Well This is probably the reason we dont see eye to eye. You think that having the wheel in a 1:1 ratio is a "novelty".
Yes I agree unobservant and uninterested are two different things, but you are the former. You specifically said its "close" or "matches" when in fact its nowhere near. Being off by a factor of over 3x is not close or matching by any definition. Unless ofcourse you mean the wheel turns in the right direction at least.
If you would reply to and read my whole response, i clarified what i meant. It's close enough considering it only turns 180. At the beginning of steering, up to around 45 degrees i think, it's very close, and then from there on out it lags way behind. That being said, like i said earlier, i pretty much never have to turn the wheel more than 180 degrees when i play, so it's always been "fairly close" under most circumstances.
So after all these years of playing the game you had to "just" go and watch the wheel now? I thought you were just UN-interested and not unobservant? So you should have known about it but not cared. Oops?
Being uninterested, i have not noticed it for quite some time. As a result i wanted to be sure i had a clear vision of what i was talking about so i could actually respond to this thread. If you're uninterested in something but have noticed it years before, that means that your memory can't be hazy? Makes sense....
The one zero posted is good because it shows directly how much more you turn your sim wheel vs the in game wheel does. But this should be the first thing you noitce playing with your 900 degree wheel anyway.
The video I posted takes this a step further and shows how much the wheel really needs to be turned in real life in the same car and track.
Unless i didn't care to pay attention to that, and cared more about paying attention to the other cars and the track....
Also, no, your's is still a stupid example. If you look at any other instance of this technology the steering won't be the same since it's trying to recreate what a human did based on a small amount of data. As such the steering already won't be the same. The only thing that could be taken from that small bit is possibly the amount of steering angle, but it's still a bad example. Zer0 has the best example, hands down.
Please. Everything Ive said has been fair and logical. You've just come out bassically saying "it doesn't bother me so your opinion doesn't matter"
Yes, because implying i don't have common sense is not ad hominem.... You're right, apparently it is rare to come across these days.
Also, for the record, i never said your opinion doesn't matter.
.
Lol complete nonsense. What irks me the most is PD pay careful attention to interior details like gadgets, dials, screens and clocks, and if any of these are even slightly wrong people will and HAVE complained about this stuff, and I'm sure you'd "thumbs up" it and say yea yea! what an outrage the clock doesn't blink correctly in the Toyota Prius 07 Fanny Pack edition! PD FIX IT.
The have been HUGE complaints about for example about Jagged Shadows in cockpit view. Shadows that have jagged edges MATTER more than an an issue like the steering wheel being under a state of complete and utter ambiguous movements?
sif.
Actually i wouldn't be one of those people. In GT5 i thought the snow and rain graphics were crap, the shadows left a ton to be desired, and when smoke surrounded the cars it made them jagged and ugly. But i didn't complain about these things because they didn't matter. What did matter was that the AI was horrid and there were so many things missing from the game that shouldn't have been.
I would gladly take every single cockpit view being a standard view from GT5 if that meant they got all of the other things that matter right. What i'm seeing inside the car doesn't matter. Seeing the windows and what's outside of them does. Having the steering wheel on screen not rotate the right amount sucks, but of all of the things wrong with these games, it's definitely one of the items that should be on the bottom of the list. That's all i'm saying.
.
