Support NeoGAF

[Aiii]

Can't believe anybody would opine that drivers who have spent their life trying to make it into the pinnacle of motorsport can accomplish the above. It's called "Formula 1" for a reason.

Yeah, you'd think that, but alas.

 

[dl77]

Really weird to think about a list of earned points as "subjective". Plus Ricciardo is just doing his job and getting points for the team. Don't blame him for Verstappen's misfortunes.

Yeah, I hate it when people start bringing up retirements as though if the driver hadn't retired they'd have definitely won the race or finished in the same position they were when they retired.

It's like the end of last season, "Hamilton would have won the championship if not for waaah-waaaah-waaaah". Well he didn't and there's no guarantee he'd have won the races he was leading. The same people generally go quiet when you mention that in 2008 Hamilton won the Championship by 1 point over Massa who had more retirements!

 

[Spades]

And why does he need to admit to anything?

Because he's not just hurt Hamilton, he's hurt #TeamLH, man. Won't someone think of #TeamLH?

Lewis is handling the whole thing better than his fans.

 

[JDB]

 

[YourMaster]

Yeah, I hate it when people start bringing up retirements as though if the driver hadn't retired they'd have definitely won the race or finished in the same position they were when they retired.

It's like the end of last season, "Hamilton would have won the championship if not for waaah-waaaah-waaaah". Well he didn't and there's no guarantee he'd have won the races he was leading. The same people generally go quiet when you mention that in 2008 Hamilton won the Championship by 1 point over Massa who had more retirements!

Luck plays a role though. And sure, every driver ever to drive in F1 is a very skilled driver which at least to some extend earned a position there.
However, when you're leading a race and your engine blows up, that's bad luck. If you're a competitor, that's good luck. To a certain extend you make your own luck, but for a large part how many mechanical failures you have, or at which point safety cars come out or even when it begins to rain is luck.
This year Ric has been quite lucky, and Ver quite unlucky. Last year Hamilton had some bad luck with his engines as well, he lost enough points with that, that would have put him over the top. That doesn't mean that a 'what if' is in any way meaningful, perhaps Ham would have gotten hit by a bus celebrating a victory that now never happened.

At the same time though, performances are judged taking special circumstances into account. Looking purely at the points it would make sense for Red Bull to start looking for a new driver because one of them clearly isn't performing. But they don't, because most likely they see this driver is driving at least as well as the other one, and has a perfectly fine expected future performance.

 

[Elros]

Those two graphs definitely show to me that Hamilton didn't brake-test Vettel, for those who were still not convinced.

We also see that HAM and VET went out of turn 15 _much_ faster during SC2 in comparison to SC1, and that may be what tricked VET into misjudging HAM's speed.

As a Vettel supporter, I have a hard time finding him excuses, here !

 

[dl77]

Looking purely at the points it would make sense for Red Bull to start looking for a new driver because one of them clearly isn't performing. But they don't, because most likely they see this driver is driving at least as well as the other one, and has a perfectly fine expected future performance.

To be fair they should probably be looking already because at least one of their drivers is likely looking into how to get into a Merc or Ferrari next year!

 

[GrizzleBoy]

So Ham dropped 3-4Kph.....or about 2.5Mph. And quite gradually too. There was no harsh deceleration anywhere. Edit: actually more like 5kph and 3-4mph

Sorry Seb. Just be a man and own up to your mistake, and at least acknowledge the fact that driving your car into other drivers maybe isn't that great a thing to do. Or even acknowledge that it happened.

 

[mclem]

If I'm reading that second chart right, is that saying that they were both much, much slower during the other safety cars? Is that at the release, or while behind the car?

Edit: Oh, wait, that was *after* the point of impact I'm looking - it makes sense that Ham might speed up a bit as a reaction to the nudge.

 

[KillerMan91]

Despite his results, he has really been on the back foot this year compared to Max, I hope he turns that around soon, because if Max wasn't retiring all the time he'd be pretty much doing to RIC what RIC did to Vettel in 2014 and that would be a crying shame. We need him legitimately in the WDC mix in the future and not end up a Kimi or Button, having to luck into a championship.

