PDA

View Full Version : FFB Questions



ramm21
03-08-2017, 20:12
Just read the GT Planer Q&A, very promising stuff, way to shoot for the Moon again SMS!

Ian mentioned 3 types of FFB presets- will they be 3 types of general FFB, like a front tires only preset (real life like), 4-tire FFB preset (where you can feel grip from rear tires as well), and a "light kerb" preset or something for all wheels?
Or will FFB presets be more in line with Assetto Corsa and Dirt, where you just pick a preset specifically for your wheel?

Will the manual FFB options be split into two bits again- wheel specific and car specific sliders? Or do the cars have their own "FFB personalities" now?

And finally, not sure how to put into words, but here I go- I read some of the fastest simracers don't use FFB at all. So if theres a chicane with some high curbing, a player without FFB can just coast over the tops easier than a FFB player, since the wheel for the non-FFB player will be still, but the wheel for the FFB player will have a major earthquake going off. So if the non-FFBs wheel is set straight and doesn't move, what happens to the disconnect between the in-car physics affected wheel, and the players real life wheel?
If a tire hits an object like a high kerb in real life, it will get turned to one side or the other, causing a reaction through the steering rack that turns the wheel. In order to get the tires back straight, you have to actually turn the wheel back to center position to do that.
In a non-FFB situation, will the tires instantly turn straight again after hitting an object? Since the players real life wheel won't be affected, the split second after the tires turn in the game, the players input (the non-FFB wheel) tells the game that the tires should be facing straight ahead. So do the tires magically turn straight, or is the transition the same FFB vs non-FFB?


Hope that makes sense..

honespc
03-08-2017, 20:44
I guess the "Raw" FFB choice is the one focus on front tyres only?. Can't wait to try them all, specially this one.

You really needed Stephen Hawking's help to adjust pc1 ffb properly, and even then at least on the t300 is a meh!, so looking forward to trying pc2 ffb settings

Roger Prynne
03-08-2017, 20:46
These pics should save me some typing :rolleyes:


239219

239221

239222

239223

239224

ramm21
03-08-2017, 20:57
So whats the difference between raw and immersive? They both sound like they are trying to replicate real world stuff, but in a different mix? One is scaled and the other not?
Immersive- as experienced IRL
Raw- full strength of various forces felt by drivers

Mahjik
03-08-2017, 21:26
Immersive will not be "pure steering" forces. It will have "Seat of the Pants" and other non-steering rack forces mixed in while RAW is more closer to pure rack forces.

ramm21
03-08-2017, 21:53
Immersive will not be "pure steering" forces. It will have "Seat of the Pants" and other non-steering rack forces mixed in while RAW is more closer to pure rack forces.

Good to know.

Any insight on why FFB is rolled out with this pick 1 out of 3 scheme for all wheels and not wheel specific presets like some other racing games have?

Mahjik
03-08-2017, 22:07
Any insight on why FFB is rolled out with this pick 1 out of 3 scheme for all wheels and not wheel specific presets like some other racing games have?

SMS does tuning per wheel, it's just hidden behind the scenes. These are essentially "flavors" of the per wheel FFB implementations.

ramm21
03-08-2017, 22:16
awesome, thanks for that clarification.

Schnizz58
03-08-2017, 23:10
So console users will not have the ability to fine-tune the FFB the way we did in PC1?

Mahjik
04-08-2017, 01:38
So console users will not have the ability to fine-tune the FFB the way we did in PC1?

Not to the level offered in PC1.

lancashirelad
04-08-2017, 05:17
^^^ Amen

Schnizz58
04-08-2017, 13:24
Well that's just awesome.

Djuvinile
04-08-2017, 14:34
Are these settings savable per vehicle or just general FFB settings?
Btw. youre saying we never need magnifying glasses and Jack Spades tweakerfile anymore?

Sankyo
04-08-2017, 14:58
Are these settings savable per vehicle or just general FFB settings?
Btw. youre saying we never need magnifying glasses and Jack Spades tweakerfile anymore?

In principle the FFB presets should give sufficient easy tuning possibilities with a few sliders to make the FFB to your liking. On PC you can still go bonkers with FFB tweakers files (different format than pC1) if you want to. FFB is highly personal, so you can never satisfy all, but the simplified (from a UI point of view) presets should cover the majority of tastes.

finagle69
04-08-2017, 16:35
I applaud SMS for the simplification of the FFB in overall settings.

