I'm definitely in.

Because of a schedule change at work, I have been away from the PC since late last year and was forced to tool around with all the knobs (who are quite satisfied with what they think is a sim) in Gran Turismo 5 in my limited free time....

I installed patch Y over the weekend without reading up on the changes. I was in for a real shock. Once I got all my setups sorted out, I could not have been more pleased with the way things are going.

It will take some time getting used to the H-shifter because I have primarily used the paddles in the past. It won't take long to get it down and I like the idea of lifting to change gears anyways. Now I will get more use out of the clutch.

Overall...great update...

- when brakes will have temperature (this one ruins the experience for me a lot, I'm used to big difference in brakes performance from public go-karts and to work with them during race to maintain them)

- when track will be covered with debris/wet (chunks of tires outside of race line, grass/sand from someone's trip out and back on road, dust at start of race session would be welcome by me too, coating of road by tire layer after many laps increasing grip, dynamic wet status with rainy weather which can make rain just at part of track + the race line drying faster than rest of road, and maybe even oil from engine failures (if someone's constantly over revving engine, the current loss of power is nice touch, but I think it can lead ultimately to a total failure) ... I hope I listed them all)

- dynamic weather (wind's there already, now only rain and day/night/clouds affecting track temperature (I mean per "pixel" of track, so the piece of road under bridge in shadow will be colder than the straight under sun couple of meters further))
Usually the difference is not so dramatic, but I did one race on go-karts in Oct'07 on slick tires starting on partly damp track under sun at cca. 5oC... in 10mins the sun went behind horizon and in the very next lap we were +3s slower (more than 10% of lap time), because the damp parts of road did start to freeze. It was more of a difference to handling between 2 laps than when it starts to rain during summer (at that point it takes at least 2-3 laps before it gets really wet and laps times grow a lot on slick tires)

- races with limited sets of tires (and whole practice/qualify/race sessions planned with weather predictions)

- when the clutch-pack differential can be overheated too just like clutch (this one is very minor to me, but the current status allows to trade a bit of power for fake traction control which I think it's sort of exploit)


... oh wait, I did post here, so I'm already in.

Still I hope the S3 will bring answers to all my points.

Quote :

(I mean per "pixel" of track, so the piece of road under bridge in shadow will be colder than the straight under sun couple of meters further))

Would anyone really notice this? I'm just asking out of curiosity. What happens to your car when a track is cooler in spots as opposed to warmer (or vice versa)? I'm guessing the effect on tires related to surface track temperature would just be a fairly flat average one (and then quite minimal, unless it's really hot or something, or as you mention, icy- but that's another factor), but I could be wrong.

Quote from Electrik Kar :

Would anyone really notice this? I'm just asking out of curiosity. What happens to your car when a track is cooler in spots as opposed to warmer (or vice versa)? I'm guessing the effect on tires related to surface track temperature would just be a fairly flat average one (and then quite minimal, unless it's really hot or something, or as you mention, icy- but that's another factor), but I could be wrong.

It would if the temperature/grip model wasn't flawed... I was karting just today, it's scary how fast tyres lose heat and thus, pretty much all traction... Just a few degrees can make the difference if you're getting out of the next corner or if you'll need someone to pick your car out of the ditch...

er... Can I still join?


.................

Quote from Electrik Kar :

Would anyone really notice this? I'm just asking out of curiosity. What happens to your car when a track is cooler in spots as opposed to warmer (or vice versa)? I'm guessing the effect on tires related to surface track temperature would just be a fairly flat average one (and then quite minimal, unless it's really hot or something, or as you mention, icy- but that's another factor), but I could be wrong.

Well, the temp itself may do big difference if you are right on the edge, but very often you have wide enough performance "window" to not care about temp, as the variation is too small to push you out of your "window". Depends on tires, as almost everything with car, grip and speed involved.

The thing is the wet/damp/dry conditions are very well noticeable, if you want to have racing line drying up faster than rest of track, you will have to model it "per pixel" (actually something like 30x30cm square is probably small enough). And if you manage to use the same system to handle also dirt+dust and temperature, you will increase the memory requirements for such system, but it will be probably the most efficient way how to produce all those factors together with that "per pixel" resolution with not that big CPU impact. And another benefit of having them simulated with one internal system is coming from the fact that all those factors do relate. I.e. dust on track with little bit of rain is deadly combination for grip, with slick tires it's easier to drive on very wet track with more than 5mm of water (feels more like sailing than driving, but it feels quite stable, just in other way than dry), than on the dusty dry track when the rain starts. The dust with the rain does produce extremely slippy thin coat of mud, which takes couple of laps (or more of rain) to be cleared out from racing line.

