| GT Racing 2002 Facts : | ||
|
|
INTRODUCTION I raced extensively in UK Saloons and Single-Seaters in the early 90s (1990-1994) and worked as an instructor for Jim Russell school at Donington Park. I started back racing and instructing again last year, did about 17 races in various saloon championships including most of the EERC races (European Endurance Racing Club) including the famous Willhire event at Snetterton. Only 6 hours last year but 9 hours this year and hopefully soon back to it's 24hr format. GTR related in that we raced with a number of Marcos Mantis' in the EERC events. Not sure what I'll be doing racing wise next year yet apart from I will definitely be doing the Willhire, hopefully some other rounds of the EERC AND another 24-hour endurance race at Snetterton - in a .. erm .. well ... it's a Citroen 2CV - about as far away from a GT car as you can get but the event should be a blast and racing is racing. I may be racing a Tomcat 220 Turbo in the Mod Prod Saloons for some races plus whatever else crops up. Also GTR related one of my intructing jobs runs Supercar Days where we get to drive Diablo's, Vipers, various Ferrari's, Jag XKR, Noble M12 GTO, Lotus Exige, Maserati 3200 GT etc. - and get this ... we get paid for it. An instructor buddy of mine (Nick Leeson) races a Diablo in the Supercar Challenge and he often uses it for circuit rides at various events and I'm hoping to drive it myself next year. Can't wait for the season to start. HOW REAL IS GT RACING 2002? Trying to evaluate a "sim" as to how good/complete it is and compare it to other sims is no simple tasks as there as so many elements that can and perhaps should be taken into account. For instance. GTR2002 has weather effects where others sims (GPL, Nascar Heat) do not, so GTR2002 can be said to be more complete in providing another real world "effect". There are also elements such as brake wear/heat that also make GTR2002 more complete. There are also things like cockpit views, track accuracy etc. etc. It's a very long list in fact. All I am really going to comment on is the handling side of the sim and how close it is to real life. In trying to do this I have to take into account the much reduced sensory input you get from a sim vs. real-life. I am 110% in favour of using a Force Feedback wheel as I believe useful Force Feedback is a major requirement of a sim. My major interest in sim driving as a professional race driver, instructor and driver coach, is for it's usefulness as a training aid for real life drivers. Of course, I am also into the sheer fun aspect of driving these sims even though they may not prove that useful in real life, most driving sims can provide this. Ideally, I should be able to fire up a sim with a car format I'm familiar with, at a track I'm familiar with and drive in the same way as I do in real life, feeling totally comfortable with the car and the way it handles and responds to control input. I wouldn't expect this from a previously non sim-driving real-life driver as they must get used to the lack of sensory input and rely much more on visual cues - that takes time, but as a fairly experience sim driver I feel I am fully used to that. No sim I have ever driven allows me to do the above and I have driven pretty much all that are out there. So, if we consider realism to be a yes or no then neither GTR2002 or any other current sim is realistic. However, it is more useful to consider realism as a sliding scale and to try and give degrees or percentages of realism - that too is difficult as I couldn't write a paragraph that would explain what specifically is "wrong" with a particular sim, it's just that it does not react as I'd expect. There are some things that I can specifically point to as not feeling right, such as low-speed grip in GPL, pitching in GTR2002 (more later).In my mind there are 2 very distinct areas where a sim can be said to be unrealistic.
