The official "NEWS FROM THE SOCIAL NETWORKS" thread

When't the last time you watched F1 man?

For one, there is no TC, SC, or ABS on the cars. They're ultra lightweight cars with 900hp turbo engines in the back. Hardly this 'advanced driver aid' series that gives the drivers these huge safety nets so they never make mistakes. Dont think the drivers not making mistakes all the time is cuz of the cars driving themselves, these are just very talented people behind the wheel. Also, tire considerations mean they aren't pushing 100% in the races, which obviously helps consistency.

In terms of gaps between competitors, I dont understand how that has anything to do with what you were talking about. You suggested that cars with uber driving aids would mean nobody could pass cuz everybody would finish where they started, with nobody making mistakes. Gaps between cars is completely unrelated and has everything to do with the level of freedom in the technical regulations to find advantages. Sometimes the competition is closer, sometimes it's not. Last few years, the competition between 1st and the rest of the field has been big, but that's because Mercedes has simply done an amazing job, not because of anything to do with driver aids. And if you're an actual fan of the sport, you'd still recognize that competition beyond that is actually pretty damn close.

Also, if you go back to the 'glory days' of F1(1991 or so and before), and I put that in quotes because I dont think it's quite what people remember, there were *truly* massive gaps between cars. You could have 2 seconds difference in qualifying between 1st and 2nd, both of them driving the same car. The cars back then lacked driver aids, but they were just generally much more physical and difficult to drive, which *increased* gaps, not reduced. So your whole argument here is backwards. I'd also like to point that by around 1994 or so, cars had some pretty dang advanced systems on them, yet still the gaps remained fairly big.

Is there much passing in F1? Yea, there actually is. I'm still getting the feeling you haven't actually watched F1 since like 2007 or something. Cuz then, yea, there was pretty much little to no passing. But that wasn't necessarily because of driver aids, cuz they banned traction control for 2008 and guess what? Still hardly much passing. The lack of passing in the mid 2000's came largely from the extreme aerodynamics on the cars. The turbulence from the car in front that gives cars great slipstream ability also has a huge effect in the corners, where that same reduced drag means *drastically* reduced downforce. Meaning following a car in front through a corner closely is incredibly difficult, making your ability to get a good run on them next to impossible. This is the main reason DRS was brought in. Not to give drivers a 'free pass' button, but to balance out the disadvantage of following another car. This gives faster cars/drivers the ability to actually take the fight to the car in front instead of being stuck behind them for an entire stint, til pitstop time came, where most passing was done in the mid 2000's. But anyways, now that we do have DRS, we certainly see plenty of passing. It's still not easy, certainly not a guaranteed pass unless you're against a much slower car/driver, but we can see *racing* again, not just processions.

All in all, it seems absolutely clear that 'driving aids' have absolutely nothing to do with the state of F1 right now, especially considering they dont actually have many of them. I hate to say it, but what 'fans' say need to be taken with a grain of salt, cuz many of them have no idea what they're talking about.

 

Yea, you are right on that part.

I apologize my post was not clear enough. My post was talking about Technology in General.

Massimo0vca said (MY bold)

I said in response to that--basically pay attention to BOLD:

My points are about advanced technology. Not specifically to TC, or driver aids, whatever. I am talking about all of it.

If advanced technology results in uninteresting races, then people will stop watching.

 

And AGAIN, as I already stated to pollinho123--it seems you didn't read it

THIS is a hypothetical scenario:

You and pollinho123 both put a lot of words in my mouth and twisted it into something it was not.

 

I'd guess seanspeed answered to that.

Whatever, let's just agree we're disagreeing and get our focus back on topic.

 

You guys need to stop and just pm each other, this thread is supposed to be about social network news since they dont use this site to update all the new info and pictures regarding the game. Take your meaningless discussion elsewhere as it adds nothing to the thread and detracts from what it is. Now someone is gonna have to scroll through all that crap trying to find some useful info actually pertaining to the thread.

I wonder if I'm going to like the 919. I only ever used LMP cars in games like Gran Turismo 3 and 4 to stomp the Ai and make easy money.

