If T10 gave this game an option to be a hard-core simulation it would be epic

  • Thread starter ctdc67
  • 54 comments
  • 2,597 views
362
United States
United States
I hope you are old enough to see my point and I do have a point. ...

. Requesting hardcore simulation physics option in a game shouldn't threaten anybody.

Mario cart racing can use real world cars but don't think it's anything but a skin.
 
1,642
Italy
Italia
There is a lot of opposition towards my post and I believe it has to do with our age differences(the 67 is for 1967) and that changes your perspective on what is fun. But also the fact that if you want a Ferrari 458 or a Nissan 370 in the game why would you not want it to perform exactly like it should..Simulation. otherwise just not go through the time and expense of licensing real world cars..
You are 3 years older than me. I don't believe is because of age differences. I just think that Horizon or NFS are meant to be arcadish to be fun. I also believe that is not that simple to implement both physics in an open-world environment. Now, if the devs would decide and managed to implement sim physics in the next installment I would definitely not said "what a waste of time".
 
3,866
Canada
Brandon, MB
Silver-Arrows21
There is a lot of opposition towards my post

Because it isn't a very good idea, for one. You've had it explained to you why it isn't a very good idea, but let me add one more: you do realize that the reason why Forza Horizon specifically has managed to succeed in the racing game space, contrary to every other title, is that it is realistic enough for most people's tastes, but also accessible enough to make it worthwhile?

To abandon that and completely re-write code base for a handling model that 90% of people won't use, and that 10% will invariably complain about because it isn't 'hardcore' (Read: frustrating) enough for them is asinine, especially when you consider the amount of time needed to get this off the ground.

Not every game needs or should be a hardcore sim, there is a market for arcade racing games. Unlike you, who seems to think that having realistic cars = it needs to be a sim racer, which as mentioned, is such a pie in the sky reasoning that it almost doesn't deserve to be entertained even semi-faithfully.
 
10
China
China
Requesting hardcore simulation physics option in a game shouldn't threaten anybody.
Especially when this game is already working with at least 2 * different sets of physics...

* An "Auto Drive" option presents that I'm unsure which set it's based on... (or even on its own set?) Anyway in my quick testing this mode is unlikely to be used mostly due to its dumb behavior. (terrible driving... would be a different story if it can match or be better than the top tier drivers)



Mario cart racing can use real world cars but don't think it's anything but a skin.
Check the Asphalt series:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCphl7N613vv9pgds_LdvpGg


...The real UFO simulator.



I hope you are old enough to see my point and I do have a point...
If you are already experimenting with my suggestion:


Please do me a favor:

What's the maximum graphics potential of Assetto Corsa in general? I'd like to learn more on the subject.







...the reason why Forza Horizon specifically has managed to succeed in the racing game space, contrary to every other title, is that it is realistic enough for most people's tastes, but also accessible enough to make it worthwhile?
...Then why Need for Speed: The Run, which has physics of exactly the same type as Forza, had such a terrible market reception at its time?


In fact, quite a number of the complaints were right on the physics... mainly for the car doesn't behave like an UFO as it "should".

Which sort of contributed to the dissolution of the studio working for the title (EA Black Box), and the physics of the future NFS going south completely...



I've done in-depth analysis on Forza Horizon 4, I find the game has poor details (mainly on cars, mostly due to its "quantity over quality" strategy), and the driving experience in general was actually bad...

What really make the game stands out are:
  • Outstanding graphics + photo mode
  • Inclusion of popular cars
  • Not so bad car exterior customization
  • A working (clumsy though...) livery editor



To abandon that and completely re-write code base for a handling model that 90% of people won't use, and that 10% will invariably complain about because it isn't 'hardcore' (Read: frustrating) enough for them is asinine, especially when you consider the amount of time needed to get this off the ground.
...Actually simply copy & paste the physics from the hardcore inclined Forza Motorsport series takes far less effort than reinventing something new.



Not every game needs or should be a hardcore sim, there is a market for arcade racing games.
Why must it have to choose... when it can actually be both?

Isn't everyone happy this way?..
 
3,866
Canada
Brandon, MB
Silver-Arrows21
Especially when this game is already working with at least 2 * different sets of physics...

