Project CARS – Build 422 Available

Slightly Mad Studios have released the newest weekly build of their WMD-powered Project CARS title.

The new build is available to all members with Team Member status and above. Alongside plenty of fixes and improvements you can find listed below, the new build introduces the brand new HUD editing feature to the simulation.

Build 422 (8/3/13, Team Member+)
Common:
* Exposed GUIDialogManager from the helper so App level dialogs can use it
* Code to allow use to render both sun/moon shadows and spot light shadows at the sametime
GUI:
* Added ‘non-modal’ dialogs
* Fixed crash in manager update loop
* Fixed some missing clone property settings
Bug Fixes:
* Some memory leaks fixage
HUD:
* Reverted HUD mirror disabling for Cockpit view. Changed the default status of the mirror to hidden
Physics:
* Fixed them damn dirty ANTS 

The build also brings plenty of physics changes as the physics department has been busy with the help of race car drivers Nic Hamilton & Ben Collins as well as the whole WMD community:

  • Formula A: Backed off the ride height sensitivity of the front wing somewhat. Reverted experimental engine braking torque curve. Finer adjustment to brake cooling.
  • Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X FQ-400: Initial physics. Basics are all about right. No fancy differentials, which has a big influence on how the car drives. 4th to 5th gear spacing makes me angry. Somebody please find data that shows the ratios are different than those used on the FQ-360 so we can change it  :)
  • Caterham Classic: Small change to front motion ratio. 0.775->0.74
  • Caterham R500: Wider RARB setting range. Fixed front motion ratio (old value needed to be squared). Details added to first post.
  • Pagani Huayra: Updated gear ratios after checking ours against the Top Gear segment. Revised brake heating. Various setup tweaks. Fixed motion ratios after comparing against the CAD model. We had these mixed up pretty badly before. Details in first post.
  • RRF-G: An experiment in damping on the street tire carcass.
  • street_green: Tiny increase in tack coefficient. Almost not worth mentioning it’s so small.
  • BMW Z4 GT3/BMW M3 GT: default/A/B/C tire compound test of various contact patch models. Feedback to the respective car threads, please.
  • Ruf RGT-8: Numerous changes to tame the beast. The real source of trouble was that the rear suspension was infested with bugs. I copied numbers in wrong or something and it was making for some very unstable bump steer effects. Went back to the references and drew it up again from scratch. Much better this time.

Build 422 is available via the Project CARS launcher that is available on the WMD Downloads Page

Click Here for Release Notes for All Builds Released During the Past Week

Build 421 (7/3/13, Senior Manager)
Input:
* Removed a rogue ifdef (fixes FFB)
* Fix for undefined devices being ignored during DirectInput device enumeration
Render:
* Code to test if the HDR is initialised. This is to handle resolution changes in the HDR (for bullshots)
HUD:
* Re-enabled save-to profile for HUD editing
* Live HUD Editing
* Adjusted HUD Motec position for wide & non wide-screen
* Tweaks to the HUD position for the Tacho, Mirror & LapInfo objects
Environment:
* Fix for warning C4324: ‘MWL::LensFlareInfo::LensFlareElementInfo’ : structure was padded due to __declspec(align())
Physics:
* Tangent FB A/B/C test, due to Ben feedback
* Tire.rg: revised street tire carcass, ABC compound testing for BMW Z4/M3 GT
Shaders:
* Drivers – disabled motion blur for drivers materials
* Overlay.fx – support for REFLECTION_MAPPING (no puddles, no drying)
* Skintest shaders modified to allow animated trackside characters to receive motion blur
Art:
* Flags animations, casual idle and cheering animations + XML bindings, rig update
* New meshes and textures for 3d crowds
Tracks:
* Eifelwald GP: Fixed truck popup in hairpin curve by increasing the LODA distance in the track.lod file
* Eifelwald GP: Fixed a bunch of LOD popup issues around the track on tribunes bridges and roadmeshes
* Connecticut Hill: Fixed missing road and fixed road uv issues
* Bathurst: The old 3d casual crowds were switched by the new ones
* Azure Circuit: Added new casino gardens, updated trees/bushes on this area, deleted old stuff, merged in latest DavidB’s works, pit stuff, reexported csm, updated sel sets, set flags
Vehicles:
* BMW M3 GT2: fixed lightflare IDs
* Ruf RGT-8: suspension fixes to make it a better drive
* BMW M3 E30: Added ao, wheel and tire LODs, updated wheel arches
* BMW M3 E30: rear wheel offset 0.5cm wider
* Pagani Huayra: revised brake heating, setup and gear ratios. Fixed motion ratios, matched to CAD reference
* Caterham Classic & R500: front motion ratio changes
* Pirault Mega: Fixed tire setup, fixed detaching CPIT bonnet

