Fandom

Real Racing 3 Wiki

Car Characteristics with Graphics

  • The car characteristics has had a layout change, it has had to be turned though 90 degrees, the data is exactly the same, when data is entered into the table graphics will automatically display.

    Example Hennessey Venom GT:

    Old Layout

    Venom old

    The data is displayed as a table of numbers, it's difficult to visually see how good, or bad these numbers are.

    New Layout

    Venom new

    The new layout turns the existing data though 90 degrees and the data is displayed in a bar, it is much easier to see the car is very fast accelerating and high top speed, with relatively poor grip.

    There is no difference to the data.

    Hybrid Layout

    Venom hybrid

    Old table with new graphics, hybrid

    Following the feedback from the community, the template has been changed back to the original, I have now added the graphics underneath, a hybrid. I believe this answers most of the feedback.

    There is no difference to the data.


    RR3 Michael P (talk) 15:13, December 10, 2016 (UTC)

    Edit: Added Hybrid RR3 Michael P (talk) 09:55, December 11, 2016 (UTC)

      Loading editor
    • I like the graphic representation, but having a top speed of 600 kmh seems way to excessive. There is no car in the game which can brake 500kmh. There is also no car with a top speed lower than 100 kmh. So if technical possible something like a scale from 100- 520, using a 70kmh stepping seems more appropriate? 

        Loading editor
    • This bar system make no sense. Please switch back

        Loading editor
    • Michael I appreciate your work and dedication very much. In this specific case I am not really sure whether it really improves the identification of the information.

        Loading editor
    • Hi Mike, Sorry but have to agree with the above. This is not an improvement, it's much worse and less clear. This is just confusing.

      I'm not sure how many people use the data anyway to look at stats, it's primary purpose for me has always been to provide total PR with/without GC upgrades which the existing layout does perfectly well.

      As has been said. Please put the old one back.

        Loading editor
    • One other critical point, it also just makes the page unneccesarily longer adding to more scrolling. This is just more pain for those who access the wiki on their mobile/tablet devices.

        Loading editor
    • No data has been removed, instead of looking at upgrades as a row, it is column. I'll took at the hidden borders tomorrow, so the columns look better.

      I've taken a look on my mobile, and the page isn't much longer to swipe down (8 lines to be exact), the graphics only display on the full site, and look good on my mobile phone, it will be fine on a tablet.

        Loading editor
    • I think the new layout is much more informative. I say give it some time for people to get used to it, then see how everyone likes it.
        Loading editor
    • This is a terrible change. It's much less informative than the old layout.

      The new layout is way too long. On a desktop monitor, it takes up the whole screen. The old layout only takes up around 20% of the screen.

      Arranging the information as columns instead of rows makes the table much more difficult to read. Since the table takes up the whole page, your eyes need to move around much more to extract the useful information out of the table.

      Humans read english horizontally, from left to right, which is how a person would read the table in the old layout.

      Putting the information vertically, from top to bottom, makes the information harder to read. It doesn't help that the table takes up the whole page; your eyes would have to move through the entire screen just to get four pieces of information. What makes it worse is that when moving your eyes from top to bottom, the colored bars break up any flow and continuity of table.

      Imagine █████ if █████ you █████ were █████ reading █████ a █████ book █████ and █████ between █████ each █████ word █████ there █████ was █████ a █████ colored █████ rectangles █████ placed █████ there.

      I agree with the other comments here. Please change it back.

        Loading editor
    • I never disagree with anything here, but sorry to say that old layout was better

        Loading editor
    • Thank you, for to all the feedback, I don't always get changes right first time ;), I've changed the table back to it's original look and added graphics underneath, more of a hybrid, I hope this looks better

      Venom hybrid

      Old table with new graphics, hybrid

        Loading editor
    • Top speed 600kph??? Are we going to have planes in this game?
        Loading editor
    • I think the cornering bar should be scaled exponentially. e.g.

      blue < 1g

      green = 1g ~ 1.41g

      light green = 1.41g ~ 2g

      yellow = 2g ~ 2.83g

      orange = 2.83g ~ 4g

      red = 4g+

      Here each tier is calculated by multiplying by the square root of 2.

