Well, that's not fair. Driving IS a problem, but it's caused by the game's BS distances. Visually, what the map is reporting as "m" seems to be 1.6 feet.
At the fast travel outside of Claire's Garage there are these nice orange six foot square tiles on the ground. Walk 9 or ten of them away so that visually you're at what SHOULD be 50 feet... and it is right on the edge between 25m and 30m. I don't know what "M" is but it sure as shine-ola isn't meters. You can see this again between telephone poles. Real world -- at least in 'Murica -- the average distance between phone poles in a suburban area is 125 feet -- hence why many driving instructors will tell you to use that as a gauge of when to turn on your directional, shortly after two pole-separations. In this game you can go two pole distances, looks pretty much like the real world distance of 250 feet, and it's telling you 150m.
THIS is why driving is so busted. The game LOOKS like you're going 15mph, the dashboard says 40mph, and even the best vehicles in the game control like you're doing 60+ in a flipping Fiat 128. Having owned one as part of my "wall of shame of auto ownership", I recognize the piss poor performance of even the best cars in the game. Hell, the Calburn's top speed VISUALLY being more like my old Plymouth Cricket. The one that was really a Hillman Avenger...
Thus why it's often easier to walk than to waste time with the vehicles, the game will claim something is half a klick off, when it's actually well under half that.
I suspect that their driving engine would work correctly if the visuals matched the numbers it is being fed.
What did they do, literally just replace Geralt's "feet" symbol with the letter M?
I read that it takes about 2hours to walk the Witcher map.
The average walking speed of a human is 3 to 4 miles per hour, or 1 mile every 15 to 20 minutes. So that is like 6 to 8 GAME miles long.
(game walk speed and game distance walked)
I wonder if anyone has walked-timed this Cyberpunk map? This way we would get more of a practical idea of the distance rather than precise MATH that may not really be applicable for game purposes.
Of course this is assuming the TIME in the game is one to one RL. If not then ANY measure can be way off.
But I believe most players/DEV play the open world as 1 to 1 time no matter how fast the day and night cycle actually is.
Well, that's not fair. Driving IS a problem, but it's caused by the game's BS distances. Visually, what the map is reporting as "m" seems to be 1.6 feet.
At the fast travel outside of Claire's Garage there are these nice orange six foot square tiles on the ground. Walk 9 or ten of them away so that visually you're at what SHOULD be 50 feet... and it is right on the edge between 25m and 30m. I don't know what "M" is but it sure as shine-ola isn't meters. You can see this again between telephone poles. Real world -- at least in 'Murica -- the average distance between phone poles in a suburban area is 125 feet -- hence why many driving instructors will tell you to use that as a gauge of when to turn on your directional, shortly after two pole-separations. In this game you can go two pole distances, looks pretty much like the real world distance of 250 feet, and it's telling you 150m.
THIS is why driving is so busted. The game LOOKS like you're going 15mph, the dashboard says 40mph, and even the best vehicles in the game control like you're doing 60+ in a flipping Fiat 128. Having owned one as part of my "wall of shame of auto ownership", I recognize the piss poor performance of even the best cars in the game. Hell, the Calburn's top speed VISUALLY being more like my old Plymouth Cricket. The one that was really a Hillman Avenger...
Thus why it's often easier to walk than to waste time with the vehicles, the game will claim something is half a klick off, when it's actually well under half that.
I suspect that their driving engine would work correctly if the visuals matched the numbers it is being fed.
What did they do, literally just replace Geralt's "feet" symbol with the letter M?
Your test is massively incorrect. I just visited the location and made this screenshot to prove it to you:
You see, if those tiles would be 6 feet wide each, than this muscle car would be 10+ feet wide. Which makes no sense. Muscle cars are 5.5 ... 6.5 feet wide, depending on model. I.e. your math is off almost by a factor of 2.
And when we take your "1.6 feet" and multiply by 2 - we get 3.2 feet, which is, indeed, almost precisely 1 meter.
I read that it takes about 2hours to walk the Witcher map.
The average walking speed of a human is 3 to 4 miles per hour, or 1 mile every 15 to 20 minutes. So that is like 6 to 8 GAME miles long.
