Sean Edwards (a real Porsche 997 racer) who is currently leading comfortably the rfactor PCC2007 championship on F1RST3, has admitted that PCC2007 physics are total crap! In fact he has given feedback for the development of another PCC rfactor mod, the Porsche Carrera Cup France, but I haven't tried it, so I don't know if it resembles reality better (actually I have never driven a 997 in rl).
Perhaps there's no need to get into all the trouble downlloading mods and tweaking settings Tristan, if absolute realism in physics is what you are always seeking for. rFactor just doesn't get well in that area generally.
I just suggested the above combo because I had real fun the other day there, despite the physics flaws. It was a pleasant break from LFS.
But if you do take the time to do some rfcator testings, then physicswise there supposed to be better mods around insetad of PCC2007. Just let me know to have a look for them (Caterham, Niel's C6 and I think Skoda Octavia Cup are amongst them).
rFactor's major problem is the poor force-feedback implementation and the poor physics, which give a really narrow margin to correct the car when it crosses its grip-limit.
Once you oversteer, 90% of the times you can't recover because the car does not accept your steering/pedal commands no matter what recovering technique you try. Also, when the car understeers, 90% of the times the force-feedback goes dead (and I mean dead). Plus that any ingame ffb setting other than Low Effects yields in a lot of canned effects.
With some mods and the RealFeel FFB Plugin things get quite improved over the default feeling, although they usually require a bloody lot of tweaking & fine tuning. And still they are NOT in par with LFS.
So if you want to have some fun with rfactor, take my advice and NOT compare it with LFS in physics and ffb, or you won't have fun at all.
The way I see it goes like that: in LFS I show tolerrance for the so-so gfx, the bad sounds and the non-existant rl tracks in order to enjoy the physics and the informative ffb. In rfactor I show tolerrance for the so-so physics/ffb (selected mods only, the rest are total crap) in order to enjoy rl tracks, awsome sound and good gfx.
Yestreday I was trying to make some good RealFeel FFB settings for Megane Trophy 2.02 (a so and so mod), testing the car in Varano (an awsome little testing track). After lots of trial &error effort I ended up with these settings, but in order to have the desired rich ffb feeling the G25 ended up feeling so damn heavy, even with the Megane's power steering option enabled
I use a G25 and especially for the rFactor I have made a profle in the Wingman Profiler, with all G25's settings equal to 0, except the Overall Strength which is 100% (those are the instructions in RealFeel's readme file) and the Rotation degrees which I have set to 360.
Ingame settings: I don't remeber by heart, but I think I have set the speed sensitivity to 25%-35% and I always put the car's steering lock between 18% and 19% on the setup.
And here is my tweaked FFB section in rfactor's Controler.ini file
[ Force Feedback ] FFB Device Type="1" // Type of FFB controller: 0=none 1=wheel, 2=stick/custom, 3=rumble pad. FFB Effects Level="1" // Number of FFB effects to use: 0=No Effects, 1=Low, 2=Medium, 3=High, 4=Full, 5=Custom. FFB Gain="1.00000" // Strength of Force Feedback effects. Range 0.0 to 1.0. FFB Ignore Controllers="0" // Do not use FFB on: 1=controller1, 2=controller2, 4=controller3 (or add values to ignore multiple controllers) FFB Throttle FX on steer axis="1" // 0 = Throttle effects on throttle axis, 1 = throttle effects on steering axis. FFB Brake FX on steer axis="1" // 0 = Brake effects on brake axis, 1 = brake effects on steering axis. FFB steer vibe freq mult="0.20000" // Controls frequency of steering vibration. Recommended: 0.5 to 1.0, 0.0 disables steering vibration. FFB steer vibe zero magnitude="0.03500" // Magnitude of steering vibration at 0mph (reference point). FFB steer vibe slope="0.00000" // Slope of line defining magnitude as a function of frequency (used with FFB steer vibe zero magnitude). FFB steer vibe wave type="0" // Type of wave to use for vibe: 0=Sine, 1=Square, 2=Triangle, 3=Sawtooth up, 4=Sawtooth down. FFB steer force