I think the way the terminology and words are published in any official Netkar posts/reports... it is all just sound too complex for how simple it really is. Nearly most simulations have these "dynamic behaviours", but they all do it in a different way. And of course, some have more or less complex tire models for their physics engine. I mean, LFS has a good amount of "bite" at an adequate pace, and if you push it, you of course are going to get some sliding feel.
Scawen has said that he knows the tire issues at hand currently in LFS, and it will be worked on. I know for one, low-speed grip is the biggest issue, that'll be nice once that is fixed. There are issues with some cars sliding in a snappy behaviour at medium and high speeds... but as it may seem a bit tooo excessive, there are any number of things that create the sliding in LFS.
People don't seem to understand the NUMEROUS complications that cause the cars to slide in LFS. And then they just go off on a tantrum about why the tires suck... blah blah.
It can be anything from:
-Hot tires (poor pressure and compound choice)
-Suspension settings
-Steering activity (too strong, too wild)
-Braking and Steering causing the car to throw itself around (thus heating up the tires from a bad slide)
-They simply just do NOT know the track, and need more practice. (They feel like a superhero and can drive any car or track instantly)
... the list goes on. And once you get a setup that can complete a race comfortably and not have you worrying about the "slippery" tires, you can find that the tire model is not all that bad. It does have its shortcomings, but those should be fixed, no doubt. And at least... that will make the driving in LFS ten times more enjoyable, with or without all this advanced mumbo jumbo Netkar is known for (I mean come on... if the simulation feels great, it is built great... words & propaganda mean absolutely nothing until you've experienced it all first hand)
Don't know what simulations you've been playing them, the Papy sims had a decent degree of 'bite', even GPL had it when it was supposed to, unlike any ISI 'sim' I've ever tried, they all just feel like floating above the track. nK namie didn't feel too great in the formula Renault or any of the closed wheel cars, but was simply awesome in the F3000 despite the ropey tire model its still the most engrosing simulation to date IMO (at a few tracks like Falkenberg + Crystal Palace) despite its poor graphics. The second most engrosing sim for me is the GTP mod for N2003.
I don't find LFS to be intensive like nK + GTP and for this reason it takes maybe 20 minutes of lapping each time I start it up to get back into it after driving the other two. Once your aclimatised to LFS's 'feel' it's pretty good, excelent in fact for everything apart from the LXs and open wheel cars. The tire model isn't bad and I don't think that has anything to do with the small issues I have with it when racing, certainly the aerodynamics model leaves a little to be desired, I'm not sure if running high nosed cars accurately effects their handling? I'd still put most of LFS's problems down to the lack of structural stiffness, a car like a Caterham will flex and being so light you really feel the difference when it doesn't and as usual I'll have to rant about the UF1, which IMO has absolutley no relationship to a Mini, you just have to look at a Mini bodyshell to realise that you could never make an open topped racing car from it, if the devs want an open car that's fine but a Mini is not a suitable carto choose for the purpose.
I have to disagree on this (though this is getting little offtopic). I just haven't been able to find/create a set for RAC/LX6/FZ5 where there wasn't that snappy feeling.
As to the differences between nk pro tires and LFS... how much do we actually know about each? As nk pro is just publishing its first real playable incarnation they want to emphasize the differences it has over other products. Of course I'm eagerly waiting the 10th day of the next month but I won't hold my breath. As tweaker said it's all words on paper, there isn't even a good video of it yet
EDIT: But the "total realism"-approach of nk pro is very appealing to me.
That whole 3 stage model sounds a bit dodgy to me - surely it should be a seamless transition? You have a few curves - slip angle : lateral grip, slip ration : longitudinal grip, tyre load : grip etc etc. When you isolate the effects of each one you should get a reliable, seamless equation for grip... Unless the value of the slip angle changes the tyre load sensitivity, but this could still be expressed with an equation, albiet a bit hard to determine. I wonder if you can actually feel the tyre model switching between stages in NKpro - ie. all of a sudden you feel like the laws of physics have changed... that would feel odd... And I'm not sure if the tyre flex is simulated in NKpro...
Caterhams are cars you drive with the seat of the pants, something you can't do in a sim, and there are two ways of going about 'solving' this (imo). One, make the sim more forgiving so aren't punished for the lack of feel or, two, just make the tyre behaviour as real as possible but risk getting 'flamed' for having cars that are too hard to control.