(game walk speed and game distance walked)
I wonder if anyone has walked-timed this Cyberpunk map? This way we would get more of a practical idea of the distance rather than precise MATH that may not really be applicable for game purposes.
Of course this is assuming the TIME in the game is one to one RL. If not then ANY measure can be way off.
But I believe most players/DEV play the open world as 1 to 1 time no matter how fast the day and night cycle actually is.
Average walking speed of a merc in 2077 may well differ dramatically due to enhanced physiques and cyberware.
Even in 2021, real world, humans are capable to walk as slow as under 1 miles per hour whenever they wish; on the other hand, certain athletes are able to walk as fast as 9+ miles per hour averaged over 12.5 miles race walking course. And this is not running - "walk" being defined as mode of movement where at no given moment there would be no contact of at least one foot with the ground.
As for "time" problem - ain't no problem if the goal is to estimate distances. We can just compare any length of "meters" displayed by the game to certain objects which are somewhat precisely known in size, just like above. Does not involve time at all, merely enough patience and precision in performing all the consequetive moves. Much like 38 parrots.
Average walking speed of a merc in 2077 may well differ dramatically due to enhanced physiques and cyberware.
Even in 2021, real world, humans are capable to walk as slow as under 1 miles per hour whenever they wish; on the other hand, certain athletes are able to walk as fast as 9+ miles per hour averaged over 12.5 miles race walking course. And this is not running - "walk" being defined as mode of movement where at no given moment there would be no contact of at least one foot with the ground.
As for "time" problem - ain't no problem if the goal is to estimate distances. We can just compare any length of "meters" displayed by the game to certain objects which are somewhat precisely known in size, just like above. Does not involve time at all, merely enough patience and precision in performing all the consequetive moves. Much like 38 parrots.
I think you missed my mention of not using math! Does it FEEL (on average) like the right distance... was my point.
Taking into account how long it takes to "travel" the "distance" in RL Player time not game time which could be as much as 10 times faster depending n the day nigh cycle. I think players and DEV do not concern with that part however for games.
But I see what you mean, walking speed maybe too varied even for a game.
I think you missed my mention of not using math! Does it FEEL (on average) like the right distance... was my point.
Taking into account how long it takes to "travel" the "distance" in RL Player time not game time which could be as much as 10 times faster depending n the day nigh cycle. I think players and DEV do not concern with that part however for games.
But I see what you mean, walking speed maybe too varied even for a game.
Not missed, no. It's just that i firmly believe that "MATH" is exactly practical. What's impractical - is some humans mistakes when handling math. Math itself when done right? Always practical.
That's why we have all sorts of numbers in 'em games, see - instead of having all the numbers replaced by a system of geometrical shapes (think "Predator" movie, you know?), or, say, all sorts of tone-coded quick audio sequences.
The "feel" of how "big" things are - including how big game worlds are - is only practical when not communicated between different people. As soon as you communicate the feel - differences in individual ways to "feel" it mess it all up.
Not missed, no. It's just that i firmly believe that "MATH" is exactly practical. What's impractical - is some humans mistakes when handling math. Math itself when done right? Always practical.
That's why we have all sorts of numbers in 'em games, see - instead of having all the numbers replaced by a system of geometrical shapes (think "Predator" movie, you know?), or, say, all sorts of tone-coded quick audio sequences.
The "feel" of how "big" things are - including how big game worlds are - is only practical when not communicated between different people. As soon as you communicate the feel - differences in individual ways to "feel" it mess it all up.
But I have a feeling we are not really talking about the same thing at this point. Let me put it this way, do the cars feel like they are not going fast enough when you press on the gas? Not slow enough when you brake for turns? If not for most players then there is a problem and the DEV did not do a good job I guess.
I have the same complaint I suppose when it comes to melee combat in most other games. I have had over 40 years of full contact Medieval martial arts and won my organizations highest ranks. That is one of the reasons I mod games, to "fix" the feel of combat. But then many players (most that do not have such experience) hate it and prefer the way the game does combat.
