Slightly Mad Studio’s Ian Bell has given another interview, this time on the official Need for Speed homepage. Along details that have been disclosed earlier, he once again stresses that Shift will be taken realism seriously:
“SHIFT is built on the most advanced physics engine we’ve made, and is by far the most advanced and realistic physics engine of any of the mainstream racing games. We’re talking about an engine that can run unlimited threads, detailed physics parameters running at around 400 Hz on consoles. Things like tire deformation based on g-forces, tire pressures, rubber thickness, which only the most diehard sim fans will notice, but we know it’s there.
We have a full realism hardcore mode called Pro that you can choose to race in from the start that will feel natural and comfortable as well as raising the bar for handling compared to anything out there (or due out soon) for all of our hardcore race sim fans.”
The full interview can be found here. In related news, Shift has won the IGN award for best Playstation 3 racing game on the E3 expo. Below are three new screens, showing the Koenigsegg as well as the Audi R8 and a BMW from cockpit view.
Developed by Slightly Mad Studios (former Blimey! Games) and distributed by EA, Need for Speed Shift is expected to be released in September 2009 for the PC and all major consoles. A demo of Shift has been announced to be available this summer.
eddiespag
July 4th, 2009 at 03:51
A lot of exciting talk of improvements in so many areas never before seen or experienced in ‘mainstream’ race programs, and tons of data for the countless physics files. So much as never before has ever existed… for CONSOLES. This brings my high hopes down a bit for the upper echelon of sim racing… the PC.
That it’s Ian Bell and his crew with deep roots in the history of simulation racing still gives me great hope.
gears
July 4th, 2009 at 04:06
“We have a full realism hardcore mode called Pro….”
(notice he said “realism” not “simulation”)
Full realism without tire wear or pitstops?
That’s hardly full or real.
Making the AI drive like “aliens” does make it a “sim”
GeraArg
July 4th, 2009 at 04:17
“If you want to recreate the experience, you have to know the subtleties of the track’s surface contained in
these data treasures that even laser scanning can’t deliver. It does no good to know about a 5mm bump in the track if you have no data to show how it makes a car react. And the reaction, the experience, is what truly matters.”
Refers to iRacing?
Gabkicks
July 4th, 2009 at 04:22
yeah geraArg, i caught that too hehe. My iRacing subscription runs out August 29th…
Hopefully they release a demo of Shift soon!!
Howie47
July 4th, 2009 at 04:34
Every so called simulation to date has been a disappointment. You get your hopes up and you try so hard to believe. Then the reality finally sinks in. They can’t deliver their promises, they just aren’t that good. So we keep hoping for something a little bit better. Of all that is promised for the near future; this one has the best hype.
Please pass the demo. Howie47
computer7
July 4th, 2009 at 05:05
@ GeraArg
:lol:
Refers to iRacing?
and codmasters
this interview had announced even 1 week ago!
i can’t find news in cotenxt
Kardum31
July 4th, 2009 at 06:07
I wish people would just enjoy games.
jux
July 4th, 2009 at 06:09
At least their hype easily surpasses any previous efforts, iRacing included. :) They haven’t had the resources to scan tracks, and try to make it sound like using video to build tracks is something revolutionary. Accurate track models don’t need the type of “reverse engineering” they’re trying to justify.
But I’m sure it will be a great sim/game. Just wish they would tone down the PR crap a bit.
Gabkicks
July 4th, 2009 at 07:34
yeah, the diss to laser scanning was a bit ridiculous.
Sensekhmet
July 4th, 2009 at 08:27
What the hell are you talking about Howie47?
superapex
July 4th, 2009 at 08:50
This quote is really difficult to interpret without his meaning of “mainstream”. Is he referring to all non-commercial race simulators? Or is he referring to console games only? Or perhaps he really is including GTR2, iRacing, and rFactor. I’m assuming that he considers his GTR2 mainstream….and I’m also assuming that Ian is smart enough to realize that making unsubstantiated claims on an upcoming product could make a considerable impact on his professional image. I still have hope that this could be a great simulator.
Fingers crossed. He mentions 400 physics calculations per second.. does anyone know how quickly iRacing or any of the Gmotor games process physics?
Kardum31
July 4th, 2009 at 08:58
See: http://forum.racesimcentral.com/showthread.php?t=329099
scca1981
July 4th, 2009 at 09:33
He says 400 Hz on consoles which is the same as rFactor :)
Really as long as this game has better physics then grid i’ll take it.
