What Funkybear said. LFS isn't going to win any points for its aesthetics (except the interface), it would have to have an undeniable authenticity to it.
The sounds would make the audience laugh.
I'm not going to be afraid to say that for me, Enthusia feels more "natural" than LFS in some maneuvers.
I encourage everyone to watch this video! It shows side by side comparisons of a real Miata on an auto-x course, verses the same car on the same course in Enthusia.
A screenshot of the video:
The top image is the real car, and the bottom image is Enthusia!
Aye... the physics demo video doesn't look that bad and you're right... one has to try it out at first but it looks promising. I also like the Trailer, some "racing" would've been nice though...
Unfortunately PS2 + Equip + Game would be too expensive for me and in he end, I'd miss the simple and great online mode, I guess
Interesting video. But I still think there is no simulation yet that has a good representation of how a car really moves. Even in that video when the Miata is sliding around the course (1st short slide), the recovery of the real car has more 'snap' at the end.... while Enthusia just looks far too solid and not 'fidgity' -- just like in all simulations. LFS could do this if it focused on factory built cars with soft suspension, but you don't see this often. From time to time, I make soft sets on purpose to get a realistic feel. They do perform in a way much like this Miata, but don't show the 'detail' of shaking or vibrations with the wheels/suspension.
I gotta say that the Enthusia video above is pretty neat, but it doesn't do justice for how the game feels I'll bet. I have yet to try Enthusia, so I wouldn't know... but a video of a car that appears similar to realife doesn't mean that it feels like reallife. I mean.... they didn't even have a FF wheel it looks like, would be silly to not have the wheel snapback (and it didn't).
There are plenty of small tracks and car companies that woudl probaly jump at the chance to get their track or car in a realistic sim. The free advertising would make it worth while for small track owners, Like Pacific Raceway in Kent, Washington.
As long as the device is analouge, it, in theory, is not really much different to a wheel, I am not the fastest in the world, but I am pretty quick, and more importantly consistant.
And yes, its a dual analouge, its what I am comfortable with, people shouldnt discount it just because its not what they think is best.
Also, I revisited GT4 last night, a Mitsu EVO XIII on the Nurby, with, and this is VERY important for GT4, road tyres, and I am sorry, but for a console game its bloody good, IRL the Evo can lap Nurby in 8'05, I can't get under 8'30.
There seems to be a lot of snobbery, not only in LFS but in every "sim" forum, on both sims/games and controllers, can't understand why , I enjoy GT4, I enjoy LFS, I enjoy GTL, I enjoy RBR, I am good at all of them, with a pad, whats so wrong with that?.
Oh, and before someone chimes in saying I have no idea what I am talking about, I am currently testing and practising for the Mighty Mini's series IRL, so I know a bit about real racing.
Anyone in here that has done a good deal of real life circuit racing and has played enthusia as well as lfs? Which do you think is more realistic in terms of driving physics/feel? I honestly dont trust anyone else, how in the heck else could you know unless you have a good deal of racing experience?
I played alot of enthusia again today, some things i noticed about it in comparison to lfs: you can slam on the brakes full force and turn in hard and you will slide straight for a bit but then you will get fast turn in, there definetly isnt as much sim info being modeled to the cars suspension; meaning the cars have a much more floaty feel all the time, whereas in lfs you can feel how every little dip and bump in the road wants to effect your cars path, and the force feedback, of course, is nowhere near as good as lfs (im using dfp). Its hard to compare closely for me because im so used to driving in 240 degree steering instead of 900 like enthusia requires. I might try playing both on 900 degree mode back and forth and note some differences if anyone gives a dam. I dont have the knowledge to declare one more realistic than the other though.
Nope. There are differences. Never played PS2 version but I've read that PC version has more (realistic) grip and probably lots of other tweaks too. And if you have a PC that can run LFS, it should run RBR fine too. You can't get addon cars for the PS2 version.
There are also minor differences in sounds and graphics. In sound PC version is probably better because of the great sound mods. Of course PC version also looks better, though they removed the shining/glare effect from the PC version, dunno why.
No, dont tease me so... i dont think my computer can run richard burns. Its a compaq presario 2100 laptop. 448 mb of ram, amd athlon xp. I know nothin about computers, if it werent obvious. I can barely run lfs with all graphics at minimum.
Here is a thread with alot of interesting comparison videos between real life/ enthusia and gran turismo 4. There are also some videos of driving/drifting in enthusia with the dfp in view. Theres also a video dissing on gt4 drifting which i can appreciate because gt4 broke my heart in that area after anticipating it for 2 years .
Even if you had an experienced racer drive LFS, or any simulator, they are not going to be able to definitively tell you that LFS "feels real". They could tell you the parts that don't feel real, and they might be able to give some pointers on how to make certain aspects better, but they are not going to be able to say, "Yes, this is exactly like driving a real race car". The simple reason is that there is just too much difference between being in a real car and driving a computer in an air conditioned room. Sensory input is severely diminished, smells are missing, no real vibration, sound, heat, fear... it's all lacking. There is nothing anybody can really do about that with today's technology.
So, a real race car driver would be a benefit to the devs, but they would not be the "end all" answer for making a realistic sim.
I have flown some of the best aircraft simulators in the world. And although they do a good job of modeling the behaviour of a particular aircraft, they still fall short of flying exactly the same. For example, one airplane that I flew had a nasty tendency to drop a wing when in a stall if you were not in perfect trim (25,000lb airplane going into a spin... not fun). The simulator never did a good job of modeling this. It stalled and mushed forward.
I have flown MS Flight Sim quite a bit, and although it is very, very good, I still could not tell you that it perfectly models the physics.
