- Sim Racing News

Project CARS vs. iRacing vs. Reality – Video

Digiprost has put together a very interesting three-way reality check video of Laguna Seca.

Digiprost has put together a very interesting three-way reality check video of Laguna Seca.

The video shows the popular American racing venue in real-life, Project Cars as well as iRacing.

iRacing has arguably set the gold standard for raw track accuracy thanks to working with laser-scanned data, you can judge for yourself how well it compares to reality and how pCARS stacks up against it below.

  • Dani .

    versus what?

  • Matt Orr

    Rainey seems kind of off in the pCars vid, but still more than good enough for most anyone.

    • Matt Orr

      And just as a side comment – after more even more iracing and various other sims, it seems the real benefit of laser scanning isnt so much bumps and accuracy, but the micro cambers in the road. When it comes to iRacing for example, often a corner I’ve seen in a bajillion other sims ends up having a different line through it BECAUSE of those minute cambers in the road – not the layout of the corner itself. The infield at Daytona is a prime example, or the first two rights at Laguna here. It’s really subtle and very hard to pick up in a vid, but you know it.

      In other sims at Laguna for example, you can take a really shallow line through those two rights because its all the same banking anyways, whereas in iRacing you can hang it out much later and use that slight bank to go faster.

      • Anonymous

        I absolutely agree. Any small imperfections are mostly getting soaked up by tire sidewalls anyway. It’s that extra resolution on the crown, camber, banking, and overall shape that seems to make the most difference.

  • Wally Masterson

    All 3 are, to all intents and purposes and to any extent that actually matters in sim racing, indistinguishable.

  • GamerMuscle

    Real life is overpriced , lets face it if they made reality cheaper they would rap up the sim market.

    Graphics have definitely got to a more than acceptable level now. I cannot wait for the Oculus rift to come out , I have a suspicion that its going to utterly transform gaming and racing simulators , maybe not for 2-3 years but eventually.

    • furiousgibbon

      I can’t wait for the Oculus Rift, I keep forgetting about it and then a post like this gets me excited again!

      iRacing is very convincing in this vid, it was impressive in 1080p full screen but watching it again in a small embedded window it’s very close to the reality. I suppose the laser scanned geometry is helping to fool my eyes. pCars is trying a little too hard in the details esp. the tarmac, it may look prettier but it looks like a game.

      • GamerMuscle

        I have done some tests with Simulators at 600×800 and it seems just enough to be drivable.

        If oculus can use the lenses to have higher pixel depth in the centre than the edges and the effect of 3D works well it might just be good enough to use instead of a large screen.

        Just hope its not long for the consumer version , its 1080p and that the developers all support it.

        Its ether going to do what the first GPU did for games on the pc be A total flop or end up as some niche curiosity product that most people ignore.

      • Anonymous

        They’ve confirmed that the consumer version will be 1080p. Also, the overwhelming response for the dev kit made them switch from 5.5″ screens to a better 7″ panel with even less latency.

        The thing that’s keeping me from buying a dev kit is that it would force me to upgrade my computer. You HAVE to be able to run 1080p in stereoscopic 3D with 60FPS using VSYNC. Anything less and the immersion is completely ruined, according to the developers.

        I don’t think this will be too difficult going forward but right now it takes a fairly expensive graphics card to do this. By the time the consumer version lands those cards will be reasonable and by the time it’s picking up huge market share they’ll be extremely cheap cards.

      • GamerMuscle

        It should be good , I was tempted to get the dev kit to do some stuff in unity for it , rather than to use as a solid gaming device as its probably not quite there yet.

        It will be interesting to see though just how well the basic dev kit version actually works , so long as its a solid proof on concept ( which it looks like so far) then it looks like we are go for VR !

      • Anonymous

        Why do you have to use stereoscopic 3D? I’d be happy to just get the extra FOV to start with. I’m sure the 3D support is optional and down to the game developers to decide. So I don’t think you need a monster PC after all.

      • GamerMuscle

        3D will likely be default due to the way drivers work , I don’t see why they could not run it in 2D though as an option , In the end its just a 7″ LCD mobile phone screen.

