some new netkar pro screens [Archive]

Shotglass

1st December 2005, 21:19

a bit off topic ... there are a few words on the license system of netkar in the latest development diary (http://www.drivingitalia.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=24201):
The licence is personal and will follow the driver and it will be generated against the driver/PC combination.
So yes, if you are 2 brothers sharing one PC you'll need 2 licences, and yes if you have 3 PCs u'll need 3 licences.
That's a shame and quite an hassle I know, but I didn't invent software piracy and I need to deal with it somehow, it's funny how honest people have to pay the price everytime for that too, but that's another story.

theres also a bit of follow up discussion about this and specifically about what happens to your license if you change your hardware ... its in italian though (and i dont speak italian and my spanish is rusty at best)
could anybody please translate this for me ?

JJ72

1st December 2005, 21:46

Well, in all honestly, that kicks ass.

In all honestly, that's very impressive work provided that Netkar is just a part time developed project.

In all honestly, I WANT VISUAL TIRE DEGRADTION LIKE THAT!!

In all honestly, I wish LFS to look somehow like that, even just in screenshots.

And as I remember, Netkar feels and drives pretty well.

Maybe it's just a kind of inspiration/competition LFS needs to be a step better,I mean, can you say no to THAT?

Shotglass

1st December 2005, 22:35

In all honestly, I wish LFS to look somehow like that, even just in screenshots.

those shots all look like a bunch of boxes with (good looking) high res textures on them (except the cars)

Matrixi

1st December 2005, 22:35

There isn't much to look at. They are only showing off a few pretty car models. Have to admit, that tire wearing texture thing does look good. If they would wan't to impress people, they should post a movie showing off the physics. I just HOPE, that game isn't based on the GTR game engine.

tristancliffe

1st December 2005, 22:46

I think it's entirely Stefano's engine.

Hyperactive

1st December 2005, 22:55

My biggest fear about that netkar is that it has the same floating physics as every other racing sim wannabe. LFS feels like driving a car, not hover ...ehm... vehicle...

As long as there is a demo without adware I'm going to give it an objective hyperactive testing ;)

JJ72

1st December 2005, 23:10

those shots all look like a bunch of boxes with (good looking) high res textures on them (except the cars)

I can't really tell how that that impression came from, as all you find in the screenshots is the car and the track surface. If you are referring to the pitboxes, then I would agree that the shading seems a bit flat and exaggarated. However if "bunch of boxes" is referring to the 3d modelling of the building then I think most of the pitboxes looks that way, which doesn't matter alot since you only see them once in a lap. However don't you think the car is beautiful? :nod:

If they can make the car look that good (especially the tires), then the building in comparison is a minor flaw, which can be easily improved. (and it's quite early to comment before they release more shots of the racetracks.)

But I'm quite confident to say if you put the current blackwood model into this graphical engine it will look ten times better then what they presented here. :D

deggis

1st December 2005, 23:17

I don't find those screenshots THAT good-looking or better looking than LFS.

Too bad that it will contain only three Formula cars. Because my lack of interest in real life F1 championship I don't find driving formulas interesting at all... not even in LFS. :|

How about the sounds in NetKar Pro? Resampled or generated?

durbster

2nd December 2005, 08:59

How about the sounds in NetKar Pro? Resampled or generated?

Both :)

Kunos/Stefano is experimenting with a synthetic sound engine but unless it's significantly better than a sample based one, they'll ship both and give the user the option.

For anyone wondering about the physics, nKPro is an evolution of what was basically a hobby project a few years ago before the developer decided to go full time on it. The old version is still available, free and you can download it from locations found here:

http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=220656

In those days, each car had slightly different physics so some drive better than others but in my humble opinion, despite being a few years old, the single-seaters are still by far the most accurate simulation around. They're truly awesome to drive. Some of the other cars are a bit nuts - the Ferrari GTO and Zonda are worryingly unstable :)

Anyway, it's a free download so I'd recommend you try it for yourself but if you do, make sure you spend more than a few minutes with it because they're a bitch to drive on cold tyres, and it does take some time to get used to how nK drives.

There is a half-decent multiplayer option with Namie but it was new and the lobby system wasn't working properly. It takes a lot of effort to get it up and running, and can be a bit unstable at times, but it's fun when you get there.

Remember that it was basically a hobby back then so there are obviously bugs and issues with it but when out on track and driving you should see the quality.

And nKPro will be a full product, so consider Namie and then multiply :)

axus

2nd December 2005, 15:28

Nothing DX9 shaders can't do for LFS IMO. :smileypul And LFS is on its way to becomming a simulation of a bizillion different types of racing - Road Cars, GTR cars, Single Seaters on Normal Tracks, Ovals or Rally. The engine covers all those areas pretty closely if there are a few known bugs floating around. The one thing I do have to congratulate the nK Pro dev's on is the interiors... WOW. Still if you take those out of the equation... LFS S2 can have equal if not better graphics with DX9 shaders, more racing posibilities and a rigerously tested physics engine (thanks to the testing from thousands of people and their input while LFS is still WIP) by the time nK Pro comes along...

tristancliffe

2nd December 2005, 15:33

Very True Axus. The cockpits do look nice. And I like (as I've said before) the tyre textures. Not sure about the sidewalls though...

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, so I'll wait until I get to drive NetKar before I hype it up or slam it down. But I can't see it beating LFS my much really. Competition is good anyway. It'll make Scawen work 20 hour days again. So much for kitchen improvements.

Tweaker

2nd December 2005, 15:38

Looks pretty good, but they really gotta cut it out with the sharpening, it is so obvious. Maybe they want to really bring out the 'detail' of the shots....

If that is what it actually looks like, well then that'd be pretty hard on the eyes.

Also note, the first picture on the page, the skies are not seamless or whatever, you can see the mirrored sky right above the car, just a half sky texture. Carbon fibre looks horrid too.

The tire texture is nice too, seems pretty simple to have done, I can't see why LFS doesn't have that :p.

Lots of people say 'cartoony', but I have to disagree, it is something else (still just as bad as cartoony). If you want cartoony, play MotoGP in cartoon mode, that is cartoony. This graphics engine looks halfway decent for the most part, but it is highlighted and glared far too much to be believable. I remember one review on LFS noted that our graphics look pretty darn good even with shaders or what not... something like "Not too colorful, not too saturated" (from AutoSimSport review iirc). If you look at a few other new 'shader' games, you will note that some developers get it right, some don't. Halflife 2 has looked the best in my opinion, maybe there are better looking games, but Doom 3 looks the worst, all shiny and crap, just way too excessive. I could compare a lot of the new simulations to Doom 3 (rFactor and this NetKar). I have yet to see a more believable graphics engine, hopefully LFS will be the one. I just cannot stand playing games that are so 'glossed up'... it just spoils the feel of making it look real. Just look at photos of race tracks, or goto one and see how different it looks compared to these 'bling bling graphics' in these games. Amazing how a good sim is so infatuated with silly graphics enhancements.

axus

2nd December 2005, 15:45

Dunno - the tyres seem to reflect WAY too much light. Compare those tyres with the ones on the cars here (http://www.fotostudiodonati.it/public/images/upload/1114609493LR9F0329-3.jpg) and it almost looks like nK is out of a cartoon. The degredation model is nice - I must admit. Have they simulated the different types of tyre degredation though? I was reading an interesting article at some stage - there is graining and two other types I can't remember which all have different effects on grip. Each of the three ware types makes different changes to the tyre's grip in a straight line (mainly under braking and out of slow corners), the tyre's grip around corners and the tyre's slip angle to grip curve. That would be impressive and nice to have in LFS... but only once the current tyre model is sorted.

JJ72

2nd December 2005, 15:49

I think of suspect they tuned up the contrast and sharpened the screenshot quite a bit before releasing cos the sharpness looks quite aftertouch-ish to me.

We need a video to do it justice.

Tweaker

2nd December 2005, 15:52

Only other problem i see with the tire wear texture... it is ALL one texture on the tire, rather than inner/middle/outer. So basically, it seems now they only have it wear for one area, rather than make it appear worn more on the edges, as it should. I may sound picky because it doesn't have that... but hey, if you attempt to simulate visual tire wear differences, why not do that? Hopefully they do get that done.

sinbad

2nd December 2005, 17:05

Dunno - the tyres seem to reflect WAY too much light. Compare those tyres with the ones on the cars here (http://www.fotostudiodonati.it/public/images/upload/1114609493LR9F0329-3.jpg) and it almost looks like nK is out of a cartoon.

I don't think they are too reflective, but for argument's sake, new tyres are shiny, that's why the parts of the F1 tyres not scrubbed-in (the grooves) in your picture are reflecting a LOT of light, more than is reflected in any of the nK pictures in fact.

Anyway, as with any title, I'll wait and see. The ingredients are certainly good, far better than those that have gone into LFS (to my knowledge anyway) i.e support from an F3 team and access to the car, AVON tyres cooperation etc.

Tweaker

2nd December 2005, 17:15

Some slicks can be super shiny, but nowadays all I see on fresh cut slicks is a more foamy look, and they are hardly as shiny as some games represent these days. All this shiny tire stuff looks terrible. It is like too much bump mapping and reflection detail. Hardly looks like how a slick would look like in reallife.
Just look at some of these photos:

http://81.173.98.2/uploads/nieuws2005_zolder_superprix_fford_startronde1_1707 05.jpg
http://www.pittalk.nl/uploads/nieuws2005_zolder_superprix_fford_vuik1_170705.jpg
http://www.pittalk.nl/Fotoservice/120404FFPaas/medium_DSCF8665.jpg
http://www.jamotorsport.co.uk/2004_Photos/1o_the_championship_1.jpg

No sparkly slicks there :x Nor a sparkly track surface.

5th Earth

2nd December 2005, 23:03

XCNuse

3rd December 2005, 00:27

.. is it just me, or do the tires on the formula fords look WAY to skinny?

also; the tire wear looks pretty interesting, would love to see that in action

some of his textures look great too; just looking at the one picture of the F3000 leaving the pits showing off the rear.. that looks great

the skys look amazing; to dark for the lighting ingame, but texture wise they look great!

lol as for his carbon fiber F3000.. looks kinda funky i like it.. kinda funny because thats what it really looks like without paint

what i notice about netkars' textures well.. let me just say this; we need to buy eric a digital camera for "the holidays" (since its politically incorrect to say christmas...... thats crap lol) if you look at his trackside pictures
(this one in particular: http://www.drivingitalia.net/img_resize.php?orig=024.jpg&val=800&dir=/software/55/)
..they're real pictures, thats why it looks great
LFS could look like that if it had photorealistic textures

TagForce

3rd December 2005, 00:30

That second pic would be a good one to show the people who whine about the dirt being too severe. :scratchch
And a good one to show that we want different dirt patches for inner, middle, and outer contact patch.

deggis

3rd December 2005, 00:37

Video from some GT '70 mod for nKpro... altough it's from summer 2004: http://70gtmod.no-ip.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=2417

Italian home page for the mod: http://70gtmod.no-ip.com

I just cannot stand playing games that are so 'glossed up'... it just spoils the feel of making it look real. Just look at photos of race tracks, or goto one and see how different it looks compared to these 'bling bling graphics' in these games. Amazing how a good sim is so infatuated with silly graphics enhancements.
Blame consoles. These over-exaggerated bloom/blur effects started from console games. Now we have them in every game just with different name. In HL2 it's High Dynamic Range, in some games it's called post-processing etc. Usually it's like playing a game after eating a bag of LSD pills. :( In HL2 it looks pretty good but still a bit too over-exaggerated though.

Tweaker

3rd December 2005, 00:38

LFS could look like that if it had photorealistic textures
LFS would look like that if the devs opted for high resolution textures. The textures we have now are nowhere near the resolution of these textures. Which is a good decision on the LFS dev's part, since it can run in many systems, however... I still think some very high quality textures could be done by Eric, it is just the boundaries the devs try not to pass (memory usage, overall package filesize, etc). If we ever did get LFS in a super high quality package, it surely would be 700mb+ in size.

XCNuse

3rd December 2005, 00:48

not always though; need for speed did a good job making most wanted i think with this whole HD technology i think it looks pretty good (especially on PS2) yes it has blur effect, but not like it did in the undergrounds; NFSMW is currently the best graphical game i've ever seen; a few things are a little 'unreal' but for selling purposes surely

usually games these days make the tarmac reflect light.. good; that does happen, but not that much. In games, you get about 3x reflection than what is normal in life
look at this picture (or go outside and look down a street if the sun is out and look towards the sun)
http://www.desertwide.com/subdivisions/SunGroves2/street.jpg
a road doesnt really 'reflect' light; it diffuses light, and thats how it should look ingame, so far every game except NFSMW has literally reflected the lightsource itself and is weird looking
either way; i suggest some of you look at some of the videos at the NFSMW website showing how the made the game, because its pretty interesting (keep in mind this is not another need for speed underground; NFS is going back to its roots but taking a few things from underground with it)

Matrixi

3rd December 2005, 00:53

Even though it would be 700+ Mb, I think it would be quite cool to have an option to have those high quality textures. Just having another packet to download if you wanted them. People with low-end systems wouldn't have to download it of course but the lucky ones with high-end systems could just download the high-res texture add-on package and be happy :nod:

deggis

3rd December 2005, 02:15

(keep in mind this is not another need for speed underground; NFS is going back to its roots but taking a few things from underground with it)
LOL. It's still FAR away from the real NFS feeling. Still too much bling bling.

And I was about to say in my previous reply that Most Wanted is currently the most horrid example of these blur/bloom/post-processing/whatever LSD drug effects. The graphics are actually quite oldish but the blooming shit effects covers that... such a easy way to make games look "better".

dontsimon

3rd December 2005, 02:55

seggons

3rd December 2005, 10:38

Matrixi

3rd December 2005, 11:40

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=245&page=1&highlight=hemi

Yep, I know that stuff. Have it installed :) But what I meant was, a package that has all textures in high-res form, like grass, banners, tarmac.. the whole deal.

sinbad

3rd December 2005, 16:51

That second pic would be a good one to show the people who whine about the dirt being too severe. :scratchch

I don't understand what you mean there. Good to show them, why?
To me it shows that the drivers there don't care about getting dirt on their tyres. I can only assume that is because they don't feel the grip drops off that much when they do, and any minor amount of time they lose with dirty tyres is more than compensated for by making the small cut in the first place.

Did you see it a different way?

A. Whinorr

Takumi_Project.d

4th December 2005, 03:49

If we ever did get LFS in a super high quality package, it surely would be 700mb+ in size.

but wouldn't that be lovely for like a texture add on pack that was entirely optional to download after you download the game :) :nod:

axus

4th December 2005, 10:28

LFS would look like that if the devs opted for high resolution textures. The textures we have now are nowhere near the resolution of these textures. Which is a good decision on the LFS dev's part, since it can run in many systems, however... I still think some very high quality textures could be done by Eric, it is just the boundaries the devs try not to pass (memory usage, overall package filesize, etc). If we ever did get LFS in a super high quality package, it surely would be 700mb+ in size.

If we were to edit the .dds files in [LFS Folder]\data\dds could we resize them and make better textures? Would LFS still scale them and put them in the right places?

detail

4th December 2005, 12:25

If we were to edit the .dds files in [LFS Folder]\data\dds could we resize them and make better textures? Would LFS still scale them and put them in the right places?
I tried changing resolution of *.raw's in S1, it worked okay.

I wanted to remake my 2003 winter mod, tried to create trees with bare branches, changed the resolution of the pictures themselves and alpha channels, and this worked out, but caused a notable, heavy fps drop, mostly where the "real" trees were. They use quite a lot of resourses and caused problems. Judging by the decrease of their amount in S2, the "real" trees are not as good as the devs hoped at the S1 stage.

durbster

4th December 2005, 12:29

So has anyone tried the namie version of netKar yet? I've just had a blast after not touching it for over a year, and it instantly felt brilliant.

When nKPro is released, I've no doubt that LFS will have it's biggest competitor ever (well, the reality is that most people will probably get both ;)).

For those claiming it might be all about the graphics then you're quite wrong. They are in-game shots - no Photoshopping - taken from the replay mode which raises the graphic quality with the extra processing power normally used for physics. That idea is used in Gran Turismo so that screenshots always look superb.

But, don't let that fool you. The physics have always been the focus of nK. I'm sure this will be more hardcore than LFS as Stefano has a history of making no-compromises when it comes to realism. It's also worth noting that they have a number of motorsport partners involved including a Formula 3 team.

Another important element is that the release of nK will be followed by a development kit, allowing mods.

Anyway, there will be a demo on release so there's no need to take my word for it :)

ajp71

4th December 2005, 13:42

Tempted to go and find namie again, from what I remember NK was totally uncompromising, forced cockpit and most likely no keyboards. Just a different attitude, there's no point bitching about this the dev is totally determined to make it as realistic as possible regardless of any sales he looses from it.

LFS is actually the most forgiving of the 3 sims worth knowing about IMO (Papy, NK and LFS). The road cars weren't totally convincing, but the single seaters were just fantastic :D

ajp71

4th December 2005, 16:51

Downloaded it again and the physics are fantastic, the F3000 feels right, there is no difficulty in starting it without going round in circles yet when it's going the ground effects are amazing and it really looses its ground effects over bumps :D This is what the FO8 should be like. There's no question IMO that this beats LFS hands down in the physics department and like N2003 it is to satisfying to test on your own, whereas LFS is just lacking some of that magic and creates fairly boring hotlaping.

Screens straight from NK namie, remember this is free, the track (Falkenberg) was originally made for GPL and this is on my computer which doesn't do GTL/rFactor. The only setting which I touched was the screen resolution and it works brilliantly out of the box. FPS seems stable and although there is no FPS counter I'd guess it's about 45 ish (higher than LFS). Admitably these graphics are with one car.

There's no doubt in my mind that those screens are unedited, and like LFS and N2003 it looks like a real track and like it should do it feels slow when you're driving but extremely fast in the replays, which have fantastic cameras that actually seem to move realisticly.

Go and get it from www.nkzone.com

axus

4th December 2005, 17:51

Perhaps it beats LFS hands down in the Single-Seater physics department and the only SS car that has been around for a while in LFS is the MRT which hasn't got downforce. The road cars which have been around in LFS for ages are near perfect and have great feel to them. The SS department will improve once there has been some physics editing based on input after the rigerous testing from the community. Scawen is working on physics now AFAIK.

EDIT: Would it be that difficult to make some high-res textures ourselves and release a high-res texture pack? If we had ~10 people working on it won't be that much work and it will be great for the community - anyone up for it?

ajp71

4th December 2005, 17:59

Actually the road cars in LFS are no way near as realisic as NK is, I don't think Scawen actually programmed them to have that totally uncompromising edge that Kunos has, the fact that LFS is controllable with keys says it all, LFS is geared more towards multiplayer racing and usability, whereas NK is geared towards being as realistic as possible regardless of how much of the potential market it kills off.

Tweaker

4th December 2005, 18:04

There are still whacky bugs in the road car physics of Netkar though ajp71. Specifically terrain and certain edge clipping issues. I remember having them last time I played that namie version. Still felt WIP, but was ok to enjoy it for a while. nkPro looks promising indeed, since it most likely wont have that WIP feel to it like namie currently has.

ajp71

4th December 2005, 18:14

I know what you mean to an extent but this is more with the add on tracks quality. As for the feel and general lack of control in the road cars I think it is caused mainly by the unforgivingness of the physics combined with cars which aren't fully refined. Just read more good news on RSC release should be within a month or 2 and there will be rain in a later release. It just shows the determination with which NK is made, the rain will actually simulate fluids with puddles in the track ;)

GP4Flo

4th December 2005, 18:41

EDIT: Would it be that difficult to make some high-res textures ourselves and release a high-res texture pack? If we had ~10 people working on it won't be that much work and it will be great for the community - anyone up for it?
Good idea! I'm not an artist, but I could creat an installer for the texture pack.

axus

4th December 2005, 18:44

LFS controllable with keys? The 4WD and FWD cars, yes to some extent, but by no means quicker than wheel. The RWD cars you have some hope of getting around the track but I wouldn't go any further than that. I think that you cannot call LFS compromising. Try do a quickish lap of any track other than maybe the oval in the raceabout or an LX and with keyboard and I will be impressed. LFS road cars are _very_ realistic. Name one aspect where they are not... (except the low speed tyre physics which doesn't really affect racing all that much).

ajp71

4th December 2005, 18:53

axus

4th December 2005, 18:56

LFS doesn't even simulate structural rigidity, which is a massive component in car handling. Has it never occured to you that open to Minis do not race in reality? As there weight advantage would be almost irelevant when compared to there handling disadvantage?

Slow down - these things are yet to come. This is because they haven't been programmed yet, not because they have been programmed in a compromising manner.

Hyperactive

4th December 2005, 19:32

Just a sidenote:
LFS isn't ready yet, S3 is distant future. S2 isn't even ready yet, though most of the parts are there. Nk pro isn't readu either.

It's very hard to compare anything when there is nothing to compare.

That namie has certainly some issues but in general it has its good points. Just like LFS.

The things that will rate nk pro are imho online stability ("smoothness") and physics. It's great to hear that the nk pro will be moddable from the start. If the game is any good there will be many interesting cars to drive.

EDIT: Would it be that difficult to make some high-res textures ourselves and release a high-res texture pack? If we had ~10 people working on it won't be that much work and it will be great for the community - anyone up for it?

Actually it's all about starting the project. All that is needed are the dds plugin, artistic talent and time. I lack the first 2 :D
Just one question: which car to do first?

axus

4th December 2005, 19:36

Actually it's all about starting the project. All that is needed are the dds plugin, artistic talent and time. I lack the first 2 :D
Just one question: which car to do first?

DDS plugin is easy - extract this (http://www.cncden.com/downloads/dxt_tools.zip) ZIP and place dds.8di in the Photoshop\Plugins\File Formats Folder. Artisitc tallent is a tough one I'm afraid.

ajp71

4th December 2005, 21:51

Slow down - these things are yet to come. This is because they haven't been programmed yet, not because they have been programmed in a compromising manner.

Stefano simply wouldn't have allowed a convertable version of a car that didn't have a handling disadvantage, just like he won't release NK Pro with the rain and AI which aren't up to scratch initially. I'm not complaining about Scawen's work, more commenting on their different philosophies on the same product. Scawen, Eric and Victor have set about creating a realistic simulation of all forms of motorsport with the goal being having fun. Stefano has set about creating the most realisitic simulation ever made, he's totally uncompromising and you aren't going to suddenley see a load of autocross layouts with jumps on, nor are you going to see flashy fullscreen menus, thats just not his style. There's nothing wrong with either.

Having used NK a bit more I also have to say that the simple windowed menus and ability to save individual laps for replays are great.

So please can LFS and all the other sims add the option not to have menus that have used up all your RAM on displaying 3D buttons by the time you get to race and please can we have a rewind button in LFS replays.

Hyperactive

4th December 2005, 22:16

DDS plugin is easy - extract this (http://www.cncden.com/downloads/dxt_tools.zip) ZIP and place dds.8di in the Photoshop\Plugins\File Formats Folder. Artisitc tallent is a tough one I'm afraid.

Well, actually I'm using Paint shop pro...I open the .dds files with irfanview but can't save them atm.

---

Live for Speed is a small development team dedicated to making the best online racing simulator. Our current release is S2 with which we attempt to recreate the thrill and fun of real racing, by simulating all aspects important to racing. Varying racing environments and cars which can be setup by an abundance of options - all on your home pc. more (http://www.liveforspeed.net/?page=whatislfs)

It's strange because reading this may give the impression that S2 is released.

Hmm, how many people are making the nk pro? Guess it's not just stefano.

Tweaker

4th December 2005, 22:23

How should the UF1 with no top have a handling disadvantage?. The car obviously is not a car that has a retractable top, it is just a version WITHOUT a top. So it is fine to realize it is lighter and better handling.

I don't understand how a Ferrari 360 and a 360 Spider would be different either... the Spider version doesn't have any handling disadvantages, just top speed drag... just like LFS. And actually a convertible would have a handling disadvantage from added weight and changed distribution. But a Spider is hardly different at all. And in the UF1's case, it gives the car more p/w ratio since it is so small.

BTW, what is wrong with jumps? Wouldn't it be good to test if every aspect of driving physics is created? In this case, suspension damage, landing impact reactions and such.... If you look at other games and jump a car in them (if possible), not all games land correctly.... some don't even bounce or react in true fashion.

It is funny you speak so lowly of what LFS has when in fact they are useful in every way. Scawen is set out to make a very realistic simulation too... and in my opinion this is the hardest one compared to others. Just played some 'namie' and soon after, played some LFS with the LX and UF1.... geez nK is just far too easy.... just like rFactor, GTR, GTL, etc. LFS is a difficult simulation because it is so detailed in physics, maybe too detailed... but I do know one thing for sure that LFS has things almost spot on that other games don't do quite well. You know when going into a corner and you just let off the gas rapidly and turnin really quick? That is drifting technique, which makes the car easily step out and slide without using power-oversteer or other forced forms. LFS does this a lot, and that is what gets people frustrated I think, and they soon return to their easy simulations. It is perfectly real though, many road cars do this. However, in netKar it is glued to the road, Modena or the Mini. Many other games do this too, and I think that is what makes them so easy. There is a grip factor that most of them have that just make it less challenging and seem 'less' advanced to me. LFS feels different from all other simulations, and who knows if that means it is wrong or right, but I do know that it means LFS is not your ordinary simulation like all the others, and that is why many people are convinced by it, or drawn away from it.

And when playing the two today for about an hour each, the dynamics of LFS wins over how netKar felt, netKar was totally imprecise and easy. It is hard to argue against that ;)

So please can LFS and all the other sims add the option not to have menus that have used up all your RAM on displaying 3D buttons by the time you get to race and please can we have a rewind button in LFS replays.
3D buttons? If anything, EA games use menus that are graphics intensive. A 3D menu is something that has animations, special effects, crazy sounds, flashy lights, and when it comes to actual publisher games, their menus actually set some of the requirements on the box! LFS' menus are merely built up of a background image, text drawn raw, sliders drawn raw, and a button texture file... WOW! You probably think LFS uses resources on the menus because it actually has a track and car preloaded, that is why (what you see it doing when loading the game...). Which makes the game super fast when ready to start playing. In a sense, it is no different then how netKar does it except LFS has pretty initial menus and that it does it all in-game, and not externally like netKar.

Shotglass

4th December 2005, 23:08

You probably think LFS uses resources on the menus because it actually has a track and car preloaded, that is why (what you see it doing when loading the game...). Which makes the game super fast when ready to start playing.

and i love it for that because unlike netkar you dont have to wait for the car and track to load everytime you want to make a few setup changes ... and you can also directly see how those changes affect the car with lots of detail since the physics are almost completely functional in the garage (id still like to see a bit more of that like bobs suggestion about areo forces acting on the car in the garage ... and maybe a textbox that shows suspension frequencies and damping values)

tristancliffe

4th December 2005, 23:55

I'm not sure if 3D menus and no rewind facility is the difference between LFS's 'fun' and NK's 'uncompromising realism'.

I think they'll be very similar actually (as they are trying to simulate the same thing ultimately). But LFS will be better in some areas, and NK in others (I guess). As long as each learns from the other and pushes each other, I think both can co-exist quite happily.

But there is no point saying "oh NKPro is totally brilliant, it'll destroy LFS" until we actually get to play NK. I remember lots of people saying rF would ruin LFS, and so far that doesn't seem to have been the case. Let's not hype up NK too much (the NK forum is for that), and just see what the competition is like. Doubtless a few of us will be converted (is that the right phrase) but lets not argue about which is best like we always do with other games. Everyone has their own opinions. If I prefer LFS to NKPro that doesn't make be Beelzebub, and if you like NKPro after supporting LFS for 2 years that won't suddenly make you evil or wrong. We're all different and out opinions about 'feel' will all be different.

Except with ISI engined games of course ;) :p

JJ72

5th December 2005, 00:09

I don't know much, but saying Scawan created LFS for the sake of making a "fun" online racing game is totally inaccurate.

And actually the ramp in autocross didn't appear until S2 after numerous request by the community, NK is a puriest sim no doubt, but there's nothing in LFS that exists without a sound reason just as well.

Tweaker

5th December 2005, 00:13

..well for one; it does use a WHOLE lot more memory than it should; everything in LFS is a poly.. all the numbers, all the text... everything you see is a poly with a texture; thats why lfs is so much slower than what it should/could be
if the dials became 1 poly and a texture.. that would save lfs so much FPS

The numbers and the text are polygons? :really:

When you say polygons, that would mean the numbers and text are 3D shapes. Look carefully and they are flat 2D textures :) You should know that :p This text I am typing right now is 2D, flat, how intensive on memory can that be? :pillepall

The dials are flat 2D aswell, how are those intensive? Oh boy, I've typed too much tonight. :tilt:

Shotglass

5th December 2005, 02:42

to me atm lfs is the purest sim mainly in the sense that you get exactly what its physics engine produces ... nothing less and most importantly nothing more ... afaik there are no higher level processes that bend the laws of lfs' physics until it feels "right" ... you get all the bugs and inadequacies due to incomplete physics (either because of wip coding or "slow" processors)
any second you play the game it feels like you can tell exactly whats going on ... and most of the time whats going on is exactly what should be ... and all those other times it at least happens the same way each and every time ... theres no randomness to what the engine comes up with

until now i havent seen a single game that could compare with lfs in that respect ... expecially not rfactor which just felt wrong every single second (probalby mostly the horrible ff)
namie was pretty good though ... but the f3000 just felt too stable ... it felt too easy to drive ... it just didnt give you the feeling of driving on the edge at all

ajp71

5th December 2005, 07:41

@ Tweak - Structural rigidity is a major problem with convertables, without the roof the Mini will be flexing like crazy. As for the LFS menus they are not the worst, but IMO they still don't need to be full screen or using flashy graphics, simple window and drop down menus are far easier IMO.

@ Tristan - I don't think NK Pro will kill off LFS yet, it can't simulate road cars as well yet and the net code is fairly non-exsistant.

@ JJ72 - Thats the difference in attitude Stefano would never have allowed ramps regardless of how much they were requested.

Hyperactive

5th December 2005, 07:53

@ Tweak - Structural rigidity is a major problem with convertables, without the roof the Mini will be flexing like crazy. As for the LFS menus they are not the worst, but IMO they still don't need to be full screen or using flashy graphics, simple window and drop down menus are far easier IMO.

I have to make a point here. The Peogeot wrc is based on the convertible model simply because better structural rigidity. Sure there are problems in convertibles and in their design, but...

@ JJ72 - Thats the difference in attitude Stefano would never have allowed ramps regardless of how much they were requested.

You can't know that :)

axus

5th December 2005, 08:10

ajp71 - go play you netKar and enjoy it. It hasn't officially been released and you are already sounding like a fan-boy and not accepting any reasonable arguements against your points.

AndroidXP

5th December 2005, 08:11

@ajp71: Please come down of your NK circlejerk trip, it's frightening.

AndroidXP

5th December 2005, 08:23

The numbers and the text are polygons? :really:

When you say polygons, that would mean the numbers and text are 3D shapes. Look carefully and they are flat 2D textures :) You should know that :p This text I am typing right now is 2D, flat, how intensive on memory can that be? :pillepall

The dials are flat 2D aswell, how are those intensive? Oh boy, I've typed too much tonight. :tilt:
No, he's right. In a D3D game, all text and seemingly "2D" elements are rendered as a texture on two polygons (2 triagles forming the shape of a rectangle, to be exactly). That's why the text display in LFS, or 3D games in common is relatively slow.

axus

5th December 2005, 09:00

No, he's right. In a D3D game, all text and seemingly "2D" elements are rendered as a texture on two polygons (2 triagles forming the shape of a rectangle, to be exactly). That's why the text display in LFS, or 3D games in common is relatively slow.