Build 420 (6/3/13, Senior Manager)
Environment:
* Updates for Lensflare alpha and position so they update from this timecycle
* Improve the performance of MorphMesh shader parameter setting – the overhead of the Base dynamic arrays was costing approximately between 1 and 9% depending on the level of Cloud (many meshes, with many parameters – the sizes are fixed so dynamic arrays were a poor fit)
* CEnvironmentManager::BlendCubeTextures now uses SSE2 on PC – this reduces the exclusive profile cost from 2.1% to 0.3%
* CEnvironmentManager::FillPixels is now implemented using SSE2 on PC – this reduces the exclusive profile cost from 1.9% to 0.4%
Common:
* Added OwnedObjectBase.assertLocked() function that will check that the object is locked by the current thread
* Tutorial asserts that its data modification functions only operate on locked objects
* Port in connector messages is transmitted as short instead of int, and is treated as unsigned short
* Removing unused timers from the CScreenShotDirector class
* Reverting a change where I made Tick public
Tweak It:
* Debug Director Mode

“When you connect to game with Tweakit there is now a new area called Director.
With in this is a setup to allow the user to enter a debug mode in which they can take screen shots.
To use..
Start a game as normal and play through a race untill you are happy you have enough to take the screen shots you wish to use.
Press the Start Director button. (At this point I would tick the Director box in the tree so it live updates)
The Start Button will then be removed.
You can now do the following.
1. Set the time in the race you wish to jump to by using changing the value in RaceTime.
2. You can change the rate in which the race plays back by setting RaceRate (default is 0)
3. There is a button to take a TGA screen shot.
4. When in Free Camera you can under Free Camera controls you can change the camera FOV , Positon and Orientation.
Note when you are not in Free Camera the cameras are the track side cameras ,
You can switch to free camera and back by pressing Ctrl+f at anytime, when you do this it will setup the camera to the
values last used from a normal camera.
(note when in TrackSide Cameras you can toggle through the other cameras available by pressing Ctrl+t )
5. You can Tweak Custom Dof Controls. Under DofControls.
Other points to note..
In this mode you can change the time of day , weather conditions and any other visual aspect”

Bug Fixes:
* Fix for crash when deleting a tweakit component which is marked to live update
Audio:
* Adding experimental Zonda R wavs
* Adding experimental Zonda R soundset
Tracks:
* Heusden: Added lights and flares to industrial buildings
* Derby National: Tightened up cut track aprox 1/2 car length on the leftside of last chicane
* Belgium Forest Circuit: Tightened up cut tracks at various outside run wide areas that seem to be advantageous if used. Per WMD feedback
* Heusden: New textures for industrial assets
* Azure Circuit: Added new textures
* Bathurst: Reworked Tent Asset LODs and meshflags, and added specific tracklod to combat pop-up there
Vehicles:
* BMW M3 E30 Group A: wheels diff_00 dds texture – alpha channel added
* Formula A: backed off front wing ride height sensitivity. reverted engine braking change. finer brake cooling adjustment
* Ford Capri Group5: UV mapping + bugfixes
* Ford Capri Group5: Added support for custom liveries
* Ford Capri Group5: UV mapping

