Support NeoGAF

[Three]

It's not really, though it doesn't necessarily translate into "feel" either. in pCARS and Forza, the physics refersh rate means the rate at which the tire and suspension physics update. For example if the car is travelling at high speed over a bump in the road and the physics refresh rate is not fast enough, that bump simply won't be calculated. Sawtooth kerbs for example are something that can't be calculated properly unless you have a really high refresh rate, and the effect has to be canned ("faked" into the physics when the car is within a kerb collision are for example). But as I said, it doesn't necessarily translate into a better feel as you also have less time for calculation during each tick, though the ticks themselves don't have to differ in feel compared to slower refresh rate.

Input polling is another thing, but that was never the argument and most of these games poll the controller at a high refresh rate.

This is by far the best explanation.

Precision and accuracy? Especially needed for a car game, since the pretty much all of the variables change as when the vehicle changes position. It just acts like a refresh rate, more frames = better picture, but in this case the physics are more precise.

This is not entirely true. The physics can be less precise and less accurate at a higher rate. There are PC racing games out there with more accurate and more precise physics that run at frequencies 3-6 times lower. This is why I say it often means very little when one specific aspects rate is used to determine its merit . It's used mostly for PR because everybody loves a Hz race even though it is not the whole picture but not entirely meaningless either. To make matters worse people often give their highest rate and that gets advertised around for physics as a whole even though some aspects may run at a lower frequency (collision detection with PhysX in PCars runs at 50hz for example), but the precision or accuracy of its physics is not determined by that frequency alone.
much like the 600hz rates they advertise for some TVs some racing game fans used the frequency of some aspect of their physics calculation to bolster the merit of their physics as a whole as if this frequency determines the complexity (precision or accuracy) of their calculations. It's not the whole picture and it often means very little in how a game feels in terms of accuracy even though it is not entirely meaningless.

 

[Stillmatic]

Had a closer look at the rain effects in cockpit view as I think they both look great, and I was curious to see a comparison. They're done quite differently with some big differences.

I've tried to keep the .gif file sizes down, but if you're on mobile you might want to wait until the next page before revisiting.

Please post if I've overlooked something, got something wrong or you know more about these things on a technical level (I know little).

Neither seem to be going for photo realism, they're both exaggerated/stylized.

- It looks like DC has a fully dynamic fluid system that handles the whole rain simulation on the windscreen.
- It looks like FM6 uses dynamic multi layered textures and blend masks to bring it all together.

FM6 left, DC right:

- In Forza the drops don't merge to become larger, the drop masks the other drops out.
- In DC, each drop can merge with each other. Here you see a rain drop landing beside another and them merging and becoming larger. It's now influenced by force more and travels faster along the windscreen.

FM6 left 3, DC right 2. (Left and right wipers of the same footage, just cut side by side to save .gif size. The middle .gif is the right FM6 wiper coming back down):

- FM6 isn't picking up the drops along the way as it's a layered effect, they're being masked out, then turning on the pool of dynamic drops at the end of the wipe.
- DC is running a fluid simulation, so each drop is getting picked up by the wiper and then merges with other drops. If these drops don't run off the side by the next wipe then they get added to the new batch of drops. Which is why you sometimes get a shitload of water (jelly effect) on your screen:

Because of that last point DC can gets large amounts of water on screen, looking awesome but over the top if you want realism:

Side windows - FM6 left, DC right:

- FM6 use the same technique as the windscreen, large drop movement is dynamic and moves with the forces of the car.
- DC is using a layered textures/sliding textures here, which is not dynamic.

FM6 left 2, DC right:

- It's a bit harder to see here but in FM6 the smaller drops aren't dynamic, as in they don't move. Only the larger drops are effected by force and direction. What FM6 does well here is show the water dissipating, it's done by fading out the layer (shown below). Water only does that from a lot of force at high speed, but it looks neat here.
- In DC every drop is effected by force/direction. It's subtle in DC, if a drop is individual it isn't effected as much but still move along the screen, when 2 or more drops combine you see a lot more movement. The water doesn't dissipate, it stays on screen until it's wiped or blown off.

Here you can see some of the masking and fading in FM6:

I love this effect in FM6:

The drop movement is obviously exaggerated but looks amazing. There should be more weight in the drops resulting in a lot less movement. But what I like (DC does this too) is how the water from the previous right wipe travels across leaving streaks to the left side of the screen and is then caught by the left wiper (this is looking at the top half of the middle part of the screen). But it looks better here in FM6 due to the fogging of the window, something DC lacks.