So some still spread this BS. Every close title fight needs some ''luck''.

 

[Aiii]

So some still spread this BS. Every close title fight needs some ''luck''.

So it's not BS then.

 

[KillerMan91]

So it's not BS then.

So you think Alonso is not legitimate F1 champion either? Won first championship thanks to Mclaren being shitbox in terms of reliability and second championship thanks to Schumacher having problems in final two races?

 

[M52B28]

Man, I love Formula 1.

 

[Aiii]

So you think Alonso is not legitimate F1 champion either? Won first championship thanks to Mclaren being shitbox in terms of reliability and second championship thanks to Schumacher having problems in final two races?

I never said Kimi and Button were not legitimate champions. That's what people read because everyone's fucking sensitive about their favorites as if it's some kind of shame that Kimi won his championship only because Alonso and Hamilton were fighting like little kids and Button only stood a chance because Brawn found a loophole in the regulation that gave them a huge advantage.

The difference between people like Alonso and Hamilton compared to drivers like Button and Kimi is that on any given day they can outperform their car and rise above and beyond. They can certainly have circumstance help them get a WDC, like Merc dominance, but there is no question they can win championships in equal or even subpar material. Can you honestly, truly, say the same about Button or Kimi? Did they ever really have another championship in them?

 

[Saiyu]

Man, I love Formula 1.

And F1 threads

 

[M52B28]

And F1 threads

And F1 threads

I can't believe I've been interested in F1 for such a long time in my life. Getting back into it over the past 7 years leading to this is just so much fun.

Anyone remember playing those old F1 PC games where they made Schumacher pretty much impossible to beat? I actually started to hate Schumacher as a person due to the difficulty, lol.

I guess they were being true to the times.

 

[KillerMan91]

I never said Kimi and Button were not legitimate champions. That's what people read because everyone's fucking sensitive about their favorites as if it's some kind of shame that Kimi won his championship only because Alonso and Hamilton were fighting like little kids and Button only stood a chance because Brawn found a loophole in the regulation that gave them a huge advantage.

The difference between people like Alonso and Hamilton compared to drivers like Button and Kimi is that on any given day they can outperform their car and rise above and beyond. They can certainly have circumstance help them get a WDC, like Merc dominance, but there is no question they can win championships in equal or even subpar material. Can you honestly, truly, say the same about Button or Kimi? Did they ever really have another championship in them?

I just don't like labeling any WDC based on luck because it's so big rabbit hole when you can break down pretty much every season and say that the winner won it by luck. I mean I don't deny that Alonso is one of the best drivers of all time but you can in exactly same way break down those 2005 and 2006 seasons and say he won by luck. Even all those Schumacher and Vettel championships when they won by huge points gap you can say that they were lucky to have monster car and weak teammates. It's never ending rabbit hole. Also for your last question technically Kimi could be 3 time worldchampion with better luck (2003, 2005, 2007).

 

[JadedWriter]

Really weird to think about a list of earned points as "subjective". Plus Ricciardo is just doing his job and getting points for the team. Don't blame him for Verstappen's misfortunes.

How was what I asked in any way shape or form a blame game? I don't have cable, I don't watch these things. I was asking if Danny was beating Verstappen on skill and not on the basis of simple car endurance.

 

[Mohonky]

SO when you carry more speed than the car in front and follow the same line, you run up the back of it....interesting. I wonder how many of the people calling for Blessed's head for 'brake checking' will be able to work it out.

You don't even need telemetry to see what was already obvious though. The telemetry makes it even more laughable though, Hamiltons speed is a consistent throughout, Vettel is clearly braking and accelerating constantly, then Seb claims he is 'brake checked'. He ran up the ass end of Hamilton, damaged his front wing and the back of Hamiltons car, got a FREE front wing replacement because of the red flag and then received a non-existent penalty from the FIA because they 'didn't want to alter the fight for the WDC' when Hamilton had to pit over his headrest issue. Hamilton basically got fucked twice; that non-existent penalty after being rammed by Seb after Seb run up Hamiltons ass, then the damage Seb did to himself was rectified under a red flag.