Each car is definitely different, as we know. I would expect - better than PC1 hopefully - that it is more easily differentiated between lightly steering road cars with power steering, DTM or non-assisted race cars, and full high downforce cars in terms of heaviness of steering mid-corner?

Also, can overall FFB gain per car be adjusted on the fly via the ICM?

Schnizz58
04-08-2017, 16:41
I'm fine with dumbing down the settings as long as there is still a way to get under the hood and tweak things. But on the surface at least, this seems like a step backwards.

Roger Prynne
04-08-2017, 18:45
I'm fine with dumbing down the settings as long as there is still a way to get under the hood and tweak things. But on the surface at least, this seems like a step backwards.

How can you say that when 90% of players said that they wanted a more simplified FFB system (and that's what they get) and actually better FFB as well.

Schnizz58
04-08-2017, 19:36
How can you say that when 90% of players said that they wanted a more simplified FFB system (and that's what they get) and actually better FFB as well.

Because functionality was removed. Taking away features is always going to appear like a step backwards.
I was never in that 90%.
A simpler system would have been ok but what we really needed in PC1 was just an explanation of how the system worked and what each of the parameters do. That would have made it much easier to figure out what we needed to change to get the feel we wanted. But we never got it. We had to figure it out by trial and error and even now, some of the processing is not fully understood.
It could have been done (in PC2) by allowing us the ability to tweak things under the hood, as I mentioned. Then you'd make not only the 90% happy but the other 10% too. Someone must have felt that it was important because that capability was provided to PC users.
I'm skeptical that you can encompass the needs of thousands of users and the capabilities of a dozen or more wheels with 5 numbers. If they have, then my hat's off to them.
I don't know that it's better.

honespc
04-08-2017, 19:41
as long as I can feel something when going on straights on my t300..

Mahjik
04-08-2017, 19:55
Personally, I'd be just fine if SMS removes the "custom" option for the PC. I've never used a custom file with PC2 during testing.. Never needed to...


On the thought of "hiding detailed options"... The problem is people in the community will tinker with them and tell everyone they have crappy FFB without tinkering (regardless of if it's true or not). Everyone will feel the need the use all of them and then complain there are too many options.

Let's face it, nobody "had" to use all of the options in PC1 for FFB. However, most users convinced themselves that was the path to ultimate FFB. It created a community of "tweaking" which SMS is moving away from.. The focus should be on the driving rather than the tweaking.

gotdirt410sprintcar
04-08-2017, 20:04
Will car master be able too be changed turned up or down like AC ?

poirqc
04-08-2017, 20:11
Personally, I'd be just fine if SMS removes the "custom" option for the PC. I've never used a custom file with PC2 during testing.. Never needed to...


On the thought of "hiding detailed options"... The problem is people in the community will tinker with them and tell everyone they have crappy FFB without tinkering (regardless of if it's true or not). Everyone will feel the need the use all of them and then complain there are too many options.

Let's face it, nobody "had" to use all of the options in PC1 for FFB. However, most users convinced themselves that was the path to ultimate FFB. It created a community of "tweaking" which SMS is moving away from.. The focus should be on the driving rather than the tweaking.

Credit need to be given where credit it due.

The FFB tweaking community came because SMS left 30+ FFB sliders available,in pCars1 , without few explanations. People are curious, "what if" drives people. Most of the FFB talk was about helping. Not about telling people are wrong or have bad FFB...

Don't get me wrong, i'm really glad how it's looking for pCars2. I trust the dev to calibrate the things they develop. But pointing those that tried to help as most of the problem isn't fair.

lancashirelad
04-08-2017, 20:17
Because functionality was removed. Taking away features is always going to appear like a step backwards.
I was never in that 90%.
A simpler system would have been ok but what we really needed in PC1 was just an explanation of how the system worked and what each of the parameters do. That would have made it much easier to figure out what we needed to change to get the feel we wanted. But we never got it. We had to figure it out by trial and error and even now, some of the processing is not fully understood.
It could have been done (in PC2) by allowing us the ability to tweak things under the hood, as I mentioned. Then you'd make not only the 90% happy but the other 10% too. Someone must have felt that it was important because that capability was provided to PC users.
I'm skeptical that you can encompass the needs of thousands of users and the capabilities of a dozen or more wheels with 5 numbers. If they have, then my hat's off to them.
I don't know that it's better.


5 numbers 4 of which look like they go from 0-100, that's quite a few combinations. A certain other game has similar settings and good FF (my opinion) and i'm happy they have chosen that route, although PC seems to have taken it a step up to accommodate their detailed FF.

Schnizz58
04-08-2017, 20:21
Personally, I'd be just fine if SMS removes the "custom" option for the PC.
Part of me says give the functionality to everybody or remove it for everybody but since I'll likely have to move to a PC platform now, the selfish part of me says NOOOOOOOOO. Also PC players shouldn't be handicapped just because of the console guys.


On the thought of "hiding detailed options"... The problem is people in the community will tinker with them and tell everyone they have crappy FFB without tinkering (regardless of if it's true or not). Everyone will feel the need the use all of them and then complain there are too many options.
I can see that but it seems like a social problem that SMS neither has a responsibility to fix nor the power to do so. Props for trying I guess but if it's not FFB it will be something else. The community is gonna do what the community is gonna do.


Let's face it, nobody "had" to use all of the options in PC1 for FFB. However, most users convinced themselves that was the path to ultimate FFB. It created a community of "tweaking" which SMS is moving away from.. The focus should be on the driving rather than the tweaking.
I can't speak for everybody; I can only relate to you my personal experience. I didn't use all the options but I did try most of them at one time or another. In the end, I only kept a few. The ones I ended up retaining made a big difference to me in terms of feel. One example is scoop. At first, I set it up for a completely linear response but I discovered that it was too strong in the upper ranges and so I flattened out the response curve so that it was pretty linear for low values but semi-saturated at the high end. The additional force I was getting at high steering angles wasn't providing any extra information to me. So faced with that situation in PC2, how should I proceed?

I certainly agree with your last statement but I had to get the feel right to get to that point.

Schnizz58
04-08-2017, 20:22
5 numbers 4 of which look like they go from 0-100, that's quite a few combinations. A certain other game has similar settings and good FF (my opinion) and i'm happy they have chosen that route, although PC seems to have taken it a step up to accommodate their detailed FF.
It's still only 5 dimensions whether the numbers go from 0 to 100 or 0 to 1,000,000. (Assuming the sliders are all orthogonal. If they aren't then it's less than 5.)

Mahjik
04-08-2017, 21:02
One example is scoop. At first, I set it up for a completely linear response but I discovered that it was too strong in the upper ranges and so I flattened out the response curve so that it was pretty linear for low values but semi-saturated at the high end. The additional force I was getting at high steering angles wasn't providing any extra information to me. So faced with that situation in PC2, how should I proceed?

You'll be able to do similar things with PC2. For that example, you'll start with RAW and then use the adjustments (likely Tone) to tune to your liking. I would highly recommend everyone wait until they get it in their homes. While I wasn't super in depth with PC1 FFB tuning, I spent a fair amount of time with it during PC1 development. I haven't yet wished for all those options back. I will say that I'm also not your typical user as I do have tactile devices on my sim rig (so some sensations others may want, I get from tactile feedback). However, I do think the easier "out of the box" approach is the right direction.

Schnizz58
04-08-2017, 21:12
You'll be able to do similar things with PC2. For that example, you'll start with RAW and then use the adjustments (likely Tone) to tune to your liking. I would highly recommend everyone wait until they get it in their homes. While I wasn't super in depth with PC1 FFB tuning, I spent a fair amount of time with it during PC1 development. I haven't yet wished for all those options back. I will say that I'm also not your typical user as I do have tactile devices on my sim rig (so some sensations others may want, I get from tactile feedback). However, I do think the easier "out of the box" approach is the right direction.
It isn't the easier approach that I object to. I agree that's a better philosophy. I'm concerned that we won't be able to dial in a good feel without some level of tweaking. [And it also pisses me off that once again, console users are taking a back seat.] Until I try it for myself I guess I'll just have to take your word that it's as good or better than PC1.

Also, on a different subject, do you think it would be possible to get some meaningful names for the controls? Volume, gain and tone don't really convey much meaning to me in the context of FFB. This isn't a Marshall amp. :) Maybe Strength, Linearity and Detail or something?