Build 419 (5/3/13, Manager+)
Render:
* FX11 – add support for backing store constant shadowing to reduce un-necessary calls to UpdateSubresource. (enabled via SHADOW_CONSTANTBACKINGSTORE define)
* Minor fix for unbalanced D3DPERF_EndEvent
* Reduce overhead over SetProfilerMarker using string reference instead of copy – makes Release about 2% closer to Gold in performance
* Cache NvAPI_Stereo_IsEnabled – calling this function dynamically was costing 6% of the entire cpu-time!
* DX11 add support for DXGI_FORMAT_R11G11B10_FLOAT render-target and textures
GUI Tools:
* Allow scroll bars to be placed anywhere
Shaders:
* FresnelCoefficient usage correction – multiplication of whole specularIrradiance insted of just sampled pecular irradiance
* Bodywork shaders unyfication
Tracks:
* Bathurst: Various placement fixes of instances
* Azure Circuit: Tweaked nmp
* Heusden: New textures for industrial area
* Heusden: New textures for solar panel assets
Vehicles:
* BMW M3 GT: Added new livery banners

Build 418 (4/3/13, Senior Manager)
Cameras: 
* Exposing the Camera Configurations.. This is part of the on going Camera Editing tool work
Environment:
* Apply rotation offset to sky dome
Render:
* Fix for rendering of cloned lensflares
Shaders:
* SPECULAR_STRENGTH macro added – used for specular strength adjustment for specialistions with and without env map
Scribe:
* Adjust common path root to include scope of branches
* Re-enable #EnterRace message
Base:
* BAppSectionManager: Ensure that app section calls are made from the same thread (asserts if not) as this system is designed to be single threaded
* Fixed exit leaks in System and Debug pools
* Removed system allocs from being incorrectly reported as leaks
* Fixed typos
* Added GetMemBuffer() to BRingBuffer so that its buffer can be freed if a custom one was provided on init
* Added dump of custom leaks on exit (allocs done via system allocation routines)
* Added custom memtraces to PC SysMalloc and SysFree calls
Tracks:
* Moravia: New AIW for changed track widths. Fixes complaints about too sensitive cut track issues
* Belgian Forest Circuit: Tighten cut track at the top left of Eu Rouge to dissallow 4 wheels over
* Bathurst: 3D eucalyptus update, optimized more
Vehicles:
* BMW M3 GT: More headlight tweaks
* BMW M3 GT: Fixed brake disc glow, and brake disc setup
* BMW M3 GT4: Fixed brake disc glow, and brake disc setup

Project CARS is coming to the PC, Xbox 360, Playstation 3 and Wii U in late 2013. More info can be found on the WMD website.

GTOmegaRacing.com

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003712360365 Lachlan Salter

    what are these ANTS they are talking about?

  • http://racingrenders.com/ F1Racer

    I was wondering that :)

  • Marco Conti

    What’s going on with the Ginettas? Are they ever coming out?

  • Alejandro Gorgal

    Man, this is a great build. I tried notMount Panorama again, a place where I was getting around 30-40 fps on average and now it’s almost always at solid 60 (v-synced) only dipping at 55 on the pit area. Crazy good considering that the 3D trees are still completely unoptimized.

    Im also enjoying the changes/fixes to the RUF, it’s still a pretty crazy car to drive, but not it’s crazy/realistic-crazy rather than just crazy like before. I look forward to see this car textured and with a proper AO bake.

    Also, the HUD editing tool seems promising, hopefully we’ll get tog-gable gizmos like in AC.

  • Alejandro Gorgal

    It’s a bug that was introduced on last week’s build, if you stopped the car completely it started to move around as if it was carrier around by ants, hence the name.
    Pretty glad to see this fixed in a record time!

  • pez2k .

    They’re in the long queue of cars to be made. Which cars get made first tends to depend on which manufacturers provide enough reference material and CAD data first. The Evo X FQ400 was on hold for a fair while due to an apparent lack of references for example. The flow of new cars is accelerating now though, so I hope that we see a Ginetta within the next few months.

  • http://www.facebook.com/scala.giovanni Giovanni Scala

    But they develop the physics by videos? Talking about the Huayra? I hope not!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Karol-Gronowski/100001185339304 Karol Gronowski

    What is wrong with physics guys from this project? Have they ever played in any other sim? Handling is bad since few months.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Markus-Ott/100000878526131 Markus Ott

    I also wonder that. Did those guys never play any sim to determine realism? Everybody knows that KS and ISI invented physics a long time ago. If it doesn’t handle like Karol’s favorite sim, it must be unrealistic.
    I demand a Karol Gronowski driving model in pCARS ASAP!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Karol-Gronowski/100001185339304 Karol Gronowski

    You really are that dumb or just pretend to be? ;) Your post is typical to troll which you definately are (after seeing other your posts). Get back to your x360 gamepad and dont forget to turn on aids, your feedback will be very useful for wmd crew.