Here's more on the point of weight: FM6 left, DC right:

Both cars are idle, water from the wipers in FM6 are treated with no weight/surface tension, it travels off to the side at a constant rate. In DC the drops are effected by gravity/surface tension and slide downward.


I think the variation in drop sizes is a lot more realistic in FM6, but they look like flat textures. DC is the opposite, large drops mostly but have depth:

At times the weather effects in FM6 can look a bit odd/disjointed, but when it all comes together correctly the weather effects can look fantastic:

In terms of lighting and reflections, DC accurately reflects the environment and light sources. I'm guessing it uses some form of GI, as the rain drops reflects the light bounce of opponents car paint and environment around the track.

Here on the right side you see the yellow light illuminate the drops on that side of the screen. Then towards the end of the .gif you see on the left side, drops light up red from break lights, yellow from side banners and blue from the car in front.

I haven't seen any FM6 rain footage at night to compare. But I don't think they react to light in the same way going off overcast footage. Probably due to using cube maps?

Which you prefer the look of is a personal choice. The way DC simulates water on the windscreen is unique and hopefully the direction these effects will go in the future. There's room for improvement but it's incredibly impressive in its current state:

 

[OccamsLightsaber]

Which you prefer the look of is a personal choice. The way DC simulates water on the windscreen is unique and hopefully the direction these effects will go in the future. There's room for improvement but it's incredibly impressive in its current state:

Incredible post. And I hope so too.

 

[nib95]

Had a closer look at the rain effects in cockpit view as I think they both look great, and I was curious to see a comparison. They're done quite differently with some big differences.

I've tried to keep the .gif file sizes down, but if you're on mobile you might want to wait until the next page before revisiting.

Please post if I've overlooked something, got something wrong or you know more about these things on a technical level (I know little).

Neither seem to be going for photo realism, they're both exaggerated/stylized.

- It looks like DC has a fully dynamic fluid system that handles the whole rain simulation on the windscreen.
- It looks like FM6 uses dynamic multi layered textures and blend masks to bring it all together.

FM6 left, DC right:
Images
- In Forza the drops don't merge to become larger, the drop masks the other drops out.
- In DC, each drop can merge with each other. Here you see a rain drop landing beside another and them merging and becoming larger. It's now influenced by force more and travels faster along the windscreen.

FM6 left 3, DC right 2. (Left and right wipers of the same footage, just cut side by side to save .gif size. The middle .gif is the right FM6 wiper coming back down):
Images
- FM6 isn't picking up the drops along the way as it's a layered effect, they're being masked out, then turning on the pool of dynamic drops at the end of the wipe.
- DC is running a fluid simulation, so each drop is getting picked up by the wiper and then merges with other drops. If these drops don't run off the side by the next wipe then they get added to the new batch of drops. Which is why you sometimes get a shitload of water (jelly effect) on your screen:

Because of that last point DC can gets large amounts of water on screen, looking awesome but over the top if you want realism:
Images

Side windows - FM6 left, DC right:
Images
- FM6 use the same technique as the windscreen, large drop movement is dynamic and moves with the forces of the car.
- DC is using a layered textures/sliding textures here, which is not dynamic.

FM6 left 2, DC right:
Images
- It's a bit harder to see here but in FM6 the smaller drops aren't dynamic, as in they don't move. Only the larger drops are effected by force and direction. What FM6 does well here is show the water dissipating, it's done by fading out the layer (shown below). Water only does that from a lot of force at high speed, but it looks neat here.
- In DC every drop is effected by force/direction. It's subtle in DC, if a drop is individual it isn't effected as much but still move along the screen, when 2 or more drops combine you see a lot more movement. The water doesn't dissipate, it stays on screen until it's wiped or blown off.

Here you can see some of the masking and fading in FM6:
Images

I love this effect in FM6:
Images
The drop movement is obviously exaggerated but looks amazing. There should be more weight in the drops resulting in a lot less movement. But what I like (DC does this too) is how the water from the previous right wipe travels across leaving streaks to the left side of the screen and is then caught by the left wiper (this is looking at the top half of the middle part of the screen). But it looks better here in FM6 due to the fogging of the window, something DC lacks.