Its not like nK menus save you time thanks to the increased loading times and its not like LFS menus use your memory while you are racing so I think LFS has the best solution.

sinbad

5th December 2005, 09:25

I have to make a point here. The Peogeot wrc is based on the convertible model simply because better structural rigidity. Sure there are problems in convertibles and in their design, but...

That may be true, but in this case the roof has been bolted in permanently, and is (as you'd expect) as rigid as any permanent roof.

In by far the majority of cases though, what Ajp says is absolutely correct. The roof is an important part of a car's torsional rigidity. Cars designed as coupes, or hatches/saloons, and then made into convertibles have much less torsional rigidity than their fixed roof siblings, that's why most convertibles actually weigh a bit more than the car they are based on, even after taking into account the motors for the roof, and despite the removal of a major solid panel. To compensate for the lack of stiffness caused by removing the roof, re-enforcement usually has to be added whereever possible.

So if the UF1000 is one car, with a removable roof, then there's no reason it should handle better or worse with or without it (removable roofs aren't structural parts). If it's two different cars though, then, based on real-life examples, the stiffer solid-roofed car should handle better, and would certainly be no heavier than the roofless version, probably lighter.

durbster

5th December 2005, 09:28

Is it really worth arguing over what kind of menu they use? :rolleyes:

The important stuff is what happens on track and it's difficult to see how nK won't at least match LFS for that element. It'll be great having a wide selection of decent race sims after so many years of darkness. Namie is a good indicator that the tyre physics and 'feel' of nKPro should be right up there, with a good chance of setting the new standard. In some respects, I believe Namie is already above and beyond anything out there.

Conversely, I doubt it will have as many features as LFS (only single seaters to start with) and the multiplayer is bound to take some time to perfect. Getting people online is also difficult, as a list of empty servers is a real turn-off, so the multiplayer element will inevitably take some time to gather momentum.

The bottom line is that this is great for all of us because it will help to drive the devs of all products on.

nikimere

5th December 2005, 10:09

I think it looks good. I will probably buy it when it comes out and then use it for a week or two, then after that maybe once a month.... just like every other racing sim thats "the most realistic ever!".
Screenies look cool though! Looking forward to the Formula Ford :D

AndroidXP

5th December 2005, 10:10

Its not like nK menus save you time thanks to the increased loading times and its not like LFS menus use your memory while you are racing so I think LFS has the best solution.
Yeah, I think that too.

Just to be clear: the things I mentioned do not mean that the menus are actually memory intensive or CPU hogging, no. It's just a general remark, that drawing lots and lots of text is slower then you'd think a 3D engine is capable of drawing. That's why I mentioned "relatively slow", it's still in the millisecond range, but when you have to render it each frame, a few more milliseconds can make quite a difference. The problem is really just that there's no native support for something like DrawText() in the current DirectX release, hence the messing around with polygons.

tristancliffe

5th December 2005, 10:14

@ Tristan - I don't think NK Pro will kill off LFS yet, it can't simulate road cars as well yet and the net code is fairly non-exsistant.

And you know this how? From Namie? A 3 year old development of a freeware version prior to even considering Pro? I'm sure Stefano realises that to get ANYWHERE close to LFS he'll have to make some damn fine netcode. It's why it's called NETkar.
As for simulating road cars, maybe Stefano doesn't want to ensure it's good for road cars, but wants racing cars, at least at first.

Shotglass

5th December 2005, 10:28

If it's two different cars though, then, based on real-life examples, the stiffer solid-roofed car should handle better, and would certainly be no heavier than the roofless version, probably lighter.

only if the uf1 uses a monocoque design ... dunno what the mini has but judging by its age it might have a more classical frame below the car that takes most of the forces and the body is just bolted on top of that as a protection against rain

tristancliffe

5th December 2005, 10:47

only if the uf1 uses a monocoque design ... dunno what the mini has but judging by its age it might have a more classical frame below the car that takes most of the forces and the body is just bolted on top of that as a protection against rain

The mini was a long way ahead of it's time, and uses a monocoque construction very much like a modern cars. In fact, there are very few areas where the mini differs from a modern car. And they are STILL better than BMW's 'Massive'.

nikimere

5th December 2005, 11:03

The mini was a long way ahead of it's time, and uses a monocoque construction very much like a modern cars. In fact, there are very few areas where the mini differs from a modern car. And they are STILL better than BMW's 'Massive'.

O/T: HELL YEAH!!! :D Mini rulz :nod:

ajp71

5th December 2005, 11:04

ajp71 - go play you netKar and enjoy it. It hasn't officially been released and you are already sounding like a fan-boy and not accepting any reasonable arguements against your points.

I don't see why I can't play both, if there was a thread about LFS on another forum that was arguing that NK has better multiplayer I would argue against because that is simply not true.

What sim feels right is a matter of personal preference NK gives really good FF on my wheel, much more informative than LFS or N2003, I know LFS and N2003 have both been very highly rated in terms of FF, but both don't give very much useful feedback for me. I'm sure on some hardware they both give good feedback.

IMO they oth have faults but NK gives the best feel, it's a personal preference, when I got LFS I didn't stop racing N2003 so I see no reason why I will stop LFS if I get NK. I'm not going to accept that an open car has no handling disadvantage or that stiffness shouldn't be simulated in LFS because that is simply not true.

AndroidXP

5th December 2005, 11:09

As for simulating road cars, maybe Stefano doesn't want to ensure it's good for road cars, but wants racing cars, at least at first.Also, if Stefano is so hardcore about creating a realistic sim, yet creates a model which only "works" with racecars, then the model is obviously too simple/undetailed/unrealistic. For me namie was OK, in the sense of "it hasn't that crappy feel every ISI engine based game has - OK" but I really can't find the LFS-beating greatness in it.

I don't say nkPro won't be able to beat LFS physics, but judging that from the namie demo is kinda pathetic.

And showing some screens of namie and then going like "oh look, it has MORE *gasp* fps than LFS" is like you're firing up Duke Nukem 3D and then saying: "Haha, Duke3D graphics are much better than HL² because it has more fps". (Not that the difference in graphics between LFS and namie is that extreme, but they aren't in the same class either).

ajp71

5th December 2005, 11:09

@ Tristan - I was making my comments based on other people thinking I was predicting the end of LFS which wasn't what I meant.

durbster

5th December 2005, 11:26

Also, if Stefano is so hardcore about creating a realistic sim, yet creates a model which only "works" with racecars, then the model is obviously too simple/undetailed/unrealistic.

I hate it when this happens on forums. A ridiculous discussion starts about something that has no basis in fact.

For what it's worth, nobody said the model only "works" with race cars and considering nKPro will be moddable, I suspect they will have considered road cars somewhere along the line. On top of that, the outdated Namie is evidence enough that road cars can be simulated on a par with LFS.

tristancliffe

5th December 2005, 11:28

Ok, but I still don't see how any of us can say good or bad things about NetKar Pro. We know NOTHING about it. Namie is not even slightly representative of Pro as far as I'm aware. Absolutely everything, from the graphics engine to the physics engine to the sound engine to the netcode [engine] has been completely 100% rewritten.

Comparing Namie to Pro is like comparing a rotten clementine to a fresh clementine. Same species and family, but nothing is the same in either one.

Yeah, I said NKP wants to simulate race cars first and foremost, not that it can't do road cars. I am basing this solely on interviews, where I gather only race cars will be included at first, but I have no other sources that any of you.

As I have maintained, I will try NKP. And I actually believe it will be incredibly good. But whether it feels right or has the LFS je ne se quois. Time will tell. Discussing made up facts here won't.

axus

5th December 2005, 11:28

@apj71 - the point I'm trying to make is that you are trying to instantly discard LFS physics as less accurate than nKPro without ever having driven nKPro.

JJ72

5th December 2005, 11:47

Hm I think he is reasonable, though a bit biased just as we do.

@tweak: I think what Nuse is saying is that all the text are textures stick on a face of a polygon (which might be invisible), so the menu is actually rendering several invisible polygons with textures on it instead of being real 2D graphics.

@ajp71: I don't think menu design really affect the purity of a sim, since the only moment you engage in the simulation part is by driving, all the things outside is just packaging and designs for ergonomics. All we have is big clear buttons with a background pic, that's not really something flashy, and imo is actually more practical than having to open several windows at a time - say consistentcy in natvigation. While if it take it to the extreme some graphics can be excluded in NK's menu as well, hey why make a banner just for the word "track day"?

But then if we push it to that extent i think the point of argument is lost because we lost sight of what is the core value in a simulator, and nobody says simulators should look dull and boring, it's a commerical product afterall not an experiment tool.

I'll give a second thought on the ramps though, if a little sense of humour equals a game not being serious enough.

Tweaker

5th December 2005, 11:49

No, he's right. In a D3D game, all text and seemingly "2D" elements are rendered as a texture on two polygons (2 triagles forming the shape of a rectangle, to be exactly). That's why the text display in LFS, or 3D games in common is relatively slow.

But he was making it sound as if it takes up a huge amount of your memory, that changing a few polygons would save you loads of FPS???? :pillepall Maybe like 6 years ago... as of now, that stuff hardly affects us at all.

And the text in LFS is not slow, and I don't see how it impacts our performance by huge amounts. If you want a truly intensive 3D menu (or just crazy textures and animations), go play an EA game, they are fascinated about awesome, takes-forever-to-load memory hog menus ;)

@ajp71: Yeah I think the FF in netKar is pretty informative, like understeer and when the car is transfering weight, but it is different from all other sims. It feels to me like it is missing a few things that give the car a 'ridgid' feel, or something that is on the road. It feels more like a washy interaction with the wheel, rather than with the track itself. The car gives some feedback to the car, but not everything... I guess I am trying to say that you feel little or no road feedback through the forces. It is more emphasized on feeling oversteer and understeer rather than the other 'connected' vibrations. Which is why LFS is the complete opposite.

You DO feel those vibrations in LFS, but hardly any understeer feedback (many people have noted they want this in LFS). Oversteer feedback is there, but not as extreme as netKar's. Example: Basically force a spin in the Modena and try to correct it in netKar, it is a lot harder because the FF swings your hands forcefully in wild directions. In LFS you have a much better chance to save a spin in a road car as it is not so extreme. I still think LFS feels better though just for overall feedback of the car, netKar still feels very empty when pushing a car to the limit.

