Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

V2 Physics Discussion

Recommended Posts

GusPerez, those jumps on Pant Mawr Reverse have always been nutty. But yeah, you're able to jump even further with V2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Count me as another one in the 'appreciating the new physics but something isn't right about the amount of time spent jumping' camp.

I don't know what it is, but as the cars become lighter there's less feeling like reality. I'm appreciative of the devs efforts to improve things so far and I'm sure they'll get it closer over the next few months, but the new update is less enjoyable for me on any stage where the car leaves the ground. I was previously a big fan of the 'weight' I felt and how airtime wasn't massively overvalued compared to most games, but the V2 cars have lost this and something's not right when the 70s cars are jumping 50 metres.

Maybe less mechanical grip and more weight/gravity would help? Maybe it's the courses themselves having too sharp gradients? Either way, logging my feedback and looking forward to future updates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Cars might be in fact too light at the moment, but it's the matter of gentle step on the brakes just before the jump, and you're not flying like a baboon. You simply cannot expect to go flat out on these crests and not fly. I just belive that such a hard landing and long jumps shoudln't be so forgiving on a car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As V2 came as a modification to the original spec, existing jumps and gradients are mapped with V1 cars in mind.  If the V2 physics are to remain as is, the track maps would possibly need re-profiled to suit.  Finland is perfect for the 555 Impreza in terms of gradients, but the car loses out slightly with the new feel through the corners.  I love driving the V2 cars, really love it, they are such an improvement but they are just not right on bumps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KevM said:
As V2 came as a modification to the original spec, existing jumps and gradients are mapped with V1 cars in mind.  If the V2 physics are to remain as is, the track maps would possibly need re-profiled to suit.  Finland is perfect for the 555 Impreza in terms of gradients, but the car loses out slightly with the new feel through the corners.  I love driving the V2 cars, really love it, they are such an improvement but they are just not right on bumps.
Yeah, the V1 cars doesn't have as much air time but when you're actually all wheels on ground there is sooo much downforce pushing the car to the ground. It's really apparent after the V2 cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bogani said:
KevM said:
As V2 came as a modification to the original spec, existing jumps and gradients are mapped with V1 cars in mind.  If the V2 physics are to remain as is, the track maps would possibly need re-profiled to suit.  Finland is perfect for the 555 Impreza in terms of gradients, but the car loses out slightly with the new feel through the corners.  I love driving the V2 cars, really love it, they are such an improvement but they are just not right on bumps.
Yeah, the V1 cars doesn't have as much air time but when you're actually all wheels on ground there is sooo much downforce pushing the car to the ground. It's really apparent after the V2 cars.
This was particularly noticeable on yesterday's daily with the Group A Scooby. I hated how it felt on Finland, so heavy, slow and sluggish 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It felt pretty good after you set the power bias back and made viscous diff stronger but yeah, there's still a noticeable difference between it and the V2 cars. Only if we could have the jump behaviour of V1 and the handling of V2 together, although I'm sure the good folk in the dev team are already looking into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Slow and sluggish isn't really relative to the issue of gravity.

Whats your opinion on V1/V2 comparison over bumps Rallycameraman?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KevM said:
Slow and sluggish isn't really relative to the issue of gravity.

Whats your opinion on V1/V2 comparison over bumps Rallycameraman?


It's not about gravity, that's not something that's been changed.
Even when it comes to jumps, it's still all about the downforce.

Downforce is the opposite of lift. Just like the wing on a plane makes it want to leave the ground at high speeds, more downforce on a car wants to push it back into the ground. That's why v1 cars don't jump as far, especially when going full tilt.
Not a difference in gravity and not technically a difference in weight either since its an aerodynamic effect.

What might be possible is if the cars weights in v1 partly factored in the high downforce.
Say, if the real car is 1000kg with 500kg of downforce as a baseline. In a v1 car, this might be balanced as a 800kg car with 1000kg of downforce.
If v2 didn't compensate, you could now have a 800kg car with 500kg of downforce.
That's pure speculation, not remotely based on any actual info. 

But either way, a reduction in downforce alone will have a noticeable impact on jump distance.