Here's more on the point of weight: FM6 left, DC right:
Images
Both cars are idle, water from the wipers in FM6 are treated with no weight/surface tension, it travels off to the side at a constant rate. In DC the drops are effected by gravity/surface tension and slide downward.


I think the variation in drop sizes is a lot more realistic in FM6, but they look like flat textures. DC is the opposite, large drops mostly but have depth:


At times the weather effects in FM6 can look a bit odd/disjointed, but when it all comes together correctly the weather effects can look fantastic:
Image

In terms of lighting and reflections, DC accurately reflects the environment and light sources. I'm guessing it uses some form of GI, as the rain drops reflects the light bounce of opponents car paint and environment around the track.
Image
Here on the right side you see the yellow light illuminate the drops on that side of the screen. Then towards the end of the .gif you see on the left side, drops light up red from break lights, yellow from side banners and blue from the car in front.

I haven't seen any FM6 rain footage at night to compare. But I don't think they react to light in the same way going off overcast footage. Probably due to using cube maps?

Which you prefer the look of is a personal choice. The way DC simulates water on the windscreen is unique and hopefully the direction these effects will go in the future. There's room for improvement but it's incredibly impressive in its current state:
Image

Damn dude, great post!

Also another random observation, each of Driveclub's individual water droplets on the windscreen etc, actually reflect the world and everything around them. Not sure how taxing that is, but it's certainly nice attention to detail. Not sure if any of the other racers do the same thing either.

An example shot.

 

[Inf3cted_b3ast]

@Stillmatic Great post man! Those last 2 Driveclub gifs, especially the one with the wiper blades leaving scratches on the windshield as it wipes across, dropped my jaw when I saw it for the first time.

 

[HTupolev]

In terms of lighting and reflections, DC accurately reflects the environment and light sources. I'm guessing it uses some form of GI, as the rain drops reflects the light bounce of opponents car paint and environment around the track.

Also another random observation, each of Driveclub's individual water droplets on the windscreen etc, actually reflect the world and everything around them. Not sure how taxing that is, but it's certainly nice attention to detail. Not sure if any of the other racers do the same thing either.

Seems likely it's screen-space resampling, similar to SSR.

 

[Baroquemantic]

Thanks for that post, Stillmatic. It was very informative. You're awesome!

 

[Windom Earle]

:bow Stillmatic windshield god!

Both games are very impressive in that regard, but I really like that DC accumulates the drops.

 

[timlot]

Which you prefer the look of is a personal choice. The way DC simulates water on the windscreen is unique and hopefully the direction these effects will go in the future. There's room for improvement but it's incredibly impressive in its current state:

Amazing post man. This is something I've taken note of myself. I always loved the way DC did windshield rain effects and was hoping Forza 6 was going to be able to emulate some of that. Knew it would be difficult with the gameplay @ 60fps. Was glad to see Turn 10 was able to do some of the movement effects. Forza 6 and DC are the only racing games to have side to side movement of water across the windshield. PC rain effects (even after the latest patch 4.0 update) only move up the windshield. There is no side to side movement of the rain drop during turns or quick lateral movement.

 

[Aceofspades]

Stillmatic post made me appreciate DC windshields physics even more.

Droplets accumulates and reflect world, lightning and gravity! amazing attention to details by Evolution.

 

[jet1911]

I really like the way the water accumulates in DC but it's true that sometimes it looks a lot like jelly when there's too much water. Given the platform I'm also really impressed by the FM6's windshield.

 

[Baroquemantic]

Amazing post man. This is something I've taken note of myself. I always loved the way DC did windshield rain effects and was hoping Forza 6 was going to be able to emulate some of that. Knew it would be difficult with the gameplay @ 60fps. Was glad to see Turn 10 was able to do some of the movement effects. Forza 6 and DC are the only racing games to have side to side movement of water across the windshield. PC rain effects (even after the latest patch 4.0 update) only move up the windshield. There is no side to side movement of the rain drop during turns or quick lateral movement.

I haven't played it in a couple of years, but I do believe raindrops moved across the windshield in GT5 as well. Of course, it doesn't look all that great now, but yeah, I thought it was amazing back when I first saw it.

Edit: Having just looked at some videos of GT5 and GT6, the rain looks really terrible compared to what we're getting in games these days. To be expected though, considering those are PS3 games.

