And here's how it may look, when you set up everything as should:
Did you notice virtual steering wheel, right behing the real one? It's there
In my case, it's not perfect but pretty close. Of course, without ability to choose low FOV (slightly less than 24 deg.) from rFactor settings, there's no way to drive like this in online events... hope that will change with rF 2
Oh, and that white thing with buttons is kind of an beta/testing version, so don't bother how it looks right now ;-)
Your cam file settings don't get changed during online games even with forced cockpit. At least not in my experience. Still the V-fov slider needs to go lower in-game (15?).. It is posted in the wishlist thread along with what I would like to see as the setup screen for rF2. I got that chance to look at iRacing's and it is terribly unintuitive.Originally Posted by LesiU
Of course, without ability to choose low FOV (slightly less than 24 deg.) from rFactor settings, there's no way to drive like this in online events... hope that will change with rF 2
Ha! I just had to check that.. and you're right! I thought there will be mismatches or file will be reverted to stock values (like it is with cockpitinfo file, when you want to setup your own seat position) but with cam file it works without problemsThanks!
very similar to my cockpitLesiU Y así es como puede parecer, cuando se configura todo como debe:
........... Nodo
www.rfactorhc.blogspot.com
Took my setup to a lan recently. Didn't take the 97lb CRT but with a 25.5" samsung mounted up-side-down I was able to enjoy a view not previously possible.
Behold, perfection..
Had to modify each mod's cam file orientation offset from +0.05 to -0.02 since it is so much lower then my CRT at home.
A bit of a friend driving in the setup (poorly). Wait 12 seconds..
Last edited by ZeosPantera; 05-17-11 at 01:47 PM.
I guess a good setup would be have a first monitor only for gauges / pannel (first plane) and a second screen for the glass windshield (second plane). To project both planes into one screen is a wrong start. Unfortunately few have money & room for to something like that (btw, the IRacing screen on the video is really bad positioned).
Ingame model provides you proper size for gauges etc. so you're only missing possibility to physically touch those gauges (but you have to look at the screen from driver's pov to see it is right).
Another solution is to create real gauges and connect them with the sim, while the screen standing behind them.
I'd have thought that a while back but that 25" monitor pulled that view off pretty well. If it were a 32" it would be perfect, and 32" tv's are getting dirt cheap! http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16889104157
Ironically, I happen to have those exact Porsche gauges out of a 997.. But alas I dont wish to destroy them less someone makes a rock solid tutorial on how to wire them.
(ebay, miss-categorized, $60 with shipping.. that same cluster is on there for 900+ )
Interesting topic. My view is that we as sim racers have to learn to "disconnect" our inner ear input. The fact that what we see isn't synchronised to any inner ear inputs in a static environment are what lead to simulator sickness and why some excellenet real world race drivers simply can't get on with sims.
We have to adapt to this and also, unless we have a projector system, a scaled world - few of us have screens large enough to equate to a car windshield - just stick your hands out as far as you can see them vertically and horizontally in your peripheral vision to see how big that should be and that is before you move your head.
Creating a genuine 1:1 environment is a great goal but for the vast majority it is a little bit like we are driving on TV, however, our brains are capable of making that feel real - we are doing a fair bit of translation to convert these images into what we feel.
I think most of us are very capable of dealing with variances in height and it quickly becomes "normality" for our view of the world from the cockpit.
Without a full 1:1 environment creating 1:1 views of cockpits becomes a very tunnel vision view so there are arguments either way and as stated a lot comes down to personal preference and how our brains are wired - remember that some can't do this at all due to the missing inner ear inputs whilst others need to find how best to substitue this aspect.
Cheers
Tony
am i in the right forums lol i only see iracing and rfactor pro are you sure you have your fov an the seat in the car in the right place??
The screens don't need to be as big as a windshield. They just need to take up the same amount of vision as a windshield does. Having just two small-ish monitors could probably accomplish the task as long as they were closer to you then the windshield. Just see my FOV thread in my signature.
Hi, what?
I have three 22" screens reasonably close but it doesn't fill my vision, most especially vertically, plus the side screens really show a view that would require a driver to move their eyes from centre to see. To get a true 1:1 scale which includes both peripheral vision and the ability to move your view as you do everyday driving to work you need a lot more screen area. Getting lifelike sized gauges cuts off a massive amount of vision which negates some of the benefit of a three screen setup to get vaguely close to what a driver really can see.
I do agree you should get as close as you can but would argue without very specialist kit it will be scaled.
Last edited by TonyRickard; 06-05-11 at 04:09 PM.
I would suggest you don't need to see all that much vertically, obviously gauges might add to it but if I had the opportunity to run true perspective on 3 screens and gauges were the stumbling point - I'd go without. As for your side screens showing farther around, such as showing beside your car (90° to your left/right) when the screen isn't (let's estimate 50° to your left/right), you can correct that with lower FOV settings - see ZeosPantera's FOV thread.
