As someone who actually races and does track days often i must say regular Assetto Corsa is probably the most accurate when it comes to physics for normal road cars. I used AC to prepare for my first ever track day and it was almost 1 to 1 game vs real life. I race a Honda Fit (Jazz) and found a mod that drives exactly like my car. It mimicked the body roll, tire scrub and steering ratio as well as the gear ratios plus the track mod i used helped me with my braking and reference points for real life. AC is a great training tool for grassroots racers like myself.
Drive ACC in the rain and you’ll quickly realize how far off it is. GT7 dry tires in the wet are absolutely punishing but you can drive like you’re on intermediate tires in ACC in the rain.
I enjoy the game, don't get me wrong, but I just don't follow the hype with this one. I often get attacked in the comments a lot if I talk about Forza and GT7 in connection with this title, so I just wanted to spark a debate to get answers like this one. I'm planning to give it a good play when I have some time off work. I'm not a full sim racer, just a casual one, hence I don't really talk about physics a lot because I'm not educated enough to pinpoint this and that, if that makes sense! I dislike the fact that people label GT as simcade and use ACC as the go-to, because with my limited knowledge, I can see it's not that good at simulation, lol.
1. are you talking about AC or ACC (it looks like you're mixing them a bit) 2. in that specific clip of ACC the inputs are way too fast. Was that on a controller or keyboard? I have to say ACC controller optimisation isn't good, it is a sim that is just better with a wheel. 3. GT or Forza are a Simcade, they have good physics, but not as realistic as a real sim. ACCs physics also are not perfekt, but still one of the best if not the best at the moment. 4. Only starting with certain cars/tracks and having to buy DLC isn't a problemfor me. The devs also need to get their money from somewhere.
Agree, for PC, in my experience, tire pressure and physics Live for Speed was the best. I bet no one have heard of them although am disappointed it didn't progress in popularity. That was the most realistic driving sim I've ever played. It beats all the rest, ACC, Burns, etc.
yet another video will come where he will show that the fuel cap is beautiful...also because when it comes to driving...well...it's better to see the fuel cap😂😂😂😂😂
I disagree. Once you get a basic feel for trailbraking and weight transfer, GT 7 allows you to throw the car in the corner with the confidence that there is gonna be enough grip all the time. ACC requires far more precision in driving depending on the car’s drivetrain, layout etc. ACC is therefore far more rewarding and enjoyable to play. Also, since I’m primarily driving in single player, ACC’s AI is a huge step up from GT 7. Even the Sophy AI still pales in comparison to ACC’s AI.
You car set the car up loose in GT7 and have the same challenge and precision. Difference is GT7 is more like real life where nobody is driving loose setups like that because it’s simply too dangerous and overall slower.
The following are my likes and dislikes for AC. Positives for Assetto Corsa (modded) - It is the fastest loading game I have ever played, 3/5 seconds startup. (with content manager). - Rolling anti-lag (scramble boost) - Boost control (while driving) - Tyre deflation on deceleration (drag cars) I guess similar to tram lining ? not sure how to explain - Parachute deploy (drag cars) - Lots of interesting animations specific to cars ie. windows, doors, indicators, screen/dashboard toggle, convertible roofs etc - Open world maps - More vehicle classes than you can imagine - Truck racing, F1, Rally, Touring car, Indy, NASCAR, Trophy Truck - Android auto CarPlay (I can't literally watch this video from inside the cars infotainment screen in game) - Pure Weather control (day/night - rain/fog/snow of varying degrees) - specific tracks - Shibuya Expressway, Pudsey, Ebisu, Touges passes, The Autobahn & Targa Florio (45 miles long) - I have 500 racetracks and 4000 cars to pick from. - I have Trial Mountain (GT) & Sunset Valley (Forza).... in Assetto Corsa. - Modding is easy, drag and drop. Easiest game I've ever modified. - I've got an old PC, and it works flawlessly. Negatives about AC - - Without mods it's a bag of shit - Doesn't have Gran Turismo graphics - There is no in game car customization - There are no soft body physics and damage simulation like Beam NG - Support can end at any moment, most modders are doing this for free.
Not sure if I missed it, but are you playing ACC on PC? Id love to see ACC on console vs GT7 car models and track details. Fuck FM compared to it, I already know how that'll be. Im on it daily and have to deal with the god awful graphics. 😂 I always skipped out on it since ACC came out on console later on and I felt like maybe an ACC2 will release. That, and going off the screenshots in the Xbox marketplace, the images look real grainy or just bad. On PC, the game is gorgeous though.
Can you please make a VID about the first Assetto Corsa? I believe the physics are way better than Assetto Corsa Competizione and thats why modders are so into the game. I also think ACC physics are not that good.
ACC in my pov is that, sometimes they changes their tyre model, suspensions yearly and their presets are absolute trash. While pros on the other hand use setups that are just doesn't looks make sense (though it feels very good in ACC's physics). Other than that, the overall package is good to me. (GT7? It's good, I like that. GT World Series? I like that, but just, way too short and not enough up to date gt3s. oh btw, both physics are good to me.) Though I don't understand why you are not using a wheel in this clip. Not too fair imo.
I had a vague feeling ACC was not all it was cracked up to be; my impression without personal experience or watching anything, just internet chatter, is iRacing is the supposed most realistic PC Sim and apparently you can do a lot with the data for motion sim rigs I think; so the nerd in me is intrigued of having a highly articulating chair with multiple vibration motors, etc. But to save my sanity, I'd invest in the PSVR2, have a 4k HDR1000 TV, get a top tier wheel and pedals, and maybe build my own rig to mount everything to. I currently tend to graze just shy of gold time trials in GT7 online and I'm using the driver's excuse that I'm on a controller; until I get a wheel, then I'll say I need VR ... then I'll come up with something after that I'm sure! ;)
I got the first AC and couldnt play it as at that stage because I was having a blast on PC racing the go karts. Graphics alone I feel AC was seriously poor compared to PC. I think lets get all 4 games compared side by side, PC, AC, Forza 8, GT7.
Just by watching your ACC’s replay, I notice the physics is so off compared to the physics du ring replay in GT, how the car behaves. It’s just another world.
I don't get what your point is. What are you even talking about? How and why are the physics "terrible"? How else should a GT3 racecar full of aero behave then? What's the point of comparing GT7, Forza and PC3 to a proper sim? Also you're showing a video from ACC, yet you also criticize standard AC too. Are you a proper simracer or an actual race car driver? Cuz they all agree on AC having top notch force feedback and tyre physics. I'm not hating, I'm not offended, I just genuinely don't understand where you're coming from...