When it comes to the older cars, they don't have so much downforce. In fact, like an aeroplane wing, they were known to generate actual lift which means they would actually jump a lot further than you would expect if a driver was insane enough to take a huge jump flat-out.
Yeah, a Stratos taking a jump at 80mph will probably go further than a Fiesta WRC at 80mph, That's phsyics and aerodynamics at work.
But then we're going to run into simulation problems. There's always going to be limits to what can be simulated in a video game, given that multi-million simulators used by F1 teams or Level-D simulators used to train airline pilots also have limits that if exceeded will no longer produce valid results. Those sims also have the benefit of huge amounts of directly sourced data from the real thing through telemetry.

Simulators can only try to accurately recreate the most commonly experienced situations. An envelope.
When you go beyond them, they fall apart.
It's why no good racing sim also has brilliant crash simulations. 
It's why Microsoft Flight Simulator was fine for little Cessnas and airliners, but was woefully incapable of dealing with high-performance jet fighters.
A lot of simulation, especially in games, still depends upon archaic methods like look-up tables and spreadsheets.
Processing power is far too limited to try and do it all in real-time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok. If it's been a pure downforce tweak in V2, would there be a need to offset the reduced downforce with increased weight (the weight will be a constant value where downforce likely increases with speed).  Then reduce the friction value in the tyre model slightly to allow the heavier car to slide more?

(If only it were that simple, eh lol)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This V2 physics is one step back, in germany, the car seams float in some corners and braking points, is unrealistic beavor. im very disappointed with this V2  in asphalt as arcade physics :(, but the gravel physics are good.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwJrbUk91BY 

Minute 1:30.. It's ridiculous, V2 = ARCADE.

Codemasters,
I want my money back if you implanted the physical V2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those background infos are really interresting and helpful in order to understand how things work. Thank you BrySkye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GusPerez said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwJrbUk91BY 

Minute 1:30.. It's ridiculous, V2 = ARCADE.

Codemasters, I want my money back if you implanted the physical V2.
Best get on steam for your refund then. 

ARCADE. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GusPerez said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwJrbUk91BY 

Minute 1:30.. It's ridiculous, V2 = ARCADE.

Codemasters, I want my money back if you implanted the physical V2.
Best get on steam for your refund then. 

ARCADE. 
It is your own attitude. Arrogance is not a good way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GusPerez said:
GusPerez said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwJrbUk91BY 

Minute 1:30.. It's ridiculous, V2 = ARCADE.

Codemasters, I want my money back if you implanted the physical V2.
Best get on steam for your refund then. 

ARCADE. 
It is your own attitude. Arrogance is not a good way.
You really don't see the irony in that post?

I'm not saying you don't have a point about the physics being off, but instead of trolling and shouting "ARCADE" (a phrase abused on this forum to the point where it has no meaning) then post some constructive feedback and critique of it.

Each patch has changed the game and it's an Early Access programme, so sometimes it will get worse before it gets better (see gravel audio), but making a fuss with no actual feedback or basis for opinion and just leaving because the developers haven't met the timeline demand you've set in your own head just means you'll never get the game you, and many others, want.

So stick around, record some videos, suggest what you think the issues are and maybe by the time v1.0 rolls around we'll have a game that we all agree is superb. How about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GusPerez said:
GusPerez said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwJrbUk91BY 

Minute 1:30.. It's ridiculous, V2 = ARCADE.

Codemasters, I want my money back if you implanted the physical V2.
Best get on steam for your refund then. 

ARCADE. 
It is your own attitude. Arrogance is not a good way.
You really don't see the irony in that post?

I'm not saying you don't have a point about the physics being off, but instead of trolling and shouting "ARCADE" (a phrase abused on this forum to the point where it has no meaning) then post some constructive feedback and critique of it.

Each patch has changed the game and it's an Early Access programme, so sometimes it will get worse before it gets better (see gravel audio), but making a fuss with no actual feedback or basis for opinion and just leaving because the developers haven't met the timeline demand you've set in your own head just means you'll never get the game you, and many others, want.