prediction="0.00100" // Time into the future that force is predicted, to help counteract wheel latency (0.0 to disable) FFB steer force max change="100.00000" // Maximum change per second based on current difference between calculated and applied force, to help avoid jerky behavior (values under 15 or so should reduce jerkiness, 100 disables) FFB steer force neutral range="0.04500" // Max distance from center "neutral force" location where forces are reduced to help avoid oscillation (0.0 to disable) FFB steer force neutral function="1.00000" // Function to apply near neutral force location, in order to tune out FFB "deadzone" but keeping oscillations in check: 0.0=original, 1.0=new FFB steer force exponent="0.80000" // Steering force output "sensitivity". Range 0.0 to infinity. 0.0 to 1.0 = higher sensitivity, greater than 1.0 = lower sensitivity. FFB steer force input max="-11500.00000" // Recommended: 11500 (-11500 if controller pulls in the wrong direction). FFB steer force output max="1.80000" // Maximum force output of steering force, recommendation 0.8 to 2.0 FFB steer force grip function="0.55000" // Range 0.0 to 1.0 (previous hardcoded value was 1.0) - lower values will make steering force decrease LATER as front tire grip is lost - try 0.3 FFB steer force grip weight="0.90000" // Range 0.0 to 1.0, recommended: 0.4 to 0.9. How much weight is given to tire grip when calculating steering force. FFB steer force grip factor="0.40000" // Range 0.0 to 1.0, recommended: 0.2 to 0.6 (previously hardcoded to 0.4). How much of a factor the front wheel grip is on the steering weight. FFB steer front grip fract="0.00000" // Range 0.0 to 1.0 (previous hardcoded value was 0.0), additional effect of front grip loss on steering force FFB steer update threshold="0.00000" // Amount of change required to update steer force/vibe (0.0 - 1.0). Lower values = steering force updated more frequently = lower frame rate. FFB steer friction coefficient="0.17500" // Coefficient to use for steering friction. Range: -1.0 to 1.0 FFB steer friction saturation="1.00000" // Saturation value to use for steering friction. Range: 0 - 1.0 FFB steer damper coefficient="0.17500" // Coefficient to use for steering damper. Range: -1.0 to 1.0 FFB steer damper saturation="1.00000" // Saturation value to use for steering damper. Range: 0 - 1.0 FFB throttle vibe freq mult="0.17000" // Scales actual engine frequency to force FFB vibration frequency. Suggested range: 0.10 to 0.50 FFB throttle vibe zero magnitude="0.09000" // Magnitude of engine vibration at 0rpm (reference point). FFB throttle vibe slope="0.00000" // Slope of line defining magnitude as a function of frequency (used with FFB throttle vibe zero magnitude). FFB throttle vibe wave type="0" // Type of wave to use for vibe: 0=Sine, 1=Square, 2=Triangle, 3=Sawtooth up, 4=Sawtooth down. FFB throttle vibe update thresh="0.08000" // Amount of change required to update throttle vibe (0.0 - 1.0) FFB brake vibe freq mult="0.90000" // Scales actual brake rotational frequency to force feedback vibration frequency. FFB brake vibe zero magnitude="0.10000" // Magnitude of brake vibration at 0mph (reference point). FFB brake vibe slope="0.00000" // Slope of line defining magnitude as a function of frequency (used with FFB brake vibe zero magnitude). FFB brake vibe wave type="0" // Type of wave to use for vibe: 0=Sine, 1=Square, 2=Triangle, 3=Sawtooth up, 4=Sawtooth down. FFB brake vibe update thresh="0.05000" // Amount of change required to update brake vibe (0.0 to 1.0) FFB rumble strip magnitude="0.25000" // How strong the rumble strip rumble is. Range 0.0 to 1.0, 0.0 disables effect. FFB rumble strip freq mult="0.60000" // Rumble stip frequency multiplier 1.0 = one rumble per wheel rev. FFB rumble strip wave type="0" // Type of wave to use for vibe: 0=Sine, 1=Square, 2=Triangle, 3=Sawtooth up, 4=Sawtooth down. FFB rumble strip pull factor="-0.50000" // How strongly wheel pulls right/left when running over a rumble strip. Suggested range: -1.5 to 1.5. FFB rumble strip update thresh="0.07500" // Amount of change required to update rumble strip effect (0.0 - 1.0) FFB jolt magnitude="1.00000" // How strong jolts from other cars (or walls) are. Suggested Range: -2.0 to 2.0.