Of course none of this compares to having something covering your full forward and peripheral vision, let alone the ability to show 270-300° allowing you to turn your head realistically (some would argue head-tracking can achieve this, and I suppose once you get used to it it's a fair compromise in the absence of a complex and expensive display), but we can make improvements even if we can't get to our ultimate goal - it doesn't need to be all or nothing.
Yes, I completely agree though there is most often compromise - e.g. surround vision when you can't physically get the screens to wrap around. The solution maybe be to provide some surround aspect so provide the ability to look and see a car next to you. I hate it when the forward view is shifted using look left/right views and track/ir just doesn't work for me.
My initial response though was to whether the inner ear would give false readings if he horizon wasn't lined up ad I believe the brain can adjust for that just as it can a scaled view. Getting the view as perfect as possible is great for immersion but I don't think is completely essential.
Ignoring the entire Inner ear discussion. You do agree that the setup above looks wrong. A foot of black between wheel and windshield and putting the cars gauges at eye level.
I do agree it would be better lower, yes. However, I look at the "perfect" views shown earlier in this thread for a single screen and think that whilst great as a driving view it makes for a poor racing simulator by not seeing what race drivers see. My personal view is the height is less of an issue than the narrow width but we may have to disagree on that one
Tony, I agree with you (and Tim) about the inner-ear thing, as someone who gets motion sickness (in real life) I've never thought the inner-ear had anything to do with comfort when playing games - the only time I've felt nauseous was when watching one of Zeos' videos with low FOV, and I'm pretty sure that was just having the view panning around so much without enough vision to be able to put everything into context. (and that despite matching the FOV so perspective was 'true'). Conversely someone I know struggles with computer games because of their artificially high FOV, can't go more than a couple of minutes without feeling ill - and he has no issues with motion-sickness at all.
I recently lifted my screen up about 4 inches and felt like I was looking up - until I looked at the window blinds beside me and realised my eyes are still only a couple of inches below the top of the screen. So there's no doubt you get used to whatever you use; it took a day or two to get used to where it is now.
The only thing I would say, is that there is something about having bridges etc. in the game being above you - but I think as that tends to come with using a large screen, the sheer size is also a factor.
Still, as far as 'proper' sim setups go, you'd think if you go to all that effort you would make it realistic in every way possible. (but then you look at tracks, and wonder why they spend all those hours making it and then fail to have timing objects stretch all the way across the track/pitlane, or put pit entry/exit lines in the wrong place, etc)
It seems that screen was set up for the purpose demonstration, not simulation i.e. to let anyone film or observe a simulator in action, while (greatly) compromising the simracing experience itself for those in the seat. I think that's the reason why in many of those demo events the screen placement is so shockingly wrong.
In the full video you see about 5 of those exact same "simulators" lined up against a wall in what appears to be iRacing's corporate headquarters.
Interesting discussion going on here. Let me first say that I am currently trying out the 'realistic' FOV thing that ZP has suggested, and so far I'm really digging how much more accurate the distances feel. In fact, I find myself braking WAAAY early because I'm still used to the corner looking like it's farther away! hahaha I definitely miss being able to spot my apex at the turn-in, though--but that could be remedied with a triple monitor setup. Anyway, I digress...
I agree that the screens from iRacing are most likely set up for demonstration purposes rather than to offer the most realistic simulation possible. Have the screen high up because that's what attracts peoples' eyes at shows and the like. They probably just use the same rigs for in-headquarters marketing as they do for trade shows. And don't forget that 'for marketing purposes', they're going to want to show off their cockpits--certainly not possible if they try to match horizons and use proper FOV.
As far as the theory about adjusting the seat position, camera tilt, etc. goes. I agree with you 'in theory'. However, practicality gets in the way. First off, matching the steering wheel like your picture only works if your controller wheel is the same diameter as the wheel on the car in the sim. Also, your seating position, posture, etc. plays a factor in how the cockpit camera should be placed. For instance, my setup requires me to sit quite upright; however, I mostly drive open-wheel cars. The seating position in most open-wheelers is such that your can barely see over the steering wheel. However, my eyes are probably a good 8+" above my wheel in my setup. In which case, it begs the question of which is more "simulation"? To match the view to my setup? Which would result in an incorrect 'simulated' view for driving an open-wheeler. Or to match the view to the posture one would actually have in an open-wheeled car? In which case I would have to rotate the view so far down in the cockpit I'm looking at the foot well, because my eyes are about level with the top of my monitor (ergonomically correct for working at the computer). Ideally, I'd match my real-world posture to that of the virtual cockpit, but again, you run into practicality issues whenever you want to switch from one type of car to another as I often do. So, for me, because I'm able to put myself into the POV of the camera, the default settings are usually the best (i.e. matching to what one would really see if in such a car).
The advantage Red Bull have with their simulator is that they only have one vehicle to simulate. Hell, they even use the cockpit from the actual car in their simulator to get around this problem completely!
-Chris
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
