone remember 3Dfx ?
Exemple :
- A particle emitters with particles subjects to a physical environment. They are subject to gravity, they bounces, the follow the wind, ... The GPU know the properties of the particles, it compute the physic then render them directly.
- Or : you blew up something, it throw lil' polygon all over the screen, thoses lil' polygon are subjects to physics, but they have ABSOLUTLY nothing to do with the gameplay and they will not interact with other object, players, or npc, ...
In fact, the cpu never know the result of the physical computation made by the GPU. Because it don't need it. It's physics computing for direct rendering.
In LFS, as you all know, there is a lot of physic computation. Steering, acceleration, aerodynamic, ...A lot of computation of little things interacting eachothers to make our car running... The GPU is 100% useless for that. The CPU need to know the result of all the physic computation ... that's something a GPU can't do (or if it can, it's very ineficient).
The physX can do that, it's made for that. The CPU send something to compute to the PPU (joints, motors, vectors, gravity, collision, ...), it does something else while waiting for the result, the PPU send the result to the CPU and it can act accordingly.
The bad news with the PhysX is that it's not an open standard.
To use the PhysX you have to use a specific physic engine, won't work with any other engine. So LFS should be rewritten to use the physX.
Imagine a GFX card that ONLY work with the CryTech Engine (used in Crysis), or only the unreal engine... that's the problem of the physX.
Anyone remember 3Dfx ?
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG