Assetto Corsa Competizione 1.0 Discussion

I am good with the game, but this is not my first trip to the rodeo. They were under pressure to release the game by the 29th, so they did the best they could. They have not abandoned the game and I am sure they will release as many patches/updates to fix the existing problems in the game as soon as there able. Sometimes I think people have never bought a pc game before there all the same they release them, and patch what is needed as soon as they can.

 

Well idk why Kunos make decision to release 1.0 w/o beta tester support. Maybe we should ask 707 games?
I was impressed by Kunos work during EA and i am sure they will do their best to fix annoying bugs. But they will not change UE4 behaviour. I can imagine few people never played UE games. But most players does. So idk why wthey are crying here now.

 

Thats true, but the question is why they even choose UE at all? Didnt they knew its worst engine you can imagine? Maybe it was cheapest one?
And true is they cant do a lot to make it better just because of that crap engine, no matter what they do AA always be bad and game always will be haeavy for every PC no matter how "fat" with hardware it is.
So deal with it.

 

Great game for GT racers for people who are still thinking to buy. Don't listen to all the negativity by people that we should live in a perfect world. Yes the game as a few issues that will be addressed going forward because the Dev listens to its community. Be patient and enjoy ACC because if the game had been delayed you would have had the same haters on here and other sites moaning about it also.

 

EDIT BY MOD: don't be rude towards other users

 

Even this reply makes it look like it's still early acces lol. But we'll see. I have no means in generating noise or disturb the kunos team in doing their jobs. It's just a big complaint and a show of dissapointment and a place for people to discuss this.

 

Yes there are a few bugs and crashes so far, but it wouldn't go as far as saying its unplayable, and I also run in VR, it works great, I am avoiding CP servers for now until they iron out the crashes, I dont want to join the race and then get rekt'd by a DNF.

 

I have a <1000 € PC, i5 8600K + GTX 1080.

I can run the game on max settings at 2k, solid 60 FPS ( i capped them because i actually don't care about having more ) ...

 

I'we been with the game ever since EA Release 1 and what a marvelous journey it has been. The quality and stability of EA Release 6 (0.7.2) has been amazing considering it was beta. Now with everything out I can't wait to learn the new cars and tracks in detail!

Version 1.0 has been a mixed bag of experiences for me so far. To summarize ups and downs quickly:

ISSUES:
- Graphics performance has somehow become worse. I now run with 90 % resolution scale to get similar perf.
- Game breaking bugs with pitstops still.
- Physics on curbs still wonky.
- SA system is too unforgiving when you are hit by someone else. Don't know if this is possible to improve.
- Rolling start is broke in current state. I think an automated initiation is the only fix with transition to manual control just before green light.

THE GOOD STUFF
- Driving physics, force feedback and variations in road conditions are the best I have ever tried (mainly PC, PC2 as comparison).
- The modelling and variations of each car is amazing and all feel unique.
- Initial impression of server finder is actually possitive. I get much more evenly matched now, than in 0.7.2, where 70 % of drivers were Aliens and the rest Wreckers.

All together it is a buggy but still amazing release with much promise for the future. My main concern is if the game has appeal and functionality good enough to get intial commercial success, so the continued development can be supported.

I really want this game to be success for Kunos, with all the good heart and effort already put into the game, it deserves success and the final polish

 

It's not worst. One of the strongest engines actually.
Price is dependant from many things. But ACC selling on steam, not in epic store wich can give em up to 45% more income from every copy of game using UE as i know.

 

No, v1.0 is not early access, but rather a minimum viable product. A result of agile development methodologies in game/SIM/SW Dev is that the 1st iteration will contain just enough functionality to satisfy the early customer base. But Devs will continue to iterate the produce to its final state, incorporating feedback along the way.

So yeah, the days of getting a completed title on disc are gone, but this is also why we as customers have access to a new title in a year instead of 3.

The sooner you accept this, the less likely you are to be disappointed.



Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

Honestly I dont get all the people crying over poor performance.
I play on 1080p with everything maxed out manually and I just tested a race on Silverstone. My FPS never dropped below 55 and were averaging at about 85-90.
GPU is a GTX 1070 (so certainly not the fastest one on the market) paired with a i7-6700K.

 

Answer is in your post already:1080p

 

After having had an extremely rocky start, I am now able to run the sim stable and smooth in VR, pretty much comparable to 0.7.2. By my own exmaple I attribute my starting problems to erratic gfx driver replacement before installing the new version, I had a separate thread on the what and why and how.

The Good

The sim gives me 45 fps in VR, and I only talk about VR. 45 is smooth and fluent over here, I cannot notice the difference to 90, at least in ACC (all my other VR toys run 90, but they do not look smoother than ACC at 45). The quality of the graphics, on a technical side, are good enough for me. The actual artistic interpretation of the cars' looks and the locations's details, is breathtaking in most cases, I am stunned by how some of the tracks look. Doing Spa and sunset yesterday, the sights over Eau Rouge back to the building complex, was fantastic, and it is like this with many such tourist events I have had. I noticed that Brands Hatch looks steeper in VR than its pendant in AC1, is there something changed in the data or is the effect maybe due to something with the cockpit? I found the difference quite irritating
The wether effects and the day of time and external light effects, headlights from other cars, provide a very superior, almost photo-realistic experience, resulting in a cockpit immersion that is second to none, may it be in daytime sun, may it be at night or in stormy weather. I am blown away.

I cannot judge the cars' physics for their claimed "realism" since I lack the standard from reality to which I could compare. But the cars all have a destinct feel, feel differently, have thei individual styles and manners. They feel heavy and massive, the FFB I get from my wheel is just about right and extremely convincing, believable, the car feels alive and like an entity with true mass. The physics to me once again feel very, very good, providing a very believable illusion of being the real thing.

Some of the cars should be thrown into prison, that brutal their sound is: raw, animalistic, and super-dooper-realistic judging from TV coverage. I think ACC overtakes Raceroom in the sound department - and considering that Raceroom for me held the crown in racing sounds, that really tells something in my book. Also the mix of own car sounds and sounds from other cars and weather. Very convincing.

The AI has been improved over that in 0.7.2, it is a bit more stingy, far less hesitent to overtake, and more willing to bite. I have seen Minolin's one video were he described basic racing rules and taked about in how far the AI is affected in its behaviour by following these rules itself, too. With that understanding it makes sense what I see from the AI. However, following these rules also tames it to a degree that for my taste goes a bit too far. It seems to work better than in AC1, but I like the action provided by the Raceroom AI better: it sets up fights against other AIs more frequently and angrily, and that raises the entertainment factor tremendously. But the ACC AI is good, taken for itself, a good and solid "B" if rating RR's AI as "A".
These all are the important things of a race sim, and all these things are solid and good. I still wait for my first software crash, with having now maybe 6 hours on 1.0

I did not test MP, since it just does not interest me that much at all. No comment from me on MP, therefore. But I watched Minolin's video on explaining it in depth again, and I understood the rating system, and I can only say "Chapeau" to all that. For multiplayers, the system must be a very strong argument pro ACC, I fully understand that. But fact is that I am lookin for a way to disable the rating display in the HUD, since for SP the ratings mean nothing and are only distracting during close racing. They also can be obstrusive to the car'S mirror.

------------------------------
The not so good

The core stuff above is embedded in a package, and this package shows some design decisoopns that I must seriously out into question and do not like that much, all of that is not decisive, but unnecessary. Really, some of these things I do noit like at all.

The general design of the game's menu looks over-ambitioned to me, like an attempt to be cool and sexy at all cost, or at leats just to be different than the others. I liked the AC1 menu a lot, it was straight, clean, self-explanatory, intuitive. This new one in ACC now is kind of cluttered. The structure in parts looks arbitrary to me, and that in VR you cannot use the mouse in menu is an unforgivable sin that really gets me furious. A mouse, just in case that Kunos team does not know that, is a well-proven technical design of greatest ergonomy , it allows easiest hand-eye coordination in controlling options and settings on a screen and is the optimal generalist and allrounder in the house - thats why it is around since thirty years now and attempts to "modify" the principle design and idea all have faltered: its ergonomy is superior. Now to control the menus via my wheel buttons with my VR headset on, makes the handling of the menu extremely clunky and a real messy experience. A very big No-no from me. This is the worst possible design there that they could have chosen. I hate PC games copying console menus and ignoring mouses, and I absolutely dislike the accepting of a worstening of the roundness of a wheel just for the purpose of reinventing said wheel. The wheel is round, it must not be reinvented, and a mouse-controlled menu must not be replaced with some new anti-ergonomic design idea only to be different than the others. - I am at war with the menu design and handling since 0.1, I do not like it. A Minus from me for all this.

Add to this that I struggle since years to understand why they must artificially limit the keybinding options for your hardware. There are functions that cannot be mapped because they are not available in the menu. You need separate software to do so - while there is no argument for raising the need of this! I did not like this in AC1, and I do not like this in aCC. Raceroom shows how it is being done: EVERY function, game and menu alike, is available for keymapping in the menu. Kunos must not chose for me what I am allowed to map and what not, I can decide my handling setup all by myself. - On the other hand, they did something very nice with the double mapping of buttons possible, pushing the button and holding the button for some time can be mapped separatrely, that doubles the slots for commands on your used hardware. Very elegant, very nice!

The ingame HUD, mind you, I see it from VR players point of view. Again the player gets limited in how he can arrange the several HUD apps. Unfortunatey, they all are locked in relative position to each other, in one layer that can be increased and decreased in size and can be zoomed in and out before your eyes, yes. But in VR, the texts are hard to read at default settings, so it must be all increased, which moves some of the apps into very unwanted positions and blows other apps up in size that is affecting the whole cockpit screen again. At night, it all is too bright while the rest of the world and cockpit is relatively dark. In VR, this means god-rays, and not too few. It should tone down in brightness with fading daylight. Also, apps are hard to individually switch them on and off, often you cannot, you always seem to be locked to some combinations that are fixed for you. For example I do not want that race standings table in the left bottom corner, I do not use it in race and find it obscuring and distracting especially at night, and it must be increased too much in size to be readable in VR. The app for the rating system top left corner sometimes conflicts with the mirror. The speedgauge and gear indicator also can conflict with the monitors some cars have, it also is, in this fixed layout of elements' relative position to each other, located too far to the right to be of convenient use without losing the front and track out of sight for brief moment (in VR), so when I blow it up in size, the tyre app also becomes very big, but it does not need this big size and is more to the centre and becomes obstructive in itself again. The F2 button cycles trough various settings but also has the page with commands that you do not want to have suddenly popping up while driving, and - well, its all several smaller things that all come together and in summary make me concluding that these design decisions have not been done well. In VR, these things must have greater degrees of freedom for resizing and repositioning. And individually switching them on and off. I am a bit surprised that they paid attention to include VR in developement explicitly and from beginning on, and the driving and car and world graphics stuff all works this well - but here witht he HUD and menus these many issues combining all to one big issue. I know, its no tchcncial bugs, its design decisions. But I absolutely question this design. Adding it all together, I give it a very weak D- . As much as I like the driving and sound and graphics, as little I like the menu design, the absent mouse for VR, the HUD.

I saw Minolins video on the weather and the reasoning behind not accelerating it per option. However. In single practice, but apparently only there, time of day can be accelerated, and linked to that: weather. Another issue I have. Kunos has made limitations for the player while the choice easily could have been left to the player - the players knows better what he wants and why anyway! I would like to have a trackday-kind of setup. Many people like that, thats why SOL mod for AC1 explicitly offers it, while AC1 did not. And maybe I would like to have that with AI cars on track, and with accelerated time of day, lets say factor 10. And maybe I would like to have a within reasonable limits an accelerated chnage of the weather and track conditions as well. Not possible. Minolin made good points in why not to accelerate weather, and I would limit the amount by which it can be accelerated, to, his argment makes sense. But at least i would allow it in a tamed way. Lets say by fixed acceleartion limits, factor 2 and 3, not more. That could be interesting still, while not throwing realism completely out of the window and avoiding hilarious weather events. But no, I cannot do any acceleration in lonely Practice at all, and for a trackday with cars I must work around, by setting up a race and using its practice mode there and having no accelerated weather and time of day again - with some of them not even allowing me to set the wanted starting time of day. Limitations, limitations, and the most important: >>>needless limitations. Workarounds should not be the functioning mode of a product. They are improvised temporary solutions meant for getting something erratic or missing running until it got properly fixed. To have work arounds by wanted design, is an unacceptable design philosophy to me.

The weather change to me so far was hard to even notice. I have variation at 35%, aleady quite much in Minolin'S thinking, and tried several starting weathers, played up to 60 minutes in one session. If somebody would have asked me and I would not have known the background, I would, have said: "static weather it is, its not dynamic". I do not often drive one hour in a row. Mostly it is ten lap races or something in the range of half an hour. These current dynamics in weather seem to be pretty useless for me. - Randomised weather might be fine, if it works, but being allowed to strictly defiinng the weather change you want, also is attractive. I am no lover of Project Cars, but the way they allowed the player to set up up to four "attractors" over the period of a race to have the weather then moving at these directions, was a very clever design thing, I think, I liked that.