Mahjik
04-08-2017, 21:30
Also, on a different subject, do you think it would be possible to get some meaningful names for the controls? Volume, gain and tone don't really convey much meaning to me in the context of FFB. This isn't a Marshall amp. :) Maybe Strength, Linearity and Detail or something?

The guys like their analogies to amplifiers. There is an explanation in the menus of what they do so that will help.

Schnizz58
04-08-2017, 21:45
The guys like their analogies to amplifiers. There is an explanation in the menus of what they do so that will help.
It helps a little but without knowing what they actually do in terms of the signal processing chain, I still don't have a good feel for the effect they will create. What's the difference between FX and Tone for example? So we're back to trial and error and trying to figure it out on our own. May as well call them yellow, green and blue.

Mahjik
04-08-2017, 22:09
FX is what it sounds like (Special FX), bump, knocks etc... Tone is more about Seat of the Pants, what the rear of the car is doing.

Schnizz58
04-08-2017, 22:44
FX is what it sounds like (Special FX), bump, knocks etc... Tone is more about Seat of the Pants, what the rear of the car is doing.

Thanks for that but I don't get that from the explanation in the menu. Both of them talk about surface detail.

The amplifier analogy is cute but forced and inaccurate. There's much more than just amplification going on in the FFB system. For example, the volume control doesn't control volume (according to the description) but gain does. If I understand what it says in the menu, volume is something along the lines of relative torque adjust in PC1. Anyway, I would just prefer terminology that more accurately represents what's going on in the signal chain rather than trying to relate it to a real-world device that it doesn't very closely resemble.

Mahjik
04-08-2017, 22:55
Anyway, I would just prefer terminology that more accurately represents what's going on in the signal chain rather than trying to relate it to a real-world device that it doesn't very closely resemble.

I would suggest you state that the relation doesn't work for you. The whole reason Jack did all of the FFB tuning is that he's a sound engineer and related directly to those concepts.

Schnizz58
04-08-2017, 23:26
I'm just going off what's written in the menus. I'm not a sound engineer but I understand quite a bit about signal processing too and I've built guitar amplifiers so I know how they work. Nothing in the description of "Tone" suggests to me that it's a filter (which is what a tone control is). If it is, then the description should say that. So they either need to use terms that reflect what's happening in the signal chain or the description needs to reflect what the parameter actually does.

poirqc
04-08-2017, 23:40
These pics should save me some typing :rolleyes:


239219

239221

239222

239223

239224


Thanks for that but I don't get that from the explanation in the menu. Both of them talk about surface detail.

The amplifier analogy is cute but forced and inaccurate. There's much more than just amplification going on in the FFB system. For example, the volume control doesn't control volume (according to the description) but gain does. If I understand what it says in the menu, volume is something along the lines of relative torque adjust in PC1. Anyway, I would just prefer terminology that more accurately represents what's going on in the signal chain rather than trying to relate it to a real-world device that it doesn't very closely resemble.

Following the descriptions, lots of globals from pCars 1 are there, just already balanced.

I'll try to translate(guess :) ) pCars 2 to pCars 1:
Flavors = various of FxyzMz & SoPs
Gain = It could either be Soft Clipping and/or RAC. Since they're talking about clipping prevention. Watch out for saturation.
Volume = This one could be Scoops, since it doesn't talk about clipping but do talk about the ramp up of forces.
Tone = This one seems pretty self explanatory. It's probably a balance between how the tire build up vs how arch the forces go down when Mz invert the forces
FX = this is definitly a combo of RAG/RAB.

What seems to be abscent, and was one of the most powerful and underused tool, is Per Wheel Movement. That one could really flavor how the FFB felt.

Schnizz58
05-08-2017, 00:55
My take is:
Flavor: I agree with FxyzMz/SoP. These are some of the "classes" of Jack's tweaker files. Like Classic, 66% SoP, etc.
Gain: Tire Force or Steering Gain or both. Volume in other words.
Volume: Scoop. The description says it alters the response curve.
Tone: Alters the balance between Mz & Fy according to the description. However if it truly is a tone control then it's a filter of some sort and that implies that it does something with the damping values from PC1.
FX: I agree that sounds like relative torque adjust.