BUT PLEASE! FOR THE LOVE OF MF’ING GOD ALLOW US TO DISABLE ANY FORM OF BLOOM/HDR… OR JUST DON’T INCLUDE IT TO BEGIN WITH. I don’t know wtf is with game makers lately. Stop taking your stupid pills. Thanks. Bloom/HDR looks dumb and very un-realistic.
DW
July 4th, 2009 at 10:34
There is nothing stupid about it. Indeed I’m surprised it hasn’t dawned on you :)
While you might not think it looks better, the majority of people DO think it looks better. In the real world it would be stupid – commercially suicidal – not to include HDR.
Husky42
July 4th, 2009 at 10:58
See here is the thing with HDR – Those who like it, are not the majority in sim racing.
youth thing oohh bright shiny glowing = pretty and realisitc.
When it does not. Mild HDR can be done right but all developers go too far. Look at Dirt its HDR was ridiculous. I have the hardware to run it just fine but i turned that crap off.
Give me real time eniviro mapping, proper shadows and light transitions/glare reflections and not this i just ate a bunch of acid and i’m going to go race crap.
DW you cannot claim the majority because your simply wrong.
The majority of simmers do not care for it or like it. As can be proven time and time again with post in many simulations forums be it racing, sub, tank or flight – Simmers do not want HDR because it is glorified unrealistic lighting.
Rfactor 2 is about the most realistic i have seen in terms of horizons and lighting effects in any game to date.
Real time shadows, real time track specific environment mapping vs ooh shiny shiny purty.. wins every day of the week.
So how dare you think to state what you believe is the majority when it really is not, at least that is what I have been lead to believe.
So many people supporting this title who i have never seen before also. What has blimey/sms done for you lately?
Nothing under their own banner and its apparent that Ian Bell has not lost any of his PR diarhea of the mouth either. Its been that way for many years and every time – he has failed to deliver.
This is a NFS title – There is no tire wear, pit stops or grids of 30+ cars. This is not a simulation. It is an arcade title and has to be viewed as such until proving otherwise.
Too many people here supporting it right out of the box and almost going so far as to trash talk other sims before they have even tried it.
Probably the same group of kids who hyped grid..and dirt.
yakshemash
July 4th, 2009 at 11:16
Husky42: You are simracer. Which means something like Übermensch, ja? :-))
As I wrote alsewere I’m disgusted of people like you. I’m ashamed to be part of this so called sim racer community for more than 10 years. It looks like a lot sim racers are bunch of “I.know.everything.and.others.are.idiots”.
And please looks at the latest screens and tell me that there is too much bloom or motion blur…
Or better compare it with real photos or stop some HD race video and look. Motion blur IS real.
Wake up!
http://img268.imageshack.us/i/vlcsnap109999.jpg/
http://img268.imageshack.us/i/vlcsnap110253.jpg/
zudthespud
July 4th, 2009 at 11:25
400Hz sounds very good… I don’t really care about tyre wear or pit stops, I mean, Race Pro had pit stops but you never need to pit. It doesn’t add to the experience for me. I just think the only thing that will let this down is the lack of a proper series. If they had some actual race series behind it instead of aftermarket road cars and GT cars then it would be much better.
kkv
July 4th, 2009 at 12:09
Husky42. Agree on every point. Disabling HDR/bloom is the first thing I do in every game. I just get tears in my eyes from that things. The same feeling as from taking a wrong spectacles.
As regards of HDR it’s a good idea in principle but I have never seen it released with a good taste yet. What that HDR do is mostly an exaggerated contrast with lit things becoming overexposed and dark one more darker. It’s actually not High Dynamic Range. It’s something quite opposite. Such contrast exaggeration is common for cheap Low Dynamic Range cameras which incapable to register half-tones and considered as a drawback in photography.
I always wonder why games tend to produce the same picture as my aging cell phone 240×320 dirty lensed camera with so low range that it makes only something brownish, muddy, and over-contrasted at the same time.
yakshemash
July 4th, 2009 at 12:21
my replay still awaiting for authorization, because there are 2 URL’s. SO here it is again:
Husky42 and kkv: You are simracer. Which means something like Übermensch, ja? :-))
As I wrote alsewere I’m disgusted of people like you. I’m ashamed to be part of this so called sim racer community for more than 10 years. It looks like a lot sim racers are bunch of “I.know.everything.and.others.are.idiots”.