  • Brandon Miller

    I tried the RUF and think it is more off than last week’s build. Every time I touch the brake the rear end wants to come forward on me. Sucks because last week it felt better. Strange this game comes and goes like it does. Sometimes it feels great, and then sometimes it feels wrong. Guess it comes with the territory of playing weekly builds and being in Alpha.

    I find it odd that you are enjoying the RUF and the changes/fixes of this build and I am not. Only on Project Cars I suppose.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Karol-Gronowski/100001185339304 Karol Gronowski

    catch ;) https://vimeo.com/61406437
    this is your definition of realism

  • Anonymous

    :o Looks like it’s driving on a plate of jelly, than on asphalt.

  • hotak

    it’s clearly a video of a bug, it obviously doesn’t handle like that,
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EawbU-Iy_Tg

  • http://www.facebook.com/jaimy.mewe Jaimy Mewe

    I think you`re a little bit dumb. Ever heard of sarcasm?

  • Anonymous

    Don’t confuse POV effects with physics; drivers have full control of ‘world movement’ in the settings, which affects how the viewpoint reacts to bumps and body roll. Some people clearly have different ideas about how to set these values for their own enjoyment. My own settings are nowhere near this “boatlike”, and I find it quite realistic.

    If you are able to view how the car actually tracks through the corners (instances of poor driving notwithstanding), you can get a better idea of pCars inherent physics.

  • Big Ron

    This happens when you set “world movement”-setting to 0% and the camera just acts independent to car movement.

  • pez2k .

    The gear ratios are a ballpark figure adjusted based on the shift points on TG I believe, while awaiting official figures from Pagani.

  • Anonymous

    Giving it a bit more front brake bias may help.

  • Philip Samuelson

    Only time I spin out the RUF is when I’m 95% brake, thus locking up the rears. For sure, it needs work, as the Huayra does, but it’s a good start.

  • Philip Samuelson

    Boy I wish I had played last week in that case, I woulda loved to see that!

  • http://twitter.com/projectcarsvide projectcarsvideos
  • furiousgibbon

    I’m surprised that they don’t get basic stats like this as part of the licensing agreement. If not, surely it can’t take more than a quick email to get the ratios from Pagani?

  • pez2k .

    It seems to take a long time to get anything from manufacturers, Pagani are even apparently one of the most cooperative and helpful.

    Consider that a videogame license is basically an outside company asking the manufacturer for a favour in return for an arguable amount of marketing, so the bigger companies especially might not necessarily care much about helping out and the technical department may not even be involved.

    I’ve done some work with manufacturers before and you’re better off travelling and asking one of the mechanics doing services than anyone in a suit for tech information.

  • http://www.facebook.com/cordell.cahill Cordell Cahill

    They actually did a track test with Pagani, so they have telemetry data and whatnot.

  • http://racingrenders.com/ F1Racer

    Yep, looks like a handling issue to me. It doesn’t seem like it’s camera/word view/pov here. The car engine note is reacting along with the cars odd movement. So seems like physics which I’m sure will be sorted.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Karol-Gronowski/100001185339304 Karol Gronowski

    no, never

  • Anonymous

    You saying Sim racers aren’t planning on buying a Pagani in the near future?

    ;)

  • Anonymous

    What is your nick/username for pCars? Can’t find you on the leaderboards. Cheers

  • Anonymous

    The Sr, Managers Might Be?

  • Matt Orr

    Either way, it’s still strange. Considering some magazines even list what the ratios are when they do a test… Unless they meant Top Gear as in the magazine, if they are one of them that does.

