Well I don't think the physics will ever be good enough to get you to the level where you can switch from sim to real life (and vice versa) and be just as fast.
Instead of the BF1 at Blackwood, imagine a real life Blackwood and a radio controlled real life '06 BMW F1 car. Even with perfect control response and crystal clear VR display, do you really think that because you might be able to do 30 fast laps in their radio control setup (with 100% perfect physics) you could get in the car itself and come anywhere close?
I don't think anyone has said that LFS physics are perfect, but they are good. The fundamental things that you have to do with your feet and your hands in LFS do transfer directly to real cars. The other differences betweens sims and real-life are far greater nowadays imo, and they always will be.
True but irrelevant - a very obvious 'straw man'.
I wasn't even considering that your argument is in any way a criticism of or challenge to LFS.
What this current discussion is about is whether 'driving skills' developed in a sim can help with real world driving.
For my part, you could replace LFS with GPL, iRacing, rFactor etc. and the points are still valid and the argument still stands.
I'm not bothered about VWS either, or tracks for that matter.
A decent update to the physics makes all cars new cars.
Any update to physics of the track surface - marbles, wet weather etc. would make all tracks new tracks.
Thats where the value is IMO
Let's keep in mind that this topic was originally for the tire physics, and, I think somewhere we all started to think there hasn't been a report, let the relation between LFS driving and real driving go somewhere else. All we want right now is an update, at least, to say where things are.
Exactly. I don't know why some people say that there wasn't a report long time ago. In the latest progress report, the developers said everything they are working on. Now they are working on it and they don't have anything new to write about. That's how I see it.
Not sure what a 'straw man' is, I am assuming clutching at straws? If so then I don't believe so, I said my piece and I stick by it. I am in my last few months of my Psychology degree and I fully agree that driving in a racing sim helps strengthen and refine the schemas used for race driving. But, my argument if you want to get more scientific is that the skills you develop in LFS are not directly mappable to those used in real life. I believe this comes from the lack of 100% realism in the physics but also the lack sensation. More specifically, when you are driving a real car you can feel so much more, through the seat, the wheel, gravity, everything and this activates a far more broader aspect of the mind. Put it this way, how much easier is it to get 'in the zone' in a RL kart than the MRT in LFS? A lot more, where the knowledge of control and prediction of the car will be similar, and practice in LFS will help you here by making your actions more second nature, you need to develop the RL experience in order to develop your RL driving skills.
Now hopefully you can see where my COD illustration came from. It's not a comparison, but a more extreme example to make it easier to understand my point.
I don't think this thread could get any more off topic lol. Until theres an update in it I don't think theres any harm derailing it as it keeps it active and hopefully in the moderators eye!
Yes it is, I'd highly recommend it, im actually studying a dual honours Computer Science & Psychology and psy is by far the most interesting. You can pretty much see everything from it as it covers so much from driving to music even the psychology of trees!
Awesome, when I graduated high school I received my Comp/TIA A+ IT Certification, got enough insight on electrical engineering to know it's not something I want to pursue, good luck with that. I was thinking med school, or psychology for now. Psychology is by far more enthralling.
You said your bit? Seems to me you choose a differn't argument and just say whatever completely contradicts the person you are posting too, so your points just go against each other, once again, your just arguing with yourself.
You've all been arguing and this is the only thing we can see since page 10 or something like that. You guys should take a break
LFS is a game, but it has good physics and that helps people being closer to real life. However, even with a dynamic cockpit (I mean one that moves around) you can't feel like you really are driving a real car. But you can at least use your hands and your feet like you would in LFS (if you have a wheel...) so it truly helps in real life, although it's very different.
Now getting back on topic, I too would like to have a test patch with the new physics and scirocco, because yes, I really want them, but also because people could find bugs. Now I know we may have to wait for a long time, and I can understand it, and I'll wait for the next progress report, if there is one.
Straw man argument:
You can't find a good way to attack the opposing view in an debate so you set up a 'straw man' - a similar/related but different (and much weaker) argument, present it as the same argument, and then attack that instead.
You attempted to present this discussion as a "Valid LFS critic vs the fanboys" argument when it was not.
(it is a very common tactic here, and always a sign of a weak argument).
We have the Tyre Physics Progress report, we know the devs position on releasing information and on the dev process. There's not much else to say on that topic. At the same time, an interesting side debate has developed, so why not pursue that instead.