        Though one advantage with 3D is it helps make things look higher resolution than they are as the human brain fills in more gaps.

        You wont need a monster pc I think EZehnder has just taken what they said out of context. Sure it would not run well on current game consoles , but it would be fine on a average to good modern pc with 1 year old GPU.

      • Anonymous

        No, it’s definitely in context. There’s really one main guy who runs the tech demos at shows like E3 and CES. He has said in multiple video interviews that the three things you have to be able to provide the Oculus Rift are the full resolution of the panels (1080p planned for consumer version), VSYNC, and stereoscopic 3D @ 60FPS.

        The monster PC thing is a reasonable expectation but it’s also subject to the game you’re playing. The more advanced the graphics engine in the game you’re playing the more hardcore your setup needs to be. Crysis 3 will be far more difficult to run at those needed settings than rFactor 2, let’s say.

      • GamerMuscle

        You can run most games on a midrange pc with a 1 year old GPU at 90 + FPS not going below 70 now with moderate graphics settings in 3D at 1080p.

        So by no means would you need a “Monster PC” , anyone with an i5 6GB ram and a 1 year old graphics card will be totally fine.

      • Anonymous

        I have an i5, 4GB RAM, GTS250 graphics card and I don’t get over 60 FPS unless I turn settings way down or the features aren’t being utilized. I don’t get 60FPS in rFactor 2, Project CARS or Assetto Corsa. I do get a lot in iRacing or netKar Pro, though.

        If we started talking about non-racing games I wouldn’t get anywhere close to 60FPS locked.

      • GamerMuscle

        I’m using i5 , 8GB , GTx 460 all over a year old and at the time I bought them cost less than £550 total so very much midrange

        – 90-120FPS in AC with most settings on max 1080p 4X AA
        – 100-130 FPS in CSGO and most source games with max settings + 4X AA
        – 70-90 fps in Arma 3 alpha with settings moderate to hight

        So even with your system now a moderate ram upgrade and GPU upgrade for under $400 would allow you to get way above 60fps Vsynked in most games. And with that it would by no means be a “monster” pc it would simply be a moderate / average gaming rig.

      • Anonymous

        Because that’s how the lenses and just the general technology work. I have not heard anything about a 2D mode being possible and I’ve looked up as much as possible on it. If you find something about a 2D mode post it here!

      • Anonymous

        Boo! No 2D, no want.

    • Dan Minton

      Obviously you cant afford to do it…. Nothing comes close to the real thing and it never will , but you keep telling yourself that .

      All three sims look amazing.

      • Anonymous

        The top one looks a bit arcade though… :-))

      • GamerMuscle

        “Obviously you cant afford to do it..”

        I don’t know many people that can afford to race in real life UK its 150k a year just to race something borderline good.

        Sure allot of people could buy a radical and maybe do 30-50 laps every now and again for 20-35k a year but that’s not exactly racing though sure would be fun.

        “Nothing comes close to the real thing and it never will , but you keep telling yourself that”

        At what point in my comment did I say simulation was anything close to real life ? , If anything my comment was saying how much better the real world is to simracing and that its a shame its to expensive for most people.

        “All three sims look amazing.”

        You do realise only two of them were simulators ?

        Your comment is insanity !

      • Jos

        reading and looking at a video can be hard sometimes. 🙂

    • Anonymous

      Oculus Rift support is planned for pCARS. It could be in at release if everything needed comes together by then.

      • Anonymous

        Also for iRacing, they have dev kits on the way as well.

  • Anonymous

    Go pCars!!!

  • Anonymous

    It’s pretty impressive that iRacing still looks better than new sims like rFactor 2. The view is too stiff and sort of lifeless though. Impressed by the accurace pCars has despite it not being laser scanned. Perhaps laser scanned tracks is just a marketing tool nowadays.

    • Anonymous

      There is an iRacing plugin that allows the cockpit view to move in response to g-forces while driving. Nothing yet for replays, though, which I agree would make onboard videos pretty cool. Just a bit of vibration and that.

    • Guilherme Cramer

      The main thing with laser scanning is the swift elevation changes modelling of the bumps.