If you (or anyone) have RL race car experience than I sincerely feel bad for you because I know how frustrating it can be to play it in a game when it is not in accord with your experience.
Edit: anyway I am speaking on a subject (car racing) I have very little experience and less expertise. So I will not interrupt the post anymore other than to say the driving in the game (without a mod) does in fact NOT feel right to me for driving fast down the street and taking fast turns based on my RL driving. I'm not talking about racing but just being in a hurry to get someplace and maybe going a little faster that the posted speed limit.
Is that console or some other platform? That area looks NOTHING like that for me on PC.... wait, went to revisit... it looks like yours now. That's NOT the squares I was seeing. They were 6x6-ish, a darker orange, and looked like they were rubber mats with holes in them atop pavement.
Those are MUCH smaller than when I was here last (right after finishing the last race). Those are visually half the size of what I was seeing just a few hours ago.
Though since the garbage 1.2 patch I've been dealing with visual glitches galore... white blood, purple textures... You know this game. I backed out to 1.12 so maybe that's why it's different now?
Anyhow, those squares seem roughly half the size I was seeing before, so adjust accordingly. The concrete dividers (also not there before) are at best 25 feet center-to-center, and it's calling that ~15m if you use the fast travel as the guide... again calling into question what the blazes "m" is, because it's not meters.
Hell a lane of road is 12 feet. The two sidewalks seem about two feet wider, so with both lanes that's 52 feet... Back against the wall across the street the distance to the fast travel JUST rolls over to 25 meters... when it should be reporting around 15.
If the distance calculations are that far off, the MPH are then all wrong, which is why the physics feels janky. It's giving us the control behavior of double the speed it looks like we're going or more, because the distance measuring is utterly banjaxed.
Is that console or some other platform? That area looks NOTHING like that for me on PC.... wait, went to revisit... it looks like yours now. That's NOT the squares I was seeing. They were 6x6-ish, a darker orange, and looked like they were rubber mats with holes in them atop pavement.
Those are MUCH smaller than when I was here last (right after finishing the last race). Those are visually half the size of what I was seeing just a few hours ago.
Though since the garbage 1.2 patch I've been dealing with visual glitches galore... white blood, purple textures... You know this game. I backed out to 1.12 so maybe that's why it's different now?
Anyhow, those squares seem roughly half the size I was seeing before, so adjust accordingly. The concrete dividers (also not there before) are at best 25 feet center-to-center, and it's calling that ~15m if you use the fast travel as the guide... again calling into question what the blazes "m" is, because it's not meters.
Hell a lane of road is 12 feet. The two sidewalks seem about two feet wider, so with both lanes that's 52 feet... Back against the wall across the street the distance to the fast travel JUST rolls over to 25 meters... when it should be reporting around 15.
If the distance calculations are that far off, the MPH are then all wrong, which is why the physics feels janky. It's giving us the control behavior of double the speed it looks like we're going or more, because the distance measuring is utterly banjaxed.
Nope, i don't do consoles. It's PC, from gog. Note, i never updated to 1.2 so far, so it's 1.12 for me. I do plan to update in observable future, perhaps in a week or two. Wanna do certain encore with Beast in Me in 1.12 first, as a farewell to driving model of 1.12 and to compare to driving in 1.2 afterwards.
Your math is way off, once again. You must never do things like "at best" and guess work like "a lane of road is 12 feet". Using very same car as above, placing it on a lane, i can clearly see that _this_ particular road has two lanes each being ~10 feet wide, assuming ~6 feet for the width of that muscle car.
Further, when you estimate distances to any marker, you must always exclude "last few meters" from your estimations, as that part of distancing to a marker may bring in significant (few meters) shifts. Also, you must always move into one single direction (not back and forth) when measuring, due to noticeable lag of beacon distance updating the game has.
Assuming those tiles are ~4 feet wide, i can clearly see it takes ~3.5 tiles walked (same direction) to have the distance to the marker updated from 20 meters to 15 meters. So, it's 3.5 x 4 = ~14 feet being ~5 meters. With this method, there are significant uncertainties (we don't know exact width of the muscle car, based on which we estimate those tiles being ~4 feet), but even then 14 feet = 5 meters is close enough to what it should be (which is, 14 feet = 4.2 meters).