And please look at the latest screens and tell me that there is too much bloom or motion blur…
Or better compare it with real photos or stop some HD race video and look. Motion blur IS real.
Wake up!
img268(dot)imageshack(dot)us/i/vlcsnap110253(dot)jpg/
img268(dot)imageshack(dot)us/i/vlcsnap109999(dot)jpg/
Serg Funke
July 4th, 2009 at 12:30
hdr is not bloom. hdr is very usefull. bloom not.
jux
July 4th, 2009 at 12:45
You will get a completely wrong idea by looking at photos and video. That is exactly what distorts people’s idea of what is realistic and what is not. It’s not supposed to look like video but real life.
kkv
July 4th, 2009 at 12:47
Of course video has the motion blur. It comes just from the fact that video is a sequence of still images. Problem is you never see it with your own eyes. It’s just so called cinematic effect. One of those intended to hide poor art in games. But I don’t want a game looks cinematic. I want them looks realistic.
kkv
July 4th, 2009 at 12:57
HDR is useful when it do not exaggerate contrast to an extent when a picture becomes a comics illustration. It’s useful when it really adapts exposure to a current situation. So it’s a mater of a good taste with decent application. Not that it’s a bad thing in principle.
yakshemash
July 4th, 2009 at 12:58
to kkv:
“Problem is you never see it with your own eyes. It’s just so called cinematic effect”
Oh really? Try one thing: When going in bus, car or whatever look at one “stationary” point, typically window frame. Now you have completely blurred road, trees etc. Yes I know, it all depends on where are you looking at the time. But don’t forget, this is a game. You can’t simulate everything
kkv
July 4th, 2009 at 13:22
to yakshemash
No, I don’t see it as you described. Whatever thing I look at from the car is always crisp and clear. Whatever catch my attention in a given moment. In motion blurred games I see everything blurry most of the time.
Jos
July 4th, 2009 at 14:27
guys, bloom and bad physics is codemasters department, and this game is not being developed by codemasters :P
Uff
July 4th, 2009 at 15:09
Just wait until you’ll see the game moving: after having the chance of watching a beta release on PS3, I can say they did a good job on the effects too. ;)
Sensekhmet
July 4th, 2009 at 16:10
Husky42, the below quote from your earlier post proves you’re just a pissant troll.
So how dare you think to state what you believe is the majority when it really is not, at least that is what I have been lead to believe.
Go away, please.
BSR-WiX
July 4th, 2009 at 16:45
in my point of view, NFS Shift is going to be what it needs to be. Making it more Sim Like would without a doubt kill there return on investment. Making it an arcade racer with enough appeal to get the simracer doing an occasional fun drive, looks like the perfect compromise. I think they are just using common sense.
Husky42
July 4th, 2009 at 18:29
Wix, i completely agree. It will possibly be a fun drive but in no way offer a sim experience that we are used to.
It is this group of people acting like shift is the saviour/the holy grail so to speak that tend to get under my skin. Who counter any claim of question about the title and why it lacks some of the features many of us enthusiast deem needed. For something so “advanced” yet running at no more capability then an engine 5 years old (on the physics side) that is pretty concerning. The physics engines capabilities are no more advanced then that of rfactor. Tire deformation, cool but how does this play into tire physics in real time? With no wear and loss of tire pressure, increase in pressure uneven heating where is the benefit of having something graphically represented but not truly physically?
You all are hyping a product that is not even out, that has been compared to first person shooter in an interview with the devs. I mean seriously? I understand they are appealing to a broad market but comparing the on screen display to a FPS shows you directly who this game is marketed to.
The points made alone do not make it a evolution of a sim – Key word here is evolution because im sure some person is going to bring up GPL’s non tire wear or Rfactors lack of weather. Well how old is GPL? And what is being included in Rfactor2? And what is included in simbin titles already? Yea thats right, when you move forward graphically, try not to take two steps back – make you damn game capable of using all 4 cores to their potential and we would not be limited by that “400 mhz” “advanced” physics engine and 16 freaking cars.