Though I don't understand why you are not using a wheel in this clip. But can agree that ACC is complicated by many means (and screwed up massively in suspension physics), the preset setups aren't anywhere good either. But what it does good is the grid size, damages and wears. And if you care about serious racing, pro leagues in ACC are great. (While GT have an excellent weather model but still have its 48 grid mode locked and unused, you can see that in their GT World Series/Offline event builds. Leaving consumer version a tiny
I didn't played ACC but I played AC with a G29 in PS4. I never felt like I was driving a real car...I don't know but the cars seems to lack grip...it seems that the tyres are full of oil or something, it' s like "grip" or "no grip" and nothing between. Is an OK game for me, but not fun. A real car you take it and drive it. In AC, if you do not change something in setup, the car isn't good...
ACC was a mess when it was released. I havent tried the game myself but I know that physics are a bit weird, in fact the car does slowly slide on idle when it should stay still. Replays are done in keyframes or something similar so movement will look weird and different from gameplay. Thats about all I know.
@@TheOfficialRandomGuy its a minor bug that won't affect gameplay but it's weird that it happens. Idle was the wrong word to use but rather the car is stationary. The engine is revved slightly but not enough to move or engage the clutch.
Tbh, Simdaddies are a Cancer to the Racing Game community, but also the people who play iRacing are even worse, imagine wasting all of your life savings on a Subscription based Sim Racer
@@TheOfficialRandomGuy Dude, Sim Racing Games are only enjoyed by Elitist morons who only care about "Super Realistic Driving", anyone in the Racing Game community knows at this point, the only one who still deny it are Simdaddies like you who only care about driving physics over anything else that makes a Videogame a Videogame, which is something that the Simcades achieve a lot better, even the ones with an underwhelming structure like GT7, PC3 or even Grid Legends at some point, man i would i even play something like Driving Emotion Type S over Assetto Corsa and/or iRacing because at least that game has content & progression compared to these "games", even if it pretty much sucks. Yeah, Gran Turismo's physics aren't as sophisticated and detailed as the ones from your Super Serious Sim Racing Games, but compared to them Gran Turismo shines in it's content and progression, and tho GT7's GT Cafe has been really mediocre at best for Gran Turismo standards, still offers something compared to the Sim Racers that have pretty much nothing, and you do nothing more than just driving, doing some Lap Times and unless you install Mods you can do nothing else but also play Online. And even if Gran Turismo's physics aren't as detailed compared to the "SUPER SERIOUS SIM RACERS" because of the obvious reason they still have to adapt them for anyone to enjoy them, some people who also plays Sim Racers have said that GT7's Physics still try to feel faithful enough to the real counterparts of the Cars included in the game, which for a game of it's type it's more than enough, because Simcades compared to Sim Racers they at least still remember they're still a Videogame, you can see it by their presentation, progression system, Upgrades & Tuning, Side Modes & Events, etc... compared to Sim Racers which only care about driving & physics
I own almost every car game out there, lol. I was playing ACC for 2 years before GT7 came out. This wasn't meant to be a GT7 vs. ACC comparison; it was simply intended to spark a debate. It's just how I feel about the game.
It's the GMOD of racing games. You get a few cars and tracks to get started, you make the rest of the fun with mods. Definitely can get boring especially when the majority of the time is spent on tweaking.
I agree with you, AC tries to over complicate stuff, Kaz said in an Interview that driving is easy, to learn and hard to master, and he's right even your grandmother can drive relatively briskly, but can she push a car at the limit and manage weight transfer etc no. That takes practice and Gran Turismo replicates that. In summary AC is like a Linux OS in administrator mode and Gran Turismo is like Apple OS in both area computers and do similar things, one just does it with more flair and is much more just friendly. As to know Forza is Windows good obvious reasons FM8 is Windows vista cause as you've proven they took a leap back with this one even 6 looks better
They legitimately feel like soap boxes in ACC, and many people label GT7 as simcade, which it isn't. Once you reach the master level of that game, welcome to a true simulation! They have done a brilliant job with GT7
Just because YOU can take corners better in GT than in ACC doesn’t mean it’s better. You’re right that about anyone can drive, but driving the limit not so much. If that was the case, everyone would be running alien lap times.
That´s true, but driving incorporates not so smooth driving and the transitions and limits of these aswell. This is where GT has some issues, even should the driving be really OK most of the time, the proper noise and detail is the real bread of what a sim is expected to do when perfect. Even before rFactor1 we had perfected most of the physics and what needs to be done. After all, no driving sim is perfect, and some will awe you much just by how it drives, even if you can´t point what it is, others won´t, physics and rattle is part of the presentation, of being real, in a sim. The same of people being invested enough to see things for more than they are, reflects in people wrongly, aswell as "based-ly" saying that the sims are basically Gran Turismo- yeah, and yeah, maybe, and no. Still You´d need some thousands of hertz to actually say "the minute things I might do" will have a true immediate effect, and the butterfly effect of me driving will show it. Small flatspotting, force propagation(HAH- From the ground up), elastic and permanent(would be nice)bending and failstates of components, rolling masses, drivetrain simulation, aero maps, what it does, how it works for you and the car behind/infornt, temps of brakes, aero push(does GT have that?)resonance in the model and on. You can never quite carry over the GranTurismo experience to the real car, as the heckin thing is always doing something somehat different, or "more", some cars will feel better, but that is car specific, and even then, the "isssue" of too much and too "techy" is often the guys who do not even want to see what´s under the hood, they just know the FFB and dynamics aren´t 100% alike what they know, even if it is mostly presentation a lot of the time. Every solid object slithers and heats up when it works, aeroplanes, bikes, bicycles, everything flexes, and these energies flow around, get absorbed by the body, sent further, meet together. Sims try to match 1:1 at all speeds, some speeds will be more accurate, with more than one spot "close to perfect" at different speeds. Even those sims need a healthy amount of informed fudging some of the time, but mostly just guessing and making the missing pieces, but overall, the cars behave almost the same, but, making a lap time simulator is the easiest endeavour in the world, no realism needed for that, just grip weight, dimension, drag and HP-we had "remarkably" accurate lap times since the 2000. In sims like ACC for the most part, as a non-airborne vehicle, even if the cars feel bloated and heavy "soapboxy", the driving is more realistic, and, even when it oversells something, atleast it happens and there