Again, I will stress that I am mainly looking at a sim for it's value in the real world of race driving. The problem with 1) is that, because it is doing extra and odd things, you end up doing extra and odd things in your driving that you wouldn't do in real life. What is worse, these are the things that make you fast in that sim. If I consider just GPL and GTR2002 for a moment, the fast lap replays/videos you see are out of this world, no wonder the drivers of these are often referred to as Aliens. By out of this world I mean that they totally defy the laws of mechanical physics and go against much of what is proper race car driving technique. Hell, I'd say that most defy the laws of physics themselves. Is this a problem? well, not to the computer games/sim drivers who are playing the game for it's own sake, whether they be playing for fun, aiming for the hot lap rankings or racing on line. It is a problem however if you were to consider using a sim as a training aid for real life drivers. Now, there is value to real world drivers in all sims of course, you really need to run the correct line and use all the track to go quickly and all sims that I have played respond to correct line. You need to be smooth with the throttle application and I'd say this is also reflected in most sims to a degree. The concept of maximising exit speed is also a key to real world and sim pace. These elements are even catered for however in the more arcade type games and many console games. So, will you learn more about real world race driving from GPL than from playing Grand Tourismo. Yes, of course, but much of what you may end up doing will be unrealistic and you may get totally the wromg idea about what it takes to go quickly in real life. I was pretty active with GPL and raved about it at the time. Whilst the handling felt very alien to me at first, this was really my first serious sim and I put much of this down to getting used to the lack of feedback from computer sims. I did find that by employing the real world techniques I'd learnt, I could go quicker in GPL, I got quite quick, quite soon. I happened to stumble on a guy who was quite quick as well but trying to go quicker, he offered his replays for viewing and I was astonished with what I saw. Essentially the guy was not much slower than me but his driving was totally unrealistic - his line was awful but he'd managed to go quick by learing to exploit the inconsistencies in the GPL engine (he had been driving GPL for 3years+). I wrote a package and did some example replays and this was very popular and many drivers found that by following the techniquues (not mine, just the real world ones that are taught) they became much quicker and more consistent. I was quite pleased with myself and was often heard to rave about GPL as a learning tool (it does have great value). Problem was I wanted to go even quicker. I found that I was getting quicker and for some time I thought it was just my hightened skill that was getting me there BUT I soon realised that I'd now started to do things that were totally unrealistic and I now too was exploiting the GPL physics engine. Once I realised this and stood back and looked at GPL I realised how "unrealistic" it was. Theres a huge amount of value in GPL, perhaps the most is the online community and "virtual" racing experience it can give that is invaluable in the real world. BUT, we are talking here purely about how close to real life the handling is and in that respect it fares quite poorly in my view. Poorly in that it doesn't provide a number of the "effects" you get in real life but more importantly, it does quite a lot of things that are "unreal" and there is quite a bit of inconsistency in those things which are "de facto" in real life in that they obey general physics principles.The above in no way is meant to criticise GPL, it's designers, programnmers or players. It's a phenominal acheivement and has so much is good, but again we are trying to compare to real life. The real reason that GPL fares badly for my purposes is that "you can go faster in GPL by doing things that would make you slower in real life or by exploiting effects that simply do not occur in the real world". So, back to the original question .. How does GTR2002 rate? Well, I'm sure had I said that it is the equal of GPL at the start of this post, many GTR fans would have seen that as very positive, well, IMO it is very much "like" GPL in that there are some things it perhaps doesn't do that you would expect in the real world and, sadly, it does many things that a driver can make it do which are totally unrealistic. It does appear from the many VCRs I've seen that these are the things that are producing the very fast laps. As a driver training aid then, it is very