For me LFS would be pretty much perfect if it had dynamic weather changes/time of day. Like being able to plug in a value for % chance of rain. And if I am not mistaken LFS still doesn't simulate brake temp.

Oh and custom tracks/cars plzkthx.

I know I'm waaay late but I'm in

Another late coming joining the party!

I say we remove the driving line as well from future versions of LFS and replace the depress of the "4" key with a link to Disney.com

I'm in the I am glad "LFS is more realistic in any way that it is club".

If it is harder or not has nothing to do with it.

If it is too easy in one area, to hard in another.. for example, that does not make it automatically more realistic.

Basically one has nothing to do with the other, it could, but it is not a given.

Quote from BWX232 :

...

So where in the thread did anyone say that harder = more realistic?

E: Actually I answered YOUR post with this reply

Quote from AndroidXP :

You do realise this thread is supposed to be a joke to counterbalance all the whine threads that appeared after patch Y was released?

E: I can see how the thread title can be easily misinterpreted, but I don't think it necessarily meant harder = more realistic. It just states that LFS is now harder (barely for people with a clutch pedal, more so for guys with keyboard/mouse, who now suffer from missing throttle cut/blip) and it is more realistic (slightly wrong(?) modelled clutch is better than no clutch, gearbox improvements, tyre heating improvements, etc).

Harder AND more realistic.

Harder - because you have to do more yourself, and can rely less on the computer making you a driving god.
More realistic - because LFS is closer to real racing than ever before. Not totally realistic, just more realistic.

If you can't understand the two concepts and the differences between them then you aren't welcome in the club

AndroidXP:
Obviously I am not talking about JUST the clutch simulation..
And if anyone understands English, it does imply harder = more realistic.


..but anyway..


I am in the "harder and more realistic club" if what LFS is simulating is supposed to be that difficult in real life in that type of car.

I am out of the "harder and more realistic" club if what LFS is simulating is more difficult than it should be in that type of car.

For instance, do brakes get hot and fade? They do in REAL CARS...

Does that mean LFS is just a "stupid arcade game" because of the incomplete brake heat/fade/warp/failure simulation? NO...(just an example)

Have I played racing arcade games that are "harder" than LFS? Hell yes.. That doesn't mean they are more realistic.. it could mean that they just have really bad physics or terrible controls (or any number of things).

The thread title implies that harder is more realistic, that is not always the case, (duh) If someone cannot understand that, then they don't understand the English language.

If it is a joke thread, than all the posts are a joke and worthless, I seriously doubt that. If anyone wants to talk about the subject and someone just falls back on "it's a joke thread" -- but if someone agrees then it's a "real thread", then that person is a joke.

It does not imply that at all. If it was worded "...harder, more realistic..." then it would, but I have used the word AND. Harder is separate from more realistic.

The entire thread is a parody of the threads moaning about how unrealistic the clutch simulation or the gear change simulation started by people that either can't drive or use controllers not ideal for testing the realism of a simulation. I started the thread as a joke. Comedy. Parody. Amusment. It just has a large element of truth to it.

But I wouldn't expect you to understand.

Had it said "Harder and THUS more realistic" you would be right BWX, but it doesn't. I'm with Trastan on this one.

Don't over analyze, take it for whats its worth. Tristan can't help it if everyone else didn't get the "joke" because they're too busy joining a "club".

Quote from tristancliffe :

It does not imply that at all. If it was worded "...harder, more realistic..." then it would, but I have used the word AND. Harder is separate from more realistic.

The entire thread is a parody of the threads moaning about how unrealistic the clutch simulation or the gear change simulation started by people that either can't drive or use controllers not ideal for testing the realism of a simulation. I started the thread as a joke. Comedy. Parody. Amusment. It just has a large element of truth to it.

But I wouldn't expect you to understand.

How could I? I am not nearly as intelligent as you are obviously, I mean, not many people are.

(By the way, it is spelled "amusement", LOL)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/and
31 results for: and

The word "separate" is not listed as a definition, however..