* An "Auto Drive" option presents that I'm unsure which set it's based on... (or even on its own set?) Anyway in my quick testing this mode is unlikely to be used mostly due to its dumb behavior. (terrible driving... would be a different story if it can match or be better than the top tier drivers)

There's a massive, innate difference in having a 'physics set' which is really stuffing the game with enough aids and settings so that those who are completely new to either the series, or racing games as a whole, can actually survive, and are expected to grow out of it and ween themselves off the aids little by little based on their gained experience, and building a completely new code base to deal with hardcore handling that, as mentioned, the vast majority of the player base won't use.

...Then why Need for Speed: The Run, which has physics of exactly the same type as Forza, had such a terrible market reception at its time?

Why the hell are you making this comparison between a game released in 2018, and a game that is going to a decade old in a year's time? This is legitimately pointless, considering that The Run and FH4 are completely different games in completely different time frames and don't deserve to be compared the way you are trying to force a comparison.

In fact, quite a number of the complaints were right on the physics... mainly for the car doesn't behave like an UFO as it "should".

Which sort of contributed to the dissolution of the studio working for the title (EA Black Box), and the physics of the future NFS going south completely...

No, it doesn't. Once again - what point does this actually have on the flawed argument being had? What point is there in reiterating the death of Black Box in a thread about the supposed feasibility of a hardcore physics engine in FH4?

...Actually simply copy & paste the physics from the hardcore inclined Forza Motorsport series takes far less effort than reinventing something new.

...you do realize that would take as much effort, yes? This isn't the one to one thing you think it is.

Why must it have to choose... when it can actually be both?

You've had it explained why it wouldn't work within Horizon 4. Seriously, stop.
 
Last edited:

VXR

10,234
United Kingdom
Plymouth, UK
motorforum
One thing it would need is a much slower steering rate, and higher grip levels so cars actually take corners like a real car does with mechanical grip and tyres within the limits of adhesion.
 
13,664
United States
Los Angeles, CA
lImaRobotl
Especially when this game is already working with at least 2 * different sets of physics...
No it isn’t. It’s working with one physics model with aids thrown in. That’s it, plain and simple.
 
10
China
China
There's a massive, innate difference in having a 'physics set'... and building a completely new code base to deal with hardcore handling...
...You don't seem to really realize how things work really.

Doesn't the program (or the term "code base" if you prefer) have to be modified, in order to support the additional "physics sets"?



Why the hell are you making this comparison between a game released in 2018, and a game that is going to a decade old in a year's time? This is legitimately pointless, considering that The Run and FH4 are completely different games in completely different time frames and don't deserve to be compared...
I wonder what you were referring to then...
...the reason why Forza Horizon specifically has managed to succeed in the racing game space, contrary to every other title, is that it is realistic enough for most people's tastes, but also accessible enough to make it worthwhile?



...Actually simply copy & paste the physics from the hardcore inclined Forza Motorsport series takes far less effort than reinventing something new.
...you do realize that would take as much effort, yes? This isn't the one to one thing you think it is.
What?.. Why would you even think that "copy & paste" was going to take as much effort as invention?



Not every game needs or should be a hardcore sim, there is a market for arcade racing games.
Why must it have to choose... when it can actually be both?
You've had it explained why it wouldn't work within Horizon 4. Seriously, stop.
But none of the points are valid enough...


Why you seemed so angry, mate? Does it really bother you?..

Adding new physics sets to the game won't have any impact on your expected gaming experience, you can still enjoy the UFO or whatsoever in whatever way you like. There's nothing to lose.

Maybe you can even enjoy it better... as new physics sets that specifically designed to cater your likes can get added too.







A system without input... would be frozen.
Yes, exactly, but it still has nothing to do with the physics. It's just how it reads your inputs.
Then how can you be sure that the physics even exists... if everything is frozen?



"Assisted steering will use Forza's artificial intelligence to guide your steering when necessary.
Normal steering gives you full control but dampens certain physical effects to make driving easier."
Yes, so you've proved my point, That it's a damper that physically affects the steering. Not the physics the game is simulating.
I believe it's clear enough...

If you had problems interpreting the words, refer to a dictionary service. (e.g. Google Translate)
 
3,866
Canada
Brandon, MB
Silver-Arrows21
I really like how the two posts before yours that clearly explained what Auto-Drive actually is, and that it wasn't the supposed second physics system you think it was, rather applying every single driving aid possible to the one and only physics system FH4 offers, was ignored, and yet you're accusing me of not knowing how things work.