is a build up of synchronolouzs tunes and bheaviours richer than a GT/rFactor1 like. If you took a GT driver on track and he was a total psycho, but knew how to drive smoothly, he would still be surprised by the crispness, rumble wobble and smallchanges in balance due to the extra physics, wind and wind direction, and the initial bite and weight change, aero and all that just isn´t like the game, and it isn´t just road surface and ticks. Even sims walk the path of feedback before realism when it comes to FFB. GT cars are boats, so what´s wrong there? They are buses of a go-kart, better the faster you go. I think Project Cars (2 definitely) is underrated, and by proxy, AMS2 by Reiza studios, who have made it a spectacular sim, and they can do it (Formula Truck, GameStock Car, Automobilista 1). The Gran Turismo bahaviour of the GT cars and the feedback just isn´t as alive, even if it does supply the needed info at the needed rates and is, in the macro world, really accurate. Just SOMETIMES, things are more of a premonition and preloading and a bang, than the smoothened action seen in older sims and GT likes. it´s not about the difference of limits and the minute differnce between GT likes and other when driving well, it is about the coherence of the experience and how seamlessly is works with the little things that "do not really need to be taken into consideration", yet are analogous to the idea of how the GT way works, while not going against what really happens and what´s in the car as far as parts( and liquids, driver weight) having multiple connections that GT doesn´t have, sending cracks and rumbles that could have an effect on handling(if at all- or different more subdued, or more dramatic) In the end, chassis and body flex is often baken into the limits of the forces the car is supposed to take while reading the provided data, fuging suspension and the tires. That still omits the reality of where these come from and how they feel, with the state of the rest you are aware of, all the while the 0.04 s that you are aware it is happening runs. GT is a great game, but If I had to go and try to sim GT3, I´d go ACC, Iracing(yes), and Rfactor2, and AMS2 should there be quality GT cars. Hardcore sims want to go big, and the last bit is the vastness that isn´t as needed to enjoy the basis of the idea of virtual circuit driving.
@@japanesecar1501you raised alot of points and your logic and reason is understandable, that not withstanding their were a few things off or miscalculated I think and these are as follows,,Smooth driving, u mentioned that as if GT only simulates or respond to smooth inputs and not sudden or abrupt in less smooth inputs. Will just like real life in GT smoother is faster and creates less body roll or forward or rear G forces to upset the balance of the car. I learned this in GT5 when I got a racing wheel and the game got easier and I was faster, especially in the slalom license test what smoother inputs was needed. And you're right not all sins are perfect GT had been honing this sim for about 30 years,. Every one of them to me has felt like perfection, leaving me to wonder how can this get any better or more real, yet each release finds ways to improve on the other, so you're right there is always room for improvement. Cause GT8 will no doubt improve on GT7. + Kazunori Yamauchi actually races at the Nurburgring, in GT3 cars so his experience has been translated to the game. Which brings my next point how can u say that GT simulation can't be transferred to real life when their is GT academy, in which gamers become racers and they actually dominate which much less real life experience than actual racers.. As long as the conditions are the same then GT cars replicates real life, it's not a basic formulaic simulator that always gives the same results. That's why it seems unpredictable at times because it's accuracy. + GT simulates Chassis degradation, due to flex, which decreases car handling and engine wear,, due to mileage which decreases engine performance, hence u can restore chassis, stifden and buy new stock engine or overall it. What other Sim does that. ? You also mentioned how easy it is to simulate laptimes , true to a point, on a simple oval track perhaps, however the Nurburgring is a 21Km behemoth with 154 corners, each off which have to be accurate , with correct camber off camber angles for suspension geometry + the many hill/ inclines and descent, that affect e speed, based on weight and aero, throttle power map of used gear. Not an easy feat if u ask me. Which brings me to the next point speed, you mention that some speeds are simulated more accurate than others how so ? it's 1 code or calculation that renders all speeds, if a 10 mile track at 10mph would take 1 hour, then driving at 5mph would take 2 hours, so all speeds would be accurate by the same formula. Another question is ACC feels like a boat or soapbox how can it be more realistic than GT when feeling is a large part of simulation. And while I agree that physically noises like rattles does add to immersion it's not an essential simulation component, unless it's a Sim of Paris Dakkar rally and the noise is to gauge or indicate u sustained damage, in terms of track racing GT simulates all the needed noise effects, going over curbs, stones in under carriage and tyres after driving in gravel, suspension bottoming out from jumps etc., next thing Balance, wind impact aero etc, all have been a part since GT2 maybe 1 in not sure, In GT2 was harder to take turns in high down force JGTC cars when trailing close behind. And did u know that in GT 7 wind not only affects physics, but direction of tyre smoke, rain and particle effects. If u don't believe see here ruclips.net/video/jVshrvQT5uk/видео.htmlsi=o_2fxMsCR-F2WQvb 27 small details which GT7 is big on , what other Sim does that. GT7 does all these things quietly without making a big splash about being from the ground up or claims of being the most advanced Sim, which it is. Lastly GT7 GT3 cars give less feedback because it is not stock cars prone to body roll and heavily provided FFB effects. GT3 cars are stable and planted, little to no body roll or inertia, so other games, ACC exaggerat their feedback and ppl think it's more real. For example look how GT Sport simulates Kart physics, look how little steering input is needed for it to dart left or right. As you can see GT is a real true simulator since it even used to came with a racing book alongside the manual which talks about apexes ,balance weight transfer etc. Not other Sim have that aspiration of introducing beginners to racing, that's why ppl say it's a simcade cause it used a velvet glove of accessibility to mask a very detailed sim . That all I have everything else u say seems plausible to me, even psychos can have decent laptimes, lol