So what your telling us is we need to build ourselves cockpits or homemade "sim seats" and mount a Harley Davidson motor to it and run it when we are racing? Then all the sensory input is there. You have the smell of the oil leaking all over the place, the vibration of the Harley motor, the sound of the "loud pipes saves lives" pipes, the heat from the motor, and the fear of the motor scattering underneath your seat! LOL, just kidding to all you Harley riders over here in the States. No offense .
Haha, you know, I'm exactly that freaky guy who uses a gamepad, with TWO analog sticks, one for turning, one for accelerating. But I guess being called a "freaky type" isn't really that bad, is it?:P
On topic: As someone mentioned, I think the idea of showcasing LFS at "Top Gear" is doable. What needs to be done is a fairly realistic imitation of one of their tracks, a car that is close to a real one, and they might just byte it.
Well... duh, lol. No offense meant.
Thats exactly what im looking for, like you said: experienced racers to tell us which game does the most parts best, or just general specifics of what they think different games do best as well as their faults driving physics and 'feel'-wise.
I suppose that it isn't or shouldn't be the aim of a sim to replace the real life racing experience, but rather to create an arena where the same skills that are required to be successful in RL racing are needed to be successful in the sim, on this base, as technology expands and our budgets allow we can add components to make the experience more immersive. That is why I also don’t object to some “aids” in sims that make allowances for things which just can’t be replicated because of technology and financial restraints.
So when we ask if it feels right, what we really are asking is if we use x technique for racing in RL, does it give similar results in the sim? And if you learn new techniques in LFS can they be applied to RL?
Where LFS is streets ahead imo is that it is endeavouring to do this mainly for online play against other human races, rather than mainly against AI racers with online play as optional or as an afterthought. No matter how good AI are, I find them just plain boring in comparision to racing real live people
I agree completely with this. I know that there are some people who don't want anything that you would not see in a real car, but I feel that some of these "extra's" are necessary. The purity of the racing experience is not ruined.
Mr. Rodgers... no, I was not suggesting that, although it would be cool
The sims I have flown all have complete cockpits, with the actual instruments and controls from the real aircraft and all were full motion. This adds to the immersion, but it still ain't the same as the real thing. My point was that because of these differences and limitations, it is very, very hard to compare a sim to real life even for an experienced person.
Licenses for cars and tracks are subject to who owns them. Some people will encourage the use while others will want booko bucks for it. I read a long time back on the racing legends site that team lotus didn't need any licenses thats why they were able to use and display the creation process of the lotus F1 car. While it was pretty common knowledge they were also modeling other cars which weren't shown (ferrari leman style 333 maybe?)
Look at LFS already 2 real life counter parts (raceabout and MRT), im sure they were done as side projects and included into the release. I think the main problem here is information, its all well and good trying to recreate a real life counter part, but the information (and resource) to get all the information is probably beyond the LFS team at this stage. Im sure that in future releases that content (cars and tracks) will outweight features (physics) when it comes to decide what will be done.
Another problem is that real racers need to have some kind of history of sim games (or even some kind of computer games). Give a game that is total arcade crap for some real life race driver who has never ever played games - and he will think that it's realistic. The prob is that he doens't know how realistic games can be today.
Yes, I did exxagerate but for example Forza and GT4 are good examples of this. Have you seen that "Forza vs. Real Life" video where two ALMS drivers praises the game? Link: http://www.gametrailers.com/pl ... &pl=game&type=wmv
And I remember Mikko Hirvonen (Finnish WRC driver) praising WRC 4 (that PS2 arcade rally serie) to be realistic in a Finnish game tv show. But those comments might (at least I hope so) have something to do with the fact that his co-driver had recorded pacenotes for the game...
And wasn't there a title called "Tommi Mäkinen Rally" at the same time as Colin McRae one. True realism. And there were some hi-class rallydrivers involved in the making of V-Rally (1st?). V-rally was said to be realistic by some magazines (those playstation geeks!), but at the time it was a joke even for me, 14 years old sim n00bie
Generally people involved in real life racing who say GTR/WRC rally/Carmageddon 2 is ultra realistic get paid for it. And they probably don't play others simulators. And defenately they wouldn't say that "some other sim B" is better if they get paid by the "sim A".
My DFP broke so i haddnt played any racing sims at all for about 4 weeks. then yesterday i fixed my dfp. :0
the 1st game i played was GT Legends. the game felt much much better with a wheel than the ps2 controller i was using.
Then i played LFS and that totally blew away gt legends. Its just i feel so much more connected to the cars in LFS. the force feedback feels much better.
Honestly... the only racing sims right now i would say are absolute must-buys are Live For Speed and Richard Burns rally. i've played alot of racing games but there are still a few popular ones i havent had the chance to... nascar sim racing being one of them
Nope, it was some years before it, Pentium I era. "Tommi Mäkinen Rally" was basicly a crappy money making sequel to "Mobil 1 RAC Rally" (pic: http://www.imagineer.co.jp/ima ... syokai/i_rally/rally1.gif) which was great. As far as I know Rally Championship was done by the same dev team that RAC Rally. RAC Rally even had very long special stages but the driving model wasn't anything near a simulator but we didn't have anything better back then.
But now that we have Richard Burns Rally it's easy to declare every other rally game being total crap (Rally Trophy being one exception).
On the subject of real life racers saying nice things about sims, I thought there was evidence that Dale Earnhardt Jr. and Martin Truex were both sincere fans of Papyrus's NR2003. Truex even went so far as to say this it contributed hugely to his success in his first season. This was in spite of them getting paid to say nice things about the vastly inferior EA game. Can any Americans back me up on this?
.
we can add components to make the experience more immersive. That is why I also don’t object to some “aids” in sims that make allowances for things which just can’t be replicated because of technology and financial restraints.