Should we want more precise verification for whether in-game "meters" displayed to any marker are actual meters or not, then we'd need to find an object which is certain to be specific, well known length, best being some car V can drive; and then apply that object "back to back" with most precision multiple times, to minimize all sorts of possible biases via calculating through larger distances.
Post automatically merged:
To do what i proposed just above, we actually have a car which we know exact width and length of: quadra type-66 was built in real life, and is based on 1970 ford mustang fastback.
The car's dimensions, from google, are:
- 187.5 in (4,762 mm) length;
- 71.7 in (1,821 mm) width.
Almost exactly 6 feet width: 5.9744 feet to be precise (1821 mm converted to feet by google), by the way. Was a good guess, that one - the car in my screeshot above is indeed one of quadra type-66 cars V can own, of course.
Thing is, one can own three different variants of quadra type-66, and they differ noticeably in width and length - we can simply see it, especially the nomad-modded variant. So which variant is corresponding to real-life 1970 mustang the best? Hard to say. But working with the two non-nomad type 66 and measuring some big enough distance (like 50+ meters, excluding last ~20 meters to a target) would probably be meaningful.
With all the above, here's the pic which should help you eye-ball the situation overall:
And from this pic alone, it's clear we have 20+ real meters from the fast travel point to the wall across the road. The fact it displays "25", i think, it's due to few meters bias happening near the marker itself. And anyhow, it ain't what you said about it - "should be reporting 15" and "utterly banjaxed", as you can see.
But I have a feeling we are not really talking about the same thing at this point. Let me put it this way, do the cars feel like they are not going fast enough when you press on the gas? Not slow enough when you brake for turns? If not for most players then there is a problem and the DEV did not do a good job I guess.
I have the same complaint I suppose when it comes to melee combat in most other games. I have had over 40 years of full contact Medieval martial arts and won my organizations highest ranks. That is one of the reasons I mod games, to "fix" the feel of combat. But then many players (most that do not have such experience) hate it and prefer the way the game does combat.
If you (or anyone) have RL race car experience than I sincerely feel bad for you because I know how frustrating it can be to play it in a game when it is not in accord with your experience.
Edit: anyway I am speaking on a subject (car racing) I have very little experience and less expertise. So I will not interrupt the post anymore other than to say the driving in the game (without a mod) does in fact NOT feel right to me for driving fast down the street and taking fast turns based on my RL driving. I'm not talking about racing but just being in a hurry to get someplace and maybe going a little faster that the posted speed limit.
Yes, in this game, cars sure feel like they are not going fast enough. And we _know_ they are not going fast enough. Is it a problem? Well, on one hand, yes, it is. However, it's sort of "lesser of possible evils" all things considered, i believe - for CDPR, i mean. There are reasons why driving is slowed "artificially" by a factor of ~2.18 for all vehicles. Namely:
- "wanna make it easier for casual player to drive around";
- "wanna extend playtime a bit through this, it's good for us when people play our game for longer given same amount of content in it";
- "wanna decrease the stress on hardware: the faster actual movement speed is, the more assets are to be loaded / rendered per second average".
The latter is probably crucial and unavoidable, given the game's LODs and desire to function tolerably on PS4 (non-pro) hardware.
As for my racing experiences - in real life, they are almost nil. But in certain car sims (starting with marvelous Geoff Grammond's Grand Prix 2 back in 1990s) - they are massive. I've progressed to the level where tiniest difference in simulated F1 car's setting, like 1 mm "too high" or "too low" ride height - was major difference for my piloting and race results. AI opponents even in highest difficulties in universally acclaimed titles were a joke to me. Real (human) opponents in multiplayer modes - extremely few were able to compete with me, and those few were about my level; nobody i've met was significantly and systematically faster than me. For over a decade i was among "top dogs" of some few car sims' scene, though nowadays i am much retired from this sport. Still, old habits never completely die, and memories certainly are bright to this day.
Here's a small sample of things i was able to do in "good old days"...
