What does footprint means?

[suryo roy]

As subject what is footprint ?

[Jack Cossack]

It's the car's size.

[freeman2344]

It's probably not the best term. I think it should be changed to...well..just "size" or "dimensions" perhaps...people nowadays think of "carbon footprint" when they talk about footprints in relation to cars.

[Killrob]

It is an accurate term to use. Size is definitely wrong, as dimensions is misleading. How do you best describe the bottom area of a shoe? I think footprint is a very good descriptor for that. Footprint = Width x Length

[freeman2344]

No. It is a misleading term to use. Follow the mindset of the typical player. He'll read "footprint", be confused and google "car footprint", ending up with results about carbon footprints. "Car or vehicle footprint" is a term that does not exist or at least is not actually being used. You guys "made it up" (well, not really, but you know what I mean) for this specific purpose.

I often deal with terminology in my line of work. Among other things, I'm responsible for the terminology used in DIN and ISO standards - if I came across this term in an automotive standard, I'd throw it out immediately and lodge a complaint with whoever is responsible.

I'm not denying that the term "footprint" can be used to refer to a certain area being covered by an object, but I would not consider it any less misleading than "dimensions", especially due to the existing connotation of the term in relation to the carbon footprint.

I still think "size" is better. Everybody knows immediately what is meant and it matches what it does in the game. City cars benefit from a smaller "size", luxury cars benefit from a larger "size" and the term lines up well with the existing automotive designation of "mid-size", "full-size" cars etc.

[Killrob]

Originally posted by freeman2344:

Valid points

I don't like either "dimensions" or "size" because those both would include the "height" dimension, which this very much does NOT include and that needs to be made clear. "Area" would be accurate but might be difficult to understand what that implies. So suggestions are welcome, without a better solution we won't change the term.

[freeman2344]

Originally posted by Killrob:

Originally posted by freeman2344:

Valid points

I don't like either "dimensions" or "size" because those both would include the "height" dimension, which this very much does NOT include and that needs to be made clear. "Area" would be accurate but might be difficult to understand what that implies. So suggestions are welcome, without a better solution we won't change the term.

I agree on "area". That would certainly be worse. "Dimensions" or "size" might, per definition, include height, but is that really relevant in the context? The height of a vehicle has little influence in the game and no influence on the properties you're trying to simulate with the "footprint" characteristic.

Size is the main term used by the industry. That's just a fact, e.g. by the EPA, which groups vehicles into EPA Size Classes (compact, large, midsize etc.) -> https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byclass/2016ClassList.shtml

"Footprint" is a term that is not in use and is confusing to begin with ;)
I'm not trying to pick a fight here, you know I'm one of your biggest supporters, but it's not a good term - as the mere existence of this thread shows. And I don't believe it's the first time this question has been asked. I don't think it's a matter of language understanding either. It would be as confusing to native speakers as it is to non native speakers of English.

[Killrob]

While I disagree with your statement "The height of a vehicle has little influence in the game and no influence on the properties you're trying to simulate with the "footprint" characteristic.", as the one who mostly designed the dependencies and calculations for the game, if "size" is the easier to understand term to use we'll do that, and then have the disclaimer that actually it is just length x width of the vehicle in the tooltip.

[freeman2344]

Maybe that didn't come out right. Is vehicle height actually a factor in the "footprint" calculations? Did you not just argue that this wasn't the case? If it is, how significant is that factor? I did not deny that it had some influence on other properties, mostly with regard to aerodynamics, I would guess. For passenger cars, vehicle height is not really that much of an issue in everyday driving where practicality is concerned, I would argue, with some exceptions (car parks etc.)...

If vehicle height has a big influence on other calculations, maybe that's also something that has to be reconsidered? After all, players have very little influence on the vehicle height (apart from ride height) other than selecting a different body, making for poor gameplay IMO.

[Killrob]

Ahh, no then it is a misunderstanding. Vehicle height does have a major influece on other stats and of course none on footprint. So the first part of your statement is what is wrong, while the second part is accurate. Height does influence all driving stats and calculations due to center of gravity, it influences visibility, cargo space, weight and costs, and like you say also aerodynamics. I probably forgot about a few other things too.

The influence of that on stats certainly is not something we are going to reconsider, there is too much work put into making this already and it has the effects we want to see in the game. You saying you have little influence on it strikes me as far fetched, after all it is the very first choice you make in your car design selecting the car body. Is there not enough body variety yet to give different choices in this regard? Sure, but that is not something we're disputing and will change. ;)

[freeman2344]

Originally posted by Killrob:

Ahh, no then it is a misunderstanding. Vehicle height does have a major influece on other stats and of course none on footprint. So the first part of your statement is what is wrong, while the second part is accurate. Height does influence all driving stats and calculations due to center of gravity, it influences visibility, cargo space, weight and costs, and like you say also aerodynamics. I probably forgot about a few other things too.

The influence of that on stats certainly is not something we are going to reconsider, there is too much work put into making this already and it has the effects we want to see in the game. You saying you have little influence on it strikes me as far fetched, after all it is the very first choice you make in your car design selecting the car body. Is there not enough body variety yet to give different choices in this regard? Sure, but that is not something we're disputing and will change. ;)

I was more alluding to maybe offering the option of morphing the car (at least slightly) with regards to height - stretching or shrinking it, if you will (I know some bodies currently offer a morphing zone in the roof). And yes, as you say, body variety is limited, which is the main problem with the current situation. But you'd have to agree that height is something that is rather hard to control with the current system apart from selecting a body. Weight distribution is a similar issue.

[Pyrophosphate]

I also didn't know what "footprint" referred to until Killrob mentioned it in his recent video series. I disagree that the terminology needs changing. What it needs is a tooltip. The real problem is that the game needs to do a better job of explaining itself to the player, but I think the devs already know that.

[freeman2344]

Originally posted by Pyrophosphate:

I also didn't know what "footprint" referred to until Killrob mentioned it in his recent video series. I disagree that the terminology needs changing. What it needs is a tooltip. The real problem is that the game needs to do a better job of explaining itself to the player, but I think the devs already know that.

True. The problem doesn't arise if a tooltip explains it.

[Killrob]

Originally posted by freeman2344:

But you'd have to agree that height is something that is rather hard to control with the current system apart from selecting a body. Weight distribution is a similar issue.

No, that is just something we do not agree on. :) I don't think either of these are "issues" at all, they are interesting mechanics that require people to make tough decisions.

The UE4 version will have all kinds of tooltips for everything, it's just hard to implement in the Kee engine as layering is pretty much hell.

[suryo roy]

Huh ok, that explain pretty much. Thx all

[RudolfHucker]

If Area was somehow qualified by including a parenthesis on the tab; "Area (L x W)" for example, would at least avoid any confusion arising from area also meaning "Locality".