Cool new dev diary video up on IGN about the tracks. http://ie.ign.com/videos/2013/01/15/real-racing-3-developer-diary-2-tracks Edit, didn't realise the video was posted by sicksilvo on the previous page, sorry for the double up.
I would guess that would apply to all the tracks. In that they are using the modern ones from whatever series (F1, Kart, Sports, Indy, Nascar, etc.) is predominantly associated with the track. I'm sure that will become clearer at launch. On another note, the in game footage looks absolutely fantastic. It's hard to believe how good it looks. Why is it not the end of February already. Edit. Was referring to Nurburgring originally. The Melbourne track mentioned in the diary is essentially real roads in Melbourne that they imagined into a race track for the game by themselves, not the F1 Albert Park track (whether that's in it as well, I don't know).
Wait.. which NFS??? Also "If they add real physics" - did you play Real Racing 2? Killjoy: Yes, something about cars will not be as glued to track as they was in RR2 and you should go the same speed through curve as on real track.. find those answers yourself if you're interested.
Have you played RR2 and NFS? There's an astounding difference in the handling of the cars, NFS feels much more realistic and the cars actually seem to have weight and heft to them; they all handle differently. RR2 and Asphalt 7 feel just weird in comparison, Solidfart was actually on to something when he was complaining about the physics in RR2. For a "simulation" or "real" racing, there are no real physics and the cars feel pretty much the same except for acceleration, traction and speed.
Dear Mr. JBRUU, NFS MW was released 2 years (yes, 2 freaking years which is equivalent to some 48 months) after RR2. In those two years, the computational processing power of mobile devices have exponentially increased. To make a comparison between both games is folly. Next, aren't cars supposed to feel different for "acceleration, traction and speed"? What other criteria are they supposed to feel different on? As long as you're not a crash-happy pansy, the physics in RR2 are really good. Collision physics is off, but braking, turning and accelerating all feels fine to me. And I am a diehard racing sim fan.
Looking at the demo some time back, I thought RR3 had worse driving physics than RR2. Funnily, I thought cars in RR3 were glued to the tack more than in RR2!
Dear Mr. Leonard, Please don't be condescending. My post was pertinent and cordial. For the record, 2 years is actually 24 months. Now if you want to talk about hardware and the capability to run physics calculations, feel free. But I think you forgot the fact that physics calculations are handled by the CPU, and moreover simple racing physics are absolutely no problem for the A4 chipset, much less Havok physics in MC4. Case in point: the iPod 4 (A4) has the same physics simulation running in NFS: Most Wanted as the iPad 4 (A6X). Hardware is absolutely not the problem here for realistic car physics. About RR2's physics...I find them nothing more than serviceable. You cannot flip your car, you cannot realistically drift, skidding is waayy off, certain cars have far too much traction and others are total crap, there is no sense of weight. It's like comparing Asphalt 7 with NFS, there is just a world's difference in the physics. One feels very floaty, close to the ground and weird while the other feels natural and allows for some really dynamic racing.
Fair point raised in your first paragraph. I don't agree with your second. I really thought the physics in RR2 were good. Sim racing is very different from arcade - dynamism is non-requisite. I don't crash, I DON'T skid, I don't drift....so all that isn't pertinent to me. As far as I am concerned, the braking, acceleration and cornering was spot on and that's more than enough!
Well, guess we'll just have to wait and see what Firemonkeys does. I'm not asking for arcadey physics, but just better ones than in RR2, that's all. Just always thought they were a bit off.
HA! That made me laugh. With regards to the physics: this new game needs suspension and lateral movement while under g's. Taking a Jetta around a corner at 80mph has a different feel to it than a Lotus would around the same corner at the same speed. I felt RR2 was an amazing game, especially considering what was available at the time with regards to competition in the marketplace, but to take it to the next level, the physics definitely need to be addressed. The only difference between the entry and mid level vehicles and the top of the line sports cars is the speed. Handling, cornering, etc were similar across all cars, only showing differences when the high end cars reached their speed thresholds. Suspension is everything in a racing game touting realistic physics, and it was severely lacking in RR2.