Basically Seb caused a collision, then had a complete brain fart, rammed an opponent and came away from the race none the worse for it.

 

[nekkid]

"But he clearly used his brakes on the graphic!"

It's really irritating that some people can't differentiate between brake use and actual speed. Yes, he intermittently used his brake, but the net result was a steady decrease in speed.

 

[Frankfurter]

SO when you carry more speed than the car in front and follow the same line, you run up the back of it....interesting. I wonder how many of the people calling for Blessed's head for 'brake checking' will be able to work it out.

You don't even need telemetry to see what was already obvious though. The telemetry makes it even more laughable though, Hamiltons speed is a consistent throughout, Vettel is clearly braking and accelerating constantly, then Seb claims he is 'brake checked'. He ran up the ass end of Hamilton, damaged his front wing and the back of Hamiltons car, got a FREE front wing replacement because of the red flag and then received a non-existent penalty from the FIA because they 'didn't want to alter the fight for the WDC' when Hamilton had to pit over his headrest issue. Hamilton basically got fucked twice; that non-existent penalty after being rammed by Seb after Seb run up Hamiltons ass, then the damage Seb did to himself was rectified under a red flag.

Basically Seb caused a collision, then had a complete brain fart, rammed an opponent and came away from the race none the worse for it.

Um, you do realize that he did get a 10 second stop and go penalty (aka 30+ seconds lost in total)? Afaik that's the harshest possible penalty outside of black-flagging the driver.

 

[stryke]

How was what I asked in any way shape or form a blame game? I don't have cable, I don't watch these things. I was asking if Danny was beating Verstappen on skill and not on the basis of simple car endurance.

I just think you don't actually understand what the word "subjective" means. The tally was saying nothing more than these are the scores for the drivers for the past 4 races. There's no bending or spinning that.

But somehow from that you inferred that the tally was suggestive of Ricciardo being better than Verstappen.

You might argue that yes the tally makes Ricciardo look good if you want to restrict the timeframe to just the last four races as opposed to looking at the whole year but there was absolutely nothing "subjective" about what that tally showed.

 

[Mohonky]

Um, you do realize that he did get a 10 second stop and go penalty (aka 30+ seconds lost in total)? Afaik that's the harshest possible penalty outside of black-flagging the driver.

Any other driver would have been black flagged, Schumacher had his entire 97 WDC points removed (granted it was at higher speed and far more dangerous) but it was the same intention; he purposefully ran into another driver.

It's questionable that Seb would even have received penalty, it wasn't until Hamilton was told to come in to rectify his headrest that they immediately gave Seb a penalty that would alter any result in the WDC as little as possible. That's the point. It's that Seb wasn't judged on his actions, but how his actions would effect the title race.

 

[DBT85]

taking him to court is part of the show. If there was a public reaction to his behaviour then this is also good business

And why does he need to admit to anything? He collided with Hamilton. Either he deliberately drove into him, or he let go of the wheel in anger, lost control of his car and drove into him. Either way is clearly dangerous driving. And his post-race interviews strongly suggest he did it deliberately and/or had absolutely no regrets (would have been a good place to try and diffuse the situation)

He would do better to admit it and say he shouldn't have done it only because he looks guiltier than a puppy sitting next to a pile of poo. If you want to be a twat, own it.

 

[Hydranockz]

Any other driver would have been black flagged, Schumacher had his entire 97 WDC points removed (granted it was at higher speed and far more dangerous) but it was the same intention; he purposefully ran into another driver.

It's questionable that Seb would even have received penalty, it wasn't until Hamilton was told to come in to rectify his headrest that they immediately gave Seb a penalty that would alter any result in the WDC as little as possible. That's the point. It's that Seb wasn't judged on his actions, but how his actions would effect the title race.

I always figured there was a delay on when the broadcast of penalties gets made. Sort of like what happens with the driver radios, no?