much compromised. As I said with GPL though, you can still learn a lot and it does have great value as a training aid but there are other games which perhaps you would not consider that are much better for this purpose. It is of course HUGE fun and a fantastic acheivement, I salute all those involved in it's production. The flaws that I speak of I believe are in the F12002 physics model itself. I think some of the things I feel are unrealistic could be made better by further work on the GTR physics. I myself have worked on many mods with the MGI engine in Nascar Heat and know that you can always improved things and that it's not simply a question of proving real world values. Much of the recent progress with Heat mods has been through tinkering with values to acheive the right effect and not relying on the MGI engine correctly modelling the (real world) values provided. I have been impressed with the M3 mod but I can feel the same issues in the underlying physics model. I read a comment by Doug which I'm not sure I have the same wording but it went along the lines of "the goal is to make it convincing rather than real".I don't think that was totally it but I think what Doug meant was that he feels it's pretty much impossible to make something that feels 100% real so the goal is to make something that is as convincing as possible. Lets face it, 99.999% of sim drivers will never drive a race car at the limit for real and have no "real" idea how that would feel. I know many here think they do but I've never met a driver that knew before he'd experienced it. Do we really want realism? well of course BUT, take away the G-Forces and general "fear" that you experience in real life driving a real life race car without these would be "pretty boring". Most here have seen in-car video of race drivers at work and it all looks very relaxed and under control. Playing a game we are effectively getting the same view BUT under our control and maybe with a bit of reasonable force fedback through the wheel. In many ways I think a sim needs to be larger than life in order for most people to take it seriously. Take the tire-sqeal we all know and love in sims. In real life, on slick tires, you should never hear tire squeal under normal driving conditions. Try turning it off though and many sim driver could not judge the level of grip and the whole experience is less intense. One issue I have with GTR is the "pitching" (back and forth movement). Sat in the cockpit I see the car jumping around like a kangeroo on hot coals (OK, I exaggerate). I think it is most defintely overdone as an effect in it's own right BUT it does make the car feel more alive and teaches smoothness. The real cars do pitch a little but as a driver in the car you have a very sophisticated shock absorber to lessen this effect on your eyes (i.e. your body). I thought long and hard as to whether the pitching was realistic and it was just the static "hard" view in the car that made it seem not so. But, after some time I do think the effect is OTT and this is one of those things that perhaps could be made better via the GTR physics files. Part of the reason I have an issue with this is that in some of the VCRs I've seen this effect coupled with braking and turning is producing very much unreal handling. As the driver is able to drive 100s of laps he WILL start to use this effect to his advantage, it's simply in everyones nature. I want to step back a little and just cover an "effect" that again, we all will experience.As I mentioned, I have worked on many mods for Nascar Heat. That involves testing physics, hence doing lots of laps with a particular car model. Often, when I first fire up a new car model, it will feel very unrealistic. There then may follow a few tweaks and before long, it starts feeling realistic, very realistic. A small amount of that is the tweaking, BUT the largest part is that I am now becoming familiar with driving this particular physics model and I attribute much of my comfort to the fact that the physics are now almost spot on. Now, this can take 2-3 months of course but the effect can be quicker. Often, when we start to drive a new sim, we will rate it on how realistic it FEELS compared to our LEARNT DRIVING MODEL. I had to be very careful with this when working on the Heat mods but was fortunate enough to be race driving in real life most weeks as well, also driving other sims to some degree. I'm certainly not immune to it though. I wasn't particularly impressed with GTR when I first tried it. I think I perhaps would have been more impressed had I played F12002 previously or maybe F1-2001 and some of it's mods. It would have felt more "comfortable". Also, in coming to some conclusions on GTR I was fortunate enough to spend a days testing at