Game Stock Car vs. F1 2012 – Video Comparison

hmbrz has put together a very interesting video comparison, putting Game Stock Car’s Interlagos side by side with F1 2012.

The title’s a quite far apart in terms of graphics, while Codemasters is using their own cutting-edge engine, GSC relies on the trusted gMotor 2 engine. This results in quite a notable difference when it comes to trackside objects and draw distance, you check out below which track is more accurate.

While Game Stock Car 2012 doesn’t offer a licensed Formula One car, the Formula Reiza used in the video has been modeled after modern Formula One cars.

GTOmegaRacing.com

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000092638292 Felipe Portela

    GSC >>>> F1 2012

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Justin-Schmidt/100001406158677 Justin Schmidt

    is the new grandstand at start/finish missing in f1 2012 which was already build before the 2011 grand prix?

  • http://twitter.com/Mojo_66 Mojo66

    asphalt textures look much more realistic in F1 2012. There are also much more objects that cast a shadow. I do like the sounds in GSC better, however.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1711429307 Chris Wright

    Hey guess what! They’re both good, only different :-)

  • Stuart Fields

    Amazing isn’t it. On one side we have one of the worlds biggest race title developers with literally millions of dollars in their pockets to develop these titles and then we have a game made by (slighty exaggerating) a bunch of talented guys in their living rooms, one of which has a modern, state of the art graphics engine and the other an engine that is now 6 years old. The end result is not that different really and GSC wins hands down with its physics and FFB every time. The main things that stand out to me are the fact that GSC has a fuel gauge, something that has been a major issue for me in all of the codemasters titles as you never know how much is in the tank despite what the engineer tells you on the radio. Secondly is how stomach churning the F1 2012 replays are compared to the simple, clean, TV style presentation of GSC. Thats all we need, just something to allow us to view the action and the cars, not an MTV music video for every lap. Even now the rfactor engine stands up remarkably well when it is used correctly. The crisp, clean look to the visuals is still very appealing compared to the motion blurred, discoloured look of F1 2012. Given the resources at their disposal and the amount of people behind each project either Reiza should be amazingly proud of themselves for punching miles above their weight or Codemasters should hang their heads in shame that they didn’t produce a better product given the resources they have. Though in truth I suspect both cases are true. Someone please give Reiza a few million to develop the Senna title and we will all be in sim racing heaven.

  • pez2k .

    I think one key difference is that Reiza are a team of superstars, and so despite being a smaller company the amount of talent per employee is exceptionally high.

  • GamerMuscle

    The difference is Codemasters are producing a “game” that’s partly marketed as realistic to make sales with general F1 fans.

    Reiza are making a simulator that’s built and sold on the car physics and FFB alone and not designed to be played with anything other than a FFB wheel.

    F1 2010-2012 has allot of fluff and attention to certain parts of visual detail + cinamitic style effects that will appeal to the more casual player/casual F1 fan and allot less attention to physics detail.

    F1 2010-2012 will also probably play allot better on game pad than any pc driving simulator as 90% of the people playing F1 2012 wont even use a wheel.

    Most people in the world probably would not even enjoy F1 driving, they like the show and the personalities more than the raw aspects of the sport and that’s what the codemasters games are designed to appeal to.

    Lets face it there are probably only 3,000 or so sim racers in the whole world that can drive to a competitive level on-line in a virtual F1 car and of them most have pore race craft or make stupid errors within 6 laps.

    Interestingly even the most realistic simulators are nothing like real racing but the key thing is as games I believe them to be better. A good simulator will simply have more depth and replayablity than a pore simulator or most arcade games.

    Still personally I’d rather play a simulator or a proper arcade game rather than a weird in-between like the Codemasters F1 games, but I don’t represent the majority of the market !

  • GamerMuscle

    The difference is Codemasters are producing a “game” that’s first designed for consoles and game pads and is partly marketed as realistic to make sales with general F1 fans or people with a passing interest in the media perception of F1.

    Reiza are making a simulator that’s built and sold on the car physics and FFB alone and not designed to be played with anything other than a FFB wheel and will be played mostly by people that want to be real world drivers but don’t have the money.

    F1 2010-2012 has allot of fluff and attention to certain parts of visual detail + cinamitic style effects that will appeal to the more casual player/casual F1 fan and allot less attention to physics detail.