  • Levi McIntyre

    spewing I paid for this boring arcade game. Loving rfactor atm tho

  • http://www.facebook.com/ritasilva33339 Rita Silva

    more videos for the addicts @ projectcarsvideos.com

  • Anonymous

    I must agree. We all tried AC TP and from the start it feels as it should. I was one of the first that bougt pCARS and they still cant convince me, that its going to feel right.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Karol-Gronowski/100001185339304 Karol Gronowski

    exactly ;) at least you have feeling that car is “physically connected” with road. Cars in pcars seems to floating above road, also the way how car brake isnt to convincing. Im not a hater, i invested into pcars 25e and id like to see really good simulator

  • Ghoults

    If anything these pcars reports only highlight to me that some members of the pcars community are just extremely defensive about the physics of this game. Every kind of criticism is met with the typical “it’s not ready” or “it is a wip”. To me the fact is the pcars physics look just plain broken. There is so much wrong.

    I understand that many people have invested a lot of money into this and thus want to defend their investment but at times I’m really troubled by what I read. Of course this is not just a pcars related problem. Every sim has its blind fans that defend all aspects of their fav sim to death (and beyond). Looking at games as a whole this is nothing special but it is a sad phenomena nonetheless.

    I’d wish more people were more open about other people’s opinions. I think it is perfectly valid and correct to say some things and opinions about pcars. Just like it is fine to say those things about iracing or ac. Saying it is a wip or not ready is not going to make things any different today or tomorrow. If we should just look at what the pr departments of various sims claim the sim will be some day and blindly believe that we will only have perfect sims on the market.

    The fact is everything today is wip. Rf2, iracing, pcars, ac, lfs. Just because pcars is wip does not make it special in any meaningful way and thuss it should be open to same level of criticism as every other sim and game out there without fanbois throwing their keyboards at you every time you say something is not right.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Markus-Ott/100000878526131 Markus Ott

    You already lost with your third sentence and that it LOOKS broken. Everything you say afterwards is meaningless. Though it is also wrong.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Karol-Gronowski/100001185339304 Karol Gronowski

    Does wdm pays you for shooting at every negative opinion about pcars? pathetic…

  • pez2k .

    You’re abstracting things a bit much by saying that iRacing and rF2 are also ‘WIP’. iRacing was launched over four years ago, and gets post-release support now. rF2 is (allegedly) in beta, and thus should be feature-complete. pCARS on the other hand hasn’t even reached alpha testing yet, aspects like the sound engine are still pending large reworking before they’re anywhere near the final targets, the entire career mode is absent, half the assets aren’t even started yet, and so on. It’s level of completion that matters, and there’s a massive difference there.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Markus-Ott/100000878526131 Markus Ott

    I just do it for the fun of it. The sim racing community is too easy. Dunno what’s more terrible in gaming, people who buy EA games or sim racers that are stuck in the past.

  • Anonymous

    Care to explain your ‘floating’ comments? I certainly feel road feedback, so I don’t get how you think they are floating above the road. …unless you are talking about watching videos, in which case no reply is necessary.

  • Anonymous

    I have invested what I would to buy the sim, so I don’t consider that I have invested ‘a lot’ of money. That said, you don’t point out anything that is ‘broken’, so how are you helping? All you are doing is regurgitating the same tired complaints. The problem with all of these opinions is that they are always the same complaints from the same people. Go back and look at the various posts and you will see the repetition.

    Here are a few just from the last couple of pCARS posts:

    “What is wrong with physics guys from this project? Have they ever played in any other sim? Handling is bad since few months.” – Yes, real helpful

    “Looks like it’s driving on a plate of jelly, than on asphalt.” – Yes, I wish I could determine physics based on a video.

    “the engine its just not up to the task, imo” – Wow, looks like someone has inside knowledge.

    “Looks beautiful but clearly drives like a boat. What’s new?” – Another ‘verify by video’ comment.

    “I said it looks unconvincing. There is no argument that can convince me otherwise – how could there be?” …and yet again another complaint based on how a video looks.

    ….get the picture? I have criticisms, but I share them on the forum and actually drive it before judging on how well it drives. The defensive posture is working in both directions. I have seen VERY little constructive criticism, mostly just complaining.

  • Anonymous

    ‘I’d wish more people were more open about other people’s opinions.’

    Including people that have actually tried it and don’t have a problem with the direction it’s heading? Labeling people as ‘blind fans’ (or ‘blind haters’ for that matter) is just wasted energy.