Donington Park in a similar spec car, well only about 1/2 the horseposer at 228bhp but a similar handling model, loads of torque though as it was a Turbo .. anyway. I ran GTR at DP the next day and it was very far away from what I'd experienced the day before. I did the same with LFS, which was and still is highly rated as being quite realistic. I had just spent a whole weekend racing a Ford Fiesta Race car (very much like the GTI in the game). A 6hr endurance race at Snetterton on the Saturday and 2 races at Brands the day after. I tried LFS and again it is very far from what a real FWD car handles like. It is a "convincing" sim and loads of fun, I spent many a happy night online with it, yes, it began to feel better and better, but after my next Fiesta race it felt as far away as ever once more. A much less sophisticated mod is NetKar which I also tried. Even though it is much less polished I could feel the semblance of a real world car there. There are some oddities but less than games such as GPL and GTR2002 and there are some definite real world effects in there. OK, so, even though I've perhaps been controversial enough I'll finish with something that might be considered even more so ... So, both GPL and GTR2002 are flawed but the best we have at the moment .. Yes? Well, No. Not based on my criteria of a sim as a Training aid. To recap, to be a good training aid the sim must model real life as close to 100% as possible. I've already said I think this is pretty much impossible at the moment (or at least intimated that) so we must look for a sim that comes closest to 100%. GPL and GTR have many real world effects which would rate it quite highly on this scale BUT, they also have numerous idiosynchrasies and oddities that count against it. I have no idea how to actual rate this, these numbers are just picked out of mid air. Say both GPL and GTR rate as 75% on the "realistic effects" scale BUT they score 50 points for their respective items on "unrealness". Now, personally, as soon as sim starts to score in the unrealness category it is flawed as a training aid and rapidly starts to decline as an overal "training sim". I'm not equating the 50 points to 50% and deducting them from the 75% but using that sort of principal, a sim that scored LOWER on the realism count (say 60%) BUT scores considerably less on the UNREALNESS score, would, IN MY VIEW be considered by me as a better sim, specifically, a better training sim AND as being CLOSER TO REALITY. Using that principle, some of the mods that have been developed for Nascar Heat (and not just those I have been involved in) are, IMO, CLOSER to reality than GPL or GTR2002, or in fact anything else I have driven.Put simply, A Nascar Heat mod is less sophisticated than GPL or GTR2002 BUT has much less UNREALNESS about it than either of these. It does have some however so please don't respond with "Heat doesn't do this/that or the other". "What!" you say, Nascar Heat, it's almost 3 years old? well, many people here rate GPL as the pinnacle and that is 5 years old. Many of the Papy technicians who worked on GPL later worked for MGI and the Heat engine. Looking at the physics files in Heat they are much less sophisticated than F12002s BUT in many ways it probably wins through because of it's simplicity. Of course, for the long terms we must produce a more sophisticated product and model more effects but it will take time to get right, the process will likely produce a more flawed product at first which I think is perhaps where the F12002 engine is at the moment. I should quickly mention that I cannot comment on Heat v. Papy Nascar Sims as I am simply not a fan of Nascar Driving and it is not something I can talk with experience of. I have driven N2002 and previous Papy titles, on road courses they are clearly not at home anyway so it is pointless to speculate on how realistic they are. I was never as fully convinced by the Papy N2002 physics as I was by the Heat physics however but this is only based on a few laps of testing at a few ovals. So, if you are intrigued by my assertions and would like to test it out for yourself. Well, if you have Heat I suggest you pick up the Ferrari F360 mod from Team Players site, also pick up the Brands Hatch site here - Files Section (it comes from the same base as the GTR track). Make sure you are running Heat in Hardcore mode and load up the HARD setup and do some laps of Brands. It will feel very different to GTR so you'll need to give it time and you'll need to get to the stage where you are driving close to the limit before you feel the Heat physics coming into play (as in real life). Then try the GTR Ferrari 360. The Heat cart will feel really easy to drive until you start to get close to the limit. One of my instructing jobs