The Project CARS Video Thread

  • Thread starter Ameer67
  • 5,999 comments
  • 442,537 views
On it's own PCars looks very realistic but when you put it side by side real life footage, you don't think as much. Real life will ALWAYS look better than games.
Sometimes I have thought PCars looks more real lmao and I can't tell the difference in this vid tbh, but perhaps that's just me? (The BAC Mono video)
 
Last edited:
Sometimes I have thought PCars looks more real lmao and I can't tell the difference in this vid tbh, but perhaps that's just me? (The BAC Mono video)
The colour palette usually gives a game away. Colours are always more vibrant a game than with onboard video. What I find really encouraging in the video though is that the sim driver is sawing on the wheel through the corners just like the real driver, indicating to me the physics are acting as they should in the places they should. They don't match exactly for obvious reasons, because the sim driver and real driver are reacting to the different forces created by the timing of their individual and distinct inputs, but generally speaking they are very similar.
 
Sometimes I have thought PCars looks more real lmao and I can't tell the difference in this vid tbh, but perhaps that's just me? (The BAC Mono video)
Youtube footage is very often bad quality, using el-cheapo cams and less than optimal technique. Overexposure, lack of shutter electronics and rickety mounts seems to be prevalent, resulting in blown highs, lack of deep blacks, wavy picture etc.. Anyway, footage is just that, footage - i.e. as seen through (often a very bad) camera, while the sim basically emulates what you'd see through your own eyes. Direct capture from a sim will have a greater dynamic range, often better resolution, perfect focus, no anomalies from cheap image sensors and crappy optics and so on. So in sum - yes, sim footage can sometimes look more "real life" than bad footage, obviously apart from the giveaway stuff such as too few and low-poly trackside detail, animations - things like that. Note that this is not a comment on any specific videos, nor saying that sim graphics is perfect, just general observations.
 
Last edited:
Youtube footage is very often bad quality, using el-cheapo cams and less then optimal technique. Overexposure, lack of shutter electronics and rickety mounts seems to be prevalent, resulting in blown highs, lack of deep blacks, wavy picture etc.. Anyway, footage is just that, footage - i.e. as seen through (often a very bad) camera, while the sim basically emulates what you'd see through your own eyes. Direct capture from a sim will have a greater dynamic range, often better resolution, perfect focus, no anomalies from cheap image sensors and crappy optics and so on. So in sum - yes, sim footage can sometimes look more "real life" than bad footage, obviously apart from the giveaway stuff such as too few and low-poly trackside detail, animations - things like that. Note that this is not a comment on any specific videos, nor saying that sim graphics is perfect, just general observations.
Thanks for such a detailed explanation. 👍
 
The colour palette usually gives a game away. Colours are always more vibrant a game than with onboard video. What I find really encouraging in the video though is that the sim driver is sawing on the wheel through the corners just like the real driver, indicating to me the physics are acting as they should in the places they should. They don't match exactly for obvious reasons, because the sim driver and real driver are reacting to the different forces created by the timing of their individual and distinct inputs, but generally speaking they are very similar.

That's my impression too. The first thing I do when I get a new racing game is decrease the colour saturation.
 
Last edited:
Reason there's FIATs out there :D
It's classic racing driver logic. Completely ignore physics and then you have crashed like these. And these:
Top%20Gear%20S12_Buses_thumb.jpg
 
Back