Essence of these things: separate trackday option, with accelerated time of day at will of the player, and weather acceleration possible if he wants, limit it to 2x or 3x or so, if you think you really must command him at all. Other titles can do it, and they do it better that way - why can't ACC?

Once again no manual, no document collecting all details and infos that now are scattered across a thousand places, boards, postings. Too often already I had to search the web for something I needed and that would have belonged in to the documentation. These new online ways of "documeting" stuff means a very messy way of providing it to the customer, I absolutely hate it. A big extra Minus from me for that, I think this really in inexcusable. The ingame texts in menus are far from complete on the things that would have been needed to describe. WTFM! If you write posts and essays and explanations online, you could as well collect it all in one place, make a textfile of it, put it into a document folder in the installation, and you are done and every customer has it at his hands, easily, completely, without needing to look around online and cursing. The new ways are not always automatically the better ways. In this case, its a far inferior way.

--------------------

I think ACC is set to become the benchmark sim in the genre, despite its limited content and scope. But the roughness of the package, the listed secondary things I mean, I do not like, are quite many as well, so while I like to drive this sim very much, I am hesitent to give it the top mark that it could have gained if the package just would be less rough around the edges. While they got again their core competence illustrated in all its glory - physics, driving - , some of their design decisions for menu and their handling just leave me scratching my head, wondering. This is not to say that the priorities of a racing sim have not been met and served extremely well - and of course I imply that the currenty issues and bugs there are will be ironed out. In this regard I trust Kunos. For driving on the tracks included, this is now my to-go-sim. But due to the limited content, it will not become the only sim. It seems my list of used racing sims has grown from two to three. But I think I said that already last year: that I do not expect ACC to replace AC1 or see AC1 dying, but that ACC will live side by side with AC1 and the latter having many more years of life in it, due to its superior mod situation. ACC is a worthy addition to a race title collection already for the very good weather and night racing already - and in these it currently is second to none, especially racing in rain: Second. To. None.

 

Hi,
I know there are still many things to complete, I will be lucky but for now after about 5 hours of driving with v 1.0 I have not had any crashes or system errors.

 

Although 1440p is on the rise 1080p is still the most widely used resolution (especially in competitive gaming).
If people like to run higher FPS they shouldnt run 1440p or higher and then complain.

 

I have 1440p and game running smoth with my rtx videocard. I think at 4k people can't use epic temporal aa, and with lower aa settings game looking not so good.

 

Don't get me wrong, this game has HUGE potential but given the capabilities of the predecessor, I just cannot see foresee any reasonable improvement with ACC AI going forward. You define the AI as 'good' but you're clearly not racing offline very much, surely?

Ultimately, I find the movement of the AI in general to be incredibly, incredibly unrealistic. It is so JERKY. If you compare this to the likes of RF2, the ACC AI is just so unnatural and is unable to follow a smooth path. Not to mention that the logic does not allow for overtaking slower cars. If you run a race on any circuit with 100% strength and aggression, you will rarely see any overtakes AT ALL. All of the cars remain in exactly the same positions. You will only ever see overtakes on long straights and that's if you're lucky. God forbid you run an endurance race that requires a mandatory pit stop, as you will find that the leader gets stuck behind a slower can and can never overtake... This, in itself, completely removes the offline experience.

 

The rf2 air is not as good asit used to be, it has issues too with lack of overtaking and jerkiness going into corners

 

Personally, I cannot complain about Performance at all.
I have a mixture of mid, high and epic settings and a perfect stable fps under whatever condition with many opponents. (relatively old CPU combined with 1070 GPU)

I hugely like the game in the state it is right now!
But you (and I) can see and feel the Release Pressure in (unfinished) corners of the game.
We live in 2019. And with almost every major game release out there it is the same (old?) story. Seems like a sign of the time. (a very frustrating sign)

I hope and strongly believe, that - once the first patches are rolled out - the "****storm" will calm down and people will forget this "early start" of the game.
It has great potential, still.

The Storyline so far is grist to the mill of every iRacing fanboy, who pays hundreds of dollars, though.
And it seems every one of them is coming out of the cave to smash ACC.

On the other hand there is nothing wrong with fair criticism. (to make that clear.)

Peace! Happy racing and hopefully a good story from 1.0 onwards...