is working on the Ferrari Experience at various UK venues. In this we get members of the public, from 18 to 80 and after 5-6 laps in a GT car we allow them to drive various Ferrari's (inc 360) around the track. They are almost all normal road drivers with no previous track experience and not done anything like this before (most are given as gift certificates). Incidentally, we do the same with Formula Cars, from FFord to F1. Yes, a complete novice can come for the day and at the end of the day will be allowed to drive a (only slightly detuned) F1 car (1980s Tyrell). You may still prefer the GTR physics, they are giving you "MORE" feel but the Heat F360 feels more realistic IMO. Anyway, perhaps readers now understand why I didn't have time to do this earlier - I wanted to do the subject justice which I think I have just about, but there is so much more I could say. I will close by echoing my earlier praise to all those involved in GTR2002 and indeed all those involved in all sims and mods. It's just my view on the particular question asked (i.e. "how realistic is it"). |
|
Comments : |
|
| Author: Jure Zagoricnik | 29-01-2003 |
|
Nice to have a real racer's prespective on racing sims. |
|
| Author: Chris_M | 29-01-2003 |
|
Very interesting. I would really like this guy to sit down and do some time with a Papy Nascar sim. I would like to hear his views. |
|
| Author: Michael Boylan | 30-01-2003 |
|
Interesting read. Some of his comments about how unrealistic certain aspects of these sims are echoed my thoughts. My biggest gripe is lack of grip. Sims just feel like they are lacking grip especially at low speed. |
|
| Author: Daz | 30-01-2003 |
|
I would have great interest in a sim/real debate with some of the most respected emmbers of the sim world around the table with real racing men.Ross Brawn and Greger Huttu in conference...lol |
|
| Author: Clark | 30-01-2003 |
|
Well this is a good read, and much point for thought, but I was hoping for more detail. The author keeps repeating "unrealistic" but never really elaborates. Can you please be specific? Is trail-braking properly implemented? Is cockpit jitter accurate? How about the effect of the kerbs on the suspension? I would like this better if it had more illustrated examples of what the author means by unrealistic vs realistic. |
|
| Author: Martyn | 30-01-2003 |
|
I was interested this article to a certain extent. But where is the specific detail or proof of why the author keeps says these games are unrealistic. I think this comes down to one man's opinion (albeit a professional racer) without any supporting facts. And the end comments to me sound slightly veiled as to being an advertisement for Nascar Heat. You could just as easily use Dale Earhardt Jr's comments about Nascar 2002 as justification of a sims accuracy. I respect the author's real world racing knowledge, but without facts or specific information on why the author finds these sim's unrealistic, it is hard to respect his opinions in this article. |
|
| Author: BrianC | 30-01-2003 |
|
Doesn't actually discuss any specifics about realism in sims. |
|
| Author: Doc | 30-01-2003 |
|
This mod is incredible! This has to be "the" most realistic driving simulation to date...bar none! |
|
| Author: David Pietras | 30-01-2003 |
|
Very informative article. It really makes me give thought about the sims I drive. It also makes me want to dust off my old copy of NASCAR Heat. |
|
| Author: 2re | 30-01-2003 |
|
A good read but like many said it's to much non specifics. I'd like to know how much wear and tear on tyres, enginge will affect the handling compaird too diffrent "Sim's" I think he was to much of a diplomat not trying to upset anyone and i dont blame him for that. 35 - 65% So Heat is good,eh.. I bealive u if u say so, simple and real. The worst example of a driver not being thrust worthy is Colin Mc.. saying R.D is good, he forgot to mention u have to be 8 years old to like it.. No ofence 2 anyone |
|
| Author: Lukep87 | 30-01-2003 |
|
Im not sure why sim racers take things so personally. There are no insulits in any way nor did he not do what he orginally set out to do and that is to see if GTR 2002 would be; "usefull as a training aid for real life drivers". And he stated that, which everyone should be aware of, that no its not 100% realistic, but neither is any other sim that has been released. GTR 2002 might be the best game by far at the moment, but so was Indy 500 when it came out. |
|
| Author: Ron | 30-01-2003 |
|
Heat blows goats. Tells ya right there he is wack! |
|
| Author: JPutty | 30-01-2003 |
|
Great stuff, like something I would write. |
|
| Author: jk | 30-01-2003 |
|
It surely is a very difficult task to compare sims with real life racing, but in this article the writer has done a good and respectable job! |
