JZStudios

It wasn't quiet. They were all active to begin with. I don't understand where that was lost. And even in the slow periods between games before the other guys were still relatively active. No one was particularly pleased with the changes that were made, especially the tarmac physics, and in our private forum section there was a lot of discussion. Also within that private section (and a little in the gossip thread) a few of them said they just weren't super enamored by it and got bored and stopped playing it. They haven't come back because no physics updates have happened. You're also entirely missing his point, but whatever. I'm not going to argue further. DR2 is not that great on or off road in terms of realism. As a bonus fun fact, he's been successfully doing actual racing for a number of years now, while also consistently getting record lap times in "sim" games, but yeah, he's a troll and doesn't know anything and just ***** on games.

Outer Wilds is fantastic though... Wow. Sounds like you didn't even play it. It's really not though. All things considered, it's just an iteration upon the previous title. And holy ****, you guys expect a racing game to get "Best Game?" Are you nuts? You'll complain about Outer Wilds, an expansive space exploration game with unique physics based world and puzzles and a non-linear story with multiple endings over freaking "Untitled Goose Game?" What's wrong in the world?

So I managed to find a really good video describing how sim game tire models work, and why it's so limited along with why every game uses it. People seem to think the tire models in games works like this; Whereas in reality it works like this: That thumbnail actually says it all. That curve surface is the tire slip angle, which literally every game uses. They just slightly change a few variables. *Edit, there's also this, showing how much of a "sim" The Crew 2 is, which actually simulates just about as much as other racing sims... just not with the same values.

It's both I guess. But when I get attacked, called a conspiracist, insulted, and banned from the AC forums for having the gall to say that Forza looks better and AC felt to have a smidge of understeer and little body roll, it's more that he's critical of it. Sim fans are nuts and their communities are toxic, which is why I only stick on the Dirt forums. Everyone here is generally pretty fun and we all give negative feedback. A further point to it not being how it's presented, but just that it is presented is there was an actual Mercedes/Porsche test driver with extensive knowledge of the vehicles present in AC. He very politely chipped in and said the values aren't very realistic and they don't handle correctly. Lord Kunos (That's actually his name) himself descended and called the man an idiot, said he didn't know what he was talking about, probably told him to read a book, and I think banned him because he said AC wasn't that accurate. They also shut down the modding section of their forum, which immediately killed a bunch of mods because "People were using it to inflate their ego." I assume they mean Fonsecker saying the game sounds terrible and making new+better audio packs from YT videos because Kunos don't know what they're doing. There's a lot more examples from a lot more games, but I'll leave it there. Why does he have to talk about the physics? I think he also did one on Need for Speed, which obviously isn't a sim. He also doesn't have an adherence to RBR, but whatever. He also compares it to SLRE, but because he said RBR+mods his point is invalidated. Ironically everything he mentions in the video is what all of us early testers said behind closed doors when we got access to the final build, because it was WAY different from the early build we had access to that we all liked. Then the game came out and literally everyone started trying to figure out what went wrong, including Dgeesio. Pretty much everyone else at this point has gotten bored with the game and haven't been very active on the forum. I remember playing NFS3:HP and there were a few major jumps. Your car would start to rotate based on where the engine was, which at the time I thought was pretty freaking cool. A Porsche would end up nose up, while a front engine would point down, and mid engines staying flatter. Forza also has a decent weight balance system that moves the active COG depending on where the weight is. It also shows the weight on each wheel. It's hard to really know what any of them actually simulate. As far as I'm aware every game uses the same tire model since at least 2003. Some games just use different variable inputs. Which is why most games feel pretty much identical. Also again AFAIK, every sim uses the system described by BayouRally. 4 tire contact points, 1 COG point that carries a LUT for aerodynamics. The only one I know that isn't like that is BeamNG. It's also important to note that computers are quick, but only do one calculation at a time, so it literally can't calculate all 4 tires all the time. I could also be wrong, but I think tires are also based off just a few points of contact, if not just 1. I'm thinking Forza has 3 zones per tire, LFS has tire flex, so maybe? And BeamNG simulates every "physical" point on the tires.