      It's okay if this is too hard to implement, just a suggestion

        Loading editor
    • Chronic Avidness wrote:
      I think the cornering bar should be scaled exponentially. e.g.

      blue < 1g

      green = 1g ~ 1.41g

      light green = 1.41g ~ 2g

      yellow = 2g ~ 2.83g

      orange = 2.83g ~ 4g

      red = 4g+

      Here each tier is calculated by multiplying by the square root of 2.

      It's okay if this is too hard to implement, just a suggestion


      The current formula is a straight line,

      My calculations are:

      Grip
      • Min 0.7g = 10%
      • Max 4.50g = 90%

      Formula:

      • g = +(90 + (19 x x%)) / 400
      • x% = ((400 x g) - 90) / 19

      Calculated x% values:

      • 0% = 0.23
      • 15% = 0.93
      • 32% = 1.75
      • 49% = 2.55
      • 66% = 3.36
      • 83% = 4.17
      • 100% = 4.98

      Online calculator:

      For a formula with square root of 2 to work, I need the bar to be a percentage 1g = 15% and 4g = 83%. If you can come up with the formula I can investigate further.

        Loading editor
    • percentage... 2 x g^2 + 13 x g

      0g -> 0%

      1g -> 15%

      4g -> 84%


      if you want the 83% : 23/12 g^2 +  157/12 g

        Loading editor
    • Tkootstra wrote:
      percentage... 2 x g^2 + 13 x g

      0g -> 0%

      1g -> 15%

      4g -> 84%


      if you want the 83% : 23/12 g^2 +  157/12 g


      Thanks see User:RR3 Michael P/Sandbox20, the MP4-X comes out at 99%, so will need another formula tweak.

      • 10% = ~0.72g
      • 90% = 4.50g (MP4-X)

      This will leave room for the text. The 83% can be a calculation.

        Loading editor
    • So, I think this hybrid one is the best, because if you want fast info, you can just look up in the classic one, but if you need comparisonable data, you can look to the colour-chart.

      GOOD IDEA LOVED IT!

        Loading editor
    • 4(g^2 + 2)  comes close i think

        Loading editor
    • I think this idea is worth trying, although some people may get annoyed by the exclusive usage of metric system (not me). Yet using both the systems will result in congestion, sadly i have no ideas to deal with this.

        Loading editor
    • RR3 Michael P wrote: Thank you, for to all the feedback, I don't always get changes right first time ;), I've changed the table back to it's original look and added graphics underneath, more of a hybrid, I hope this looks better

      Mike, thanks for responding to the feedback in a positive manner. Having critisised the old layout I think the Hybrid layout is a good compromise and worth a try. Cheers.

        Loading editor
    • Michael, thanks for your thoughts of improvements. For me it is not that bad, like others sai here, only the bright colours are a bit burning in my eye :)  but this can be adjusted. I have a suggestion: why dont make the bar of the velocity (100-600) more thin, and the bar for the actual car more thick?

        Loading editor
    • I think the graphic display needs a legend... I can't make sense of it

        Loading editor
    • I've made sense of it ... but it wasn't immediately obvious.

      PS - I think this horizontal layout would be perfect for the upgrades section, so that way level 1 upgrades would be in the same column, level 2 would be in the same column, etc - much easier to interpret and find data quickly

        Loading editor
    • Also imagine having checkboxes for two "benchmark cars" to compare to, a high-end and a low-end one, for example Ford Focus and Porsche 911 gt3 rs

        Loading editor
    • How about a tabs view?

        Loading editor
    • Tkootstra wrote: 4(g^2 + 2)  comes close i think

      Thanks, that worked and the template has been updated.

        Loading editor
    • RR3 Michael P wrote:

      Tkootstra wrote: 4(g^2 + 2)  comes close i think

      Thanks, that worked and the template has been updated.

      I think the g^2 should be "square root of g"; right now the handling stats is scaled exponentially, but in the wrong direction.

        Loading editor
    • Hi Michael,

      firstly, I am sending you my motorsports regards from Germany, really appreciating your work here to provide all this information up to date ...

      For the New Layout of Car Characteristics with Graphics I have got some ideas.