Haha, now that´s a worthy reply! Hey, thanks for taking your time dude. As far as what you write, I think we are largely in the same boat. The speeds i meant as far as what happens with the physics and the masses involved, when you bring in the binary of tick rate, how it smoothens, and what happens when input differs- when Forza, and other aswell, have differing results with different fps, even though the physics should be uninterrupted. It looks for Forza, the mesh of track/geometry is somehow related to the fps, and that is a classic in the way of the input being fps bound. In other words, at real high fps, the game adjusts the steering more, and you scrub less on average. You can break through the asphalt when you have sufficient velocity, and fit in between the ticks right. when you project a beyond the barriers "next position"- a-la the jumping throuigh walls at sufficient speeds with the middle of the car between the checks, breaking through asphalt(speed sled sparky car glitch). The car is propelled via what the assumed surface allows for, what the body touches, idk, and, perhaps as the mass is gear/direction baked in, as a switch, you can run the asphalt with your tires spinning forward, ie. car should be trying to go backwards, (who knows) yet you go forward as the HP allows, you are burning rubber, and you lose friction and axle/body bob in that state, and maybe there is pitch turn off of downforce, but that, idk, anyway, yo you go faster than with wheels in "reality", even if you "burn rubber" in the opposite direction you go. Forza at 90 or more FPS is just a good bit faster. Solid several 1/10 of a second a minute. The game is not made "to perfectly lag", and the inputs tied to fps is not ideal. So, in Forza, PC and series players have faster times, some PC times are unobtanium- they just drive faster, hell they go faster full stop. The bogging and friction has to be smooter and somewhat reduced. (See Sepi, SP4 video) Anyway, the topic is awesome, and I like anything to do with it. The inner workings of the engine and the matrices you can manage within always have caveats, and the weirdness of simple finite systems will catch you out when you design thecars for the game. In AC, the physics loop is always reconsidreing the car´s position, as should, but that creatures 0.001 vectors that make you slide around. The noise is connected and because the functions determine position change based on input of value/energy, the car is jittering when stationary, and could even walk away a bit like that. So sims often fudge low speed with "tyre/suspension/momentum/inertia magic". Should the physics reach "0", that is analogous to a crash of the loop, and crashes by default as there is always some force loading, and that always results in some movement. In AC, the low speed physics are(were atleast), basically a different simplified set that enabled the kinematics of the main body to stay away from locking up the loop(maybe freezing it in a way that was simple to do), and the car computes "the racing physics" at over 30 kph or about there, and as AC ties the position and physics relative to a stationary "zero point", the further from the centre of the map, the more jagged and amplified the results and decresed fidelity, as the diameter is just too huge, and you try to pinpopint something with the same, finite fidelity at big distances. Not like you can´t have Huge tracks, but you could not have little country sized tracks and see reasonable behaviour. Even for all the mods, it should still be there in some capacity, as that is the heartworks of AC. I think that GT does have all the basics of driving down, and that some "omissions" and curve/function make it all the better for it, enough smarts can make up for any number of engine physics modules. Still, even then the rattle and minutes are somewhat muted, as the game selects the appropriate points for what´s happening, and those, while they can have any amount of complexity and pre calc, won´t have the same effects shown, as what other sims do when they are truly on, on the 1/3 of cars that are just great- with exporting physics that manage the micro and the macro into what is happening inside the cockpit. In GT, The damage to the suspension of the parts and the like is nice and gamey, but the accuracy will be somethign else. Not that I don´t believe they are not monster devs, i jsut don´t believe, regardles of what I know or not, that the go that far as to accurately do many takes to eyeball what dies first, and how much it costs. When you mess up ground effect for a car( and that goes with the whole of the aero), by 2%, it will never be even close to the real thing at half the setups, and will be close, when the setup, angles and rake "is wrong", and that depends on how accurately the intersect of the functions is made as far as coherency of the car. Some cars in some sims are great, but they are weirdly made, they still function suprisingly well, most of the time. Kazunori is not wrong when he is adamant that even the last 1.5%( or soemthing like that) of deviation anywhere is just icing on the cake, but true sims should know what every wheel does, and the actual "signs" are muted in GT and its kin. When you introduce more oscillating parts without proper tie up, you end up with a disjointed model that can´t be fixed to match the IRL progression, and seems like GT lacks a bit, as everyone not a hater will tell you the game is surprisngly good, great even, but it seems it isn´t quote up to par when jiggle and more flexing-strtetching is introduced in more acclaimed sims. You bet there is still fudging going on, or there is some "smoother than smooth" going on. peeps want their cake, especially when the games say they can bring it. Rfactor modders often did it, eyeballing cars, then fudging the body physics hard, AC did something to damping calcs that isn´t by the books either, the cars may be "real" until you lose it at 15 degrees off, then you go WTF is this mass, aero and tire, that´s not what I was driving! I play RaceRoom, and that game is taking strides- for being simpler andmore GT/rFActor 1 like, it never wavered since they revamped the studio a few yrs ago. Just recently they had DTM champs, and it looked great, even for the 2015 Iracing graphics. The devs are exactly the kind of involved experienced people who know where they are, and they get ever sharper, they know what is what, have a well curated approach, main physics guy is a former racer who drove more cars than Loeb, and every update builds up on the last seamlessly. That game is one to watch out for, as they are not bogged down by publishers or similiaar struggles, so I´m looking forward to what they bring this year. You can download it on PC for free, with a few tracks and cars, but the whole is 60 ish, unless a big sale is going, atleast you can try the cars, a-la Iracing, and the sounds, despite IMO needing some revamping in sound stage and reverb, are still the blurpiest, meatiest and most accurate clean sim sounds since they began in 2013. Anyway, Good talking with ya, Ol´Chap ! And enjoy yourself some.@@4thManonCross
Now we are talking. Enough of bashing forza lol, it's time for comparisons between GTxACC to put an end to this nonsense spreaded over and over that ACC is a better sim than GT.
@@AutomotiveVPthey’ve already put this argument to rest. Look up Kireth. He went out and test drove a Supra to test the physics of GT, and came to the conclusion that GT isn’t realistic, and commented that he gained more respect for ACC afterwards.
All PC Sims are highly overrated
Sounds like something someone pozzed on simcades would say
Gamepad hobo spotted
See... You already bait the superfanboy of pc sim enjoyer 😂
skill issue
@@superlight1999 Nice pedo PP...
As someone who actually races and does track days often i must say regular Assetto Corsa is probably the most accurate when it comes to physics for normal road cars. I used AC to prepare for my first ever track day and it was almost 1 to 1 game vs real life. I race a Honda Fit (Jazz) and found a mod that drives exactly like my car. It mimicked the body roll, tire scrub and steering ratio as well as the gear ratios plus the track mod i used helped me with my braking and reference points for real life. AC is a great training tool for grassroots racers like myself.
Drive ACC in the rain and you’ll quickly realize how far off it is. GT7 dry tires in the wet are absolutely punishing but you can drive like you’re on intermediate tires in ACC in the rain.