 

[Frankfurter]

Any other driver would have been black flagged, Schumacher had his entire 97 WDC points removed (granted it was at higher speed and far more dangerous) but it was the same intention; he purposefully ran into another driver.

It's questionable that Seb would even have received penalty, it wasn't until Hamilton was told to come in to rectify his headrest that they immediately gave Seb a penalty that would alter any result in the WDC as little as possible. That's the point. It's that Seb wasn't judged on his actions, but how his actions would effect the title race.

I don't think that's true. If the stewards thought that Vettel driving into Hamilton caused the damage on Hams headrest, they probably would have black flagged him.
The comparison to Schumi just doesn't make sense, totally different circumstances - much higher speed, way, way, way more dangerous.

 

[JadedWriter]

I just think you don't actually understand what the word "subjective" means. The tally was saying nothing more than these are the scores for the drivers for the past 4 races. There's no bending or spinning that.

But somehow from that you inferred that the tally was suggestive of Ricciardo being better than Verstappen.

You might argue that yes the tally makes Ricciardo look good if you want to restrict the timeframe to just the last four races as opposed to looking at the whole year but there was absolutely nothing "subjective" about what that tally showed.

I will definitely admit to a stupid word choice. I know the points tally is pretty much concrete facts based, but behind that there's always a story...usually. I was just wondering what the story behind the points tally was.

 

[NeloAnjelo]

This data shows that Hamilton did not break check Vettel. Vettel expected Hamilton to accelerate at the corner and just went into the back of him. This may be what he and other drivers would do at the corner, and should do. However, the lead car sets the pace, so this was Vettel's vault. The drive along side, then banging into Hamilton on purpose was even worse.

He should have gotten a harsher penalty, or from this instance something else need to be created between disqualification and the 10 second penalty.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

Just seen that FIA is investigating Seb then?

Will be interesting to see if Seb at some point acknowledges he did anything wrong. Or if he even did ANYTHING for that matter.

juges in courts routinely give sentences based on whether the accused actually realises they did anything wrong or show any remorse for their actions.

If th FIA feel like Seb is not reacting in a proper fashion in terms of sporting conduct, they may decide he needs additional persuasion to see the errors of his ways.

 

[Spades]

Any other driver would have been black flagged

Bullshit.

 

[nekkid]

Bullshit.

If it had been anybody other than Vettel or probably Hamilton, they would have. The stewards wanted to protect the battle at the top, and not be the reason it swings one way or the other, meaning those two would have had far more leniency.

The implications were huge, so in a blind panic they chose the softer penalty knowing they had to do something, but didn't have time to consider all the consequences.

 

[Psychotext]

Had there been a crash or puncture then yeah, but I don't think so for what we saw.

As for Vettel generally. I think judging him on his post race response is pointless, what's more telling is that he hasn't come out and admitted any sort of over reaction since.

 

[DrM]

I think that penalty would be harsher if more serious damage would occur, like front suspension damage that would lead into DNF

 

[brotkasten]

Had there been a crash or puncture then yeah, but I don't think so for what we saw.

As for Vettel generally. I think judging him on his post race response is pointless, what's more telling is that he hasn't come out and admitted any sort of over reaction since.

That's why it's a shame that the next race is next week. I can't wait for the press to grill him a little more. I hope they not only mention the Steward ruling, but also the telemetry we've seen today.

 

[Zaru]

Had there been a crash or puncture then yeah, but I don't think so for what we saw.

As for Vettel generally. I think judging him on his post race response is pointless, what's more telling is that he hasn't come out and admitted any sort of over reaction since.

In Vettel and Ferrari's minds, accidentally incriminating yourself with words is a real possibility, so they're using lawyerspeak. Deny and deflect.
People will mostly forget about this and for a team spending north of 400 million it's not worth potentially losing a championship over just to look more honest and repentant for a few weeks.

 

[Spades]

If it had been anybody other than Vettel or probably Hamilton, they would have.

I love how all of you guys are all about the stats, showing telemetry graphs, can't argue with the cold hard facts - yet come up with this pure speculative bullshit in the same breath.