|
| Author: Maxx | 30-01-2003 |
|
Thanks to all for posting - I thought I'd try and BRIEFLY answer some of the points raised. Firstly, this was a single forum post that I tried to cover all bases with and try and avoid any confusion as to what I was saying. I have followed it up with a dozen or more posts which expand on it and answer specific questions at the GTR2002 Official forum here : https://www.simmods.com/forums/ (forum link top left). The thread is the one about "how many GTR drivers have driven real ..." The thread was also picked up in the West Racing "General" forum here : https://www.west-racing.com/forums/ the thread is the one about "give this guy a beta .." OK, here goes some specific responses : 1) Low-Speed grip - def an issue with GPL but not something I'd say about GTR. In general novice (real-life) drivers go too quick in slow speed corners and too slow in high speed corner which I think is related to the expectations of grip. 2) Nascar Sims - It's mainly a question of time and the fact that I don't think the Nascar cars are built for the sort of handling you need on a road course. I could run ovals but you are only utilising a small proportion of the handling elements of a vehicle, no real weight shifting, braking etc. it's very much a question of keeping the car balanced and letting the setup do the work, it's more to do with racing/drafting strategy. Maybe more than other forms of motorsport the Nascar driver will rely on very subtle feedback from his backside to tell him what the car is doing and whether he can push more or should push less. I will try and give it a go sometime though (i.e. N2002) 3) Specifics of unrealness - I did cover this a bit in later posts. The bottom line is, and I know this is non-specific, when I try to drive a GTR2002 car like I would a real (similar) car it does not do what I would expect. It's not that there is one specific huge thing (like I press the brake and it goes faster) the elements are much more subtle and inter-twined than that. Driving a race car at the limit all would agree is a skill that takes a lot of practice and experience - it's a VERY precise skill and not something you do by joining the dots (i.e. I'll do this, the car does this, it then does this so I need to do this). It's like walking or maybe some form of gymnastics, once you have aquired the skill you "perform" it virtaully unconcsiously. I can quite easilly (after some practice) drive the GTR cars very quickly, the more practice I have the faster I could drive them and get them on the limit pretty much all the time - I could react to slides etc. and save the car BUT I am not doing exactly the same as I am in a real car. I could live with a degree of that apart from the fact that these elements of unrealness, once overcome and exploited, seem to result in faster lap times. I am going to try and demonstrate this at some time in the future but it will be difficult. I want to get a video of as fast lap in GTR and a real life lap and try and highlight the differences. You could do this yourselves, there are lots of in-car footage on the net and fast lap vcr's of GTR are also available. A very obvious point to look for is that, in GTR the driver is on the gas constantly, being very brutal in braking and change-down and accellerating pretty much from turn-in to exit. In real life a driver is much smoother on brakes and change-down, enters the corner on a balanced throttle (so as to be using ALL traction budget for cornering) then eases on the power as he unwinds the wheel (i.e. making full use of the traction budget when required for cornering and accellerating). This is such a fundamental part of fast driving and really is the main element of the "art" of fast driving that unless a sim handles in a way that promotes this it is badly flawed as a driving training aid. I also mentioned "pitching" which IMO is overdome, mixed with braking and turning, and to a lesser extent throttle application, the car will turn in a way (sharper) than is realistic and in this way it appears to defy the laws of physics - not a HUGE effect but something specific that you might experience or see. 4) Heat advert - not at all, i've no connection with MGI - I am involved in Heat purely because it suits my purposes and mention it as a possible way of "feeling" what I am trying to put into words (i.e. the 360 compare). I've not said Heat is a better game/sim or whatver, just than when looked at with my criteria of REAL stuff vs. UNREAL stuff (handling only) it fairs better than GTR IMO. 5) Most realistic - again, it's not as broad as that, Heat has no standing starts, no weather, no ... lots of stuff, GPL has lots missing (i.e weather) - the comment was purely the realism of the handling vs. real life cars of a similar format. 6) Tire/Brake wear - I've not even looked into this and it never entered into my "calculations". 7) Heat blows goats? is this good or bad - If bad please remember that I am talking of just a few of the dozens of mods made for Heat, 3 of the best IMO (in terms of realism of handling) would be Ferrari 360 Heat, Caterham Heat and Brisca F2 Heat. Also, the soon to be released (updated) USF2000 Heat is very good, we have had over a dozen real life F2000 drivers beta testing it and bucket loads of real life data & telemetry to aid in the physics setup - it's not perfect as it taxes the Heat engine severely, but is one to try if you have Heat. Maxx |
