Career sounds like a proper career, starting at the bottom of your chosen discipline and working your way to the top.

Also, I had a real abusive relationship with Shift 2, Bob. It had so much going for it and could produce some genuinely amazing races, but the handling model was a mess and the AI just barrelled through me at every opportunity, not to mention its ability to take corners way faster than was physically possible. Its presentation was fantastic, mind.

Project CARS is gold! It's actually going to be released on 8th May, no more delays.

It feels like a trick....

I'm not getting it if the screen tearing is too bad. I hate screen tearing.

I think I'd be happy with 30fps for ultimate eye candy.

Yeah, I'd settle for 30fps. Hats off to anyone who can ignore screen tearing though, but I suppose we're all different.

That's put me right off.

Bob wrote:

It also sounds like nose cam will put less strain on the system and that PS4 is the way to go sadly Bird.. frame rate higher.

It sounds like no system is the way to go just yet until we get a definitive verdict. A ropey framerate that falls short of the targeted 60, be it a few frames higher on the PS4 is still ropey if it impacts the experience. It needs to be a constant 60 or a constant 30 with NO deviation. Both versions seem to have their reservations so a full DF article will be interesting to see how they tweak the settings to get the best set up.

Well that's certainly one way of looking at it.. but with a fixed architecture you have to make compromises to make it work. This way the user gets to optimise their experience.

I like to see a developer try something new. Can't see that's a bad thing.

God knows if they'd locked it to 30fps there would of been lots of negative feed back.

Let it run at 60fps and then it'll be 'looks like a PS2 game' lolz all round.

What's the point of crowd funding if it produces the same results as what ever souless effort EA would pump out?

Fair enough vote with your wallet. You should try reading some stuff on this very forum written about racers and 30fps though. It might be informative.

I doubt it'll require endless tweaks though. Presumably most people will be able to work out the trade offs with in couple of hours of play and then you're most likely set for your time with the game.

Besides PC owners seem to get a kick out of it.

We should not have to piss about with performance settings on a console. This is not open for debate.

Yeah I'm out.

I really want to play this as I love Brands Hatch and I think it's the only place I can play it on PS4 or Xbox One. I'll be waiting for a price drop though.

Eric wrote:

Wasn't this a Kickstarter though that promised sim based physics at 60fps? This should have been 30 FPS all day long, looks like they have tried to cram too much in; 45 cars...really?!

But it's nice to have the option to uncram it.

45 car grids sounds cool.

Personally I've never been fussed about crash damage so that's getting turned off from teh start

When targeting a framerate I'd make a distinction.  I'd say 30 frames would be perfectly acceptable for your Horizons and DriveClubs of this world, Horizon in particular does a fantastic job of delivering a rock solid 30 that seems to simulate 60 in its smoothness.  I would prefer a locked 60 for sim games; Forza proper, GT and this.  Better that they set that benchmark and added bells and whistles and seeing where they could go without impacting performance.  Attempting 60 and hitting 45-50 is not the way to do, and adding PC like sliders/options does rub against the console ideal.

Having played recent(ish) code, I never noticed any issues with the framerate. As in, it wasn't 60fps but it didn't seem to fluctuate wildly or anything.