  • speed1

    It’s just like each of your referred projects, one in development and no less or more crap because they all are. Not one of them is perfect or error-free.
    If you are looking for errors it can be found everywhere and not a single one blows me away. If we already are at, can I find not a single one ground-breaking. It is simply a compromise or, depending on preferences, and it is and will remain a game.

  • Ghoults

    lfs is also beta. In this day and age these are all labels that are based on what and how the developers want to portray their products. I could list thousands of games which use the word beta simply to avoid criticism for the simply reason some gullible internet readers think it still means state in software making that it meant in its strictest form in 1990s software making…

  • Ghoults

    What I say is meaning and wrong just because you say so? Is this some kind of discussion technique? Oh it is. You seem to think you can simply make my opinions wrong by saying they are wrong…

  • Matt Orr

    I put it this way – stop worrying about what is beta / alpha / pre alpha / post release and just say “in development”.

    Heck, iRacing will probably never be finished until they decide to do something else. rFactor 2 even after release will still be updated just like rF1 was with updates and new features. AC already has a what, 5 year plan where we know several planned things aren’t going to be in v1.0?

    By the words in your post, iRacing is still alpha. They evolve every 3 months, pCars every day / week / month. rFactor 2…. whenever. Don’t forget iRacing completely changed their tire model (for better or worse), is overhauling their sounds, went 64 bit and plans on going DX11 in the fairly near future. Finished product? Hardly. Was pCars a “finished product” when you could buy – err, support – it?

    According to the alpha beta final wording, rF2 is “feature complete” because it’s beta… yet we’ve seen no sign of dirt that we saw years ago and we know is still coming.

    Whats in a version number, anyways. It doesn’t really matter – they could call v1 v.01 – if it’s the same, it’s the same. Alpha / Beta / Finished simply indicates a rough guideline. pCars is in development, just as the other 3 major players on the market. 2 of them happen to be on the market as is.

    Some cars + tracks feel much closer to a beta result in pCars, some of them feel not even close to that.

  • Anonymous

    And yet you want us to believe the physics are ‘wrong’ just because you say so? You’re adorable.

  • http://twitter.com/TheRoggan Roger

    I tested this build yesterday for an hour, I am a bit disapointed with the handling, still much work to be done.

    A few months back the cars where very grippy and steering was quite direct, feelt quite good inside the grip threshold. But as soon as you went outside of grip it was “not so good”.

    Now in the current builds you have more movement and slip when you go outside of grip but you have lost the steering feel and the predictability of the chassie is not related to any physics im familiar with from driving real cars and other good sims.

    I still have high hopes, the car and track selection is great and the visuals are top notch. But there is still much work to be done on the physics and tire modelling.

    In my view AC has really set a new benchmark (before nkPRO and rF2 was the benchmark IMO). I hope the SMS team spends a lot of time with AC for input on how a well tuned tire and handling model should feel like. If they get to a similar level during the remainder of development pCars can be a serious contender for top sim!

  • Ghoults

    I specifically chose to not talk about specific physics issues as that was not my point and I kinda wanted to avoid making this yet another discussion topic about “physics in pcars”. My point was about how criticism about pcars seems to be always taken in the wrong way or simply shrugged off as pointless complaining about “unfinished product”.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mazda.mps.1 Mazda Mps

    To be honest, I haven’t really been sure on the direction of pCars over the 300 odd builds I’ve been playing for. It has certainly had some good points so far and I hope the final product is something that the hardcore drivers can enjoy.

    I’ve enjoyed the Capri most recently. My favourite car being the Atom but have stopped driving them since the placeholder sounds were added.

    Fingers crossed the Mugen gets it’s rorty NA soundtrack and the 300 gets it’s supercharger glory soon.

  • http://www.facebook.com/wesley.modderkolk Wesley Modderkolk

    I’m not defending it in any way but in a lot of cases it is “because it is wip”. I’m sorry that you dont like it, but that just is the case. When iRacing, rF2 or AC add something it has been tested long before in house, so yeah you get a car that is pretty much right the first time. With pCARS the simracers are pretty much the beta testers and take a large share in the feedback of the cars or what they would like to see. In pCARS you get an update and with that could be the first export of an car, with barely worked on physics. With that it gets worked on and improved.

