PDA

View Full Version : project cars desctuction physics



fahadj2003
28-03-2016, 04:32
well, i know its too late for pcars1 to do anything about it
but i'm hoping pcars2 will be better

aren't the cars too.. 'stiff'?
check this out https://youtu.be/vdOBsBf-hhY
in pcars, cars barely get wrecked, anndd they never flip. ever.
even bumping into other cars feels weird and like they're made out of indestructible metal, that has no rebound effect..

*jus throwing my opinion*
its a great game but this will vastly improve it.

kevin kirk
28-03-2016, 04:36
isn't this a matter of car makers forcing a limit on the damage done to the car?

fahadj2003
28-03-2016, 04:56
isn't this a matter of car makers forcing a limit on the damage done to the car?

how so? and why?

Rambo_Commando
28-03-2016, 05:02
I've seen cars flip. I've had my car, formula rookie, flip on several occasions. The car was not driveable after that and had to retire the race.

Cheesenium
28-03-2016, 05:10
Part of it is manufacturer restriction where SMS cant do much about it.

I agree that cars should be able to DNF in major crashes. AMS does that aspect really well, where I ram into another AI car at 150kmph and both of us totalled. Not much of a spectacular crash visually, it felt realistic.

As it stands, it is really hard to crash out and DNF a car in pcars now. It is quite easy to damage a car so badly till I have to DNF. It is not bad now, I wont say its the best.

kevin kirk
28-03-2016, 05:22
how so? and why?
...oh, I mean from a visual aspect. Sure you can knock yourself out of the race. I was talking about the way the car looks after a big crash. If that is the case,and I'm just guessing

fahadj2003
28-03-2016, 06:16
Part of it is manufacturer restriction where SMS cant do much about it.

I agree that cars should be able to DNF in major crashes. AMS does that aspect really well, where I ram into another AI car at 150kmph and both of us totalled. Not much of a spectacular crash visually, it felt realistic.

As it stands, it is really hard to crash out and DNF a car in pcars now. It is quite easy to damage a car so badly till I have to DNF. It is not bad now, I wont say its the best.

what do you mean manufacturers restriction? and why'd they even want that? i mean, why hide it? its not like it'll make their cars look bad considering ALL cars crash and theres nothing as such bad about it (from a safety marketing prospective, like oh my car is safer than theirs), and we have seen the insides of a car very well, in terms of proprietary stuff.. so why make shitty crash physics?
and, its a racing sim. cant have racing sim if it doesnt sim crash that well. i mean walls of tyres feel like walls of concrete in the game.

you cam consider blood/gore to be an issue in terms of age restrictions but thats a lame excuse.. so why?

Joshua Healy
28-03-2016, 06:31
what do you mean manufacturers restriction? and why'd they even want that? i mean, why hide it? its not like it'll make their cars look bad considering ALL cars crash and theres nothing as such bad about it (from a safety marketing prospective, like oh my car is safer than theirs), and we have seen the insides of a car very well, in terms of proprietary stuff.. so why make shitty crash physics?
and, its a racing sim. cant have racing sim if it doesnt sim crash that well. i mean walls of tyres feel like walls of concrete in the game.

you cam consider blood/gore to be an issue in terms of age restrictions but thats a lame excuse.. so why?

It may be a lame reason on the part of the manufacture but it is in fact the reason. Manufactures don't want their cars to appear unsafe in any state and most have specific requests (IIRC Ford specifically wanted no doors or panels coming completely off the car), it's strange when crashes are a part of racing but it's their call. Unfortunately it's a choice between licensed vehicles or realistic visual damage.

Cheesenium
28-03-2016, 06:48
what do you mean manufacturers restriction? and why'd they even want that? i mean, why hide it? its not like it'll make their cars look bad considering ALL cars crash and theres nothing as such bad about it (from a safety marketing prospective, like oh my car is safer than theirs), and we have seen the insides of a car very well, in terms of proprietary stuff.. so why make shitty crash physics?
and, its a racing sim. cant have racing sim if it doesnt sim crash that well. i mean walls of tyres feel like walls of concrete in the game.

you cam consider blood/gore to be an issue in terms of age restrictions but thats a lame excuse.. so why?