    F1 2010-2012 will also probably play allot better on game pad than any pc driving simulator as 90% of the people playing F1 2012 wont even use a wheel.

    Most people in the world probably would not enjoy F1 driving, they like the show and the personalities more than the raw aspects of the sport and that’s what the codemasters games are designed to appeal to.

    Lets face it there are probably only 3,000 or so sim racers in the whole world that can drive to a competitive level on-line in a virtual F1 car and of them most have pore race craft or make stupid errors within 6 laps.

    Interestingly even the most realistic simulators are nothing like real racing but the key thing is as games I believe them to be better. A good simulator will simply have more depth and replayablity than a pore simulator or most arcade games.

    Still personally I’d rather play a simulator or a proper arcade game rather than a weird in-between like the Codemasters F1 games, but I don’t represent the majority of the market !

  • http://twitter.com/franzbri Frans Brink

    Ask Kimi, Lewis or Fernando what the Grandstands at Interlagos look like.

  • Richard Hessels

    One thing the trusted gMotor engine has nothing to do with, trackdraw distance and roadside objects. Those are static values and 3d modelled objects.
    So that’s Reiza’s work, not gMotor’s shortcoming.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=309600558 Ben Lee

    See this is what I don’t get. That F12012 video of Spa, looked horrendous, however that track model of Interlagos didn’t actually look all that bad. I can only assume the track work is farmed out to different people and that’s where the variance in quality comes from…?

  • Juhan Voolaid

    Who wants to play a game with 6yrs old graphics.

  • http://www.facebook.com/triskele10 Peter Koch

    Those “old” games are still the best racing sims at the moment.

  • Luciano

    rFactor based titles’ F1-like cars are fully playable with 360 like gamepads.
    But it is not good as a game
    And Codemasters F1 2012 is not bad because its not a sim: it is bad as a game and as F1 sim game. Its garbage compared with Forza and its cars do not behave as a F1.And thats the result not of a lack of talented people (with money you hire talent): its the result of design decisions.
    Again: Turn10 make awesome games, Reiza make awesome sims and Codemasters decided to treat F1 fans like morons.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pablo-Coronel/583236136 Pablo Coronel

    Great post!! but dont’t forget that those tittles have a diferent target, even in their conception, that explain the diferent aproach, one seek the simulation other seek the MTV style game.

  • http://racingrenders.com/ F1Racer

    Since when has graphics been the cornerstone of sim racing ? We managed quite nicely up to now with it and show me a better simulator with better graphics right now.

  • GamerMuscle

    I have played RF1 based games with a game pad and also tried a mouse just to get an idea of what it was like.

    Suffice to say even though you can tweak it and put assists on the fact is the average user is not going to play RF1 with a game pad and the game is not designed for a game pad.

    My point is still valid in that F1 2010-2012 is designed for console and a game pad but with wheel support , where as PC sims are designed for pc and driving with a wheel but with game pad support.

    It is frustrating though that the IP goes to a company that wont put deep physics into the engine or that F1 will only do a single license every couple of years.

  • Kendra Jacobs

    As F1racer said. Graphics dont matter, unless you have the attention span of a very young child.

    To make this point even further, look at all the F1 teams sims’, look at all the commercial and fighter aircraft sims, and read about military simulations.

    THEY ALL HAVE CRAPPY GRAPHICS.

    All the resources of the computers’ power are being put into the physics, not visuals.

    Ultra complex bullet flight characteristics, aerodynamics. rubber characeteristics of tyres, object fragmentation calculations, suspensions, materials, how everything interacts and has an effect on everything else, weather and its effects, road and other environmental surfaces/interactions, mass/intertia of spinning objects like tyres, bullets, etc. motor dynamics like intake pressure, stall characteristics of airplane engines, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc

    If the graphics deter you from the objective at hand, which is to drive a race car to the best of your abilities as in real life, well, then you dont want to drive a race car, you just want to play a “racing video game”, and thats a big difference, and therefore you wont like simulations.