So stick around, record some videos, suggest what you think the issues are and maybe by the time v1.0 rolls around we'll have a game that we all agree is superb. How about it?
OK ..thank I do understand. But I do not agree. Jumps seem unreal. And his grip on gravel and asphalt is unreal and unnatural. It seems that the grip is assisted, the car never loses line of the road, always returns to its place very easy. Is my opinion, I say this as constructive critique. I do not want to offend anyone. I express only my impression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As much as I like the changes overall, some things don't seem right. I criticised DR cars being too planted, too glued to the ground before, and the downforce thing seemed to explain that. This doesn't happen with v2 anymore, and I like it.

I thought, well the 01 Impreza seems a bit easy to drive. I tested the 555 against it and found that it wasn't that much of a difference, and considering there were a few years of development between them, it wouldn't be such a surprise. I wondered if the game was made deliberately easier, but some cars like the Kadett or 131 feel more difficult than before, hence I doubt it was meant to make it easier.

However, there seems to have happened something with momentum or mechanical grip or something like that. In Greece, there are a few tight hairpins with heavy gravel "banks". Overshooting these in the 555 makes me slide for 1-2 seconds sideways over the heavy gravel, but in the 01 Impreza I "come to grips" much faster, making it feel like medium gravel instead. It feels as if the 01 was only half the weight, while actually it's the same weight. Sliding sideways at some 50kph can't be explained with downforce, and I struggle to believe that better tyres and suspension would make such a difference in that situation. It simply feels as if the 555 had much more mass.

I'm not sure about what's more accurate, I tend to think in this case it's v1. As much as I love the new physics, in some areas I wonder if they are too forgiving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real issue with the physics is wonderfully pointed out by this thread, Everyone has their own opinion about it...

So who's right and who's wrong? Answer is no one. Clearly their is no way to please everyone, some like V2, some like V1. Some would like a mix of both, some think both versions are completely wrong.

The problem is the physics are subjective, what feels right to you probably doesn't feel right to someone else. Upon release the majority said the game had to much grip, they have change it now and some people still don't feel its right.

Their is no right or wrong and no way to please everyone. Ultimately everyone will have their own opinion.


and that's ok :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that it's fine that everyone has his opinion. I for one prefer v2 overall, but it's understandable that everyone may feel different about it.

However, physics aren't subjective. Game physics, as in: do I like them or not?, are debateable. But real physics aren't. Regardless of what would make the game more fun, I'd so love to hear the opinion of some people who actually drive rally cars on v1, v2, and of course DR vs RBR. The best you usually get is "DR sux it's UNREALISTIC 4WD is nothing like that I know because I drove my mom's Cherokee on the beach"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evilsmurf said:

The real issue with the physics is wonderfully pointed out by this thread, Everyone has their own opinion about it...

So who's right and who's wrong? Answer is no one. Clearly their is no way to please everyone, some like V2, some like V1. Some would like a mix of both, some think both versions are completely wrong.

The problem is the physics are subjective, what feels right to you probably doesn't feel right to someone else. Upon release the majority said the game had to much grip, they have change it now and some people still don't feel its right.

Their is no right or wrong and no way to please everyone. Ultimately everyone will have their own opinion.


and that's ok :)


Please tell me you're kidding. Many things can be debatable but pure physics are not one of those.

People have pointed out some physics flaws and have been very nice and constructive. Just because we still believe Codies wants to do quality job and we appreciate that. If I'm completely honest I could have been like a complete jerk if I'd wanted because these flaws are so clear. These are just things no car would do in real life. Stop fooling yourself, geez..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell me you're kidding. Many things can be debatable but pure physics are not one of those.

People have pointed out some physics flaws and have been very nice and constructive. Just because we still believe Codies wants to do quality job and we appreciate that. If I'm completely honest I could have been like a complete jerk if I'd wanted because these flaws are so clear. These are just things no car would do in real life. Stop fooling yourself, geez..
That's your opinion :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocStrangelove said:

However, physics aren't subjective.
Not saying your right or wrong... But, if it's all about the math, then why can't everyone in this thread agree one way or the other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evilsmurf said:
DocStrangelove said:

However, physics aren't subjective.
Not saying your right or wrong... But, if it's all about the math, then why can't everyone in this thread agree one way or the other?
Because none of us has a real understanding of rally car physics. Even a scientist would be wrong here because he'd have only limited theoretical knowledge of what's going on between wheels and track. Only actual rally drivers could give an informed opinion on if the physics feel right or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×