Does sliding the car get punished in Rfactor2

The problem most people have with iRacing (myself included) is that the grip drop off when you go past the slip angle is waaaaay too pronounced, so in effect you make a small mistake sending the car into a slide and there's just no going back at all. But this thread is about slippage

 

Yeah, that also isn't it I heard they are changing that a bit. My only wish going forward is just that the devs of Rf2 do keep being observant of physics and all of that, restraining themselves to changes that relate to reality, not just what fans feel like. I could see where that would end up . Though, keep an eye on us fans, as sometimes we get it right, but the people there should be the masters and hopefully there last decisions are the right ones.

 

You know whats funny? I just read now about the yaw simulator... I think I have a comment on a youtube video saying that... Ahaha, at the time I was enamored with ACC and had came back from Rfactor2 at the time, when this sort of issues of "over rotation" creeped in, it felt wrong and then I came to rfactor again. Turned head physics and all camera effects down. Haven't looked back

 

Seat of the pants feel. EG on an outlap warming tyres you start to feel the extra grip as you work the tyres via multiple sources, your seat, your neck, your hands, inner ear as well as visually. Your body has various "gyroscopes" that plot your movement and position. In the Sim we get visual, sound and (fantastic) FFB only.
Frame rate IRL is faster
Lack of warping or lag
There is just more time to react. (In my Silverstone wet race highlights I get the chance to make 3-4 corrections in one corner (Club) due to all the feedback.
Front lock ups produce smoke as well as FFB feel of less grip.

Your sense of where you are on track and what is occurring is just so much better.
I can learn a real track in a fraction of the laps required IRL and have learned tracks IN the qualifying session and done ok.

But what does happen in RFACTOR2 does, to me make perfect sense.

 

IMO all the benefits of RL, such as ultimately more senses, details, etc.... Should not be compromised by altering physical stuff that could be achieved to be very close to reality otherwise.

Oh, I understand it better now. I agree. The cars should be drivable at and over the limit, it should be possible to play around the limits with the car. It shouldn't be ultra difficult and undrivable. But this easy vs hard stuff is very subjective. One has to be very honest with himself, being able to overdrive the high performance modern racing car will take skills, especially to do it for a long time consistently. What is easy to me now, was hard to me five years ago when I knew not much, had little experience and less practice. What is easy for an alien who is consistently 1-2seconds faster than me, might be difficult to me... but basically, yeah, I know what sim you are talking about, there is one sim that is notorious for not letting play much with the limits, and a lot of people thinks there is something not right about it, myself included, I am not wishing for that, it is balancing act to find the ballpark which can be done by just simply understanding the car, tires, aerodynamics.

And what drivers say, and what they complain is the same thing I understand their positions, same stuff applies what David has posted in a post above as well, just as you pointed out. I think most of that stuff is a matter of getting used to, then it won't be that much of a big deal, although of course sensing more is better, but it does not have to alter physics.

I have found some driver who does youtube, and he is very good driver. He did some insights on simracing. Absolutely roasted iRacing, was very positive about AC, and surprisingly to me - praised PC2 a lot as well, which IMO is quite a bit in arcadey side... But the main criterion which he used (and it is very important point to judge criteria as well) was if the same driving techniques as real life works, almost to put as simple as possible - can he control oversteer almost (and thats what we usually focus on as well). So he couldn't control oversteer in iR - bad, understandably. AC - his real life techniques worked, good. PC2 - his RL techniques also worked, excellent, but hey wait... what about criterion about when it perhaps shouldn't ? The point is, he is very good driver, it pretty much should work for him all the time. IMO it becomes a lot more subtle to judge when stuff should become not easy anymore, especially for someone who knows he is good, he might even never consider that there is some point where he shouldn't be able to maintain control anymore....

Anyway.... my point is that to have complete order and justice in simulation, both sides extremes must be kept in check. IMO simulations risk in occupying certain ranges of realism perceptions, while in perfect situation simulations would keep on getting increasingly similar, because all are after simulating same things. But it might not happen, some sim will be favorited by those who like more hardcore, other will like something that is more easy and I have no idea where will "just right" come to be, ideally rF2, but IDK, don't see it coming.

Here is Nik Romano YT channel, very entertaining stuff. His iR vs AC video collected over 100k views, he joked that people care more about simulations, than real life. Which I think is correct observation, because if simracers would care more for observing real thing, they would know better. Shame he didn't go for rF2, rF2 seems to be cursed when it comes to these things... when Niels Heusinkveld made a run through many sims this year and talked about them, he skipped rF2, which unfortunately tells something....

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7mcGzCQIWKBSDb4uv9CoUA/videos

 

Well, he agreed with the premise there is something fishy about alien setups and driving style. Not sure if that should merit him to just say he was so disappointed he couldn't make a video on it

 

There is a chance that the reason has nothing to do with what you think it has to do.

Maybe, average RF2 user is not the kind of user that go to YT videos to contribute to visualizations.
A poll of some years ago showed that RF2 user has an average age of over 40 y/o , we know that RF2 is quite "niche into a niche" so, considering that those video work best when of a certain length... maybe someone had to be discarded.
YT is quite a mess, most of those channels exist for the sole purpose of keep existing, they need to stretch simple stuff into a 20 minutes bla blabla bla that must run on the thin line of say good and say shit at the same time. Numbers of player wise, and age, RF2 is not a good target.