 

[bobeth]

Had a closer look at the rain effects in cockpit view as I think they both look great, and I was curious to see a comparison.

Great job!

 

[flipswitch]

Water distortion from wipers causes double image on car to the left.

 

[Conduit]

Amazing post man. This is something I've taken note of myself. I always loved the way DC did windshield rain effects and was hoping Forza 6 was going to be able to emulate some of that. Knew it would be difficult with the gameplay @ 60fps. Was glad to see Turn 10 was able to do some of the movement effects. Forza 6 and DC are the only racing games to have side to side movement of water across the windshield. PC rain effects (even after the latest patch 4.0 update) only move up the windshield. There is no side to side movement of the rain drop during turns or quick lateral movement.

GT5 and 6 also have that. There is a gif somewhere in this thread.

 

[Aceofspades]

Water distortion from wipers causes double image on car to the left.

I think thats a glitch somehow, can you provide another example?

 

[VanWinkle]

The rain on the windshield on DC just looks so...weighty. It's really awesome to look at.

 

[flipswitch]

I think thats a glitch somehow, can you provide another example?

It's from the drive club gif thread, I can't make another atm as I'm busy, but I've seen it happen before and it's definitely not a glitch.


I also apologies for the gif not running smoothly ( well it's not on my end) it's due to the way I've encoded it, it seems if choose a larger size for the gif it doesn't display smoothly.


But I will try and make another shortly if I have enough time.

 

[HTupolev]

Forza 6 and DC are the only racing games to have side to side movement of water across the windshield.

Huh?

This has been a thing since at least sixth-gen.

I'm playing RalliSport Challenge 2 right now. Not sure about the actual windshield view (the wipers are hyperactive and there aren't lots of droplets), but the moving droplets on the implied glass on things like bumper cam and follow cam are very clearly affected by turning. This is a 60fps oXbox game.

 

[commedieu]

Yay pcars porn!!!

 

[benzy]

Huh?

This has been a thing since at least sixth-gen.

I'm playing RalliSport Challenge 2 right now. Not sure about the actual windshield view (the wipers are hyperactive and there aren't lots of droplets), but the moving droplets on the implied glass on things like bumper cam and follow cam are very clearly affected by turning. This is a 60fps oXbox game.

Wish there was a Rallisport 3 on Frostbite 3.0.

 

[Inf3cted_b3ast]

Even the Anema switch is on in the Huracan. The attention to detail is amazing to me.

 

[HueyFreeman]

I haven't played it in a couple of years, but I do believe raindrops moved across the windshield in GT5 as well. Of course, it doesn't look all that great now, but yeah, I thought it was amazing back when I first saw it.

Edit: Having just looked at some videos of GT5 and GT6, the rain looks really terrible compared to what we're getting in games these days. To be expected though, considering those are PS3 games.

It's funny, I remember in the brief flash of rain in one of the GT5 trailers it honestly looks earth shattering, like nothing anyone had ever seen. Then we all got the game and it was a complete fucking mess.

 

[benzy]

It's funny, I remember in the brief flash of rain in one of the GT5 trailers it honestly looks earth shattering, like nothing anyone had ever seen. Then we all got the game and it was a complete fucking mess.

The rain effects were really low-res in GT5, even in the trailer but most people didn't notice it at the time.

They fixed the low-res problem for the most part in GT6 but decreased the amount of drops and effect complexity, so you don't get the water streaking like above. Still looks pretty good though.

 

[Janski89]

-

 

[Three]

No this is not correct. I honestly don't think you quite understand how important it is. It is more important than graphics!

Please, educate yourself. Here I give you a link. There is lots of good information in here:

https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/85828-LFS-Physics-approach-vs-other-sims

Not sure why you're so hostile but I never once said it's less important than graphics. The precision and accuracy of the physics are NOT determined by the sampling rate alone. There is nothing incorrect about that. Especially when the quoted values often don't have what specific aspect runs at that frequency. These frequencies are often just banded about by those who don't know better. Leeh for example knew that forza ran at 360 times a second and took the opportunity to shit on PCars and say how Forza was doing more, little did he know PCars runs at 600. We've had several article's incorrectly thinking that PhysX in PCars runs at 600hz too. The number is used more as a false measuring stick of "physics" I'm not saying it has no meaning.

I'm not sure why you linked that thread too. If anything it shows what I'm talking about.