I enjoy the game, don't get me wrong, but I just don't follow the hype with this one. I often get attacked in the comments a lot if I talk about Forza and GT7 in connection with this title, so I just wanted to spark a debate to get answers like this one. I'm planning to give it a good play when I have some time off work. I'm not a full sim racer, just a casual one, hence I don't really talk about physics a lot because I'm not educated enough to pinpoint this and that, if that makes sense! I dislike the fact that people label GT as simcade and use ACC as the go-to, because with my limited knowledge, I can see it's not that good at simulation, lol.
1. are you talking about AC or ACC (it looks like you're mixing them a bit)
2. in that specific clip of ACC the inputs are way too fast. Was that on a controller or keyboard?
I have to say ACC controller optimisation isn't good, it is a sim that is just better with a wheel.
3. GT or Forza are a Simcade, they have good physics, but not as realistic as a real sim.
ACCs physics also are not perfekt, but still one of the best if not the best at the moment.
4. Only starting with certain cars/tracks and having to buy DLC isn't a problemfor me. The devs also need to get their money from somewhere.
Agree, for PC, in my experience, tire pressure and physics Live for Speed was the best. I bet no one have heard of them although am disappointed it didn't progress in popularity. That was the most realistic driving sim I've ever played. It beats all the rest, ACC, Burns, etc.
Can’t wait to see what you have been working on, love the videos dude keep em coming.
yet another video will come where he will show that the fuel cap is beautiful...also because when it comes to driving...well...it's better to see the fuel cap😂😂😂😂😂
I disagree. Once you get a basic feel for trailbraking and weight transfer, GT 7 allows you to throw the car in the corner with the confidence that there is gonna be enough grip all the time. ACC requires far more precision in driving depending on the car’s drivetrain, layout etc. ACC is therefore far more rewarding and enjoyable to play. Also, since I’m primarily driving in single player, ACC’s AI is a huge step up from GT 7. Even the Sophy AI still pales in comparison to ACC’s AI.
You car set the car up loose in GT7 and have the same challenge and precision. Difference is GT7 is more like real life where nobody is driving loose setups like that because it’s simply too dangerous and overall slower.
The following are my likes and dislikes for AC.
Positives for Assetto Corsa (modded)
- It is the fastest loading game I have ever played, 3/5 seconds startup. (with content manager).
- Rolling anti-lag (scramble boost)
- Boost control (while driving)
- Tyre deflation on deceleration (drag cars) I guess similar to tram lining ? not sure how to explain
- Parachute deploy (drag cars)
- Lots of interesting animations specific to cars ie. windows, doors, indicators, screen/dashboard toggle, convertible roofs etc
- Open world maps
- More vehicle classes than you can imagine - Truck racing, F1, Rally, Touring car, Indy, NASCAR, Trophy Truck
- Android auto CarPlay (I can't literally watch this video from inside the cars infotainment screen in game)
- Pure Weather control (day/night - rain/fog/snow of varying degrees)
- specific tracks - Shibuya Expressway, Pudsey, Ebisu, Touges passes, The Autobahn & Targa Florio (45 miles long)
- I have 500 racetracks and 4000 cars to pick from.
- I have Trial Mountain (GT) & Sunset Valley (Forza).... in Assetto Corsa.
- Modding is easy, drag and drop. Easiest game I've ever modified.
- I've got an old PC, and it works flawlessly.
Negatives about AC -
- Without mods it's a bag of shit
- Doesn't have Gran Turismo graphics
- There is no in game car customization
- There are no soft body physics and damage simulation like Beam NG
- Support can end at any moment, most modders are doing this for free.
Even the graphics can be tremendously improved with mods, so much so that they can become one of the best currently available
Assetto Corsa & Competizione ❤️
can you make graphic comparisons between GT7 and ACC ? They are both my most favourite Sim racers.
Thanks for discrediting your forza hate with this latest opinion on ACC.
That aside, i respect your non apologetic approach.
It was to spark debate bro @le-johnny9236
Not sure if I missed it, but are you playing ACC on PC? Id love to see ACC on console vs GT7 car models and track details. Fuck FM compared to it, I already know how that'll be. Im on it daily and have to deal with the god awful graphics. 😂
I always skipped out on it since ACC came out on console later on and I felt like maybe an ACC2 will release. That, and going off the screenshots in the Xbox marketplace, the images look real grainy or just bad. On PC, the game is gorgeous though.
Hmm underrated opinion, good video.
Thank you!
Can you please make a VID about the first Assetto Corsa? I believe the physics are way better than Assetto Corsa Competizione and thats why modders are so into the game.
I also think ACC physics are not that good.
ACC in my pov is that, sometimes they changes their tyre model, suspensions yearly and their presets are absolute trash. While pros on the other hand use setups that are just doesn't looks make sense (though it feels very good in ACC's physics).
Other than that, the overall package is good to me. (GT7? It's good, I like that. GT World Series? I like that, but just, way too short and not enough up to date gt3s. oh btw, both physics are good to me.)
Though I don't understand why you are not using a wheel in this clip. Not too fair imo.
I had a vague feeling ACC was not all it was cracked up to be;
my impression without personal experience or watching anything, just internet chatter, is iRacing is the supposed most realistic PC Sim and apparently you can do a lot with the data for motion sim rigs I think; so the nerd in me is intrigued of having a highly articulating chair with multiple vibration motors, etc.
But to save my sanity, I'd invest in the PSVR2, have a 4k HDR1000 TV, get a top tier wheel and pedals, and maybe build my own rig to mount everything to.
I currently tend to graze just shy of gold time trials in GT7 online and I'm using the driver's excuse that I'm on a controller; until I get a wheel, then I'll say I need VR ... then I'll come up with something after that I'm sure! ;)
2:02 if wasnt not for mods on pc assetto corsa would be alive today
I got the first AC and couldnt play it as at that stage because I was having a blast on PC racing the go karts. Graphics alone I feel AC was seriously poor compared to PC. I think lets get all 4 games compared side by side, PC, AC, Forza 8, GT7.
Just by watching your ACC’s replay, I notice the physics is so off compared to the physics du ring replay in GT, how the car behaves. It’s just another world.
They’re not off, GTs is the one that’s off.
I don't get what your point is. What are you even talking about? How and why are the physics "terrible"? How else should a GT3 racecar full of aero behave then? What's the point of comparing GT7, Forza and PC3 to a proper sim? Also you're showing a video from ACC, yet you also criticize standard AC too. Are you a proper simracer or an actual race car driver? Cuz they all agree on AC having top notch force feedback and tyre physics. I'm not hating, I'm not offended, I just genuinely don't understand where you're coming from...
