it is a fact that currently Porsche is 'famous' for the Cayenne, the Macan and the Panamera ... but seeing the 2012 Beetle (FWD with front engine) as a baby Porsche is total heresy (while older model were indeed baby Porsche).
by the way, those mysterious new type of vehicles may be this kind of toys :
THe only thing I would consider coming from Volkswagen as being a "baby Porsche" would be the Karman Ghia. I think I spelled it right. The Beetle is simple a car in its own right. You can make something as fast as a porsche with it, but it would really be a fast VW.
You Think it'll be bikes? LOL I had a demo of some Moto GP sim that I don't think got off the ground. You think Tire physics holds up things? ROFL wait til Scawen decides to get obsessed with shifting body weight.
If anyone could pull it off though, it'd be Scawen. Besides, I don't really whine for a particular model of car. Well ok, a 1968 version of an RB4.
If he did bikes? I'd probably get banned for constantly bringing up some sort of motorcycle or another. Me and probably fifty or sixty more of us.
Ok that baby posche maybe was too much,
Yea there are a lot of ideas for the new cars, just see the s3 cars post, as far as i understood the dev try to cover all areas of racing, i dont know if bikes will cover because is not the same turn in a car that turn the handle bar and tilt the bike at the same time,maybe that sidecar racing bikes could be an option.
I would like the dev cover several iconic kind of racing as i say on the other post
May I ask how you noticed that? At that point you had already recreated the Formula BMW. Did these flaws show up with that car as well or was the amount of data for the Scirocco just much bigger? Or does it have to do with ESP/ESC?
Put open diff on a FWD car (especially) in LFS, the car is not at all behaving correctly. So you have to do crazy thing in the setup to calm down the beast. I tried a lot to make the GTi to handle correct with open diff for testing purpose, and was not able to ... Who has never driven a FWD with open diff IRL ? I do not think they are handling that mad !
Yeah , he would have to associate with Piboso to speed up the thing ^^
Seriously, it could be possible to have something surprising (Scawen is a big fan of 2-wheels vehicles )
I really don't see the point of motorcycle games - with a driving sim you can at least set up a car-like cockpit with a wheel and pedals, but I've yet to see a motorcycle sim controller.
Besides, the whole idea behind riding a bike is that the shifting of the rider's weight is what keeps it under control and going around corners. I don't see how that can be effectively simulated without factoring in some sort of sense of balance...
On a bike, you actually control the balance/lean by steering, especially on heavier bikes or at higher speeds. That said I think the different types of vehicles being referred to are carts/trucks, as Scawen said the current tire model doesn't work well with tires sized differently than what we currently have.
Well, it's just going to be like fighting games on a gamepad and FPS with keyboard and mouse. For the majority of games the control method isn't anywhere realistic. I feel quite ok using joystick/gamepad with bike games.
Well I certainly haven't driven any real car the way I'd typically do in LFS, which is at the limit.
But the handling differences could stem from a combination of problems. I'm thinking of the suspension here. The FWD cars in LFS all have trailing arm rear axles. But we don't know at which angle they are attached to the chassis. Real life torsion beam axles pivot around angled mounts (so the toe angle changes if the wheels deflect differently i.e. during corners), made possible by rubber bushings and the fact that steel is not perfectly rigid, but flexible. Both of which I assume is not modeled in LFS, same goes for chassis flex. We also don't know much about the steering geometry, do we? (Honest question there) Edit: "Parallel Steering" seems to be responsible for this, but we don't know which geometry applies to 0%. That would also be a hard thing to find out about real life counterparts (Citroën AX, VW Polo?)
So maybe, just maybe, Scawen is "blaming" too much on the tyre model. If the handling problems are distributed among several issues with the physics model, he couldn't expect the new tyre model to solve everything.
But again I don't know what kind/amount of data Scawen has to work with.
Edit2: Has the suggestion been brought up to display suspension stuff in "Shift+F" forces view?
For suspension we have Shift-L view, but maybe you meant something more advanced showing how the forces are transferred to car body etc. I vaguely remember some plans for suspension improvements being also mentioned a long time ago in connection with the tyre model.
I agree with you, but in this case the key word is 'simulator'.
Nice find - not a sim controller though, as they say: "As a first impression this may look like a video game, but in fact, the monitor displays video recordings made by “on-board” cameras at different circuits used during the World Championship season."
Sounds like it's the motorcycling equivalent of a treadmill... but it probably wouldn't be too difficult to make it into a control device.
That reminds me of the Hellcat in IL2. To operate the landing gear you must realistically crank a wheel. Now since no one ever produced a flight-sim landing gear crank wheel controller, you use the keyboard.
There's also this funny Lewis machine gun on SE5a's in Rise of Flight, that you can realistically elevate to fire upwards. Now since no one ever produced a Lewis machine gun elevation controller, you use the keyboard.
There was also this awesome submarine simulator called 688i. Now since no one made a proper sim sonar operator panel, you use the mouse.
Funny I don't remember any racing wheel controller that came with a keyhole ignition. I guess if you stall in LFS you have to use the keyboard as well.
If you can't see the point of adapting whatever's available to control the sim of choice, then you're left with only computer simulators I'm afraid.
I personally feel that there is a minimum requirement for a simulator experience - for driving, you need a wheel; for flying, you need a joystick; and so on. if you need to replace the entire control system with something completely different, then you're not really simulating.
So, all that leaning into corners they do is just for show?
It's an old discussion that always brings up arguments whenever it appears, but the main force to make a bike turn is applied through the bars. For example, to turn right, push on your right hand or pull on the left. This momentarily makes the wheel turn left. This has two effects that make the bike lean to the right. A gyroscopic effect that instantly causes a bit of lean to the right, and also the steering effect of the rubber on the ground aiming left also makes the bike lean to the right. Now, the leaning of the bike itself (to the right) applies a gyroscopic effect that makes the bars turn right.
So, quite strangely, but this is very easy to feel, when you push the bars left the bike leans right and the bars turn to the right. It's very easy to feel, just get on a bike, ride along, hold the bar with one hand. Do not move your body at all relative to the bike, and just push forward or backward gently with the hand that is on the bar.
This applied force can actually be quite hard on a medium to large motorbike. You can give it a serious push forward on the right bar to make the bike lean rapidly to the right, and another good push on the left to flick the bike back over to the left. This comes with experience though so please be careful. You can test it with a pedal bike but the force to apply is quite small.
The positioning of the body left and right in road racing is mainly to allow the centre of gravity to be further leaned without parts of the bike scraping on the ground. Also when the lean isn't quite so extreme, some lateral body movement can help to keep the centre of gravity above the contact point (which moves left and right if you have wide tyres). [EDIT: By "above" in the previous sentence I don't mean vertically above, but in the direction of the bike's vertical axis.] With considerable lean the bike is happier to sit at a given angle with the rider moved left or right a bit but this body movement is not the principle force that makes the bike lean in the first place.
My ride has 6 cylinders and weighs 800 pounds. I can lean any which way I want, but if I don't initiate the turn, it'll still go straight.
It's hard for my uneducated @ss to explain how this works out.
Oh and when I was talking about shifting weight, I really meant the effects from leaning forward and back on the bike. Not just sitting up and hunching down but actually shifting forward and back. Sorry. I'm just not smart enough to put this into words, but I'm fixing to go out and do it though