I only ever argue where I see fit and im used to debates far more intellectual and academic than a bunch of LFS fanbois! You could say that, but it would be under false pretension because my argument has stayed the same throughout otherwise why would I have a) bothered and b) stuck with it?! If anything can be salvaged from this argument it's that you et al have made multiple personal attacks including this one, sign of a weak argument? I most certainly think so.
Congrats, you have disguised that fact extremely well.
LOL, I was clearly attacking your argument, not making a personal attack.
Here's a hypothetical example of a personal attack for the sake of comparison:
"It beats me how someone as thick as you who doesn't have the first clue how to construct and defend a decent argument could make it through school let alone get into University. I worry for the future"
Can you see the difference between that and what I said earlier ?
He would be starting way above the zero level.. It would take a lot less time for him to reach level x, than for someone who hasn't driven simulators.
I think you are giving way too much weight to sensation, feeling and to the tiny physical details. The latter affects the less. It still helps a lot if the physics are somewhere close to realistic. I mean, all the cars are different, but if you have driven one, you can more easily learn to drive another one.
Feelings and sensation will make it hard for first, but you will get used to them quite fast. And how much those affects, it heavily depends on individual.
Controlling a car is mostly coming from muscular memory, you don't have time to think it in your cognitive consciousness while driving. Training muscular memory is slow process, and to some level, you can train it in simulator. And it makes it easier (faster) to learn IRL racing.
Uh, the COD part was joke i hope. But what comes to war, military uses a lot of simulators as a training tool. And so does flight companies and NASA. I think they know what they are doing, better than you.
You can learn to be a better tank driver, gunner, helicopter pilot, astronaut, airplane pilot, etc... by practicing in simulator. You can also learn to be a better car driver.
They use simulators in driving schools nowdays. And bus simulators have been used for a long time to educate bus drivers.
If you are only saying that driving in LFS doesn't make you michael schumacher, then wtf are you doing? Do you just want to provoke? That's totally obvious to everybody that it doesn't.
But it helps a lot, ALSO in terms of being able to control it. And shortens the learning curve.
Can you define what you mean by 'racing dynamics'. If it includes knowledge of weight transfer, and the ability to control it using throttle and brakes, and the knowledge of how it affects the car in different situations, then yes i agree with you. And by knowledge i don't mean the knowledge you get from reading the book, but what you get from practicing. The ability to make correct actions in a split of a second, without thinking it. Like a reflex, action coming from muscular memory.
After you get used to g-forces, and get over the sensor overflow, and the sensation and feelings messing your mind, the knowledge you have gained from simulator is there. And you can use it. At that point it's very far from zero level you mentioned earlier.
But if you have never driven a car fast, near to the limits, you should not think you can handle it even if you are LFS WR holder. Only after you get used to it, the feeling that your life (or health at least) is on your hands RIGHT NOW, and be able to stay totally focused and calm in that thrilling moment, you start to get advantage from simulator training. But that's not a big step, not nearly as big as you describe it. It wasn't for me at least. I got used (addicted) to that feeling when doing "down-hill" with my mountain bike at 7years old, and never looked back since.
The hard part in simulators is that you don't get that feeling. And it's much harder to stay focused and concentrated than IRL, and your mind starts to wonder around and then you find yourself making stupid mistakes. So IRL racing doesn't necessarily make you better sim racer, that's for sure. I think rosberg has very hard time finding the motivation and concentration to drive the simulator like he drives the real thing. I drive simulators coz i don't have the money to drive the real thing nearly as often i would like, and i'm not fast enough to get someone to pay the bills.
Rubbish. You have contradicted yourself at the core of your argument. Bawbag pointed this out and you have done nothing to address his point other than a desperate attempt to imply that he is too stupid to understand.
As far as LFS and real driving, you may have a valid argument. You obviously think you do, but until you admit that some of what you've written is contradictory, and some ambiguous, and then start again, making it clear what your point is, you're just making yourself look foolish.
Even then, many people may not argee with you, and you don't seem to have any empirical evidence to back up your claims.
I just wanted to bump this thread to ask something to the devs (if they read what's written here):
Coud you please show some screens or a short video of the new physics, more precisely the smoke? The one I saw from the progress report looks very different, and I would like to see how it looks like in more details.