Though I don't understand why you are not using a wheel in this clip. But can agree that ACC is complicated by many means (and screwed up massively in suspension physics), the preset setups aren't anywhere good either.
But what it does good is the grid size, damages and wears. And if you care about serious racing, pro leagues in ACC are great. (While GT have an excellent weather model but still have its 48 grid mode locked and unused, you can see that in their GT World Series/Offline event builds. Leaving consumer version a tiny
I didn't played ACC but I played AC with a G29 in PS4. I never felt like I was driving a real car...I don't know but the cars seems to lack grip...it seems that the tyres are full of oil or something, it' s like "grip" or "no grip" and nothing between. Is an OK game for me, but not fun. A real car you take it and drive it. In AC, if you do not change something in setup, the car isn't good...
you've played it not only on console but on a terrible jackhammer of a steering wheel too, what did you expect??
ACC was a mess when it was released. I havent tried the game myself but I know that physics are a bit weird, in fact the car does slowly slide on idle when it should stay still. Replays are done in keyframes or something similar so movement will look weird and different from gameplay.
Thats about all I know.
I haven’t experienced any slide on idle except when I’m on a hill
@@TheOfficialRandomGuy its a minor bug that won't affect gameplay but it's weird that it happens. Idle was the wrong word to use but rather the car is stationary. The engine is revved slightly but not enough to move or engage the clutch.
Tbh, Simdaddies are a Cancer to the Racing Game community, but also the people who play iRacing are even worse, imagine wasting all of your life savings on a Subscription based Sim Racer
This guy is doing exactly the same thing you hate about snobby sim racers. Criticizing a game he knows little about.
@@TheOfficialRandomGuy Dude, Sim Racing Games are only enjoyed by Elitist morons who only care about "Super Realistic Driving", anyone in the Racing Game community knows at this point, the only one who still deny it are Simdaddies like you who only care about driving physics over anything else that makes a Videogame a Videogame, which is something that the Simcades achieve a lot better, even the ones with an underwhelming structure like GT7, PC3 or even Grid Legends at some point, man i would i even play something like Driving Emotion Type S over Assetto Corsa and/or iRacing because at least that game has content & progression compared to these "games", even if it pretty much sucks. Yeah, Gran Turismo's physics aren't as sophisticated and detailed as the ones from your Super Serious Sim Racing Games, but compared to them Gran Turismo shines in it's content and progression, and tho GT7's GT Cafe has been really mediocre at best for Gran Turismo standards, still offers something compared to the Sim Racers that have pretty much nothing, and you do nothing more than just driving, doing some Lap Times and unless you install Mods you can do nothing else but also play Online. And even if Gran Turismo's physics aren't as detailed compared to the "SUPER SERIOUS SIM RACERS" because of the obvious reason they still have to adapt them for anyone to enjoy them, some people who also plays Sim Racers have said that GT7's Physics still try to feel faithful enough to the real counterparts of the Cars included in the game, which for a game of it's type it's more than enough, because Simcades compared to Sim Racers they at least still remember they're still a Videogame, you can see it by their presentation, progression system, Upgrades & Tuning, Side Modes & Events, etc... compared to Sim Racers which only care about driving & physics
Sounds like you’re just used to the flair, and physics of GT
What's the purpose of "video game" sir?
@@superlight1999 what’s that have to do with my comment kid?
I own almost every car game out there, lol. I was playing ACC for 2 years before GT7 came out. This wasn't meant to be a GT7 vs. ACC comparison; it was simply intended to spark a debate. It's just how I feel about the game.
@@TheOfficialRandomGuy everything 😂
@@superlight1999 the purpose of video games has nothing to do with my comment
I haven't played AC before. It looks boring in terms of the content and gameplay, but the mods are definitely something different.
It's the GMOD of racing games. You get a few cars and tracks to get started, you make the rest of the fun with mods.
Definitely can get boring especially when the majority of the time is spent on tweaking.
I agree with you, AC tries to over complicate stuff, Kaz said in an Interview that driving is easy, to learn and hard to master, and he's right even your grandmother can drive relatively briskly, but can she push a car at the limit and manage weight transfer etc no. That takes practice and Gran Turismo replicates that. In summary AC is like a Linux OS in administrator mode and Gran Turismo is like Apple OS in both area computers and do similar things, one just does it with more flair and is much more just friendly. As to know Forza is Windows good obvious reasons FM8 is Windows vista cause as you've proven they took a leap back with this one even 6 looks better
They legitimately feel like soap boxes in ACC, and many people label GT7 as simcade, which it isn't. Once you reach the master level of that game, welcome to a true simulation! They have done a brilliant job with GT7
Just because YOU can take corners better in GT than in ACC doesn’t mean it’s better. You’re right that about anyone can drive, but driving the limit not so much. If that was the case, everyone would be running alien lap times.
That´s true, but driving incorporates not so smooth driving and the transitions and limits of these aswell. This is where GT has some issues, even should the driving be really OK most of the time, the proper noise and detail is the real bread of what a sim is expected to do when perfect. Even before rFactor1 we had perfected most of the physics and what needs to be done.
After all, no driving sim is perfect, and some will awe you much just by how it drives, even if you can´t point what it is, others won´t, physics and rattle is part of the presentation, of being real, in a sim. The same of people being invested enough to see things for more than they are, reflects in people wrongly, aswell as "based-ly" saying that the sims are basically Gran Turismo- yeah, and yeah, maybe, and no.
Still You´d need some thousands of hertz to actually say "the minute things I might do" will have a true immediate effect, and the butterfly effect of me driving will show it.
Small flatspotting, force propagation(HAH- From the ground up), elastic and permanent(would be nice)bending and failstates of components, rolling masses, drivetrain simulation, aero maps, what it does, how it works for you and the car behind/infornt, temps of brakes, aero push(does GT have that?)resonance in the model and on. You can never quite carry over the GranTurismo experience to the real car, as the heckin thing is always doing something somehat different, or "more", some cars will feel better, but that is car specific, and even then, the "isssue" of too much and too "techy" is often the guys who do not even want to see what´s under the hood, they just know the FFB and dynamics aren´t 100% alike what they know, even if it is mostly presentation a lot of the time. Every solid object slithers and heats up when it works, aeroplanes, bikes, bicycles, everything flexes, and these energies flow around, get absorbed by the body, sent further, meet together.