–conjunction 1. (used to connect grammatically coordinate words, phrases, or clauses) along or together with; as well as; in addition to; besides; also; moreover: pens and pencils.

You didn't word it correctly- parody, joke, or otherwise.

I guess I won't join your club because your club is vague and lacks definition.

One thing is true, this thread is a joke because no one wants to actually talk about anything that has any merit.

Quote from BWX232 :

How could I? I am not nearly as intelligent as you are obviously, I mean, not many people are.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/and
31 results for: and

The word "separate" is not listed as a definition, however..

–conjunction 1. (used to connect grammatically coordinate words, phrases, or clauses) along or together with; as well as; in addition to; besides; also; moreover: pens and pencils.

You didn't word it correctly- parody, joke, or otherwise.

I guess I won't join your club because your club is vague and lacks definition.

exactly.....pens and pencils are not the same


Harder in addition to being more realistic. I'm not quite sure what you're reading there...maybe have another cup of coffee

xxxxx is better because it has pens "and more pencils"?

xxxxx is vague and lacks definition.


Edit- why does any comment about LFS in this thread devolve into arguments about this thread? No one responds to actual discussion about the real issues with or about LFS.
I don't want to argue semantics, I wanted to talk about the simulation of various parts of the car in LFS.

I believe the english club has a meeting on Wednesday. They may be more of a help to you.

Talk about them then. But not in this thread, because you clearly don't get it.

Re: Spelling mistake in amusement: ever heard of a typo?

Re: Use of full stops versus use of commas. A perfectly legitimate, if not wholly grammatically 'correct' method of emphasising something.

If you can't understand the real life uses of English, and/or detect a joke thread when you see one then please don't post here anymore. This thread isn't for you.

Other than writing, for the millionth time, what LFSs simulation lacks (brake temps for example), feel free to try and discuss the flaws in LFS. There are many. Simply stating that clutch heating is unrealistic because I said so isn't sufficient.

I'm late, but im in

It's so much better now in my opinion!!!

This thread is still getting funnier after 28 pages.
Another great achievement for the harder & more realistic Tristan!

Quote from tristancliffe :

Simply stating that clutch heating is unrealistic because I said so isn't sufficient.

It isn't the heating, it's the slipping.. and the relationship between the two, and time.

Maybe the joke is on you though, you keep responding- and I detect that your blood pressure is getting higher..

Not really. I'm sitting here calmly comparing the technical regulations from this year and 2001 for a car we used to race to see if I can be bothered to get it out for a race later this year. Out of interest, it's pushing the boundaries of being legal (we've tuned it a touch too far, but I don't think 105hp/litre out of a 40 year old narrow angle V4 is that bad!), so I think it would be eligable.

My blood pressure is only slightly above normal because the dog just tried to trip me up too.

I respond in an attempt to correct people like you. Sadly, it's people like you that are unable to be corrected, so I try and try and try to get it through to you, but you won't get it. That's, ultimately, your failing, not mine.

Quote from tristancliffe :

Not really. I'm sitting here calmly comparing the technical regulations from this year and 2001 for a car we used to race to see if I can be bothered to get it out for a race later this year. Out of interest, it's pushing the boundaries of being legal (we've tuned it a touch too far, but I don't think 105hp/litre out of a 40 year old narrow angle V4 is that bad!), so I think it would be eligable.

My blood pressure is only slightly above normal because the dog just tried to trip me up too.

I respond in an attempt to correct people like you. Sadly, it's people like
you that are unable to be corrected, so I try and try and try to get it through to you, but you won't get it. That's, ultimately, your failing, not mine.

Well maybe I am just acting that way to give you a hard time? Or (more likely) I really think LFS deserves some more discussion about these kinds of things- in this thread or others.

I have been around for a while. I know how people get treated by "regulars" or other self important forum members when they disagree with them on even the smallest thing when it comes to LFS. This thread is proof of that. I am not talking about myself either- Anyone who tries to discuss things in other threads get called names and verbally abused... even if they are (or might be) right. That kind of response doesn't really serve the betterment of LFS- open honest discussion does.

It's too bad that even the smallest disagreement about LFS physics or anything related to that usually ends up in some kind of huge argument. Making a joke thread just to ridicule people that disagree with you about one or more aspects of a LFS update just proves my point.