I wonder what you were referring to then...

That's clearly meant to mean games that are comparable to FH. Specifically Ghost's NFS output, and The Crew. It's you who decides to pull out a NFS game that is approaching ten years since release, and isn't even comparable to FH4 if we're going by the generation gap, considering one is a sandbox, open world racing game, and the other is a linear racing experience. Not only that, but you also try to be smart and drive it down a hole where we re-litigate why EA decided to close down Black Box, which is completely unrelated to the actual thing being talked about, and something that has been talked about in other places on the internet.

What?.. Why would you even think that "copy & paste" was going to take as much effort as invention?

Lets say then, to entertain your argument, that Playground did actually decide to copy and paste the physics of Forza Motorsport into Horizon.

- How does Motorsport's physics model handle snow and ice, something that it never has to deal with?
- How does Motorsport's physics model handle rough terrain and the jumps that are present within Horizon?
- How does Motorsport's physics model handle off road terrain, something that is a danger to racers in Motorsport, but is a key part of the environment in Horizon?

All that, plus some other things that I don't have on the top of my head at the moment, are what need to be addressed just for this simple scenario you've put across to be a reality. Which, for the point of this thread (which is clearly reflected in the title) would be too much work just so that 5% or less of the player base will actually care for it, and not pick it apart anyway for not being realistic or 'hardcore' enough.

If you had problems interpreting the words, refer to a dictionary service. (e.g. Google Translate)

Mature. This coming from the guy who completely ignored what a portion of the game involved just so they could continue to act like this is a simple one to one thing. But we're the ones who don't know how things work, right?
 
18
United States
Denver
I guess it's all a matter of what your purpose is. I'm also born in 1967, and I love Forza Horizon 4 because I can spend hours doing what I'd love to do in real life, which is throw any number of cars around and drive like an eejit with very little consequence. I drive in sim chair, hood view, manual with clutch, simulated steering and no assists except ABS, H shifter, analog handbrake. For Horizon, that's about as "simulation" as it gets and it's a decent workout and I think the actual car simulation is good. I haven't played another game on the Xbox apart from racing games that feel anything like the realism in terms of car dynamics.. and personally racing games now bore the crap out of me now with the possible exception of Dirt 4 because I have and always will be a very scrappy driver.

To me there are three sides to the "physics". Car physics, being one part, and with tuning etc. I think Forza have found a good balance, but I'd be fine if they went further in this and brought even more realism that challenged me to drive better, but I'm ok with it. (Historically Horizon 1 was further behind its counterpart FM4 back in the day than H4 is behind FM7 now IMHO)

Traction physics being another part, and here I'm ok with it too. There's a basic level "no, that car ain't going to do that" in Horizon 4 which should't really be fully realistic because I'm not going to take a Lambo into a quary in real life, but I might want to when I'm tooling around in the virtual.. again, because I want to drive like an eejit.

EDIT: Just remembered that when I took the Mercedes 18 wheeler cab out in Horizon 4 it flippin sucked for this reason. Got stuck on everything which makes me more of a HARD NO on changes to this one.

Then there's the physics of what happens when you hit something. I think decisions here are tricky. If like me your purpose is driving the crap out of a car in a way that you would probably kill yourself if you were doing it in real life, having an "out" if I lose it on a corner and can pull things back after going through some shrubbery, then I like that. If I could switch on "simulated world physics" in the game I'm not sure that I would because I'm trying to drive "on the edge" and if I screw up I don't want that to a disaster like in actual reality. If that mode was available Eliminator would be practically impossible to have fun with - although I guess that's debatable. I sometimes wonder if I'd win more often if there was some kind of performance bonus for using less assists.. I definitely have to work harder for a win than someone using assists and following view.

Related pet peeve: the irony of people being on the pure simulation side of the discussion only to reveal that they drive sitting 20 feet in the air behind their cars :) I've seen that a lot over the years of this debate which started with Horizon 1.
 
10
China
China
("Auto Drive") ...wasn't the supposed second physics system you think it was...
If it does count... that would be the third.
I don't even know how a game would work with two different physics models, especially when it comes to racing each other.
Actually Forza is one of the examples... ("Simulation" vs. "Normal" in the settings)
Especially when this game is already working with at least 2 * different sets of physics...