 

[BradleyLove]

Not sure why you're so hostile but I never once said it's less important than graphics. Thfe precision and accuracy of the physics are NOT determined by the sampling rate alone. There is nothing incorrect about that. Especially when the quoted values often don't have what specific aspect runs at that frequency. These frequencies are often just banded about by those who don't know better. Leeh for example knew that forza ran at 360 times a second and took the opportunity to shit on PCars and say how Forza was doing more, little did he know PCars runs at 600. We've had several article's incorrectly thinking that PhysX in PCars runs at 600hz too. The number is used more as a false measuring stick of "physics" I'm not saying it has no meaning.

I'm not sure why you linked that thread too. If anything it shows what I'm talking about.

Exactly! Your physics engine could be running at 10,000hz but if your physics engine is flawed and inaccurate to begin with, it's still inaccurate despite the amazing sample rate.

Or in other words, you can't polish a turd.

That being said, the argument could be made that more samples = more precision which isn't necessarily the same as accuracy.

 

[danowat]

Physics are much more difficult to debate, graphical debates are a walk in the park in comparison...........

 

[JackAubrey]

DC rainy windscreen effects are impressive - but at the same time any sane driver would have the wipers going quicker to shift all that water. Another of those "hey look at this great effect" moments that don't fit with how one would really drive, but I guess that's games all over really.

 

[Janski89]

-

 

[leeh]

Not sure why you're so hostile but I never once said it's less important than graphics. The precision and accuracy of the physics are NOT determined by the sampling rate alone. There is nothing incorrect about that. Especially when the quoted values often don't have what specific aspect runs at that frequency. These frequencies are often just banded about by those who don't know better. Leeh for example knew that forza ran at 360 times a second and took the opportunity to shit on PCars and say how Forza was doing more, little did he know PCars runs at 600. We've had several article's incorrectly thinking that PhysX in PCars runs at 600hz too. The number is used more as a false measuring stick of "physics" I'm not saying it has no meaning.

I'm not sure why you linked that thread too. If anything it shows what I'm talking about.

Props to PCars for that, I never knew that myself. Although I'd go with the polish turd remark which someone made below. I primarily play with the controller, and even with custom settings which have been posted on here it just doesn't flow and seem as responsive as Forza. In my head I took that as the sampling rate, but obviously that isn't true.

I'd love to play these games with a wheel but I don't have enough space. I'm guessing PCars has a better wheel implementation than Forza does.

But yeah on-topic wise, since this is graphics. I'd love to see PCars on PC at 4k, but I just don't think it looks as good as Forza, even on the PS4. Obviously, all subjective.

 

[danowat]

But yeah on-topic wise, since this is graphics. I'd love to see PCars on PC at 4k, but I just don't think it looks as good as Forza, even on the PS4. Obviously, all subjective.

Dynamic TOD and weather makes PCars look better overall than the pre-baked lighting conditions in FM, I also think, at least on the PS4, PCars has better overall IQ with less jarring AA, although the AF is a bit rubbish.

 

[chromatic9]

[

ps: I forgot how much I hate Project Cars photomode controls, dear god.

Damn, they still haven't put the free cam back in?

 

[Javin98]

*snip*
Which you prefer the look of is a personal choice. The way DC simulates water on the windscreen is unique and hopefully the direction these effects will go in the future. There's room for improvement but it's incredibly impressive in its current state:

This is an excellent post. I wish more posts in this thread were like this. But instead, most of the time, we get fanboy fuel.

 

[Three]

Okay that was my mistake. But this post is the worlds most important post when it comes to high frequency physics:

https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/148802#post148802

More samples = more precision = more accuracy.

This is graphics thread so I stop here.

If it was the exact same game running at higher frequency then that assertion is without a doubt correct, more samples=more accuracy but ask yourself this is a rigid body simulation running at 2000hz more accurate than an FEA one sampling at 600? Then things become more complicated. You cannot compare sampling rate for different games and different aspects of the physics model even because the rate loses its meaning entirely and cannot be directly compared. it is not a case of higher arbitrary rate = more accurate physics.

 

[dr guildo]

Had a closer look at the rain effects in cockpit view as I think they both look great, and I was curious to see a comparison. They're done quite differently with some big differences.

I've tried to keep the .gif file sizes down, but if you're on mobile you might want to wait until the next page before revisiting.
...]