 

I still believe that technology doesn't make a race less interesting. If you wanna go along the F1 example used before you can think about 1988 season Mclaren won 15 out of 16 races, in 1989 they won 10 out of 16. Back then was the so called Golden Age of F1 when drivers were real men and cars where furious beasts almost impossible to dominate... But 1989 season was boring as hell, with Mclarens lapping every other car in (almost) each race.
What makes a serie boring (or interesting) is a good set of rules AND without loops to exploit (as did Williams in 1992 with active suspensions, or Brawn in 2009 with the double-decker diffuser, or Redbull in 2010 with the flexible font wing). But above all a good set of rules, not the level of tech utilized: today's F1 has Mercedes dominating because they did a 10000 miles better car than opponents, but behind them competition is fierce (and the amount of tech utilized is insane).

Sent from my Samsung G935F with Tapatalk 6

 

Well ok.

But I'm still not sure your arguments holds up at all, even in that case.

F1, the most technologically advanced motorsport in the world(though WEC is arguably quite close, too), is the most popular motorsport in the world as well. Which would contradict any notion that being more advanced kills off the audience.

Two, how exactly does it create bigger gaps? You haven't really explained that. I'd say it's done quite the opposite if you look back at F1 history. Modern F1 is *way* closer than F1 used to be back in the day. You can argue Mercedes is a good bit ahead of other teams the past few years, but this isn't because of more 'advanced' technical regulations at all. Dominance is just an inevitable occurrence when you have a non-spec, non-BoP series.

And in terms of racing, I'd really recommend going and watching older F1 races if you can find them. They are *not* these amazing action-fests that nostalgia-blinded fans seem to think they were. The gaps were bigger than ever and much less happened each race as a result. F1 got seriously stale from about 98-08 in terms of racing, not because general 'technology' was advancing, but because aerodynamics became more and more influential. I know you're going to sit here and say, "Well A-HA! That proves what I'm saying!", but it doesn't at all. Because aerodynamics are just one form of 'technology' and not all of them have the same kind of detrimental effect on racing. And F1 has since gone and addressed that issue by introducing DRS, which has resulted in more passing than F1 has ever had in its entire history, by far. And the general grids of the modern era have been extremely close by historical standards, too. Dont think the gap between Mercedes and the rest is the only gap in the field. If your point is to have any truth, it needs to be true for the entire grid, which it simply isn't.

 

So now we know where does Kunos get all the money for contracts and why they don't bother making DLCs expensive. A genius programmer, an expert licensing manager and a rich guy, what a team!

 

Arisoil is all over Monza.

 

See aris, its all your fault that there is crashes at T1 all the time

 

I said "some people" not most.

 

There is TC in F1 but not as you know it.
It's now called CT=Controlled Traction, and once mapped in it makes the job of your right foot not "So" important.

 

Stefano Casillo ‏@KunosStefano
This is going to be a cool day at vallelunga

-------------------------
Guess we know what was in the truck now! Holy ****!

 

I'm sure your comment was meant as a joke, however you are kinda right. Whilst there isn't TC in F1, what they do have is a number of traction enhancement systems, mainly the throttle maps which help to cut down on wheelspin. Go back to an F1 race start say before 2000 and tell me what you see? Lots of drivers getting very varied starts and plumes of blue smoke from wheelspin.

Now go watch a modern start, everyone kinda gets around about the same start give or take and there is no wheelspin to the point of producing tyre smoke.

 

Nice. I wonder who is going to drive it? Aris?

 

Cant wait to see @Aristotelis comparison video. Can it drift?

 

How to fix F1:

Moar tyres
Slightly shorter and wider cars
Less/cleaner aero (less turbulence)
Scrap DRS
Put at least a car's width worth of grass before every run offs to prevent cars running wide

Wishful thinking:

STICK SHIFT YO
Minimal electronics
Different engine specs (V4, F6, V12, etc)
Tyres that arent garbage and no fuel saving (read: go fast)
Tracks that arent parking lots

 

Isn't the car supposed in the PP2 next week? Bit late for it to be measured and tested/compared to the virtual one I think. But I wonder if there is another software studio with a racetrack on their doorstep (Tokyo R246 in Gran Turismo doesn't count )

 

Maybe they forgot to model the cupholders and brought it back .

 

Stefano Casillo ‏@KunosStefano
A truck full of joy