|
| Author: murkz | 30-01-2003 |
|
Malcolm, I really enjoyed your article. Jeff |
|
| Author: Hoefsy | 30-01-2003 |
|
Well done!! Articicals like this can only benifit the racing sim world and i totally agree with your comments on gpl. You can go fast but then to go faster you cheat the phisics of motor sport. But its still fun.... |
|
| Author: Georg_Kuyumji | 30-01-2003 |
|
I also felt like this was a NHEat Advertisement. I drove F2000 Cars and I think GPL and Nascar 2002 are the most accurate when it comes to Physics. In other Sims I often get the feeling u have to find out how the Programmers want you to drive, and then you have to follow there thoughts, while in Papy Sims (GPL and Nascar Series) you can use real life knowledge into the Sim, and get the expected response. |
|
| Author: Brian | 30-01-2003 |
|
I am still unsure as to whether GTR is realistic or not, yet it was interesting to get a reali racer's perspective on racing sims in general. |
|
| Author: Slowry | 30-01-2003 |
|
Very imformative article. I look forward to here more. |
|
| Author: Burk | 31-01-2003 |
|
I find it of very great value to obtain the sim-racing perspective of someone who has extensive real experience. Thank you Malcolm for taking the time and putting forth the effort to compose such a great article. |
|
| Author: Ian Riches | 31-01-2003 |
|
Interesting article. I look forward to any follow ups comparing the specifics of real world vs. sim driving. For those who are sceptical of Heat, all I can say is try it! Make sure you have one or more of the mods suggested, the latest patch and hardcore physics enabled. Put you preconceptions to one side, and enjoy.... |
|
| Author: DS | 31-01-2003 |
|
It's difficult to be convinced without specifics and I haven't played the specific mods the author mentioned but the few examples of unrealness he gave also applies in Heat mods I played. MGI was ex papy employees but Ed Martin left Papy because he was more interested in arcade side of the game than realistic simulation. And that arcadish feel is very well reflected in both Heat and Thunder 2003 physics. There's difference between "physics" and the way the car feels. If this author is referring to the way the car feels, then you can't blame it on physics but the developer who tweaked it to simulate the car. Of course GPL is very old, it simulates '67 F1's, and it's physics is not as tweakable as F12k2 or Heat so it is unfair comparison to modern day simulations. I respect the author's real life experience but many of F12002 mods and even GTR physics are tweaked by people with real life racing experience as well. I wonder if they'd agree if heat physics is more realistic. He says he can't comment on N2002 physics because he hasn't played it much but its "physics" is same as GPL. Just tweaked to feel like a stock car. |
|
| Author: david smith | 31-01-2003 |
|
Very interesting points of view,we can get a fixation on our sims that are obviously not quite in the right ball park when compared with life. lets have more of the same please |
|
| Author: DocRay | 01-02-2003 |
|
The article is intriguing, because I've never looked at NASCAR heat mods before. I'm not sure why computer gamers think you can ever simulate racing on a computer. A physics model that can be mastered with practice is all that we can hope for, beyond that , some people are never happy. My probelm with f12002 mods is the fact that the base software is poorly written for reliability. I prefer Papyrus games because they tend to work. As for the article, I would have preferred some more specific examples, the writing was very etherial, vague and descriptive. Could have said the same with 1/2 the words. |
|
| Author: Lars O. Steffensen | 01-02-2003 |
|
Very interesting: I would love Edesons coment on the reverse question: What should you drive in real life (Caterhams, Formel Fords or other) if you enjoy GPL and have trained your instincts with that sim? |
|
| Author: Paul Turston | 01-02-2003 |
|
Excellent, balanced article. |
|
| Author: Jure Zagoricnik | 02-02-2003 |
|