      I think it is good and worth it to compare the characteristics of the cars, specially graphically. Here my feedback to the actual design:

      1. I think that the bar is not needed to be that hight --> how about it would be just a bpld horizontal stroke with the same colours? then it also woudn't occupy so much space and another physiologic aspect: It wouldn't be so dominant glowing with its colours on the gray page. Further I think that the bar is always the same information, while the pure characteristics each car is changing, therefore the characteristic information should be bigger/ more dominant/ better or faster to catch with eyes.

      0 100 200 300 400 500 600


      2. on some events a comparision between two or more cars would be good / is needed. Therefore it would be good if the Characteristics each car of a event would be on the same graphics below each other. If need to click here and there - then no graphically comparision possible. 

      3. the PR value is only shown at the manufacturers upgrade page. Why? Would be one more column at the Cars page possible?

      3.1. regarding to 3: maybe it would be also possible to provide an online calculator for upgrading costs at the event or car pages? What I do for each event / Car is, to copy your information from the manufacturers upgrade page into an Excel-sheet. There, I have programmed a logic which can calculate the Upgrade levels, based on (needed PR) and (needed Gold per 1 PR). It's half-automatically and outputs Gold- and R$-Costs, as well as Upgrade-Strategy. Can provide you the sheet if yoou need.

      4. Sorry for the 1. 2. 3. - style ..... I am German ... :)

      5. Thanks :))

        Loading editor
    • Sorry for the delay, I've managed for get the square root of G formula working for cornering. The official media Wiki formula SQRT isn't applied to our wikia, instead wikia staff advised me to use the Root formula, and use the Root of 2.

      The formula used is 62.2 x SQRT(g) - 42.

      % = value of Cornering(G)

      • 0% =0.46
      • 15% =0.84
      • 32% =1.42
      • 49% =2.14
      • 66% =3.01
      • 83% =4.04
      • 100% =5.21

      This has been tested and implemented today.

        Loading editor
    • Hi MIchael,

      When not playing with Power Query, I had a think about this.

      I think it would be better if you used a LOWER/UPPER range for the calculation to ensure the result percentage is always between 0 and 100 percent.

      e.g. LOWER = 0.01, UPPER = 5.00. These could be amended as necessary.

      PERCENTAGE = ( SQRT(G) - SQRT(LOWER) ) / ( SQRT(UPPER) - SQRT(LOWER) ) * 100

      This gives results heavily weighted towards lower G values ...
      Exponential

      I couldn't get the photo to load properly!

      Just a suggestion, take it orr leave it!

      Nick

        Loading editor
    • Thanks Nick,

      The lowest grip car is the Dodge '69 Charger RT with 0.7g, highest is the McLaren MP4-X with 4.5g

      • Min 0.7g = 10%
      • Max 4.50g = 90%
      • The exact formula used is: {{#expr: (62.2*{{Root|{{{CORN}}}|2}}-42) round 0}}%

      RR3 Michael P (talk) 08:39, April 15, 2017 (UTC)

        Loading editor
    • Exponential2
      Ok.

      Same formula ...

      PERCENTAGE =

      ( SQRT(G) - SQRT(LOWER) ) /

      ( SQRT(UPPER) - SQRT(LOWER) ) * 100

      Tweak the LOWER/UPPER values and you get your 10%-90% range with the current cars. I just think it's easier if you have a flexible formula without hard-coded add/subtract values which will be wrong if they add new cars with PRs outside the current range. This formula is flexible and very quick to set the LOWER/UPPER values to give the results you want.

      Just trying to help.

      Have a good Easter weekend.

        Loading editor
    • I think 1.5 G should be near the middle of the bar, so I like QuickNick's formula a bit better, with Lower = 0.5 G and Upper = 5 G

        Loading editor
    • Hi Chronic.

      The point I was trying to make is that a formula which doesn't rely on hard-coded values but instead uses current min/max possible values (with maybe a bit of leeway) is always going to be correct.

      I'm sure Michael has it all sorted.

      Nick

      P.S. How can I change my username? My team-mates (and I use the word loosely) have been pointing out that these days SlowNick might be more appropriate!

        Loading editor
    • A Fandom user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.