Shotglass

5th December 2005, 11:54

I'm not going to accept that an open car has no handling disadvantage or that stiffness shouldn't be simulated in LFS because that is simply not true.

a) as i and others have said it very much depends on the type of car and on wether the uf1 is actually an open roofed car with a hardtop rather than a closed roofed car with a sawed off roof
b) nobody ever said stiffness shouldnt be simulated in lfs ... its just that lfs doesnt simulate stiffness atm
but as far as i can tell scawen plans on putting carts into lfs whos handling is very dependend on chassis flex so on that basis sooner or later lfs will very likely simulate chassis flex
but lfs is just at the second stage of a three stage physics development process and it isnt even remotely finished with that stage ... so give it some time
and its also that simulating chassis flex should be utter hell to code

AndroidXP

5th December 2005, 12:01

I hate it when this happens on forums. A ridiculous discussion starts about something that has no basis in fact.

For what it's worth, nobody said the model only "works" with race cars and considering nKPro will be moddable, I suspect they will have considered road cars somewhere along the line. On top of that, the outdated Namie is evidence enough that road cars can be simulated on a par with LFS.Ok, maybe I didn't find the right words for what I wanted to express.

I just wanted to say that for a true sim you build a base model that ideally only needs car parameters added to accurately simulate any car class you want. Apparently, or atleast that's what I understood, namie is only convincing on openwheelers, which for me means that it's base model is still not ideal, or too specifically developed to just fit "race cars".
LFS on the other hand is IMO quite close to it, with the only real problems in the base car model being low speed grip and aero.

I just got fed up hearing all that glory of how uncompromising Stefano is about realism and yet what we did see from him until now is only "working" on race cars. No, actually I got fed up on judging anything that is about to come in nkPro from namie.

Also I don't quite get how namie is "evidence enough that road cars can be simulated on a par with LFS"? Do you mean namie shows the potential that nkPro may be on par with LFS? Nah, that would be judging from namie again. Let me rephrase that. Do you mean that namie shows that Stefano has the potential of creating a sim that will one day be able to be on par with LFS? Because namie surely isn't on par with LFS in that aspect.

ajp71

5th December 2005, 13:05

@apj71 - the point I'm trying to make is that you are trying to instantly discard LFS physics as less accurate than nKPro without ever having driven nKPro.

@ Tristan/Axus - I am basic my comments on namie, forget Pro, IMO whilst dated and lacking in certain areas namie feels more realisitic than LFS IMO. There are huge wholes in LFS physics atm, and ffs. the UF1 is a mini stop this 'it might be an open top car with a removable roof' crap, it is a mini and with the roof on it drives like a mini does IRL.

Lets drop the menu from this disscusion, I prefer the NK/GEM style some of you don't thats fine by me, it's not going to make the racing experience any different.

I just got fed up hearing all that glory of how uncompromising Stefano is about realism and yet what we did see from him until now is only "working" on race cars. No, actually I got fed up on judging anything that is about to come in nkPro from namie.

I personally find it fairly annoying as well, Scawen would never make a sim where you can't see replays from the cockpit, Stefano would because IRL there is no way of seeing what the driver sees on TV. I personally think the ramps make a fun diversion from racing. If NK had an autocross editor it wouldn't include jumps. I like the way Scawen will listen to the community and is prepared to change his product to suit. As far as I see Stefano wouldn't do this, people asked for external cams but Stefano replied by saying they were not necesary and cut these people out of his community.

It would be interesting to see what Scawen's opinion is on this, but I feel he would say he is not such a purist (nothing at all wrong with that).

Tweaker

5th December 2005, 13:08

I personally find it fairly annoying as well, Scawen would never make a sim where you can't see replays from the cockpit, Stefano would because IRL there is no way of seeing what the driver sees on TV.

What??

Well not through the eyes of the racer, but yes, you can see driving action from inside the car in reallife replays & recordings...... Even Champ Car has helmet cams that are are RIGHT next to the drivers eyes, how close could you get to that? :) Perfectly fine to have incar views in replays.

ajp71

5th December 2005, 13:17

What??

Well not through the eyes of the racer, but yes, you can see driving action from inside the car in reallife replays & recordings...... Even Champ Car has helmet cams that are are RIGHT next to the drivers eyes, how close could you get to that? :) Perfectly fine to have incar views in replays.

Don't have a go at me I would like a cockpit view in replays as well.

axus

5th December 2005, 13:27

In a single seater, anything but cockpit view is unnecessary, yes. BUT, in a road car, it can be kind of annoying to have 50% of your 15" viewing space (that's how much it is on a 17" CRT) chopped off by interior so that you see this tiny area, smaller than the area of your wheel representing what IRL would be about 20x bigger. Nice 'simulation'. IF I had a motion simulator so that I could feel the road the way I would in a real car and I didn't have to use the wheels view to do this and IF I had a 50" screen to make it as big as the cockpit of a car, I would indeed use the in-car view but as it stands I don't and nor do ~99% of the community. So you cut that out of the community and you have a real nice 'online racing simulator'.

ajp71

5th December 2005, 15:30

@ Axus - I don't share Stefano's view at all, I personally use cockpit view but I think it is just pointlessly slashing away at the potential market if you force it. I would far rather race against a full grid of drivers using wheel cam than just a few using cockpit view.

axus

5th December 2005, 15:34

I'm not having a go at you, I'm having a go at Stefano's flawed 'purist' logic.

KiDCoDEa

6th December 2005, 18:21

the fact that LFS is controllable with keys says it all

no it doesnt. i can explain.
if u know how they work and what they actually do. its not left for left and right for right. if it was like that cars would be uncontrolable and if u were here around keyboard-code type testing you would know dat. keys in lfs arent a 5 min coding job. its a whole program that if a real car maker was forced to control its cars irl with keys, they would prolly code a assisted system like in lfs. after the system maturity it was even tweaked at later stage by keyboarders in the community. key code in lfs had many iterations and its spot on imho after all the tweaks over 2years.

btw nkpro also supports keys and mouse and also aims at broadning its spectrum. funny how those posts the no-compromise dev made a couple years ago about that theme look now eh?
follower at the very least.

Tweaker

6th December 2005, 19:01

Also note that a lot of flight simulators (expensive/professional ones) also support keys for control. So that doesn't mean it is bad, the keyboard is afterall control hardware.

flyby3d

7th December 2005, 08:41

Kunos

PHYSICS

099 had 2 main flaws on the chassis physic: one was in the anti-roll bars code, and it is easy to exploit hitting a curb hard; this will throw the car into a roll on itself. The second flaw was in the reaction torques at the differential generating a couple on the body moving too much weight back and forward as function of engine torque.

The entire software structure was changed and what was a modular software solution in netKar 099 is now a monolithic structure driven by scripts and databases. In nK099 there was a main simulation program (nks.exe) that connected to a client module for multiplayer (nkClient.dll) and cars' modules (f3000.dll, mini.dll ecc..). In netKar PRO everything is easier and held into the nks.exe file.

The change was made to support what we call the nK|dK (netKar Development Kit), which will allow the community to create additional cars for the simulator and it was the main element that got me busy during this year.

One important element with the creation of nK|dK is the possibility to deeply analyze the car's behaviour in an engineering-like environment and compare it with theorical and experimental data from books and other sources. In netKar PRO nothing is "cheated" and you can check the formulas from your car dynamics book with the simulator and find the same results, the manual for the future nK|dK will be most enlighting about this matter.

DRIVETRAIN
The drivetrain was also rewritten at the beginning of the netKar PRO adventure. The main aim for the new code was to support 4WD cars with 3 differential connected.

TIRES
The main element of any simulation was also the subject of a total rewrite. The model is now a Pacejka 96 full model with integrations for temperature and pressure changes plus some integration for dynamic behaviour for the quick spinning on the Y axis of the tire. (quick steer).
What I really love about this Pacejika's model is the incredible control it gives on the relationship between longitudinal and lateral forces plus the ability to reproduce a tire with 3 different "zones": a linear zone, a sliding zone, and a frictional zone once the tire lost the grip. I find the linear zone often missing generating a tire that is in "sliding" mode all the time.. giving a sort of "floating" feel to it. In netKar PRO, you get a clear linear zone that gives the tires an incredible amount of "bite".. you really need to push the car to get into the "sliding" mode of the tire and makes driving fast with netKar PRO a very different experience where you literally throw the car into a corner at speeds that most of the time you won't believe and then you'll handle her on the edge of the limit. Driving is more "physical", after 20 laps with the powerful stiff cars you really feel your head shaking.
I turned off the automatic surface smoothing featured in nK099, and this makes the ride really scary on the stiff lower cars and you'll often find yourself bottoming around shaking like crazy. The fact of driving directly on the triangles of the track also gives meaning to the idea of "fast bump and rebound" settings.. mostly unusued before, you'll need these badly to set up the attitude of the car on bumps. I was able to turn off the smoothing because the new tire model is so good to handle the contact/no contact situations, much better than the old one. As you can tell, I am quite happy and excited by the results.

Just some more info about the upcoming NKPro directly from Kunos...(in english)
http://www.drivingitalia.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=24201

Another link to the unofficial FAQ (italian... sorry!)
http://www.drivingitalia.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=24390

axus

7th December 2005, 12:43

flyby3d, interesting read, but I find the whole "a linear zone, a sliding zone, and a frictional zone" thing a bit fishy - surely it should be a seamless graph relating slip angle and grip, no?

sinbad

7th December 2005, 14:13

I don't pretend to know about tyre coding or modelling or whatever you want to call it, but:
COLLABORAZIONI E PARTNERSHIP:
AiM
Avon
Brembo
Sparco
Riccardo Azzoli e Andrea Quintarelli, rispettivamente pilota e ingegnere di pista della Target Racing.

Collaboration and partnership with Avon tyres. That can only be a good thing, access to real data and tyre experts.

I'm not sold on nKpro yet, I haven't tried it, but the ingredients are good, the potential is good, and I'm looking forward to seeing what has been made of it.

These threads are very unproductive, people arguing about an as yet unreleased title. It just pushes people to the extremes as the argument grows, more and more is "at stake" as more and more time is "invested" in the argument.....which leads to people really not wanting to be wrong, and usually totally influences their "unbiased" opinions when the actual product is released.

VALE 46

7th December 2005, 15:56

Nk Pro looks very good, but i wanna know what it sounds like with the choice of samples or synth sounds :)

Why do threads about other games always turn out to be a competition of what game's best?
If you want to argue over the better game start a new thread and leave this one alone!

ajp71

7th December 2005, 19:08

key code in lfs had many iterations and its spot on imho after all the tweaks over 2years.