    So yeah, when you complain about the car on it, lots of things arent right because they are WIP, and a lot of things then improve in later builds. I can remember taking the “R18″ for a drive the first time playing the game, it drove like crap, you couldnt take a turn correctly, but now it actually feels convincing, you feel the brakes heat up and the tires grip when you drive it. That was much less the case earlier on.

    So whether you like it or not, a lot of criticism can be countered by “it’s a wip” and these things will be fixed in later builds.

    Comparing it to iRacing, AC, rF2 is not even right, as the development models are so much different.

  • Ghoults

    You are forgetting that iracing for example also gets patches which sometimes make the cars drive totally different. And while some stuff is good or bad or patches changes the product from one to the other it still does not make “it is wip” any more usable as an excuse or reason. If iracing was called beta should we suddenly just treat it differently because of its tag?

    Even the best cars in pcars are not anything good to talk about and I leave it to that. Again, my opinion about pcars is not what I want to talk about. My point is not how pcars is now. But how people take it when I say my opinion about pcars.

    There are of course many ways to look at it. One is to just look if the title has beta or alpha next to its name. Being cautious with criticism is fine when that alpha or beta tag is just maybe couple of months old. Like with assetto corsa. Or when pcars was brand new. I’d not say the things about ac that I say about pcars for that reason. But when a product still claims to be a beta or alpha after being available to the public for years (lfs, pcars and even rf2) without any siginificant real progress or even realistic assumption that there will be that… the situation changes and you can start treating it the same way you treat any game or sim that is being worked on actively (iracing, lfs, rf2).

    So for me the way to look at a game or sim is to look at what they are now. And then look at how it got to this point and then try to make assumptions where it is going and keep that in mind when writing feedback and criticism about it. That gives me different viewpoints when I look at something maybe reiza studios has just announced, what iracing looks like or how lfs or pcars look like. But that also makes these products open to criticism within that context. And that also puts pcars, rf2, lfs and iracing open to comparison and criticism. But for the same reasons I would leave ac out of that comparison for time being. If after 2 years the tech preview is still the only thing we have from ac then the situation changes.

    Iracing for example is an ongoing project. It has solid base and albeit slow progress it is still promising and very good sim today. Pcars to me has kind of strange progress but at the same time it still feels not good like it felt when it was first out. LFS is still called beta but it isn’t going anywhere either (literally). AC looks extremely impressive for what it is: a tech preview. But overall I don’t think it cuts it anymore to call it alpha/wip when you look at pcars.

    Looking at its rate of progress, its current state and its future from that perspective it looks like what it looks now. Not very good. No matter how wip or alpha it is. Even as an arcade racer I’d not rate it very highly. Even if I’d treat the current state of pcars as sports car gt and the final product was something like game stock car the timespan alone for that kind of total stranformation is still measured in tens of years.

    While I don’t think sportscar gt is in any meaningful way a decent representation of game stock car I very much doubt there is such leap of quality coming with pcars. Maybe pcars is so much better than it is now 10 years from now on. But at its current state of constant patches and development it is still… well… not decent. Very much imho of course.

    Do you honestly see that pcars is getting there? Does the alpha or wip tag with the whole package of expectations, history and future honestly justify the kind of criticism silence some users are expecting when quality of pcars is being talked about?

  • pez2k .

    No ‘significant real progress’ in pCARS over the last year? I think you must be making jokes now.

  • http://www.facebook.com/wesley.modderkolk Wesley Modderkolk

    You clearly have no idea AT ALL of what pCARS is.

    “You are forgetting that iracing for example also gets patches which sometimes make the cars drive totally different. And while some stuff is good or bad or patches changes the product from one to the other it still does not make “it is wip” any more usable as an excuse or reason. If iracing was called beta should we suddenly just treat it differently because of its tag?”

    iRacing is tested in-house before the release, pCARS is not. it is released as an barely ready car and with feedback from that is improved.

    There is a lot of difference between in-house testing(what every other sim does) and testing based on subscription. The guys who paid for it(much like a kickstarter project) get the builds and are the ones to test it. I dont see how I can make it more clear.

    With iRacing, rF2, AC, you are the consumers of the product. with pCARS you are the consumers as well as the beta testers of the product.