I think the LX6 is very hard to drive on the limit constantly and I suspect that's because of it's high power combined with the known shortcomings of LFS's tyres at high slip angles and low speeds. But the LX4 is sweet as. You can feel it squirm on the sidewalls, hold four wheel drifts through corners (though the tyre temp model with punish for driving like this) and generally be at one with the car. If you watch that "Whose Fault was it" Caterham video you'll see just how realistic the LX4 is, and how physical and nervous a real caterham is on the limit.
@ajp71 --- I never argued against any simulations (come on now ajp71, you've been though this way too many times, and still at it)... I clearly said that most simulations have good tire models, but all are done in a different way, and as an end result, they all feel different. I think you don't understand what I was saying.
My point was about that was that what is said for any simulation, is that however they explain their tire models, the conclusions are drawn once you drive the simulation... however detailed and concise the explanations may be on the tire model (like above), it has absolutely no precedence for being the 'best' tire model... it is all in how it feels. Which is not what the thread starter seems to understand. Because 1) the game isn't even out yet (this is just community interest knowledge), and 2) LFS doesn't 'lack' these things in its tire model, and I am pretty sure it is quite similar. But again, the results are given in how well the tire model is done once you drive the game. So overall, the point being that the most popular simulations have some good and bad tire models... and that judgement call is ALWAYS based upon people's opinions of how it felt, NOT through all the technical talk (which is only used to back up reasons for having a good or bad tire model)
And for crying out loud, Papy's GPL was good, floaty, but good. But the most enjoyable tire model comes from NR2003, no doubt about that. So if you would just get off that mindset that I only think LFS has the greatest of all things :rolleyes: It would be very easy to have a conversation here ajp71... and you wouldn't go on about your stupid UF convertable structural abilities rants.... heard it plenty of times already!!!
I also honestly don't think structural stiffness is the problem with some of the little tire issues people gripe about anyways. Clearly things are wrong with the tires, and a lot has been talked about them... quite in-depth I might add. And there are a few huge threads that go on and on about that. It isn't a dumbfounding mystery we all have to solve when it comes to LFS, it is pretty easily noticeable what needs to be fixed, and kudos to Scawen for saying he'd fix it.
That is a bit worrying, because at first when S2 came out, this was a problem for everyone. I had some terrible snappy sets that I could just not deal with. Now if you go and try a few world record sets and others that are circulating, they are VERY NICE and stable. Just because you cannot find a setup without a certain performance issue, doesn't mean that the tire model is entirely at fault.
Here is where the personal preference comes in. For me the only sims without the floaty feeling are the GPL, nkar namie and LFS. Everything else feels just floaty with little or none feeling at all. Btw. rFactor is way better though than the rest of isi creations but it still lacks here. imho
I think the LX6 would be a prefect ride if there was a completely flat track on LFS. The car just doesn't like bumps (or me). But again comparing sims comes always down to personal preference. For some people rfactor behaves exactly like they expect a real car to behave or they just like it. Same thing with every sim
@tweaker : so basicaly what you're sayin is all that talkin bout NK pro is BS, right ? (i know you didnt SAY it was BS, but it sounds like it to me )
anyway, whatever you meant remains your opinion that i actually dont agree with , and i even think that NK pro is really promissing concerning tire physics..
you mention that some might have bad setups, or tires heat issues that makes the LFSian car hard to handle, is this an excuuse ?? ..the thing is , in LFS you have to have a diffrent setting "approach" and despite the fact you're good or not at setting up cars..it's like you're setting the car for rain conditions to prevent that brutal spining, and adapting you driving and/or setups to some "false" and wrong behavors isn't really exciting IMO..i really think you're not really objective when it comes down to LFS, as many others here by the way..but whatever.
@ajp71 : i agree with you there when you brought up NR2003 and GTP...it just feels so grippy and even with the worst setup in the world you still have that grip/bite feeling!
i know LFS is still an alpha and whatnot..i just hope that LFS will reach that NK or NR2003/GTP tire physics level someday........ and by the way , it's been a long time i havent gone for a spin on LFS and i wont till a patch for tires is out, and at the mean time im gonna get that Nk pro when it's out by the end of this month..