I'm well aware the physics in LFS are far too acurate to use genuine digital inputs but from the previous stance that NK took this time would not have been spent designing a computer to drive the cars but instead to make the physics even better. From what you said this view may have changed for Pro, all my comments about NK have come from the 3 year old namie (which IMO is much more realistic than LFS).

KiDCoDEa

7th December 2005, 19:51

(which IMO is much more realistic than LFS).

sure it is. thats why u can drive the car upside down (yes wheels to the air), with fuxxored cambers and arbs coupled with some magneto balls acting as wheels and bang.
you have a wr.
gimme a break.

i hope nkpro rules indeed. but it can only do that if it has redone the physics. judging from updates i dont see much about that, but we'll see.

this is not what i call better than lfs http://70gtmod.no-ip.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=2417

its ridiculous magnetic and stupid wipeout behaviour.
how is dat better than lfs tyre code? its not even close.

Tweaker

7th December 2005, 20:12

this is not what i call better than lfs http://70gtmod.no-ip.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=2417

its ridiculous magnetic and stupid wipeout behaviour.
how is dat better than lfs tyre code? its not even close.

The one thing I did not like about netKar is how funky the cars look 'in action' from the outside. Take the Modena or any other road car for that matter, and try to focus on how the suspension acts, how the car performs... it looks far too high and 'solid', and fluidity comes into play when braking, and it looks as if the car is floating when infact the car should really be playful. Just like it shows in the video KiD has there.

Watch a road car in LFS, and I'd have to say it is very believable... suspension, tire deformation, it all is in action, and doesn't look so floaty like in that video.

That video almost reminds me of those typical first stage development simulations you get from various people as a personal project -- Where it is a simple track, detailed car, and WIP physics... where it may be in the progress of having some pretty nifty realistic detailed physics and calculations, but things just don't look right.

ajp71

7th December 2005, 21:55

Having watched the video I'd have to agree that it doesn't look real. LFS simulates road cars better, but TBH the attempt at single seaters is rather WIP when compared to NK or the N2003 GTP mod. The video doesn't really do the track justice, as Falkenberg looks way better than any LFS track on my computer, it may be that it's a GPL convert that just gives it that feel, but I have never really been that impressed with any of the tracks made in full 3D as opposed to the Papyrus system, not saying the LFS tracks are bad at all, just on my system they suffer a bit from the overly simple graphics style, whereas GTR/GTL suffer from trying to be overly flashy and photorealistic, and god knows what rFactors on, it won't work on my PC, but from the screenshots it looks like a cartoon.

NK may produce super sharp screenshots but those who have seen it in motion (video doesn't do it justice) will probably agree that it doesn't feel overdone like most new sims.

Another thing that seems pleasing about netkar is that looking through the hotlap forums higher downforce actually produces faster laps (on most circuits), no one has this made desire to produce cars that are completely undrivable. I feel there is something majorly wrong, as IRL no one drives with a car setup remotely like in LFS. There may be some people here who have experience in bigger single seaters to correct me, but thats what I know from small single seaters.

durbster

7th December 2005, 22:02

sure it is. thats why u can drive the car upside down (yes wheels to the air),
Hahahaha! That still bothers you, after all this time!? Didn't you ever wonder why you were the only person who had an issue with it? :spin:

Incomplete software tends to have incomplete elements in it, that's what defines it as incomplete. Slating it for that is beyond ridiculous. :D

Meanwhile, I agree that LFS does look a hell of a lot better on replays. The way the cars move around on external views is better than anything else around. The problems with LFS are in the subtlety of the physics engine, which wouldn't show up on a replay too well.

ajp71

7th December 2005, 22:12

Hahahaha! That still bothers you, after all this time!? Didn't you ever wonder why you were the only person who had an issue with it? :spin:

What is this driving upside down bug?

Like LFS netkar has some parts of tracks where one can fall through, the NK tracks are 3rd party addons for a free, very WIP sim. The LFS tracks are produced by a profesional, virtually finished product. I think this thread is turning into mindless slating.

As for the replays, I personally think NK looks stunning with the F3000 as it gets out of shape, it really looks like a real car wriggling about, whereas in LFS it looks like it's just a completely controled slide, and in NK replays the sound is fantastic (every other sim on the planet seems incapable of producing replays where one can here the engine, including my favourite N2003) and the cameras are not actually completely locked onto the centre of the car.

Tweaker

7th December 2005, 22:22

The video doesn't really do the track justice, as Falkenberg looks way better than any LFS track on my computer

.....

it may be that it's a GPL convert that just gives it that feel, but I have never really been that impressed with any of the tracks made in full 3D as opposed to the Papyrus system, not saying the LFS tracks are bad at all, just on my system they suffer a bit from the overly simple graphics style, whereas GTR/GTL suffer from trying to be overly flashy and photorealistic, and god knows what rFactors on, it won't work on my PC, but from the screenshots it looks like a cartoon.

NK may produce super sharp screenshots but those who have seen it in motion (video doesn't do it justice) will probably agree that it doesn't feel overdone like most new sims.

You really think Netkar's track are better than LFS's, or other driving games? :zombie:

I mean... even GPL's age old track graphics look better than Netkar's. How is Netkar's tracks 'not overdone'... if anything, they are halfdone. I would call an overdone track with fancy uneeded special effects such as blink lights, kids playing in a nearby playground, and maybe some dolphins jumping in the ocean on the horizon...... but name a driving game that has that, not even LFS. I guess a really nice track must be a flat textured driving surface, plain grass, plain sky, simple trees and maybe throw in some spectators? :pillepall

Come on now... what else are you going to try and find about this current Netkar that is actually not that great at all? Amongst most serious sim-racers here, you have the strangest definition and expectation of a simulation.

VALE 46

7th December 2005, 22:39

Still you keep comparing LFS to Nk PRO, and now you're even bringing Nk Namie into it, which was just a free [game] / [test] basically to see what they could achieve.

If you dont like netkar or netkar pro, you dont need to come to this thread and tell us, i for sure dont give a **** what you think, and would rather find out info about Nk Pro than listen to you lot acting like 8 year olds!

ajp71

7th December 2005, 23:00

Tweak, which tracks are half done? I was talking about Falkenberg, only Falkenberg, Spa and Donnington are worth looking at, most of the NK namie tracks are converted from either Toca Race Driver or various ISI games from a few decades ago, neither of which are very graphically pleasing. I know others may like 3D spectators and so on but I feel that GPL can look fantastic, it may all be 2D graphics, so no they don't look correct from some angles (but you should be going along each piece of road at the same angle every lap :D). The Papyrus tracks don't have to look like old tracks, have you ever seen the tracks that came with the GTP mod? They use this unsophisticated, old fashioned technology and look absolutley stunning with good frame rates. LFS's tracks don't look bad at all, but they don't capture an atmosphere like the GPL tracks, there's no reason why they should, they have no history and all look like they've just been built, this isn't a critisism of Eric's artwork, I don't think he ever intended to create historic tracks with such an atmosphere.

Still you keep comparing LFS to Nk PRO, and now you're even bringing Nk Namie into it, which was just a free [game] / [test] basically to see what they could achieve.

I'm comparing NK namie to LFS, IMO the single seaters in netkar are perfectly comparable to LFS.

I will try and make this clear one last time, my comments are entirely based off namie and S2 P2. I am only trying to compare the F3000/FO8 and Formula Renault/FOX. The road cars in namie just don't feel right, I don't know how realistic they are but they just don't have the same feeling as they should do.

Tweaker

7th December 2005, 23:26

Funny VALE, something about Netkar posted in the LFS forum... what do you expect, that we ignore it? Let Netkar have no comparison of another great sim? Surely the thread is about the new screenshots, but one people about LFS in a reply leads it in the wrong direction.

It is not that this isn't wanted, it is annoying to see these threads turn up and have us try and be defenseless in these threads, therefore we leave ourselves to word-to-word combat over various simulations, there is not much else you can do.

That is like putting a Lamborghini in a Ferrari Dealer's showroom.... Ferrari fans would come up to it and talk about what is nice, what is not. Same situation here. Blame the damned thread creator for crying out loud, you'll never get a decent thread about a different sim in another sim's world.

At least this is not as bad as RSC... where RSC fills itself full of GT4 vs. LFS, rFactor vs. LFS, GTR vs. LFS, the list goes on. I grew tired of that, and this thread is nowhere near those moments.

LFS's tracks don't look bad at all, but they don't capture an atmosphere like the GPL tracks, there's no reason why they should, they have no history and all look like they've just been built, this isn't a critisism of Eric's artwork, I don't think he ever intended to create historic tracks with such an atmosphere.
No shit! GPL was 67 era... Plus, Eric's work is fantasy tracks, of course they don't have any historic 'edge' feel.

XCNuse

7th December 2005, 23:27

lol that list of tracks you said.. were conversions.. the ORIGINAL tracks from Namie. graphically looked like something from CART precision racing back when i was like.. 8 lol

the tracks themselves though (layout) i think were pretty good though.. one of them was atleast.. cant remember which, havent played netkar in soooo so long

VALE 46

7th December 2005, 23:43

It is not that this isn't wanted, it is annoying to see these threads turn up and have us try and be defenseless in these threads, therefore we leave ourselves to word-to-word combat over various simulations, there is not much else you can do.

Who's attacking LFS ... lol :pillepall
Posting pictures of another game isnt going to do any harm to LFS, so why does everyone turn round and start engaging in "word-to-word combat" lol

http://www.drivingitalia.net/articol...software&id=55

must say looking pretty good :eek:

Blame the damned thread creator for crying out loud

It's not the thread creators fault, he just seemed to be impressed by the screenshots, its the people that followed, such as yourself!

:uglyhamme

Tweaker

7th December 2005, 23:46

You're not getting the point of my post. Nevermind then.... :rolleyes: This thread has 8 year olds in it remember.