Unbelievable.

 

[Carn82]

Man, there was a pretty good documentary on TV last night, about accidents and safety in F1, called '1: Life on the Limit' http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2518788/

Has anyone seen that? I was aware or most of the 'famous' accidents, but when they showed the footage of Williamson literally burning to death at Zandvoort; with the stewards next to the car doing totally nothing, and David Purley's efforts and panic to help his friend, it pulled a number on me.. I'm sure it's famous footage but somehow I've never seen it before; I did see the pictures by Cor Mooij (see below). Glad that there are proper rules and regulations and protocols in place. Like Max Mosley (i think) said: crashes and incididents belong to F1; but no one should die while racing in an F1 car.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdkH3X0XIvU

pics (spoilered them because they might be considered disturbing)

Spoiler

 

[darkinstinct]

Look at time index second 11. Hamilton brakes constantly up to second 11. Then instead of continuing to slow down (as he did in the previous safety car phases) he keeps the speed at 62 km/h, even goes to 63 km/h (that doesn't magically happen without touching gas and lifting the brake). Then he brakes harder than he did before second 11. going from 63 km/h to 52 km/h in half a second. Vettel reacted to Hamilton keeping his speed. That reaction would take at least 2 tenth of a second (human reaction time). And you can see that Vettel stops braking 7 tenths of a second after Hamilton started. But because Hamilton made it seem like the bottom speed was reached (it happens after the apex) he is now too close when Hamilton brakes again. It's one second after Hamilton stopped braking, then started braking again. That is what caused the crash, it's only on Hamilton. The data clearly shows that brake testing did happen.

Vettel on the other hand never accelerates after the apex. So much to those that say he thought Hamilton would accelerate after the corner and just did it as well. Vettel is constantly getting slower, Hamilton accelerates first, then gets slower.

 

[nekkid]

I love how all of you guys are all about the stats, showing telemetry graphs, can't argue with the cold hard facts - yet come up with this pure speculative bullshit in the same breath.

Unbelievable.

Where facts are available, we use facts. Where none exist, we have to speculate.

What's so hard to understand about that. Are you new to how discussion forums work?

And I'd take thoughtful speculation over a one-word profanity speculation ;-)

 

[Zycban]

Any other driver would have been black flagged, Schumacher had his entire 97 WDC points removed (granted it was at higher speed and far more dangerous) but it was the same intention; he purposefully ran into another driver.
...

I think you should check how schumacher got his first WDC in 1994 .

 

[brotkasten]

Where facts are available, we use facts. Where none exist, we have to speculate.

What's so hard to understand about that. Are you new to how discussion forums work?

You stated your speculation as a fact.

"If it had been anybody other than Vettel or probably Hamilton, they would have. The stewards wanted to protect the battle at the top, and not be the reason it swings one way or the other, meaning those two would have had far more leniency."

That's not how it works.

How do you know any of that? What's the precedent for that?

 

[DD]

I gained an appreciation for F1 recently.

I bought Project Cars GOTY edition from the steam sale.

It seems the consensus among the more knowledgeable community is the actual driving model of Project Cars is sim-Arcady. Anyway, this my first racing game since playing F1 on Saturn with my dad growing up.

I turned off all assists and loaded up a Renault 3.5. Couldn't even accelerate out of the auto start without spinning out. Slowly learned how to feather the throttle instead of stomping on it. I'm used to my slow Chevy Cruze, and arcade games. Tons of slipping, skipping and under steering. But slowly I began to learn how to stay on the track. I chose the short Nurburgring circuit and kept practicing on it.


Over the weekend I got a thrustmaster TX to get a better feel of wheel slip and to better control acceleration. I moved up to Formula A (PCars non-licensed version of F1). Wow. Slowly learned how to keep things under control after a couple hours of constant restarts.