* An "Auto Drive" option presents that I'm unsure which set it's based on... (or even on its own set?)



...the one and only physics system FH4 offers, was ignored, and yet you're accusing me of not knowing how things work.
It appears that you did not know indeed...



...isn't even comparable to FH4 if we're going by the generation gap, considering one is a sandbox, open world racing game, and the other is a linear racing experience.
Why can't non-open world driving games be compared with the open world ones? Don't they share the same core mechanism (driving)?..

Also note: calling it "linear racing experience" is simply untrue.



- How does Motorsport's physics model handle snow and ice, something that it never has to deal with?
- How does Motorsport's physics model handle rough terrain and the jumps that are present within Horizon?
- How does Motorsport's physics model handle off road terrain, something that is a danger to racers in Motorsport, but is a key part of the environment in Horizon?
Copy & Paste, leave things as they are.

At least we'll have a working physics for the tarmac... Better than something that doesn't work at all. (given the Motorsport's physics doesn't evolve at all)



...5% or less of the player base will actually care...
...90% of people won't use, and that 10% will invariably complain...
Could you please provide sufficient statistics to prove the numbers?..



But we're the ones who don't know how things work, right?
How do you know?
 
362
United States
United States
Most people paying FH now like what it does(I play it and all I can think of is, what if.

The hardcore simulation physics would be for a new(old. lol)group and more buyers.

When you go off the track in a Ferrari it will get damaged and stuck.......
 
7,521
Denmark
Denmark
Physics in FH4 are fine as they currently are, and in my opinion better than FM7 in some aspects. If "hard-core simulation" implies high realism across the board, then I'm quite sure the game would become less epic. Surviving the massive jumps is part of what makes Horizon an easy-going and fun experience, and a hard-core simulation would most certainly ruin that. On the other hand, FM8 has my green light to become a highly realistic simulation.
 
13,664
United States
Los Angeles, CA
lImaRobotl
I believe it's clear enough...
What's clear enough is that you're conflating things here. That's about it.

If you had problems interpreting the words, refer to a dictionary service
The words are quite clear, you just don't make any sense with what you're saying. Also google translate is not a dictionary service. What are you expecting that to do, translate English to English?

Then how can you be sure that the physics even exists... if everything is frozen?
That makes absolutely no sense and there is no correlation. It's really quite simple to tell if the physics exist or not, put your controller down and watch the AI drive. otherwise the AI would not be able to drive at all if the physics "didn't exist" because the input method is removed.

For someone who pretends that they know what they're talking about you sure seem to grasp really hard at things that don't really have anything to do with what you're talking about.
 
Last edited:
10
China
China
What's clear enough is that you're conflating things here. That's about it.
...Not I'm conflating things but things are conflated by nature.



What are you expecting that to do, translate English to English? (or other languages)
Isn't it exactly what dictionaries do?..



Actually Forza is one of the examples... ("Simulation" vs. "Normal" in the settings)
No, that's not one at all. That's just two different input models, and has absolutely nothing to do with physics changing.
Isn't the input an important part of the physics?..
The input model is important to drive a car. It has nothing to do with the physics model...
A system without input... would be frozen.
Yes, exactly, but it still has nothing to do with the physics. It's just how it reads your inputs.
Then how can you be sure that the physics even exists... if everything is frozen?
That makes absolutely no sense and there is no correlation. It's really quite simple to tell if the physics exist or not, put your controller down and watch the AI drive. otherwise the AI would not be able to drive at all if the physics "didn't exist" because the input method is removed.
...At this point whether the physics exists or not is no longer the point, the point is: whether it exists or not there'll be zero difference to the outcome.



...don't really have anything to do with what you're talking about.
They do... you don't see.
The words are quite clear, you just don't make any sense with what you're saying.
 
13,664
United States
Los Angeles, CA
lImaRobotl
...Not I'm conflating things but things are conflated by nature.
:lol:

Isn't it exactly what dictionaries do?..
No. Dictionaries tell you the definition of words. Translators translate words from your language to another. Again, conflating things. If you don't understand the difference between the two than I don't understand how we can expect to believe what you say about something way more complex.

...At this point whether the physics exists or not is no longer the point, the point is: whether it exists or not there'll be zero difference to the outcome.
That's because you're just either intentionally misleading, or you're absolutely confused about what you're talking about.