KiDCoDEa

8th December 2005, 10:52

Having watched the video I'd have to agree that it doesn't look real. LFS simulates road cars better, but TBH the attempt at single seaters is rather WIP when compared to NK or the N2003 GTP mod.

indeed. thats correct. and thanks for quoting the other sim i participated in making of . gtp mod is indeed the product of over 1 year efforts with 6 months finetuning. it had way more work (and research and testing) than lfs singleseaters. why do i know? nothing the credits of both games wont tell ya.
thanks for aknowledging the other side valid points here and there, its always a refreshing meeting people willing to listen the other side.
peace

KiDCoDEa

8th December 2005, 10:59

Hahahaha! That still bothers you, after all this time!? Didn't you ever wonder why you were the only person who had an issue with it? :spin:

Incomplete software tends to have incomplete elements in it, that's what defines it as incomplete. Slating it for that is beyond ridiculous. :D

hi durbster. it doesnt bother me cause i dont drive nk. simple as that.
i mentioned it in reply to someone that was saying its driving experience was more realistic. im sure u agree thats a valid point?
incomplete? at 0.99 its incomplete? is the 0.01 thats missing the car upside down?
its not me who does version numbers. also it was never stated officially it was incomplete and that it had all those errors people discovered.
yes he accepts them nowadays, but didnt then, just like so many other things he changed after seeing that the route others followed and he so harshly dissed, became more sucessful.
no harm in changing our opinion and i congratulate him for that. and believe me it wasnt his fanboys that made him do that smart philosofy "tweak".

durbster

8th December 2005, 11:41

I expect nKPro to be less compromising than LFS but I'm sure the policies will have been tamed from the approach taken for Namie. The inability to reset, or turn damage off was one thing that I always felt was wrong, for example. It's all very well saying that's because it's a hardcore sim, but when you're learning a new track and the gravel traps and grass doesn't work as they should, it's incredibly frustrating to find yourself sliding towards the wall for the 10th time.

AJS

8th December 2005, 12:36

Satorian

11th December 2005, 15:23

As appreciative one can be of ajp's fandom, I politely ask the ones reading this thread to not take everything he says about what kunos (nK's coder and main dev) would do or wouldn't do as gospel. That's left to kunos himself and I haven't seen any pamphlets yet proclaiming his policies written by himself.

nKpro's physics model is indeed a complete vehicular physics framework and not tailored towards specific classes or cars. It just happens that kunos is, as he stated in some posts on RSC, basically an open-wheeler fan so most of his energy probably went towards getting access to open-wheeler cars and he didn't bother with tintops. One of the teams working with him is the italian F3 Target Racing team for example.
As the development kit nK|dK is scheduled to be released some time ("2-3 months") after nKpro, tintops or any other car can be included at will.

While there may be similarities to LFS in terms of car choice or focus, nK seems very much its own thing to me. There will neither be AI, nor rain nor complex damage beyond suspension damage as for as I know in the first release but development on those has already progressed and looks like it's going to be just a matter of time.

nK 0.9.9 aka namie, often referred to as the demo is already 3 years old and I think only in so far indicative of nKpro that one might expect the strengths, what is already good about it, to be strengthened more and polished and the weaknesses dimished or eliminated.

I hope everyone interested in sims will give it a fresh, unbiased try and chance to really evaluate if it's to his liking and give honest and fair feedback.

Hope to see you on the track, guys! :thumbsup:

AndroidXP

11th December 2005, 16:56

http://forum.rscnet.org/images/smilies/clapclap.gif

ajp71

12th December 2005, 00:00

nK 0.9.9 aka namie, often referred to as the demo is already 3 years old and I think only in so far indicative of nKpro that one might expect the strengths, what is already good about it, to be strengthened more and polished and the weaknesses dimished or eliminated.

What you've said is true, but I would like to forget completely about NK Pro, as far as I'm concerned I've been comparing the FO8 in LFS S2 P2 to the F3000 in Netkar 0.99 namie

deggis

10th January 2006, 21:18

I just played couple of hours 0.99 namie for the first time. I kinda liked the FF feel as this is this kind of unpolished beta, at least it doesn't feel like ISI/SimBin. The most negative thing is the feel of speed. I thought it was a minor problem in LFS but this is just way too slow. 150 km/h feels like 30 km/h. Changing the FOV doesn't really help. Because of this it's almost impossible to catch the braking points. Well it was fun to test drive some real tracks, altough teh 'Ring version from GPL was buggy as hell.

netKar Pro website is lauching soon:
http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=239147
http://www.netkar-pro.com

"Professional online racing simulator". They stole our slogan! :D

ATHome

10th January 2006, 22:04

"Professional online racing simulator". They stole our slogan! :D

Nah, LFS is just an "Online Racing Simulator", so were no professionals :scratchch

deggis

10th January 2006, 22:39

Nah, LFS is just an "Online Racing Simulator", so were no professionals :scratchch
I know but they still copied it from us. :)

When I was searching for a update for the netKar Nordschleife GPL conversion I found these:

http://70gtmod.no-ip.com/index.php?showtopic=341
http://forum.racesimcentral.com/showpost.php?p=2386212&postcount=45
http://forum.racesimcentral.com/showpost.php?p=2304809&postcount=26

F*CKING AMAZING! \o/ Pics are from last spring but I've never seen those. Those are from that 70 GT Mod for netKar Pro. Of course it's an unofficial (I mean not licensed) version. Finally we can have a proper and accurate version of the Ring (other than that rather "crappy" and old GPL version).

durbster

11th January 2006, 08:13

Those Nurby pics are renders, not in-game screenshots. I'm sure it will look better in the game ;)

Also, I think netKar always had the strap line of "Online Racing Simulator", they just added a Pro to it because this is the pro version.

Tweaker

11th January 2006, 09:59

Also, I think netKar always had the strap line of "Online Racing Simulator", they just added a Pro to it because this is the pro version.

I dunno bout that... I don't even think netKar lived up to having a motto like that... where can you even go online and play people? Nowhere afaik :zombie: :shrug:

durbster

11th January 2006, 11:01

I dunno bout that... I don't even think netKar lived up to having a motto like that... where can you even go online and play people? Nowhere afaik :zombie: :shrug:
No it didn't but that was the original aim and that's where Pro comes in. It is called netKar after all.

From Kunos:
http://forum.rscnet.org/showpost.php?p=2757928&postcount=25

ATHome

11th January 2006, 11:34

I dream of having a ring like this in LFS :tilt:

But right now, we just have to wait until S3 is out. Oh man, I wish I could travel in time or just sleep until S3 is with a good unoffical Nordschleife is out :shrug:

mrbogeyman

11th January 2006, 11:58

does nobody else think those track screen shots just look a bit 'flat'??

fair enough the track and kerbs look nice, but the barriers and tree look crap.

i dont know how to pin it down, but netkar and many other sims just seem so 2D, especially the environments.

imo this is very important in a game, and create the right/wrong feel for the whole game.

tristancliffe

11th January 2006, 13:46

Keeping one eye on the development of NetKar, it has to be said that in terms of the list of features, Netkar looks like it's gonna be the daddies. Of course, having lots of features, and actually being realistic and playable are very different things, but I hope that LFS keeps an eye on the competition - Netkar and rFactor are, gradually, adding some extremely desirable features to their sims (not that LFS isn't, I'm just used to LFS, so my perspective is somewhat different).

ajp71

11th January 2006, 14:43

The Nordschleife screens posted aren't that great. For one my graphics card ain't going to like them :) Secondly they are over complicated, I don't want to see that much detail when I'm racing, sure it would be nice to read the writing on the track, but when your driving on it at 150 mph you really aren't going to notice it.

I know some people say the GPL 'ring is 'crap' that's just because you haven't tried it recently with the later updates. The 1970 conversion for N2003 is pretty amazing, although by no means as graphically good as the best GPL addons. Anyway to me the graphics are irrelevant so long as you can get immersed in them. The GTR press demo always used to give me good frame rates and a very detailed image, yet I could never actually read them and just found myself crashing off all the time.

Graphics can go two ways: Letting the user become part of them without to much visual rubbish. I recently tried the original GPL tracks, yep 8 year old graphics, which I can still connect with just like I can with LFS. Obviously I downloaded updates after trying it in original spec, but tbh the updates just make it look nicer on the replays, when your actually in the car it doesn't matter how bad it looks.

The other way is to try and fool the user with GT4 style stunning visuals, yes they can give a sense of being there but your still only looking at a computer screen. IMO super high res everything is not needed.

As for anyone who says the GPL 'ring is crap they really should actually try it again, it's not about flashy graphics it's about the track. Sorry Eric but I'd choose the 'ring over all the LFS tracks anyday ;)

The Netkar conversion of the 'ring was just awful, it was just about ok in geometry, far too bumpy, but the fact you kept seeing over the edge of the world just put me off.

For those who don't love the GPL 'ring I'd say you've either never driven it or you really aren't determined to keep trying and learn it.

deggis

11th January 2006, 19:12

Those Nurby pics are renders, not in-game screenshots. I'm sure it will look better in the game ;)
Damn. I didn't read that thread on rscnet.org that well, just fastly scrolled and saw the pics. Actually I saw a post saying it's a render but I confused because someone had just posted an edited picture. But who cares because the ingame version will possibly look even better. Here's the proof that it's really under work for nkPro: http://forum.racesimcentral.com/showpost.php?p=2793558&postcount=60

Those pics really look very screenshot-like but the mip mapping is a bit weird when you closely watch them.

The Nordschleife screens posted aren't that great. For one my graphics card ain't going to like them :) Secondly they are over complicated, I don't want to see that much detail when I'm racing, sure it would be nice to read the writing on the track, but when your driving on it at 150 mph you really aren't going to notice it.
As usually :) you have really weird opinion. Even the ingame version could look something like those renders those are still far away from super-fancy graphics. So you basicly want that the new remake of the Ring looks graphically like the GPL version remakes?

You should really buy some new hardware and stop whining. I have actually pretty low-end computer too but I don't have any problems running LFS with 4xFSAA/AF.

Graphics can go two ways: Letting the user become part of them without to much visual rubbish. I recently tried the original GPL tracks, yep 8 year old graphics, which I can still connect with just like I can with LFS.
Never heard about nostalgia? Give Wolfenstein 3D for someone who has never played it before and guess what he thinks about the graphics.

The other way is to try and fool the user with GT4 style stunning visuals, yes they can give a sense of being there but your still only looking at a computer screen. IMO super high res everything is not needed.
I have never played that GT4 Ring but isn't it concerned as the most accurate version? Too bad that the problem is it's only in GT4. This nkPro Ring version could be best version ever, at least on PC.