But just as we did in PC1, we're just guessing.

ETA: I also agree about per wheel movement. That was a really useful feature.

poirqc
05-08-2017, 01:24
My take is:
Flavor: I agree with FxyzMz/SoP. These are some of the "classes" of Jack's tweaker files. Like Classic, 66% SoP, etc.
Gain: Tire Force or Steering Gain or both. Volume in other words.
Volume: Scoop. The description says it alters the response curve.
Tone: Alters the balance between Mz & Fy according to the description. However if it truly is a tone control then it's a filter of some sort and that implies that it does something with the damping values from PC1.
FX: I agree that sounds like relative torque adjust.

But just as we did in PC1, we're just guessing.

ETA: I also agree about per wheel movement. That was a really useful feature.

I'll just auto quote myself since Roger replied that my assumptions were mostly right:



Me too. Nobody should be treated like that.

Is the FFB really dumded down. I'm not sure. Put aside the fact that you can't use the tweaker files on the console(While they can be really useful, it's a workaround imho).

Here's what's happening on paper. The globals are better tweaked per wheel. They should already be in the "best" working range(I'm not talking about how you mixe the forces). This part isn't really needed in the fore front. At some point, every wheel has an optimal range.

I view the sliders as "global per car" now. With those sliders, you automatically balance the forces in a way that works, while leaving the out the mathematical possibilities that don't work/worsen/etc... the FFB. In the end, i think this is the part that is subjective. This one is still available.

This time, if they had time to balance the cars against the new system, manual tweak shouldn't be necessary per car. Picking a mix of forces you like should work for all cars.

Wheel;) find out in september.

**I don't have any insider info, it's just my understanding of the new system

The thing is that the globals should be already tuned, based on wheel make(All globals were about the same, in pCars 1), this time. The only thing left to manage is the recipe of FFB. Since the "car FFB" will only consist of 4 sliders, it shouldn't take long for you to tune whatever you think is off from the default template.

Were only guessing because we didn't tried it yet.

Schnizz58
05-08-2017, 01:34
The thing is that the globals should be already tuned, based on wheel make(All globals were about the same, in pCars 1), this time. The only thing left to manage is the recipe of FFB. Since the "car FFB" will only consist of 4 sliders, it shouldn't take long for you to tune whatever you think is off from the default template.
How do they know how I want my scoop? My rel. torque adjust? They don't. Those things are subjective and should be configurable. I hate soft clipping. Have they disabled that? We don't know.


Were only guessing because we didn't tried it yet.
We shouldn't have to try it to know how it works when we've already seen the configuration screen. All should be clear. We're only guessing because the terms don't match the descriptions.

poirqc
05-08-2017, 02:06
How do they know how I want my scoop? My rel. torque adjust? They don't. Those things are subjective and should be configurable. I hate soft clipping. Have they disabled that? We don't know.


We shouldn't have to try it to know how it works when we've already seen the configuration screen. All should be clear. We're only guessing because the terms don't match the descriptions.

I won't be able to find the post(Reply from Mahjik), but WDM users provided the feeback for the wheel makes. My guess is that they mostly dialed the FFB deadzone and ruled out heavy clipping. Besides that, i don't think anything is really needed behind the scene. The rest is available to you. You mix it however you want!

Personally, and it might have to do with the language barrier, but i think they've had a fair shot at the FFB settings description. You can even change them in a live session, if i'm not mistaken. It might not be perfect, but it should be alot better than the first 1.

Mahjik
05-08-2017, 02:22
I would recommend not trying to compare/contrast what was available in PC1 with regards to FFB. This is a different approach.

poirqc is correct. There is a lot of per wheel feedback from WMD (and some are very vocal). Also, SMS does test with most of the popular wheels used today. They likely test all supported wheels, but the comments we see are typically around the popular ones (i.e. the ones WMD own and are discussing).

SobritoS
05-08-2017, 07:43
Yeah... this is bad. Don't get me wrong, I'm super excited for pc2 but I'm also very very afraid that all this hype will eventually turn project cars into the new forza. Let's simplify for the people so we can reach a larger audience. That usually means that we will have a lot, and I mean A LOT of people that don't know how to race, don't want to race and just crash everybody or that they don't have the interest in "git gud". Also, by implementing this kind of simple solutions will lead to: "you know, maybe if we tone down all this realism and make it more simple we can reach an even larger audience.
Hope not, but we are getting there... little by little.

inthebagbud
05-08-2017, 08:44
We also have to remember that for console users we have seen no game play or feedback from anyone. As far as I know no wmd members have been able to test the console version.