Sims try to match 1:1 at all speeds, some speeds will be more accurate, with more than one spot "close to perfect" at different speeds. Even those sims need a healthy amount of informed fudging some of the time, but mostly just guessing and making the missing pieces, but overall, the cars behave almost the same, but, making a lap time simulator is the easiest endeavour in the world, no realism needed for that, just grip weight, dimension, drag and HP-we had "remarkably" accurate lap times since the 2000.
In sims like ACC for the most part, as a non-airborne vehicle, even if the cars feel bloated and heavy "soapboxy", the driving is more realistic, and, even when it oversells something, atleast it happens and there is a build up of synchronolouzs tunes and bheaviours richer than a GT/rFactor1 like. If you took a GT driver on track and he was a total psycho, but knew how to drive smoothly, he would still be surprised by the crispness, rumble wobble and smallchanges in balance due to the extra physics, wind and wind direction, and the initial bite and weight change, aero and all that just isn´t like the game, and it isn´t just road surface and ticks.
Even sims walk the path of feedback before realism when it comes to FFB. GT cars are boats, so what´s wrong there? They are buses of a go-kart, better the faster you go. I think Project Cars (2 definitely) is underrated, and by proxy, AMS2 by Reiza studios, who have made it a spectacular sim, and they can do it (Formula Truck, GameStock Car, Automobilista 1).
The Gran Turismo bahaviour of the GT cars and the feedback just isn´t as alive, even if it does supply the needed info at the needed rates and is, in the macro world, really accurate. Just SOMETIMES, things are more of a premonition and preloading and a bang, than the smoothened action seen in older sims and GT likes. it´s not about the difference of limits and the minute differnce between GT likes and other when driving well, it is about the coherence of the experience and how seamlessly is works with the little things that "do not really need to be taken into consideration", yet are analogous to the idea of how the GT way works, while not going against what really happens and what´s in the car as far as parts( and liquids, driver weight) having multiple connections that GT doesn´t have, sending cracks and rumbles that could have an effect on handling(if at all- or different more subdued, or more dramatic)
In the end, chassis and body flex is often baken into the limits of the forces the car is supposed to take while reading the provided data, fuging suspension and the tires. That still omits the reality of where these come from and how they feel, with the state of the rest you are aware of, all the while the 0.04 s that you are aware it is happening runs. GT is a great game, but If I had to go and try to sim GT3, I´d go ACC, Iracing(yes), and Rfactor2, and AMS2 should there be quality GT cars. Hardcore sims want to go big, and the last bit is the vastness that isn´t as needed to enjoy the basis of the idea of virtual circuit driving.
@@japanesecar1501you raised alot of points and your logic and reason is understandable, that not withstanding their were a few things off or miscalculated I think and these are as follows,,Smooth driving, u mentioned that as if GT only simulates or respond to smooth inputs and not sudden or abrupt in less smooth inputs. Will just like real life in GT smoother is faster and creates less body roll or forward or rear G forces to upset the balance of the car. I learned this in GT5 when I got a racing wheel and the game got easier and I was faster, especially in the slalom license test what smoother inputs was needed. And you're right not all sins are perfect GT had been honing this sim for about 30 years,. Every one of them to me has felt like perfection, leaving me to wonder how can this get any better or more real, yet each release finds ways to improve on the other, so you're right there is always room for improvement. Cause GT8 will no doubt improve on GT7. + Kazunori Yamauchi actually races at the Nurburgring, in GT3 cars so his experience has been translated to the game. Which brings my next point how can u say that GT simulation can't be transferred to real life when their is GT academy, in which gamers become racers and they actually dominate which much less real life experience than actual racers.. As long as the conditions are the same then GT cars replicates real life, it's not a basic formulaic simulator that always gives the same results. That's why it seems unpredictable at times because it's accuracy. + GT simulates Chassis degradation, due to flex, which decreases car handling and engine wear,, due to mileage which decreases engine performance, hence u can restore chassis, stifden and buy new stock engine or overall it. What other Sim does that. ? You also mentioned how easy it is to simulate laptimes , true to a point, on a simple oval track perhaps, however the Nurburgring is a 21Km behemoth with 154 corners, each off which have to be accurate , with correct camber off camber angles for suspension geometry + the many hill/ inclines and descent, that affect e speed, based on weight and aero, throttle power map of used gear. Not an easy feat if u ask me. Which brings me to the next point speed, you mention that some speeds are simulated more accurate than others how so ? it's 1 code or calculation that renders all speeds, if a 10 mile track at 10mph would take 1 hour, then driving at 5mph would take 2 hours, so all speeds would be accurate by the same formula. Another question is ACC feels like a boat or soapbox how can it be more realistic than GT when feeling is a large part of simulation. And while I agree that physically noises like rattles does add to immersion it's not an essential simulation component, unless it's a Sim of Paris Dakkar rally and the noise is to gauge or indicate u sustained damage, in terms of track racing GT simulates all the needed noise effects, going over curbs, stones in under carriage and tyres after driving in gravel, suspension bottoming out from jumps etc., next thing Balance, wind impact aero etc, all have been a part since GT2 maybe 1 in not sure, In GT2 was harder to take turns in high down force JGTC cars when trailing close behind. And did u know that in GT 7 wind not only affects physics, but direction of tyre smoke, rain and particle effects. If u don't believe see here ruclips.net/video/jVshrvQT5uk/видео.htmlsi=o_2fxMsCR-F2WQvb 27 small details which GT7 is big on , what other Sim does that. GT7 does all these things quietly without making a big splash about being from the ground up or claims of being the most advanced Sim, which it is. Lastly GT7 GT3 cars give less feedback because it is not stock cars prone to body roll and heavily provided FFB effects. GT3 cars are stable and planted, little to no body roll or inertia, so other games, ACC exaggerat their feedback and ppl think it's more real. For example look how GT Sport simulates Kart physics, look how little steering input is needed for it to dart left or right. As you can see GT is a real true simulator since it even used to came with a racing book alongside the manual which talks about apexes ,balance weight transfer etc. Not other Sim have that aspiration of introducing beginners to racing, that's why ppl say it's a simcade cause it used a velvet glove of accessibility to mask a very detailed sim . That all I have everything else u say seems plausible to me, even psychos can have decent laptimes, lol
Haha, now that´s a worthy reply! Hey, thanks for taking your time dude.
As far as what you write, I think we are largely in the same boat.