You started a thread, asked for an opinion and when someone gave one that differs from your initial mind-set, you flamed them! You just threw the guy's opinion, which you asked for, back in his face. There is no denying that LFS tyre physics lack in certain aspects - and Tweaker admitted that. You say that you hope LFS reaches NK tyre physics levels some day like you already know what NK physics are like. The fact of the matter is that you don't know what NK drives like and you don't know how tyres are modelled in LFS because Scawen hasn't given us a detailed description so you have no basis for such a statement. If you are here to cause shit with this thread then a moderator should please close it ASAP. If you are here to have a decent conversation
then do so.
No not BS at all. Those statements (if coming from NK officially) could be very well all true. But if you notice these days with a lot of simulations, they get more attention and hype before the game even comes out... just by posting some gratifying reads that the community just loves to oogle about. Happened with a lot of past simulations, and still happens whenever something news arises. Take rFactor for example. Soooo much was said and discussed about that simulation... had me VERY interested just like NetKar has done too. BUT, once the game came out, it was a complete failure to me, it did NOT meet my expectations that I interpreted from their stupid reads and pre-release hype mumbo. I am not saying NetKar will do the same, but rFactor is just an example of how "iffy" these reads can be... which is why it isn't so smart to request something for LFS from a simulation that has not even been widely tested/played. Once NK comes out, only then could these explanations you read about be used to reinforce why the tire model is so good, or so bad.
I know what you mean about setting your car to adapt to the slippery physics, that is present with most setups with most of the cars in LFS. But still, the tire model overall is great in LFS regardless of that point because the setups ARE being made PROPERLY in order for the car to make grip. Think of it this way... If you had a sportscar that had trouble with slippery rear-end grip, and you had the chance to fix it via the car's setup, you'd have to give the car very similar settings as you would in LFS. The only downside is, we are making setups for the lack of a specific kind of grip that fails at a certain maximum. Like as if we had some poorly made tires that collapse from fright . Once that is fixed, the feel for LFS will be great, and I am sure people will approve of it and we won't have to be making setups that try and alleviate the sliding.
As for objective... yeah... to your contradiction... I can recall when you said everyone was "fukin' retards" online the other night because nobody agreed with you :rolleyes: :doh: Gimme a break, relax yourself.
you should relax dude, i only gave my own opinion, i aint preventing anyone from giving his/her opinions...i dont see no flaming or such thing on my post, i was just just comparing the 2 sims concerning their tire phisics..i think you should calm down abit instead of jumping on people's necks like that and stop being dramatic pls, no use..
How's that? The guy just told you that he thinks LFS physics does lack in certain aspects and you call him un-objective? What else do you want him to say? And LFSers aren't objective as opposed to the rFactor boys? And of course let's not forget the GTR boys who will flame you for wondering about Unsprung Mass Distribution and things like that... I may have gotten hold of the wrong end of the stick here and found the minority of posts that stand out as bad, but I don't think that anyone in the LFS forums will just post in your complex physics discussion thread just to tell you that he thinks you are a dumbass.
On the completely opposite extreme - on this forum you get some very objective discussions:
first we're talkin bout NK vs LFS here not "all the other sims" , second you said it yourself "hose statements (if coming from NK officially) could be very well all true.", i think NK guys are pretty serious , i guess.. i also compared it to GTP and NR2003 for more specific references..now , i think you got my idea ayway...
concerning your sweet memories from online, you also forgot to recall why i said "f**** retards, but hey , you couldnt help it but bring that shit up here anyway, huh ? the sad truth is there are some retards online really..but i dont think it's the topic of this thread neither the right place to quote things that happen Online..you may wanna stay on topic ..and if you have anythin to say bout the online bitching or whatever , you're more than welcome to PM bout it so you'll get the proper answer to that.. once again , let's stay on topic pls. thx.
nothin is wrong bout what i said ,actually i meant he might not be objective, so now you may wanna take it easy and lose that attitude ok? and thx for calling me a dumbass (i wont reply to that here even if im able to say a lotta thing bout you too)..chill out now and stop posting here if u dont like the thread, im kinda sick of you being dramatic from the start..back to the topic.
I've just been on MSN smiling sweetly really - can't say I've done a great deal of helping as the RAF/CMX/SMX stuff just confuses me most of the time...