  • Luciano

    If you could steer Codemasters F1 2012 car with a 360 gamepad without aids (input override to steering wheel and the fullrange of all the axis), make a video and come back here and I’ll give you 100USD. Deal?
    I can perfectly steer rFactor 2 beta current “F1″ ISI masters cars.
    The main point is that single-seater handling itself in rFactor is fully playable with analog gamepads. Due to the actual steering range of these being very little. The same is not true to other kind of tractions and steering ranges like road cars.
    In Codemasters it is not. Keep in mind that when youre using a gamepad in F1 2012, youre not even handling the car: turn the analog stick one direction and you will see that the game calculates a steering movement that you will never see on a F1 footage.
    If you turn off this built-in aids through the input-override option, you will not be able to play because… there is no gamepad support!
    There is only that default driving aids instead of a steering support for analog gamepads.
    And the car behaviour is made over this driving aids. As a result you jus cant make an oversteer car (a single-seater). Because if you turn one direction and the rear of the car getsloose you need to correct turning the oposite way.Although it is not meant to be played with a gamepad (it does not support Microsoft’s xinput, you have to use your gamepad with microsoft directinput instead), it is fully playable (rFactor single-seaters cars) with a 360 gamepad without any aids. rFactor has built-in filters to make the analog axis “wider”.
    It has “exaggerated yaw” also for a feedback of “understeer/oversteer”. But the weight of the wheel, its true, its impossible without a proper FFB wheel.

  • Anonymous

    The comparison is pointless, both games were targeted for different type of gamers with quite opposite preferences.

  • http://twitter.com/HM1988 Henry M

    in the world of sim racing; probably more people than the ones who want simplified/less realistic physics simulation… there’s a reason why games like Richard Burns Rally are still considered the best of their kind…

    also I would like to add that just yesterday I did around 20 laps in “NASCAR Racing” from 1994 and I was impressed by how good driving was compared to newer mainstream racing games,

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Marcus-Caton/647940120 Marcus Caton

    What stood out to me the most was that GSC got the camber levels spot on.
    As Stuart says, amazing with such differences in budget.
    I’m all for laser scanned tracks in everything but if the GSC guys built more tracks like that i’ll be ok with it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Renato-Simioni/1556380242 Renato Simioni

    Beyond the differences in graphical glossiness and all the temporary grandstands which GSC Interlagos does not have (as it´s not supposed to be the GP version of the track), the comparison also showcases the varying degrees of accuracy between the two versions – from the proper curb profiles and dimensions, to the astroturf on the exits of T5 and T11, the concrete run-off at T13, the new permanent grandstand on the main straight amongst other details – there are no skyscrapers around the track, for one :)

    Naturally priorities may and will vary, but I´d expect the above to be the more pertinent “sim racing” aspect of the comparison.

  • http://twitter.com/alexsawczuk Alex Sawczuk

    And in the interest of fairness yes the banks on the left heading towards T6 and outside of T3 are more accurate in the codemasters version…

  • GamerMuscle

    “If you could steer Codemasters F1 2012 car with a 360 gamepad without aids (input override to steering wheel and the fullrange of all the axis), make a video and come back here and I’ll give you 100USD. Deal? ”

    I don’t have F1 2012 for Xbox , I do have F1 2010 though and drove that with all assists off and on the hardest difficulty using a 360 pad.

  • Ricoo

    Great work Reiza. :)

    The wrong skyscraper positions in Codemasters title is indeed huge. :)

  • David Wright

    Sorry to go a bit off topic but I’m puzzled by the mantra that graphics don’t matter in a sim. Simulating the visual has always been an important part of simulators and simulators have always pushed graphics hard when they are initially released. Grand Prix, Indycar Racing, Grand Prix 2, Grand Prix Legends, F1C, GTR, GT Legends, GTR2 – when launched I have never been able to play them at anything like maximum settings because they all pushed graphics hard. And people seem to think its because the physics requires a huge amount of processing power. GPL physics will run on a 166 MHz Pentium. F1C physics will run on a 1 GHz Pentium 2 or Athlon. rF/GTR/GTL/GTR2 physics will run on an Athlon 2500+ and thats mainly down to the graphics engine as the physics isn’t that much more advanced than F1C physics.

    With a modern game engine which properly utilises multi-core processors you can have your cake and eat it. For example, Shift runs better on my PC than GSC2012. They both use the ISI physics engine but Shift looks much better and runs faster because it utilises multi-core processors better.

  • Ricoo

    GPU have reached a point that they can push graphics much more than needed by a racing game.

    Even pCARS runs great on my 3 years old GTX275… iRacing at full is above 100 FPS.

Back to top