Yes – This is an advance in the Console area to a point. But for those of us in the PC world (the make up of the simming community) it is a step forward and a step back. A push in the right direction if even 10% of what Ian states is true about the “hardcore” mode. People complained about GTR2 having an Arcade mode, really did not bother me because there was a full simulation mode and the postured themselves on that mode. Ian and SMS seems to be posturing themselves in the middle, saying one thing to get the NFS fanboy child crowd hyped and to con the simmers into thinking there is a glimmer of hope in this title.
I cannot state without any proof that this is going to be some crap title, or a fantastic one. All I can only do is be objective, critical of comments and things I think are mistakes.
This all go’s back to tire wear, weather, pit stops, and now more recently Ians comments taking stabs at other titles just not directly. It is low and cheap for him to take pop shots such as he is.
Sensekhmet – nearly 11 years in the simming community (not just race sims mind you) I do not think I’m going to be “going away” any time soon. I’ve given back more then you ever have.
I am a simmer, race, sub, combat, tank, flight. I pay for the best when I can afford it and I only speak my mind. If you do not like what I have to say, do not read it.
What I simply see here is more Ian Bell hype – This is the same glorified hype that we have seen come out of his mouth for many years now.
Now for the nice bit,
I hope to eat my words here, I hope Shift is a quality title, but I think it will be nothing more then a “fun” arcade racer. With 16 cars that’s all it ever will be.
They say they wanted the game to be able to run on all systems cool, set 16 as standard but let those of us with higher spec systems run 24-32 if we want. It should be our choice. 16 is the number of cars in a failing race series.
Uff – We have seen the game moving, what do you think all us watching this title have been doing:? ignoring the video? Certainly not – The effects once again are over done.
Just go watch plenty of onboard video – Go drive your car really fast – Blur as it is implemented in games is completely unrealistic.
Oh and for those images yakshemash – Your posting caps from video. Have you gone to an ALMS race? Have you gone to a champ car race? Have you sat in the cockpit of a 500 HP 32 Ford Super Gas (fiberglass shell) – Have you gone 160+ in just a few seconds down a drag strip? Have you slammed that 32 ford into a concrete wall to have the fiberglass explode around you? No? Well i have, that was the last day i stepped into a race car. Some people have what it takes and im not embarrassed to say I did not, i feared for my life after that crash (it wasn’t even a bad one)
Motion blur in the cockpit is pretty much non existent to the human eye. What you get on film like in those shots is not what you see at the track, or even on standard cameras. The racing is filmed like that with primary focus on vehicles on purpose. There is nothing “realistic’ about what you posted. Thats what the TV crews want you to see, not what you would see in person.
I’ll state this one more time, I hope shift lives up to this hype that people are creating for the title. I’d be amazed if it did but if it does I’ll easily eat my words and be the first in line to say how great it is. I just am not expecting much out of it whatsoever and i’ll still buy it (because hey even i liked dirt as an arcade game)
Whew, long post and hopefully explained a little bit nicer then my previous 3 AM pissed at the cat for not letting me sleep post.
f0xx
July 4th, 2009 at 19:28
Husky ppl are free to hype so I dont understand whats ur problem with that. I think everybody in here knows that NFS Shift wont be a full sim. What ppl are expecting is a funny game with a more realistic side to it :)
The motion blur in cockpit is real, but its not necessary to be used, because when we’re racing with a non-blurred cockpit our eyes automatically unfocus/blur the cockpit to focus on the track ;)
Oh and u said “Tire deformation, cool but how does this play into tire physics in real time? With no wear and loss of tire pressure, increase in pressure uneven heating where is the benefit of having something graphically represented but not truly physically?”, well you could have read the entire interview before criticizing it:
Ian Says
“For example, when the tire sidewalls flex under load in a corner, it minutely changes the shape and location of the tire’s contact patch, which in turn changes how the tire grips the tarmac as it strains to keep hold. Without details like this a driving game can still be fun, but it can feel sterile and dead.”
This means tire deformation will actual contribute with physics while driving :)
Oh and grats for the racing driving experience, I envy you :)
cheers.
Husky42
July 4th, 2009 at 20:23
Dont envy me, it was short lived. Was my 2nd run at a real strip. I spent over a year sitting in a garage in the car learning the timing tree. I had a few runs at a private piece of airport runway that my family owned. but nothing to hit there.