Lame excuse? Thats what happening in the game right now. Fictional cars like Marek LMP1 has better damage models than licensed cars. It is either you make fictional content that no one will restrict you from doing what you want or follow what the rights owners wants.

Manufacturers do not want their cars to be portrayed unsafe as there are games, like older Codemaster games did have some overdone crashed models with heavily damaged passenger cell which is largely impossible in real life now with safety technology advancements. Manufacturers do not like out of proportion damage cars that they own the right to it. Either you play by their rules or make your own fictional content.

It is a racing game, however, the major difference is, pcars isnt a demolish derby. It does not need Wreckfest or BeamNG level of crash physics. If the bumpers can detach and paint jobs fade off from contact, I have little issues with crash because this game is about racing, not crashing your car to the wall. My issue with pcars damage system is more on the fact that cars are very difficult to DNF and the damage of components feels a bit scripted.

fahadj2003
28-03-2016, 07:42
well, thats sad. i dunno who manufacturers are trying to fool with that.
but even aside, they can make crash physics more realistic without having to impliment visual damage..
like all cars feel waaayyy to solid and unrealistic. and i have been playing it since uts release on june and ive maybe seen 2 crashes where the car even lifts off of the ground. flipping is farr away.

also, its a racing sim and crashes and bumps are part of racing, imo, it would add an extra challange/dynamic to the overall game if crash/bump physics are taken more seriously.

Patrick Kulinski
28-03-2016, 07:46
I've been working in the automobile industry for a while now and there are really harsh requirements that car manufacturers apply to themselves, at times much more harsh than what lawmakers impose. F.e. it is true that some manufactures never want a passenger door to even open (let alone detach), or that the passenger cell should stay intact after every imaginable crash. I worked in a department constructing doors once, making my diploma thesis there (Constructing door components by replacing steel with fibre-reinforced plastics), and I was shown safety regulations. The FMVSS (as an example, European ECE regulations are somewhat simiilar) requirements were tricky to meet, but then manufacturer requirements entered the stage and all of a sudden the hill I wanted to climb became a mountain. :eek:

So I can understand why manufacturers don't want to see too much heavy damage in games. It's because they don't want to see heavy damage in real life either.

Konan
28-03-2016, 09:02
I've been working in the automobile industry for a while now and there are really harsh requirements that car manufacturers apply to themselves, at times much more harsh than what lawmakers impose. F.e. it is true that some manufactures never want a passenger door to even open (let alone detach), or that the passenger cell should stay intact after every imaginable crash. I worked in a department constructing doors once, making my diploma thesis there (Constructing door components by replacing steel with fibre-reinforced plastics), and I was shown safety regulations. The FMVSS (as an example, European ECE regulations are somewhat simiilar) requirements were tricky to meet, but then manufacturer requirements entered the stage and all of a sudden the hill I wanted to climb became a mountain. :eek:

So I can understand why manufacturers don't want to see too much heavy damage in games. It's because they don't want to see heavy damage in real life either.

True but that doesn't take away the fact that a door CAN open in a crash,parts CAN detach in real life,etc....
Putting up restrictions in games for a marketing/reputation point of view is pointless and stupid imo...in these days one just has to open "Google" , type in crash followed by a brand of car and you can see all you want...
People aren't as easily fooled as in the pre-digital days...and we shouldn't be treated like children...we all know what can happen in a crash...just by simply watching the news...

Sankyo
28-03-2016, 09:09
Damage to cars in pC1 is largely limited to functional/internal damage like suspension/engine damage with the visuals not being allowed to portray the real damage as stated above. pCARS's damage model is quite detailed, but for the licensed cars it cannot be used. I'm not into the technical details, but my guess would be that because of these restrictions, the damage sensitivity of the licensed models has been set to very low so that even with the biggest crashses, no parts will come off. Only the functional damage remains for those cars.

Patrick Kulinski
28-03-2016, 09:23
True but that doesn't take away the fact that a door CAN open in a crash,parts CAN detach in real life,etc....
Putting up restrictions in games for a marketing/reputation point of view is pointless and stupid imo...in these days one just has to open "Google" , type in crash followed by a brand of car and you can see all you want...