Oh, it's freaking terrible with a controller. I mean, I've only tried it with an Xbox controller, so maybe with the proper PS2 hardware it's better. GT4 for example used the pressure sensitive face buttons (I'm not sure if Enthusia does) but since my Xbox controller only has digital buttons it's either full throttle on or off, same with brakes. But with a wheel, it's proper gold. I've also got it set up to properly display 16:9 in progressive scan so it looks pretty good too. That's what iRacing markets it as, but any top level driver that actually plays it uses it as a toy to mess around in. There's more than a few cases of the pro drivers saying as such. It is a shame it never went anywhere. A sequel with some better funding would've been ace.

My problem is it's somehow changed so much that there's very little "fun" racing and driving games anymore. There's no more Burnout, Midnight Club, Driver, etc. and the only ones around that aren't "sim" handle terribly and for some reason people defend it with "But it's an arcade game, it's supposed to feel terrible." Eh, anyways, if you want a look at Enthusia you can check this out; A lot of people seem to not like Austin despite him consistently being at the top of the leaderboards in pretty much every game because he's really critical of sim games and how much they've stagnated, and how terrible some of the exploits are. I've always though he was the most reliable source to get a look at where sim games currently are. Enthusia really is eerily similar to AC, but I think actually a lot better and more fun to play with. It certainly does a lot more suspension travel and body roll than AC does, where everything must be maxed out all the time.

If iRacing marketing is to believed THE most accurate sim is iRacing, including terrible tire models and all. There was a point where you could get faster lap times on cold tires, and they also warmed up inside out. But as someone else keeps arguing, every racing game is simulating physics in some manner. Personally, I think for "low speed" BeamNG takes the crown. Anything below ~60mph feels pretty realistic to me through car movements and FFB. Above that the tires don't really have temp models and they start freaking out a bit. But it also simulates tire, suspension, frame, and steering rack flex in real time. If you send enough power through to the wheels the tire rubber and wheel rim itself will start to expand due to centrifugal forces. So for a good introduction, flight sims came out well before driving sims, because you can get away with using LUTs so you don't have to do real physical simulation in computationally expensive time. It's a perfectly fine method. Planes if you think about only have primarily the fuse that you have to worry about simulating, but with vehicles it's at least the 4 tires, and then still all of the aerodynamics of the vehicle itself which is exactly equivalent to an airplane. The only game I know that properly simulates all that in real time in BeamNG, and they haven't figured out how to do tire thermals yet. And people have made airplane mods that actually fly based on in-game physics. From what I played of it, I have no idea why RBR gets praise at all. Vanilla and with mods it just wasn't great. I also spent some time with PCSX2 and tried out GT4 and Enthusia with my wheel. I was not impressed with GT4, but Enthusia was truly shockingly good. Has great suspension modelling and honestly gives AC a run for it's money, a decade prior. Honestly really good fun, but sucks with a controller. Though so did GT4... From here I could rant alongside Austin Ogonoski and say that racing sims really haven't changed much at all since 2000, but I won't.

Well come on, second place is just first loser. Who shows up to an asskicking contest?

I've played every one from the beginning of the franchise up until Black Ops when it got too stupid, boring, tedious, and repetitive. I haven't liked a single one of them. Good thing I only played them on other peoples systems.

*Next Summer. I doubt it'll be this year, but it's possible. I won't buy it because it's COD.

This is the reason I've uninstalled the game. I just can't handle 18gb updates for content I don't actually have access to.

A game coming out a year later with all the DLC bundled isn't uncommon. Games have been doing that for over a decade. Even GTA4 had the "complete" edition selling for under the cost of the original base game.