I decided I wanted to really learn a track so I chose Monaco (looked cool on Archer). Slowly learned the track and during work studied this video of someone going through the track and pointing out cornering speeds and gears, landmarks and where to hit and come out of the corners. After hours of practicing just the first half, I'm starting to really nail the first 6 turns of Monaco, and I'm just thinking to myself "I feel like I'm being too aggressive on these corners, it's almost suicidal", especially when attacking the first turn, cutting across the bumper and shooting to the opposite left wall. I always slip there but I've learned to manage.


So finally, on to the point of this post. I went and watched real life F1 onboards at Monaco, and I'm just in fucking awe. F1 racers are madmen. I watched Kimi's 2017 pole lap and he slips on the first corner too, but he doesn't give a fuck, he just recovers and fucking SCREAMS through the track.

TL;DR discovered a love for F1. Might actually book a trip to catch a race next year. Gonna keep playing and get better too.

Project Cars isn't arcade at all. It's just bad at trying to be a sim. If you're into F1 now, I think you should get F1 2016, if you can stand that disgrace called Denuvo. Or if you want a sim that's actually good at being a sim, you should pic Automobilista or Assetto Corsa.

If you think F1 drivers are crazy with their near indestructible cockpits and typically 100 m safe zones I am interested in your reaction after watching your first onboard WRC race.

You think WRC drivers are crazy with their near indestructible cockpits, I am interested in your reaction after watching your first onboard of a Isle of Man TT race.

 

[hitgirl]

Um, you do realize that he did get a 10 second stop and go penalty (aka 30+ seconds lost in total)? Afaik that's the harshest possible penalty outside of black-flagging the driver.

I think he should have been black-flagged tbh. I guess since it was at a slow pace they didn't feel the need. But still.. He hit another driver on purpose.

 

[nekkid]

You stated your speculation as a fact.

"If it had been anybody other than Vettel or probably Hamilton, they would have. The stewards wanted to protect the battle at the top, and not be the reason it swings one way or the other, meaning those two would have had far more leniency."

That's not how it works.

How do you know any of that? What's the precedent for that?

I thought it was self-evident that it was speculation, with a little bit of a steer from this report. I didn't think that needed to be explicit.

I'll make note to cater for the overly-pedantic and the lowest common denominator from now on.

Spoiler

Hint: I won't.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

Look at time index second 11. Hamilton brakes constantly up to second 11. Then instead of continuing to slow down (as he did in the previous safety car phases) he keeps the speed at 62 km/h, even goes to 63 km/h (that doesn't magically happen without touching gas and lifting the brake). Then he brakes harder than he did before second 11. going from 63 km/h to 52 km/h in half a second. Vettel reacted to Hamilton keeping his speed. That reaction would take at least 2 tenth of a second (human reaction time). And you can see that Vettel stops braking 7 tenths of a second after Hamilton started. But because Hamilton made it seem like the bottom speed was reached (it happens after the apex) he is now too close when Hamilton brakes again. It's one second after Hamilton stopped braking, then started braking again. That is what caused the crash, it's only on Hamilton. The data clearly shows that brake testing did happen.

Vettel on the other hand never accelerates after the apex. So much to those that say he thought Hamilton would accelerate after the corner and just did it as well. Vettel is constantly getting slower, Hamilton accelerates first, then gets slower.

Eeeeeeh.

Are you really trying to reasonably say that Hamilton "accelerated" in the realm of any kind of human discernabikity or relevance because he went 0.5mph faster for 0.075 seconds.

Even your own remarks of human reaction being 0.2s makes this irrelevant. Extrapolating more, it's far more likely that he he simply straddled the the line between going HALF a mile an hour faster for about three quarters of one tenth of a second.

If we're going to rationally use the data correctly, it would be more accurate to say that:

- Hamilton was decreasing speed steadily going into the corner as shown by the even deceleration.

- After passing the apex, he held his speed for 0.4s (probably until he straightened up the car) then proceeded to continue to decrease speed at basically the exact rate of speed as before.

Even if Vettel didn't accelerate, he failed slow adequately. He intended to stay right on Hamilton's tail and didn't leave himself enough time to react to a 6mph overall decrease over the course of almost 1.5s after Ham passed the apex.