This is where at least our views differ. For some manufacturers, a door should NEVER EVER (one can't emphasize this enough) open during a crash since a door is considered a shield, keeping material/car parts out of the passenger compartment. If, during any crash test (front crash, side impact, rollover, you name it), a door opens shit basically got real and people become very nervous. This is why, in this area for example, manufacturers are picky about their requirements.

Konan
28-03-2016, 09:29
This is where at least our views differ. For some manufacturers, a door should NEVER EVER (one can't emphasize this enough) open during a crash since a door is considered a shield, keeping material/car parts out of the passenger compartment. If, during any crash test (front crash, side impact, rollover, you name it), a door opens shit basically got real and people become very nervous. This is why, in this area for example, manufacturers are picky about their requirements.

I understand but all of those tests can never replicate all the factors that could come in place in real life (race or road)
Fact is that doors STILL open at certain circumstances in real life...
The only thing they can do imho is weld them shut to be absolutely sure of them not opening....which would be ridiculous.
A door still remains a part that SHOULD open if necessary and that's it's weakness right there...
That's what my point is about:don't try to hide what everyone already knows can happen....

Patrick Kulinski
28-03-2016, 09:59
I understand but all of those tests can never replicate all the factors that could come in place in real life (race or road)
Fact is that doors STILL open at certain circumstances in real life...
The only thing they can do imho is weld them shut to be absolutely sure of them not opening....which would be ridiculous.
A door still remains a part that SHOULD open if necessary and that's it's weakness right there...
That's what my point is about:don't try to hide what everyone already knows can happen....

I try to sound not too defensive, knowing that I'm mildly biased due to my job ;)

This split in requirements (not opening in case of a crash vs. giving the chance to open it afterwards) is one of the biggest challenges when making a car crash-safe. Nevertheless, today's systems are very good. You almost have to rip a car in two parts before something undesirable happens. Otherwise, the hinge and lock systems are a fine piece of engineering making it possible to achieve those two goals in most cases.

On top, the impression I got is that manufacturers prefer the door to be stuck in the closed position instead of opening during a crash because the threat of stuff flying around the passengers' heads is more dangerous than having them being stuck in the car. Moreover, most crashes are such that only one door is blocked anyway (f.e. if you slide into a tree sideways) while on the other side it shall be fine, giving you the chance to climb out there. (BTW I can remember one requirement saying that if the crashed door is stuck, the door on the other side of the vehicle must be operable.) You must have obscene loads, paired with funny load cases (car rotates fast around its longitudinal axis), before a door opens on its own.

Konan
28-03-2016, 10:11
I try to sound not too defensive, knowing that I'm mildly biased due to my job ;)

This split in requirements (not opening in case of a crash vs. giving the chance to open it afterwards) is one of the biggest challenges when making a car crash-safe. Nevertheless, today's systems are very good. You almost have to rip a car in two parts before something undesirable happens. Otherwise, the hinge and lock systems are a fine piece of engineering making it possible to achieve those two goals in most cases.

On top, the impression I got is that manufacturers prefer the door to be stuck in the closed position instead of opening during a crash because the threat of stuff flying around the passengers' heads is more dangerous than having them being stuck in the car. Moreover, most crashes are such that only one door is blocked anyway (f.e. if you slide into a tree sideways) while on the other side it shall be fine, giving you the chance to climb out there. (BTW I can remember one requirement saying that if the crashed door is stuck, the door on the other side of the vehicle must be operable.) You must have obscene loads, paired with funny load cases (car rotates fast around its longitudinal axis), before a door opens on its own.

I am not in any case trying to contradict you,since you are more in a position to know about these things than i am....
That last sentence intrigues me though...because in a race car those circumstances can occur (albeit very rarely)
Putting the "door discussion" aside...and getting back to the general problem, obviously parts of any kind can come loose during a crash and i still think it's a bad idea from some manufacturers to try and hide the obvious by restricting game developers from using ,in my view, real damage physics....

Mahjik
28-03-2016, 13:13
FWIW, if you look for videos during the development phase of pCARS1, you can find videos showing what the Madness engine is capable of in terms of damage.

Konan
28-03-2016, 13:15
FWIW, if you look for videos during the development phase of pCARS1, you can find videos showing what the Madness engine is capable of in terms of damage.

Yep...i think i watched about every video there was pre-release (research you know) ;)
I assume those were made before the restrictions?