I share Becky's, ajp71's and Hyper's points of view!
With some recent mods and plugins rFcactor is well worth your money, not to mention some brilliant real life tracks (e.g Nordschleife 2007, or Le Mans 1977-1988).
It easily complements LFS in the areas the latter suffers, and vice versa. rFactor when properly modded is a hell more immersive sim than LFS when it DOES NOT come to physics and force-feedback
GTR2 is another title I would definintely recommend, as it features the absolutely best modelled rl tracks than any other sim I have tried so far. It focuses on GT cars, but there are also mods for it (most of them crappy)
Both titles use the gMotor2 engine (developed by ISI for rfactor and tweaked by Simbin for GTR2 -added rain among other things) which means you will need to spend a lot of time in fine-tuning several aspects (including the force-feedback for your wheel, which is very important, but you will never feel it like you do in LFS). But you'll be thrilled in other areas (gfx, sound, mods, etc).
I also hear good words about Race07, but haven't tried it myself. Richard Burns Rally is also an excellent choice if you like WRC (I don't). nKar pro's physics and ffb are in par with LFS, the gfx is awsome but the sim is buggy and abandoned (rumor has it that its dev is making a bike simulator now lool).
PS. Tristant, com'on buddy... driving PCC2007 (Mobil 1 Supercup) fully manual (h-shifter, clutch, right-foot braking) with Real Feel Plugin properly set, in Nordschleife 2007 ver 2.0 is not that bad, even with ISI's flawed physics
Last edited by migf1, .
Reason : typos (lots of them lol)
When coming from the mouth of lots of experienced and dedicated LFSers, then improving suggestions and lack of motivation is not moaning. It is constructive critisism (or food for thought if you prefer). And it surely doesn't negate what LFS and the community have achieved so far!
As for the demo users, if the demo's capabilities, the LFSW and these forums aren't enough for them to buy the sim, I seriously doubt that any S2 user will ever persuade them to do so. There is no point in pushing someone to do something he doesn't really want to do (btw, 'informing' differs from 'pushing' )
I'm affraid I'm getting on dan's boat too. Since a month or so I'm having trouble getting motivation to race LFS. I do it occasionally but I don't get joy out of it (or at least not the joy I used to get out of it).
I was waiting for OLFSL to announce their calendar, hoping to get my motivation back, but the hope was put out as soon as I read LX6's in SO, LX4's in rallycorss and FZ5's+RAC's in FE. I'm burnt out I guess and "sadistic" combos don't really help me out a lot
For a while I have kinda switched to rfactor, mostly because I can race on some well implemented real-life tracks, legendary tracks like Nordschleife, Monza, Watkins Glen, Laguna Seca, etc. rFactor's physics are a bit of a joke and forcefeedback is even worse, but I'm honestly fed up doing Astons, Blackwoods and Westhills
Ultimately I would really love to be able to follow online real life championships (like F1 or DTM or whatever) as they happen but in a sim with decent physics. That would give me long term motivation.
For now I'm sticking mostly to rFactor, without leaving LFS of cource (I may even participate in a few OLFSL races) hoping that I will miss racing on LFS tracks sooner than I think
TBH, I do notice a bit of a differenece between 1024 and 2048 skins, although not while racing (mostly when watching replays and/or videos).