Awesome post !
DC is clearly on another level, for me it's a-generation-ahead case in terms of graphical features.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

I like in Driveclub when you drive right into a dynamic cloud and your windshield gets drenched within seconds:

I also like when the sun is out and hanging low and you drive right into it with a lot of water on the windshield:

Would look even better if the resolution of the drops was higher.

Also, a while ago we had these neat little real life vs. game comparison of the windshield rain in here, I thought since we're talking about the windshield effect again might aswell post them again:

vs.

 

[icecold1983]

driveclub is, by far, the most accurate representation of weather. i laugh at all the people who probably dont even have licenses/have never driven a car before trying to claim x title is closer to reality.

 

[dr guildo]

Damn dude, great post!

Also another random observation, each of Driveclub's individual water droplets on the windscreen etc, actually reflect the world and everything around them. Not sure how taxing that is, but it's certainly nice attention to detail. Not sure if any of the other racers do the same thing either.

An example shot.

And they have pushed the details to the extreme. If you notice carefully, the reflection is reversed inside the droplets such as IRL.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

NXGamer Forza 6 Attention 2 Detail Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITONMEmHSTc

 

[TheAdmiester]

On phone so can't quite easily, but that .gif of the foggy, rainy window on Forza is still one of the most realistic things I've ever seen. It blows me away every time it's posted.

 

[Putty]

I like in Driveclub when you drive right into a dynamic cloud and your windshield gets drenched within seconds:

I also like when the sun is out and hanging low and you drive right into it with a lot of water on the windshield:

Would look even better if the resolution of the drops was higher.

Also, a while ago we had these neat little real life vs. game comparison of the windshield rain in here, I thought since we're talking about the windshield effect again might aswell post them again:

Shows just how accurate DC is. On another level to anything else right now.

 

[Noobcraft]

NXGamer Forza 6 Attention 2 Detail Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITONMEmHSTc

You would think he would actually bother buying the full game to do an attention to detail analasys video rather than basing his entire video off of the demo.

 

[danowat]

NXGamer Forza 6 Attention 2 Detail Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITONMEmHSTc

It's a decent synopsis of the game, however, I just wanted to pick up on one point.

He said that the night races lack depth, I disagree, there are two corners on Le Mans Bugatti that have a lot of depth, at Le Musee the lights diffuse enough to lightly illuminate the trees at the boundary of the track, while at Garage Vert, there are a couple of lamp posts that shed light on the boundary of the track, these go a long way into bringing some depth to the darkness, also, the skybox, especially on Spa, also has some subtle, but very nice differences in colour.

You would think he would actually bother buying the full game to do an attention to detail analasys video rather than basing his entire video off of the demo.

Where does it state that?

 

[Noobcraft]

Where does it state that?

All of his footage is identical to the venues in the demo. Down to the assists and vehicle choices.

Either he got the full game and only chose to record the first couple of events (available in the demo), or he just got the demo and took his footage from that instead. For an analysis of the attention to detail in the game it's kind of lazy imo.

 

[Shin-Ra]

Even the Anema switch is on in the Huracan. The attention to detail is amazing to me.

SIMFA?

 

[danowat]

All of his footage is identical to the venues in the demo. Down to the assists and vehicle choices.

Either he got the full game and only chose to record the first couple of events (available in the demo), or he just got the demo and took his footage from that instead. For an analysis of the attention to detail in the game it's kind of lazy imo.

If that's the case, then that is quite pertainant information, and should be listed in the description.

 

[Mascot]

NXGamer Forza 6 Attention 2 Detail Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITONMEmHSTc

This bloke always comes across as if he's reading the script for the very first time, and doesn't even understand half of what he's reading. He might even write the script himself for all I know but the pauses, the inflection... it's all wrong. And annoyingly so. Every time.

 

[danowat]

This bloke always comes across as if he's reading the script for the very first time, and doesn't even understand half of what he's reading. He might even write the script himself for all I know but the pauses, the inflection... it's all wrong. And annoyingly so. Every time.

The aquaplaning stuff sounded like it was read directly from something like a wikipedia page.

 

[JackAubrey]

driveclub is, by far, the most accurate representation of weather. i laugh at all the people who probably dont even have licenses/have never driven a car before trying to claim x title is closer to reality.

I've been driving for over 24 years, I've yet to see rain illuminated as though I have a searchlight on the roof of my car.

I laugh at your silly forum post.