    “Even the best cars in pcars are not anything good to talk about and I leave it to that. Again, my opinion about pcars is not what I want to talk about. My point is not how pcars is now. But how people take it when I say my opinion about pcars.”

    You dont want to talk about the physics about it but then again call the physics crap? And they say their opinion because they are allowed to, not because “it is pCARS”. And also they dont take your opinion wrong because “it is pCARS” but because “To me the fact is the pcars physics look just plain broken. There is so much wrong.” is such a ridiculous statement, I dont see how you could not expect anything agains that. Not to mention that there was no argument added to it at all.

    You are saying that “it is because it is a wip” is wrong, but on the other hand you do exactly the same with your “the physics suck” statement. I believe that is what is called a hypocrite.

    “There are of course many ways to look at it. One is to just look if the title has beta or alpha next to its name.”

    That isnt done it ACTUALLY IS A BETA AND THE PLAYERS ARE THE BETA TESTERS. It isnt a fancy name, it actually is in Beta(or Alpha, I dont really know), and you dont even need to play the game to understand it. “This is where the discipline logo will go” or “Under Construction”. I just name 2 things that show how not Beta it is. I mean seriously? A lot of tracks barely got any off track buildings, or got weird stuff on the ground etc. etc. Also in the menu there are a lot of placeholders, and a lot of functions arent implemented or implemented to very basic level. And that is what people call an Alpha/Beta product.

    That you even consider it a full product like iRacing shows that the closest you came to pCARS was watching a vid of it on youtube. I dont see how you can base your opinion on that.

    Like said, 5 seconds when starting the game and you notice it is still Beta/alpha.

    “But when a product still claims to be a beta or alpha after being available to the public for years (lfs, pcars and even rf2) without any siginificant real progress or even realistic assumption that there will be that… the situation changes and you can start treating it the same way you treat any game or sim that is being worked on actively (iracing, lfs, rf2).”

    pCARS not changed? Are you serious? Even from these great youtube vids you can see how much it has improved over the past time.

    ” But overall I don’t think it cuts it anymore to call it alpha/wip when you look at pcars.”

    But you havent looked at it, because if you looked at the actual game you would notice it is still wip.

    “Looking at the rate of progress of pcars, its current state and its future from that perspective it looks like what it looks now. Not very good”

    And once again you show you have never touched the game, or even came close to that. Because then you would know that it actually did improve. Like I said with the not-R18, when I first drove it you couldnt take a turn normally, but now it feels very convincing.

    “But at its current state of constant patches and development it is still… well… not decent. Very much imho of course.”

    current state of constant patches? Are you serious? That is the whole point of it, we get builds every week with new features and fixes. It isnt a patch, it is a new developper build.

    “Do you honestly see that pcars is getting there? Does the alpha or wip tag with the whole package of expectations, history and future honestly justify the kind of criticism silence some users are expecting when quality of pcars is being talked about?”

    Yeah it does. And once again; if “it’s a wip”, with an explaination of why it is the case isnt good enough, please explain to me why “the physics suck” without any explaination whatsoever is.

    What you are posting, you are either stupid and have no idea what you are talking about, or you are a troll. And if you are the latter I can give you a 7/10.

  • Anonymous

    Good to see the weekly flame fest started in earnest. This week’s submission comes to us from Ghoults. I personally don’t think your trolling post is worth the number of replies it has given.

    I don’t like rFactor 1, SimRaceWay or iRacing so I don’t read the posts or try to dissect what the players think about. Just do us a favor and if you don’t like the game don’t play it or comment on it when VirtualR posts about it. If you actually want to get into our heads about physics development and how software works, go join WMD and get educated. You’re more ignorant on the process of creating a racing sim than you know.

  • Anonymous

    “Have they ever played in any other sim?”

    You do realize that the team behind Slightly Mad Studios (headed by Ian Bell) were the same ones behind GTR, GTR2 and GT Legends, yes?

  • Anonymous

    What is your nick/username for pCars? Can’t find you on the leaderboards. Cheers

  • Anonymous

    More often than not, it’s because it IS pointless complaining, and you’re no exception.

  • http://racingrenders.com/ F1Racer

    What puncuation? :)
    Just pretend you’re speaking it and put a full stop in at the end of each sentence.
    Oh and watch the language.

Back to top