Regarding bandwidth, 2048 jpgs can be compressed enough so they don't exceed the 400kb limit on LFSW and they still look crispier than their (much less compressed) 1024 counterparts. So bandwidth isn't a problem with 2048 skins. But they would cause an fps problem if what was said earlier in this thread is true: that skins get decompressed in gfx card's memory so they can be rendered (is this indeed true?)
I'm attaching a rar file containing two screenshots from the CMX Viewer. I saved them in bmp format so they don't get compressed at all (compare for example the tow handle in the front). I'm also attaching the 2 skins, the 2048 being 396kb and the 1024 being 377kb.
It's a little bit of everything that turns down some people and turn on some others. A sim can't satisfy them all in all areas.
What I'd like to further comment on is about some fellow posters who claimed that it's only natural to get bored if you play the same game over and over again for a vast period of time. It surely is natural, but the whole point of this thread is to seek why this might happening with LFS (correct me if i'm wrong). LFS is not supposed to and does not remain the same game through the years. It's rather an ongoing project, so we shouldn't play the same game over and over (and in some extend we didn't).
So the real question is whether the LFS progress satisfies the majority of the community, especially the online racers according to the topic's title.
Although I agree with Ian that the sim's progress is slow and with questionable priorities, I beleive LFS is still the... king of online racing. I've tried mostly rfactor and GTR2 and none of them offers the same excitement online... not even close! Wheel-to-wheel fights feel really short and somehow fake in those sims. Is it the superior LFS force-feedback, is it the physics engine, is it the fact that I'm by far more experienced in LFS? I dunno, the point is that LFS still offers me the greatest deal of enjoyment online, compared to any other sim I have tried.
That being said, constructive criticism should always be welcome by any sim's devs & community, since it's the only healthy way for a sim to evolve towards the right directions. For me RL tracks and sound rework shoud be high in LFS's to-do list, others prefer physics, more cars and grfx to be done first. Some others prefer rain, night and offline championships. One way or the other, the truth is that LFS is starting to show its (evolving) age and it's up to the devs to get the message early and do something about it, before the competition reaches or even overcomes LFS's current strong points.
As far as it concerns me, RL tracks play major role in what is called "immersion" (gfx and sound help too). Also, RL tracks will open a door to the outside world for LFS, where everybody else (and especially motorsport entusiasts) have a common code of communication (point of reference or whatever other expression comes in your mind for that matter).
Actually if you really think of it, RL tracks would do more good than harm to LFS, in almost all directions. It's up to the devs firstly and the community secondly not to misuse them.
As I have already said, I'm not entitled to dictate what's the best way of bringing RL tracks into LFS. But I'm entitled to express politely a healthy opinion about the sim I like most, whithout having people responding (even indirectly) with references to my... cock
I have to admit that after almost 2 years I've also started loosing a bit of my interest on LFS. Not badly, though!
For me, RL tracks would dramatically boost my interest (secondly physics, thirdly sound and then graphics). I'm not entitled to dictate in which way they should enter the LFS world, but I honestly believe a whole new LFS era would start if RL tracks make their way into the game.
It seems indeed! Frankly, I believe most gripes about the clutch overheating have to do not with the missing realism but with the extra effort needed to achieve laptimes similar to patch X.
However, I noticed that in some combos I've achieved better laptimes with patch Y (although using patch X setups). For example, with the MRT@SO2 in patch X I had a pb of 0.55.100 but with patch Y I already managed 0.55.060 (and with a couple of gear misses).
PS. I don't know if SO2 has been shortened in patch Y or I have improved as a driver (or... both ) but with patch Y is certainly more fun!
All this fuss for a feature which from the driver's point of view gets LFS one step towards realism? Cars with no ignition-cut require you to lift-off the throttle during gear changes, those with ignition-cut don't.
As simple as that!
I don't care if it is the clutch, the drivetrain or whatever that gets worn when the gearbox is abused, I'm happy that flat-shifting is punished when it should be punished.
I am a "driving monkey" (meaning I don't really care for the mechanical stuff under my feet) and in my book LFS is more realistic now!