The speeds i meant as far as what happens with the physics and the masses involved, when you bring in the binary of tick rate, how it smoothens, and what happens when input differs- when Forza, and other aswell, have differing results with different fps, even though the physics should be uninterrupted. It looks for Forza, the mesh of track/geometry is somehow related to the fps, and that is a classic in the way of the input being fps bound. In other words, at real high fps, the game adjusts the steering more, and you scrub less on average.
You can break through the asphalt when you have sufficient velocity, and fit in between the ticks right. when you project a beyond the barriers "next position"- a-la the jumping throuigh walls at sufficient speeds with the middle of the car between the checks, breaking through asphalt(speed sled sparky car glitch).
The car is propelled via what the assumed surface allows for, what the body touches, idk, and, perhaps as the mass is gear/direction baked in, as a switch, you can run the asphalt with your tires spinning forward, ie. car should be trying to go backwards, (who knows) yet you go forward as the HP allows, you are burning rubber, and you lose friction and axle/body bob in that state, and maybe there is pitch turn off of downforce, but that, idk, anyway, yo you go faster than with wheels in "reality", even if you "burn rubber" in the opposite direction you go.
Forza at 90 or more FPS is just a good bit faster. Solid several 1/10 of a second a minute.
The game is not made "to perfectly lag", and the inputs tied to fps is not ideal.
So, in Forza, PC and series players have faster times, some PC times are unobtanium- they just drive faster, hell they go faster full stop. The bogging and friction has to be smooter and somewhat reduced. (See Sepi, SP4 video)
Anyway, the topic is awesome, and I like anything to do with it. The inner workings of the engine and the matrices you can manage within always have caveats, and the weirdness of simple finite systems will catch you out when you design thecars for the game.
In AC, the physics loop is always reconsidreing the car´s position, as should, but that creatures 0.001 vectors that make you slide around.
The noise is connected and because the functions determine position change based on input of value/energy, the car is jittering when stationary, and could even walk away a bit like that.
So sims often fudge low speed with "tyre/suspension/momentum/inertia magic". Should the physics reach "0", that is analogous to a crash of the loop, and crashes by default as there is always some force loading, and that always results in some movement.
In AC, the low speed physics are(were atleast), basically a different simplified set that enabled the kinematics of the main body to stay away from locking up the loop(maybe freezing it in a way that was simple to do), and the car computes "the racing physics" at over 30 kph or about there, and as AC ties the position and physics relative to a stationary "zero point", the further from the centre of the map, the more jagged and amplified the results and decresed fidelity, as the diameter is just too huge, and you try to pinpopint something with the same, finite fidelity at big distances. Not like you can´t have Huge tracks, but you could not have little country sized tracks and see reasonable behaviour. Even for all the mods, it should still be there in some capacity, as that is the heartworks of AC.
I think that GT does have all the basics of driving down, and that some "omissions" and curve/function make it all the better for it, enough smarts can make up for any number of engine physics modules.
Still, even then the rattle and minutes are somewhat muted, as the game selects the appropriate points for what´s happening, and those, while they can have any amount of complexity and pre calc, won´t have the same effects shown, as what other sims do when they are truly on, on the 1/3 of cars that are just great- with exporting physics that manage the micro and the macro into what is happening inside the cockpit.
In GT, The damage to the suspension of the parts and the like is nice and gamey, but the accuracy will be somethign else. Not that I don´t believe they are not monster devs, i jsut don´t believe, regardles of what I know or not, that the go that far as to accurately do many takes to eyeball what dies first, and how much it costs.
When you mess up ground effect for a car( and that goes with the whole of the aero), by 2%, it will never be even close to the real thing at half the setups, and will be close, when the setup, angles and rake "is wrong", and that depends on how accurately the intersect of the functions is made as far as coherency of the car. Some cars in some sims are great, but they are weirdly made, they still function suprisingly well, most of the time.
Kazunori is not wrong when he is adamant that even the last 1.5%( or soemthing like that) of deviation anywhere is just icing on the cake, but true sims should know what every wheel does, and the actual "signs" are muted in GT and its kin.
When you introduce more oscillating parts without proper tie up, you end up with a disjointed model that can´t be fixed to match the IRL progression, and seems like GT lacks a bit, as everyone not a hater will tell you the game is surprisngly good, great even, but it seems it isn´t quote up to par when jiggle and more flexing-strtetching is introduced in more acclaimed sims. You bet there is still fudging going on, or there is some "smoother than smooth" going on.
peeps want their cake, especially when the games say they can bring it.
Rfactor modders often did it, eyeballing cars, then fudging the body physics hard, AC did something to damping calcs that isn´t by the books either, the cars may be "real" until you lose it at 15 degrees off, then you go WTF is this mass, aero and tire, that´s not what I was driving!
I play RaceRoom, and that game is taking strides- for being simpler andmore GT/rFActor 1 like, it never wavered since they revamped the studio a few yrs ago.
Just recently they had DTM champs, and it looked great, even for the 2015 Iracing graphics. The devs are exactly the kind of involved experienced people who know where they are, and they get ever sharper, they know what is what, have a well curated approach, main physics guy is a former racer who drove more cars than Loeb, and every update builds up on the last seamlessly. That game is one to watch out for, as they are not bogged down by publishers or similiaar struggles, so I´m looking forward to what they bring this year. You can download it on PC for free, with a few tracks and cars, but the whole is 60 ish, unless a big sale is going, atleast you can try the cars, a-la Iracing, and the sounds, despite IMO needing some revamping in sound stage and reverb, are still the blurpiest, meatiest and most accurate clean sim sounds since they began in 2013.
Anyway, Good talking with ya, Ol´Chap ! And enjoy yourself some.@@4thManonCross
Now we are talking. Enough of bashing forza lol, it's time for comparisons between GTxACC to put an end to this nonsense spreaded over and over that ACC is a better sim than GT.
Working on doing a side by side!
@@AutomotiveVPthey’ve already put this argument to rest. Look up Kireth. He went out and test drove a Supra to test the physics of GT, and came to the conclusion that GT isn’t realistic, and commented that he gained more respect for ACC afterwards.
You should watch this ruclips.net/video/_EAmNin7sqc/видео.html@@TheOfficialRandomGuy
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@AutomotiveVP what does that video have to do with GT7 not being realistic? The point is ACC is more realistic than GT7.
You are playing chase view with a controler. Your point of view is useless
See that's the point of this video. You just left too far behind. Keep up and understand the content.