  • Mike Cantwell

    iRacing is way better than CARS. Why do they add stuff that is not there? Grandstands etc that are not there? They ruin this track and Bathurst.

    • Anonymous

      I have never noticed that stuff even when I’m looking for it. When racing, I wouldn’t notice it if you paid me to. The overall graphical fidelity is what you remember when playing it and is what smacks you in the face when you play iRacing or SimRaceWay.

      Even rFactor 2, which doesn’t look all that bad, ends up sticking out like a sore thumb because of games like Assetto Corsa and pCARS, in my opinion.

    • Anonymous

      At this stage in the licensing process, I believe there has to be a number of minor changes to cars/tracks to avoid being in legal jeopardy. So until such time as Lagune Seca is officially announced in pCars, I’d expect to see such things in a side-by-side comparison..

  • Terrell Olvera

    The thing about adding stuff that isn’t there is that it changes from race to race, last year I went to both the ALMS and Grand-Am races and there were (obviously) different booths and tent locations each time. Same goes for MotoGP and the other events. The most notable difference for me at the moment is the trees and bushes, which are being worked on now. Iracing does look great though, but it should for how long it’s been out and the price you pay for content.

  • Marcus Caton

    PCARS on rails.

    • Anonymous

      Actually, in that video, the real car and the one in pCARS are moving about, reacting to the track and the driving, while the iRacing car looks like it isn’t reacting much. It could be the rigid camera, but then I’d expect to see “the world” bounce around a quite a bit.

    • Alejandro Gorgal

      The fact that you post the same kind of thing on every single pCARS article ever leads me to believe you are obsessed with the game. Maybe you secretly want to play it?

      Why can’t you just enjoy what you like and leave it be?

  • Justin Schmidt

    we need the car seen in the rl video in our sims. full version of the rl video with multi onboard angles.

  • Howard Motz

    iRacing and the real video is like a track day at Laguna Seca. pCars is like when there is a big race. As in this video. I’d rather have the pCars track. All the excitement of a big race. Not empty.

    • Anonymous

      That’s one of the thing I do with iRacing did better, more scenery variation. If you run a SCCA car, just have a few people milling about, no major sponsors. When in an IndyCar for a race there should be series specific advertisements and banners on the walls and painted in the runoffs, I want to see tire carriers running around the pits, golf carts and cars circulating around the track… just those tiny touches that make the race feel alive and like this race takes place during an actual race weekend different from all the others.

  • Dani .

    thees videos are for saking comunity, against one or other sim. Yes, yes they let us match the quality of the graphic designers/tecnology of the sim, but the final purpose is to argue about sims, and polarize opinions, in this case it’s not too noticeable. But really posting that reality checks, sim vs sim vs sim vs sim vs my mind vs reality vs the eye of a fish etc.. are they necesary… Maybe one sim vs reality yes, butsim vs sim, it’s not. all we know they are all different, They are only to argue about one or another sim. All sims are valid options, you play that it’s ok, i play this one…

    • Anonymous

      I can definitely agree with this.

      I doubt anyone has really changed their minds on a sim due to one of the sim vs sim videos. If someone likes the sim, they will just use the video as ‘evidence’ their sim is better, even while someone else is claiming the exact opposite using the same video.

      I much prefer series of screenshots from the same angle comparing reality and virtual tracks anyway. The onboards tend to move too fast to really do a solid comparison anyway.

  • Anonymous

    I for one have an appetite for all three Sim’s…. To bad the Real Life One is out of my price range…. sort-of since I do own a Spec Miata and have raced it at Barber Motorsports park and hope to run road Atlanta this year.

    Anyway, I for one think pCARS is close enough for me compared to laser scanned…! However, I do own iRacing full package and it cost so much I have to renew every year…. but I watch for the $75 special.

    I hope all Sims are successful… CA, pCARS, rF2, R3E, the new Truck Racer by Reiza, all of them and even ones we may not know about…!

  • Anonymous

    After finally getting the chance to watch the video, pCARS is clearly wrong. The pair of trees at the Corkscrew, probably the single most important reference point in all of North American motorsport, is missing.

    How can you drive Laguna Seca without it?