DS, Nascar Racing 2002/2003 isn't just tweaked GPL physics model. It has like much more elements and calculations in it (tire model...). |
|
| Author: ed d'agliano-luna | 02-02-2003 |
|
God bless you for your enthusiasm and passion for motorsports. Motorsports are like a diamond in that there are so many brilliant facets for the enthusiast to enjoy and appreciate. You contribute so much to a facet(s), one of these being sim-racing. Motor racing becomes even more enjoyable for the driver, player or fan when these different facets are presented and experienced. It's all tied in together thus creating a deeper, more passionate and and satisfying experience wherever one is at in the world of motorsports! |
|
| Author: oldns_low | 03-02-2003 |
|
hit the nail on the head. Imsa 25 years ago |
|
| Author: Ashwin | 04-02-2003 |
|
Good article.Well thought of. |
|
| Author: TVadney | 04-02-2003 |
|
I would like to see more articles like this. We all know these games have great graphics but are 'real' are they? |
|
| Author: Faffy | 05-02-2003 |
|
I liked the article very much, evebn if it biased toward HEAT :). Nevertheless, a very well written esay about sim-racing. Thnk You Malcolm to invest quite a lot of time in this. However, when you talk about the unrealistic properties of GPL, you only talk in general, you did not give any example.(I.E. : Obviously the tyre and the brake model is pretty simplified in GPL, so we can use unrealistic brake bias and push the gas and the brake at the same time.) Faffy |
|
| Author: Christian Fraenkel | 05-02-2003 |
|
Very interesting article, but the conclusion is already known: you cannot simulate car racing in every real-life aspect! You need the input of your back for feeling grip. So you can rate sims in graphical and sound matters, and also if there is enough comptetion, to get not boring soon. GTR2002 proves that, and that is all, that can be possible. |
|
| Author: Gyuriba | 06-02-2003 |
|
Good read. A bit more details of what exactly the added `unreal`/less `real` (eg GPL brakes, etc) pieces are, would add to the value. One thing I challenge, though, the tire squeal & stuff. About `simulation`, I understand `even-ness` as well with difficulty vs real life. We do not have our ass-meter working in PC sims, we gotta have audio for that (no farting, please), in replacement. Whithout something like that, the sim experience would be less real and overly sterile. |
|
| Author: Maxx | 06-02-2003 |
|
Just a quick further comment for all those who have asked for specifics, this is an ongoing discussion and some specifics have recentluy been aired (rea-life vs. in-game video comparison). There are a few forims debating this : here is the GTR2002 forum thread : https://www.simmods.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=27&t=8232&st=160 Maxx |
|
| Author: real-life auto tester & engineer | 08-02-2003 |
|
At last, the real deal on car sims! Those that are being heralded as being the most realistic can also have too many idiosyncrasies. I'll often prefer a sim that skips some details, but sticks more to fundamental real-life vehicle dynamics. |
|
| Author: Tim Gavin | 10-04-2003 |
|
Great article - as a formewr racer myself I'd be interested on the authors opinion of GP3 or GP4 |
|
| Author: Mark | 17-05-2003 |
|
Very interesting and objective report. Brought up some points I had not considered before - should come in handy for the Ferrari 360 day at Thruxton I am doing next month. |
|
| Author: Brian | 03-09-2003 |
|
I kept waiting for specific instances. You can't write a persuasive peice without evidence to back it up! I don't necessarily agree/disagree with the article, I just wanted it to be more fleshed out, mabye compare specific instances (particular track and car) in several sims and tell us what happens correctly, incorrectly, etc. The author basically never goes beyond saying they felt "way off". |
|
| Author: trgz | 11-12-2003 |
|
Very interesting; I've never diven a real racing car but, based on ordinary ones, I've never been convinced that these sims/mods etc. come close to reality (the comment by MB about low-speed grip is very valid), but are vastly entertaining if taken in the context of a game, or maybe as a tool to learn the layout of a track (but realworld perspective must hamper this to some degree). That said, I'm intrigued by Nascar Heat (especially if I understand correctly that there is a Caterham/Brands combo available) and I'm off to find a copy). All in all, an excellent appraisal of the track racing genre. |
|
| Author: Gary Tompkins | 26-08-2005 |
|
an honest apraisal of sim physics modeling. Some may call it heresy to rate Heat better than GPL. However, I find it refreshing and concur with the author. |
|
|
published at : bhmotorsports.com © copyright 1999 - 2002 |