I wouldn't have bothered replying again this time if you hadn't put words in my mouth, saying that I called you a dumbass. If you have a language issue that's your problem, but if you read carefully you'd see that I was refering to someone asking a physics question on the GTR forums being called a dumbass for wondering about such things.
As you say, back to topic. There isn't much to say on it except we know how the LFS model drives and it is currently one of the closest representations of the real world out there. We have no idea how the NK model drives because noone has driven it. We know how the NK model works in terms of how they have gone about simulating physics. We have little such information about the LFS model apart from what is simulated in it - we do not know the methods used. Little basis for comparison, don't you think? illepall
As for the NK guys being serious about NK Pro, that they are. The question still remains - are they serious about simulating physics like the LFS people, or are they serious about making money and is this a big facade to get people interested? That question shall be answered when people actually drive NK and give their opinoin. This thread is pointless until then, so when you throw an insult or put words in someone's mouth, don't expect people to stay on topic because there really isn't one.
EDIT: Shotglass, it is coming along nicely - thanks for asking. For more information, you are free to visit our wiki at http://monkster.hopto.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?TractionBudget and take a look at what we have. There's still quite a bit of work. I've really done about as much as tristan - digging up physics formulae and arranging them in a sensible manner for our programmer (MonkOnHotTinRoof).
Sorry tweak if you took my post the wrong way, obviously I can't draw conclusions about nK pro yet although in terms of feel the only 3 simulations I've ever thought feel even remotely 'right' have been Papy, nK and LFS.
To what Tristan said about the LXs I would argue that the LX4 is still far too nervous, although it's important to remember it's on road tires. As for the video neither of them really had much of a clue as to what they were doing, far too agressive not driving smoothly or setting the car up nicely into corners, to an extent you just couldn't do in LFS.
The fastest Caterhams I've seen have always been the ones that are actually setup with minimal oversteer and even a touch of understeer. It rather concerns me that the fastest people in LFS seem to drive at such ludicrous angles, whether no one fast has explored different setup philosophies or whether there are physics bugs I don't know.
I'd be suprised if nK turns out to be anything other than an extremely serious simulation, it is offering keyboard support this time and none cockpit views, but is not offering any driving aids, so don't expect keyboard users to be competitive anymore. It's also offering server filters to force cockpit view and not allow keyboard/mouse users.
yeah, i think i went a bit too fast reading your post since you seemed pretty agressive from the start... my mistake on that one then.. as for insulting people, come on, i dont think i insulted anyone here...that's a bit too much..anyway, how bout GTP/NR2003 vs LFS tires ? i already mentioned it in some posts above..is it more specific to you to come up with a conclusion ? how bout the feeling anyway ?
im gonna add GTP/NR2003 in the tillte topic by the way.
no cockpit view ? i thought i read on NK RSC forum there gonna be a cockpit..it's in the unofficial FAQ stiky..or maybe we're not talkin bout the same cockpit view ..
Well, my opinion on LFS tyres since S2 has been that they are pretty good overall - I get a good feeling when I drive LFS. My body tenses up and I know what's going on. Gotta concentrate when driving something with a big power to weight ratio but I'd say that's the same in real life. There are the obvious low-speed grip issues and the issue with the rate of regaining of grip but the overall model is solid and has potential to be very close to real life under almost all conditions. The issues are aknowledged and being worked on with a patch in the not-too-distant future... I don't think I can give an objective opinion on how good the LFS tyre model currently is and nor can most people. This is because I have been driving LFS so long that I know the model and it has become my reality. The only true objective opinon can come from an unbiased racing driver or the like who has not driven LFS before. I think the coming patch will set the benchmark for tyre physics realism though (I may be wrong but that is my current feeling). Even if NK sets the benchmark when it is released I think that the new LFS patch is likely to claim it back when released (I'd say no more than a month later). As for NR2003 and GTP, I can't say I have spent much time with them...
and by the way , it's been a long time i havent gone for a spin on LFS and i wont till a patch for tires is out, and at the mean time im gonna get that Nk pro when it's out by the end of this month..
..and if you have anythin to say bout the online bitching or whatever , you're more than welcome to PM bout it so you'll get the proper answer to that.. once again , let's stay on topic pls. thx.
illepall 