Even after Hams so called "acceleration" of half a mile an hour for less than a tenth of a second, there was still 1s of steady deceleration for Seb to react to.

 

[DBT85]

Look at time index second 11. Hamilton brakes constantly up to second 11. Then instead of continuing to slow down (as he did in the previous safety car phases) he keeps the speed at 62 km/h, even goes to 63 km/h (that doesn't magically happen without touching gas and lifting the brake). Then he brakes harder than he did before second 11. going from 63 km/h to 52 km/h in half a second. Vettel reacted to Hamilton keeping his speed. That reaction would take at least 2 tenth of a second (human reaction time). And you can see that Vettel stops braking 7 tenths of a second after Hamilton started. But because Hamilton made it seem like the bottom speed was reached (it happens after the apex) he is now too close when Hamilton brakes again. It's one second after Hamilton stopped braking, then started braking again. That is what caused the crash, it's only on Hamilton. The data clearly shows that brake testing did happen.

Vettel on the other hand never accelerates after the apex. So much to those that say he thought Hamilton would accelerate after the corner and just did it as well. Vettel is constantly getting slower, Hamilton accelerates first, then gets slower.

We're still going with this after all the people in the know looking at all the data said nothing happened?

Only Hamilton can draw such ire.

 

[kiyomi]

TL;DR discovered a love for F1. Might actually book a trip to catch a race next year. Gonna keep playing and get better too.

Not to rain on your parade or whatever, but give Assetto Corsa a shot if you're ever looking to "step up" in the future. It's less pretty, but it's a much better feeling game IMO. You can find a bunch of F1 tracks to download (as mods), and there's a really good F1 mod called Formula Hybrid, IIRC. It feels fucking great to drive, there's plenty of grip as you would expect from a modern F1 car but it practically wants to throw you off the circuit, too. It's a blast. Plus it has a shit-ton of configurable performance options, letting you manage the ERS, DRS, MGU-K, etc, while you're driving. It's basically as close to the real thing as you're gonna get, AFAIK. You'll gain a real appreciation of not just the driving, but all the management with hybrid systems that drivers have to do in 2017.

 

[brotkasten]

I thought it was self-evident that it was speculation, with a little bit of a steer from this report. I didn't think that needed to be explicit.

I'll make note to cater for the overly-pedantic and the lowest common denominator from now on.

Spoiler

Hint: I won't.

How is it self-evident, if you didn't link the report most people in this thread can't read?

I'm not sure why you react that way and have to be an ass about it. You could simply be more helpful towards others and provide information they don't have.

But seeing how the edit of your post changed its tone quite a bit, I also don't want to harp on it any further. Referring to other users as overly pedantic and "the lowest common denominator" is still unnecessary, though.

 

[zeshakag]

Not to rain on your parade or whatever, but give Assetto Corsa a shot if you're ever looking to "step up" in the future. It's less pretty, but it's a much better feeling game IMO. You can find a bunch of F1 tracks to download (as mods), and there's a really good F1 mod called Formula Hybrid, IIRC. It feels fucking great to drive, there's plenty of grip as you would expect from a modern F1 car but it practically wants to throw you off the circuit, too. It's a blast. Plus it has a shit-ton of configurable performance options, letting you manage the ERS, DRS, MGU-K, etc, while you're driving. It's basically as close to the real thing as you're gonna get, AFAIK. You'll gain a real appreciation of not just the driving, but all the management with hybrid systems that drivers have to do in 2017.

Huh, it's pretty cheap too. I might pick it up.

 

[nekkid]

How is it self-evident, if you didn't link the report most people in this thread can't read?

I'm not sure why you react that way and have to be an ass about it. You could simply be more helpful towards others and provide information they don't have.

But seeing how the edit of your post changed its tone quite a bit, I also don't want to harp on it any further. Referring to other users as overly pedantic and "the lowest common denominator" is still unnecessary, though.

I'm not sure why I need to measure my replies and show more respect. I feel like my response went over an above the post I originally quoted, and the one I take issue with, which was simply "bullshit".