My 2nd run resulted in me just losing control. I slammed into a concrete wall and i have not in my life experienced anything as scary as hitting and hearing that fiberglass explode into many pieces. I pretty much had a tub surrounding me by the time i stopped. I decided right then and there. Drag racing was not for me. Pretty sad i think considering my family’s drag racing history started in the late 50’s early 60’s down in California. My Grandfathers brother drove a knarly dragster from that area and it was insane. Still has it hanging on his garage wall lol
Yea i read that bit about the tire contact patch so i guess its fair enough to say some of it is modeled in. But without the wear and grip levels decreasing or having uneven wear and heating equated to varied grip levels on track it is definately a disappointment.
I’m sorry to anybody I might have offended, im rather opinionated as you can see and have a wait and see approach rather then a set up expectations only to be let down :D
Howie47
July 4th, 2009 at 20:37
I’m not sold on laser scanning in the way iRacing boast of it. As a means for real race drivers to learn the track. Why. Because track surfaces are dynamic. That means they are constantly changing. They can’t possibly rescan tracks often enough to keep up with such changes. “Limerock” by the way. Already has a totally different layout then the iRacing version.
greggio
July 4th, 2009 at 21:00
I wouldn’t listen too much to what Ian Bell says. He knows his PR speak. ;)
And his comment about track modelling cracked me up!
UncleChuckle
July 4th, 2009 at 21:27
Is it me or does EVERYTHING this guy says amount to same thing. I mean go back and look at prior posts, he always says the same tired crap over and over again about his product will be a sim.
He’s a marketing drone (in every sense) and should not be listened too. He’s talking bollocks.
My interest in giving this title a chance is pretty much dead now. No tyre wear? Idiocy. Don’t come to us crowing about your simulation when it clearly isn’t, Ian. You’re full of crap.
Howie47
July 4th, 2009 at 21:54
As in all Sims. Some things are simulated and somethings are not. You enjoy worrying about tires wearing out. I don’t. I’ll just pretend all that is managed by the pit crew chief. Even if the pit stops them selves are imagined.
yakshemash
July 4th, 2009 at 23:26
You are so pathetic…
Shift is lame, everything is laaame….
f0xx
July 4th, 2009 at 23:48
Ian never said NFS Shift was intended to be a pure Sim. Idiocy is coming here and whine like you did in the previous topics ^^
Sensekhmet
July 5th, 2009 at 12:02
Holy crap, Husky42, so you can be sensible. Were you drunk when you wrote the previous posts?
And please, cut the “I gave more than you, etc.” bulls**t if you know nothing about the person you’re writing to. Maybe you did, maybe you didn’t. Just like bench/coffe racing, such assumptions based on nothing piss me off.
All I can say is I feel sorry for your racing being cut short, perhaps jumping right off the bat into powerful machinery was not the best choice? I’m in a much more comfortable situation I think, no peer/family/sponsor pressure and no cash for something fast enough to get killed in (but, hey, you can kill yourself if you slip in your bath tub, too). I not a fearless or talented racer, I’m more of a craftsman than an artist: but regardless I don’t think I’ll ever be able to afford even the lowest pro series: this is sad, because I’m a junkie, I can’t live without racing. Since I ‘used up’ another car in February I’m a shell of a man, I feel like a zombie, nothing can keep me interested for long. I already told my family that if I die racing, I’ll go down with no regrets, doing what I love doing. Well… OK, the only regret I’ll have is screwing up!
JAGUAR1977
July 6th, 2009 at 01:17
Already the excuses as to why NFS Shift won’t stand up as a sim are coming thick and fast.
Personally I just want to drive realistic car’s such as the Ford Escort Cosworth on the Nordschleife in a state of the art ’sim’.
eddiespag
July 6th, 2009 at 17:22
Does anyone think that with Ian Bell’s love of (I’m assuming) of sim/arcade motorsports programming, or Gjon Camaj’s passion for sim creation and coding, if they coupled this with actual driving/racing experience in different types and classes of cars, would it help them to create an incredible race simulation program? There’s no doubt that they are not just talking the talk but doing what they believe in and bringing a project into existance from start to finish.
So a question to most of you out there. “In your opinions, what will it take for creators like these to produce an immersive and successful race simulation of epic proportions?” For example. Is it for technology to be further along or a change in their philosophy, or is it their team of coders and artists that surround them, etc.? For sure they must face many tough challenges on all fronts.