...what about Pikes Peak on Dirt for men, tarmac for boys? Except maybe some of the ridiculous cars like that VW thing. There were some pretty nuts times going on when it was all dirt.

I'm just glad I'm not the only one with a celeb crush on Aniston.

We gave feedback, but given how different our build was from final release, i.e. I liked the alpha build and don't particularly like the final build... And it wasn't in-house, we got alpha keys for Steam. But again, thy never claimed it was by the players and it's not the early access deal the original had.

When did DR2 ever make that claim?

Wait... don't you guys have the Micro Machines license? You could literally make a game about racing around the studio.

Why would a subscription service of $10/month give people more money than a single $40-60 purchase? Much less the $400 for a wheel? Sure, but people don't really use the sub forums, so I guess they're trying to promote them. Why they don't do a standard forum layout and have a "home page" with all the subforums listed for general, technical, suggestions, etc. I don't know.

Well I'm sure Pandemic, Visceral and Dreamworks, I mean Danger Close, I mean Dice L.A. are still around at EA too. They just aren't their own studio, I didn't mean the guys were fired. So anything to share? Oh, I forgot to ask yesterday, it's completely unrelated, but what kind of car is this? Also ignore my gigantic windshield crack. It's been like that for like 4 or 5 years. It's not broken. It's different.

Psh, says you. Seemed to be kind of like an EA thing, they tried one game and then they "shuttered" the studio and absorbed it into the main conglomerate. But uh, why were you visiting? Yeah, but if it's part of the Rallycross license you'd think they'd make it work.

Their purchase of the Evo Studio guys was a perfect time to make a new engine, which I think they did, used it for their one rather impressive game, and then shut it all down. Yeah, well after the EA Porsche deal... Outside of Horizon making a major shift into "appealing" to hipster D bags, the driving is pretty fun. I boot up Driver San Francisco and just drive around. That does lead to problem 2 though, the Horizon series has gotten more and more straight roads with very little character to them. I still think the first game is the most fun to drive with tighter winding roads. I'd say it's likely that next is D5. Makes sense to switch it up every release, but given the very lackluster reviews of D4 I also wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't.

I have very little idea what you just said. Forza 5 scrapped nearly everything from cars to tracks and started over. Anything that was close enough still got manually reworked. For Forza 6 and 7 they added more cars, tracks and features. They may or may not even do something similar with Forza 8 on the new console, after all they're taking a 3 year "break" between releases instead of the standard 2 they've done so far. A new game is much easier to use a new engine with (But I somehow doubt they'll actually do that, even after acquiring both Slightly Mad and Evo Studios, both of which made their own much more impressive game engine. And even though the devs fairly consistently talk about the engine limitations. But I guess keeping a game in 2006 and occasionally tossing some stuff at it is the norm for "sim racing" so it's pointless to try and argue anything different. Why expect a new game to actually fix issues, add new content and features when you could just... not and keep everything really old and outdated?

I don't know about you guys at CM, but I remember seeing some Forza promo where they have a big robot either laser scan or probe all over the surface of the car. They still do opening doors, hoods, trunks, engine bays, some occasional hatches, the entire interior too though, and I'm assuming that's probably done mostly by hand, or maybe with some photogrammetry and retopology tools. I was watching Mighty Car Mods do a video on "Yaris Hilton" and Marty said they should've got a Subaru. Moog just reaches over the roof of the car and slaps him.

Factually false. Turn 10 scrapped everything and made from scratch for Forza 5 to match a new "standard" for the now current gen consoles. They may have kept some of the higher poly count Forza 4 cars, but there's a reason Forza 5 had 200 cars vs. Forza 4's 500, and Forza 7 has something like 700. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-06-why-forza-motorsport-5-has-less-cars-and-tracks-than-forza-4

...you were gone? Because they can also just make a new title and potentially theoretically add in new features and engine improvements. It's not like Activision is starving for cash for releasing COD every year.