We all know that ffb for consoles was completely different from pc and in my case the options where needed . The "cut down options " in other racing games means I cannot play them as they just don't work with a fanatec/xbox combo. With pcars I was able to adjust to my liking and I am still therefore playing the game.

I just hope that whoever is testing the console version has taken note of the differences in ffb setups and is conversant with how it should feel and how it differs from pc version

Schnizz58
05-08-2017, 15:53
Besides that, i don't think anything is really needed behind the scene.
But what if I do? I have no way to adjust it. PC players do.


You mix it however you want!
Well not really. I mix it however I'm allowed to.


I would recommend not trying to compare/contrast what was available in PC1 with regards to FFB. This is a different approach.
Yeah, good point and I understand that. I probably could have worded it better. Since the parameter names don't really give you much of a clue what the functionality behind them does and the descriptions seem to be at odds with the names, I was trying to relate it to something I already understand. I wasn't trying to say that they control those parameters because those parameters don't even exist in PC2.

Sankyo
05-08-2017, 18:24
Could we please stop jumping to conclusions that the simplified FFB set-up also means simplified FFB, when no-one has actually tried it?

Schnizz58
05-08-2017, 18:25
I don't think that's what I'm saying Remco. Or were you referring to someone else?

gotdirt410sprintcar
05-08-2017, 19:41
Simpit guy said he was worried about FFB, He says he is not worried no more if you can't take there word for it. everyone will have to try it in 1 in a half months

Sankyo
05-08-2017, 19:48
I don't think that's what I'm saying Remco. Or were you referring to someone else?
Yeah sorry, not directed at you :)

amazed
05-08-2017, 20:19
We also have to remember that for console users we have seen no game play or feedback from anyone. As far as I know no wmd members have been able to test the console version.

We all know that ffb for consoles was completely different from pc and in my case the options where needed . The "cut down options " in other racing games means I cannot play them as they just don't work with a fanatec/xbox combo. With pcars I was able to adjust to my liking and I am still therefore playing the game.

I just hope that whoever is testing the console version has taken note of the differences in ffb setups and is conversant with how it should feel and how it differs from pc version

I believe Team VVV have a recent YouTube video showing comparison between PC and PS4 gameplay, not sure how much he says about ffb though....

4dri3l
05-08-2017, 20:51
Love that sms has simplified the ffb approach, but one thing I don't see is a deadzone removal slider... how we logitech owners will adjust for it with the new ffb system?

Mahjik
05-08-2017, 20:53
Love that sms has simplified the ffb approach, but one thing I don't see is a deadzone removal slider... how we logitech owners will adjust for it with the new ffb system?

On the PC, you can tune it via the Custom setup. However, SMS is tuning dead zones for supported hardware so it's done out of the box.

ShneebnaMRR108
07-08-2017, 19:43
Buy it, try it, keep it, or return it. Simplified solution. Another game has a similar set up and after about 10 minutes, your set and done. I'm a G920 user and the 'Other" game has no dead zone issue. More time driving and less time tweaking. Akin to an audio engineer who fiddles with the EQ all day just because he can.

FIA
15-08-2017, 00:28
There was a setting in Pcars1 to change the stiffness of the wheel when the car was still, it came under the menu spring strength
and was good for turning the car around fast after a spin, so wheel was loose, how will this be changed in this new ffb setup
are there going to be more sliders added later, trying to turn a car like it has no power steering when stopped will not be good...

drathuu
15-09-2017, 02:46
There is still another menu with around 20 further detailed settings tucked away to do further tuning , i assume that will be on the consoles also. (Been closed off from the builds last week), so i cant put a screenshot up.. Someone who has had steam offline all week maybe able to.

Sankyo
15-09-2017, 09:43
There is still another menu with around 20 further detailed settings tucked away to do further tuning , i assume that will be on the consoles also. (Been closed off from the builds last week), so i cant put a screenshot up.. Someone who has had steam offline all week maybe able to.
:confused: Are you talking about pC2 FFB?