The Netkar conversion of the 'ring was just awful, it was just about ok in geometry, far too bumpy, but the fact you kept seeing over the edge of the world just put me off.
Yup, it was awful because of that. The author has been (afaik same "si3v") working on a far better version... seems like he forgot it and moved to work on the nkPro version. :)

ajp71

11th January 2006, 20:48

Good enough for me :)

http://hem.bredband.net/klafje/track_updates.htm

I know some people may like having the flashest graphics but IMO they are just one of the methods of outputing information to you. Sound and a decent method of input are as important IMO. I'm not whining at all, I personally can play LFS with fairly high graphics settings (bad at starts) and I think LFS does look good, but not as good as these GPL tracks IMO. Yes they are 2D everything, but do you actually ever notice some 3D caravan or spectator and would the time not have been better spent revising the physics?

deggis

11th January 2006, 22:18

I know some people may like having the flashest graphics but IMO they are just one of the methods of outputing information to you. Sound and a decent method of input are as important IMO. I'm not whining at all, I personally can play LFS with fairly high graphics settings (bad at starts) and I think LFS does look good, but not as good as these GPL tracks IMO. Yes they are 2D everything, but do you actually ever notice some 3D caravan or spectator and would the time not have been better spent revising the physics?
Yes, physics comes first but detail on tracks is important too. If it lacks in detail it doesn't look or feel like a real track. It's not that important when actually driving but in case with this GPL version it's just too plain nowadays. In real life it's a track where every corner is different but in this GPL version many of them at least looks the same, because there is no extra detail which would remind you about the braking points etc. :) Of course I don't agree when the fancy detail on tracks goes ahead of the accuracy or physics.

Btw detail on tracks also affects the feel of speed. The more stuff goes by your monitor, the faster it feels. :)

Satorian

12th January 2006, 15:20

I guess si3v will do LODs on the track, so I wouldn't worry if you don't like/need details and scenery.

If some of you people want to try racing namie, feel free to take a look in http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?p=2843023#post2843023
I'm probably going to be online again today around 21 CET (20 GMT) hosting the server, so please do join. :)

The interface is wonky and sometimes the synchro on entering the game doesn't work, collisions don't work (so race clean ;) ) and you can't join a race in progress if you are wondering why you can't join although the game is being displayed.

I will post the IP later in that thread again. :tilt:

ajp71

12th January 2006, 19:31

Yes, physics comes first but detail on tracks is important too. If it lacks in detail it doesn't look or feel like a real track. It's not that important when actually driving but in case with this GPL version it's just too plain nowadays. In real life it's a track where every corner is different but in this GPL version many of them at least looks the same, because there is no extra detail which would remind you about the braking points etc. :) Of course I don't agree when the fancy detail on tracks goes ahead of the accuracy or physics.

Btw detail on tracks also affects the feel of speed. The more stuff goes by your monitor, the faster it feels. :)

Firstly there were no braking markers at the 'ring in the 60s and even in the 80s there were only a few. As for the writing on the track it would instantly loose the feel of 60s racing as it definatley was not there in the 60s, some may have got there by the 80s, but frankly from an in car cam you don't notice it in the 956. If you have the 956 In Car DVD then you'll see that really you notice very few extra objects round the 'ring, (except for the tires walls etc. that weren't there in the 70s) with the exception of a few breathtaking views, but I doubt almost any version will be able to recreate the depth perseption from a number of miles away :shrug:

You are right that detail is very important, in the track surface, on the tracks that use a 3D mesh to determine geometery (LFS, nk, ISI) they can simply be so undetailed, and therefore bumpy that they cannot be driven on. I'd still rather have an accurately modeled track that is just fantastic to drive on, even if you have to use a bit more imagination ;) It's all personal preference, but I've always felt the Papy system does work very well, there are a large number of tracks out there, some are bad ugly ones that look like they've been made in MS Paint but there are some real gems as well. I don't know if you have N2003 but I guess you'd not even look at a track like Symmons Plains simply because of the graphics. If you gave it a chance you'd find it's one of the tracks in any sim. Attached a few pics of the best N2003 tracks, none of which are let down by the graphics IMO, not saying they couldn't been done better but they are still great as they are.

deggis

17th January 2006, 12:00

Firstly there were no braking markers at the 'ring in the 60s and even in the 80s there were only a few.
I didn't mean braking markers. When I said reminding the braking points I meant all the extra little detail on the track/scenery which helps to remind hard corners on such a long track.

As for the writing on the track it would instantly loose the feel of 60s racing as it definatley was not there in the 60s, some may have got there by the 80s, but frankly from an in car cam you don't notice it in the 956.
I wonder is that netKar Pro version made to look like the track looks right now. Because it's made for the GT '70 mod of course it would be logical to make 70's version. But I don't care as long as it's accurate for the year it tries to simulate. :)

I don't know if you have N2003 but I guess you'd not even look at a track like Symmons Plains simply because of the graphics.
I don't have N2003 and actually I've never even played it but what do you mean by that? I think the original subject was that why the netKar Pro Nyrb version should look graphically like 8-years-old game just because we don't need to see a bird flying on the sky while driving. :)

ajp71

17th January 2006, 19:00

ATHome

17th January 2006, 22:17

As for the GPL 'ring there are plenty of braking reference points to use (except in a few parts on the back of the circuit where it all looks the same on the 956 DVD). What I'm still trying to argue is that having overly complex graphics (regardless of how well you can play them) will always take more time to get your eyes to see what's really happening and become apart of the picture.

Real life has many many details that can distract your attention from the track, so I don't really get your point of why not having nice looking graphics with many details:scratchch

Eldanor

18th January 2006, 10:02

So... what do you guys think ahbout netKar Pro? It makes a lot of big promises, and I have to say it looks great! Do you think they will keep them, or we will be dissapointed like it happened with rFactor?

AndroidXP

18th January 2006, 10:29

Well, we have to see what the final product looks like. Namie shows the potential NKPro has, but nothing more.

For me, rFactor was no disappointment, simply because I already knew that no matter what you do to the ISI engine, it's still the same old "floating on the track" feel everytime, so it actually lived up to my expectations, namely it being crap (IMO, remember).

Nevertheless, I'm eagerly awaiting NKPro's release because Namie simply doesn't cut it. Especially the newest track, Monaco, shows its weak points and this pretty much soaked all the fun out of it.

ajp71

18th January 2006, 13:13

Real life has many many details that can distract your attention from the track, so I don't really get your point of why not having nice looking graphics with many details:scratchch

In reality there are infanatley more tiny details everywhere that big objects aren't so distracting. I'm sure if you painted every trackside object in floresant pink drivers would get distracted by them.

The point is in reality drivers will not be constantly checking these side objects. On a screen you get no concept of pheripheral vision so adding these objects in full detail draws ones attention to what are just flashes of colour in the corner of your eye IRL, I maintain there are three ways to make these seem real - 1. Blur them 2. Make them less detailed. 3. Using trick/curved screens track IR etc.

Until we are all buying new specialist screens we simply can't have unblurred objects at full detail.

Out of intrest what do you think of the GTR2 screenshots, I personally think they look awful, sure they've got much more advanced lighting than any Papy product but because of this it looks artificial. The Papy sims just give a much plainer image for your brain to add the depth to.

durbster

18th January 2006, 13:41

DejaVu

18th January 2006, 14:41

:pillepall gtr2 looks artificial vs papy sims? rofl

ajp71

18th January 2006, 15:41

I still think GTP looks better than GTR2, of course I don't know what it looks like in motion, which is where the Papy graphics outshine just about everything.

I couldn't find any decent high res GTP screens so these really don't do it justice, still not bad IMO.

http://www.bhmotorsports.com/GTR2/screenshot/15894
http://www.gtpzone.com/images/gtp-screen1-large.jpg
http://www.gtpzone.com/images/gtp-screen2-large.jpg

TagForce

18th January 2006, 16:18

I must say you're putting forward an extremely bizarre argument ajp. You seem to be suggesting that graphics should not resemble real life at all, and should only really consist of the fundamental elements e.g. road and cars.

The job of graphics in a computer game is to increase involvement and illusion. The closer they are to reality, the more immersive the environment. Users aren't going to be distracted by a tree, a spectator or a hotdog stand on a computer game any more than they are in real life.

ajp's argument is exactly what you say... On stills (renders) the environment may look real, but the way we look at the screen and objects make them completely unreal because of the amount of detail we get... What you see on the screen, is not what you'd see in a real car on the same track... So he pleads for less detail to make it more realistic.

DejaVu

18th January 2006, 16:53

hmm, looks nice actually - but that screen of gtr is very low quality, the new screens are awesome :thumb:

deggis

18th January 2006, 18:30

hmm, looks nice actually - but that screen of gtr is very low quality, the new screens are awesome :thumb:
http://www.sim-racer.de/index.php?area=2&p=gallery&action=showimages&galid=92

ajp71

18th January 2006, 18:47

Those shots are impressive yet the shading still makes everything either far too glossy or matte.

Tweaker

18th January 2006, 18:51

Yeah this image (http://www.sim-racer.de/system/pic.php?img_id=929&galid=92) of the wet track in front of the car is just way too icy and glossy. In real life it would never be a perfectly smooth water surface like that... it would be in blotches. And the fact that they have this glossy reflectiveness, it just makes the cars appear to float on the pavement... (as seen in that Maranello pic)

And particularly, there is no spray or wash coming FROM the tires, it is just some rocketbooster-mist-puff coming out the rear :zombie: Still old GTR to me, and just visually it looks fine, but things like this just bug me.

ajp71

18th January 2006, 19:00

These are so blatantley edited, reminds me of err... Codies :doh:

http://www.sim-racer.de/system/pic.php?img_id=928&size=full

Obvious photoshoped blur, couldn't even be bothered/able to run AA on the cockpit on the machine used to take offical screenshots. Also the cockpit just looks too detailed for me, I'd rather not have details like the LG plate as the more detail you add in one place the more you notice the lack of it in other places.

Tweaker

18th January 2006, 19:04

Ermmm well I cannot open that pic (just get a bunch of code and crap), have a different link???

BTW, I saw this in the code:

(probably the tool they used to resize the pics for the web, but still, silly :p)

AndroidXP

18th January 2006, 19:12

Meh, it works in IE. And yes, it's an obvious photoshop...

ajp71

18th January 2006, 21:24

This one: http://www.sim-racer.de/index.php?p=gallerypic&img_id=928&galid=92&area=2&ascdesc=desc

Intresting find tweak, could never have guessed :D

deggis

18th January 2006, 22:29

Funny that almost all the comments regarding GTR 2 bash the graphics. Like it was the most important thing in a sim. On the other hand for SimBim (or now Blimey! Games) it has been (for example in GTL). :)

Tweaker

19th January 2006, 01:29

It isn't the most important, but the way I feel about graphics that are blatantly overdone or not done properly.... it just is horrible. I wouldn't stand having the glassy track, it just doesn't look right. Neither does racing in the rain look like that at all.

I love the detail of the cars and interiors, they get that stuff spot on, but a lot of the small miscellaneous exterior & track effects make a big difference in either making it look good or look really bad. I love watching replays too, and having something that looks like that Maranello or something, it would look wierd. Take that screenshot, and show it to some people, see what their first reactions and comments are. A friend of mine just said "WTF?" "I never knew Ferraris could drive on glass tables, damn"