 

He skipped it, but he commented on it in one of his other videos. He said something you might not like to be honest, but as far as I remember he said something similar to what @Slip_Angel claims. Please don't quote me on that, as I watched this video some time ago, but this is how I remembered it. Also please note that I'm merely an observant in this discussion. I know too little about cars and have too little sim racing experience to actually take part so I'm not standing on any side, just try to help if there is a place I can (like here).

"I've tested RF2, I wanted to make a video about it, but while it felt great initially I could not achieve times I thought I should be doing. Then I watched some alien videos on YT and saw how they drive. I applied the same technique and then I was able to achieve those times. But this technique was artificially over driving the car which is not how one would drive it in real life. After that I lost my interest in RF2".

This is how I remembered it. I'll try to find this fragment in a second so you can hear this for yourself.

Niels does not live from his YT channel. He is completely opposite of most youtubers. He doesn't make videos people want to watch. He makes videos of stuff he wants to share and he is interested in. Which can be seen by how chaotic and sometimes unnecessary long his videos are . So while your arguments are valid most of the time I don't feel they apply to him. And he really did want to make an RF2 video. He didn't not because people would not be interested in it, but because he lost interest in RF2.

EDIT:
Found it, wasn't that difficult to find (starts at 1:17, it removed my timestamp):

 

Yeah, Niels have a point. Let's hope the tire model/heat update we heard about from Marcel makes this driving style of aliens almost impracticable.

Niels still should have done the video man... It's so stupid. People would take him more seriously than any video by Ermin. Niels has experience in the industry and is qualified to ascertain so many things and he decided to be selfish and keep it to himself, not sure why...

 

Yeah, 100% agree. I was very disappointed he decided not to. But he also said in some video that he only drives and makes video of things that he likes, that give him pleasure. He has no stake personally to make RF2 better. He just wants to share the stuff he likes. And RF2 is not one of those...

 

Oh well, if you put it like that... Still think it shouldn't be ignored as it's one of primary sims and it's very advanced already and probably his insight could help it move forward. Maybe he has contacted the team of studio 397, we don't know. Ermin said that he talked with Marcel behind the scenes about this exploit stuff and maybe Niels came into question too, as he also mentioned Niels video and they seem to get along well. Rfcator 2 after some refinement on that part is probably unstoppable.

 

Lol, I quoted you. Trolololo haha !

To be honest, I like very much what he said. basically because it matches with my perception. I suppose it won't be false to say that we wish everyone elses perceptions would match ours, so we are happy when that happens.

I very much have the same idea, real GT3 car is somewhere in between ACC and iRacing, and I think his car drove beautifuly in that video. And ACC is somewhere in between rF2 and iRacing, and I wouldn't be surprised if one day ACC will gets hotpached into being further left than rF2 S397 cars are.

However, one point has to be made. There is an aspect I dislike from Niels perspective about rF2. He seems to be very much not a fan of physical tire models, such as used in rF2. Perhaps because he owns great deal of knowledge and control working with older tire model method. IMO he should have given a go to some other car, such as Camaro GT3, which he would have probably found to be much better match to his perception of how GT3 car drives, or perhaps Megane, but thats not GT3.. and if it is not GT3, then it is not a car.

 

But you did not quote me on that (my perception and memory of what he said) ;-P

Then I'm a little bit lost to be honest, because from what I understand he said that to drive the car fast you need turn the wheel into the corner more than you would in real life (inducing more oversteer than it's realistic, possibly past the optimal grip point) and accelerate heavily on exit earlier than you would in real life cause of the additional bite of the wheel that allows you to do that. He even demonstrated that (the overdone wheel turning) for a split second. Which is something you guys seems to agree that is not the case (contrary to what Slip_Angel claims). But I might've misunderstood.

I think, but this time I really only think that he commented on this as well at some point, saying that this "physical" tire model by itself is overrated. That the underlying model of how the physics are calculated doesn't really matter as long as the output is close to the reality. That you can have a wonderful physical model that outputs completely unrealistic values and you can have a "table" based model that output unrealistic values. Model doesn't matter as long as it gets the job done. But it'd be much more difficult for me to find that fragment so please take it with a grain of salt.

 

This comment make sense when you think to a closed platform / finished product. RF2 is not like that, it is the only platform where you can insert whatever vehicle you would want to create, stick some tires on it and see how it would behave in the real world. On another platform you would need to decide how it will behave and put numbers into the recipe accordingly. the output can be the same on a macroscale, but I don't think they can be equivalent.

 

@Havner No, I also think that there is too much abusse needed to go fast with these particular cars that trends rF2, not enough careful, higher concentration "needle threading" kind of technique needed.

And IMO physical model is far superior, much higher possibilities, much more control and much less artificial. You literally work on tire variables that makes slip angles happen realtime the way they should happen. Instead of plugging in slip angles plots and hoping that they will work realistically with every possible circumstances, and ending up with compromises. With older model tires might come easier when working with data (heard such talks) as for example just getting plot set of slip curves with various loads and plugging in pneumatic trail parameters and so. Perhaps easier to get "good tire" that way, but no way it could be possible to get tire as realistic in all possible circumstances as in well done physical model. Technically just having few slip curves is not enough. In physical model slip angles just happens to work how they should in all circumstances, if tire is built correctly, and realtime parameters are good. And with physical model, at least I found myself not thinking about slip angles as much as the details that takes part in resulting of slip angles, thats absolutely different approach, and suddenly tires starts to make more sense, seem less mysterious.... Of course advantage of physical tire greatly diminishes if it is not made well, I think great physics specialists can kick a** with usual tire model, but they would do even better if they would take good control over physical model.

I'd say model really doesn't matter as long as it gets the job done. But it depends how picky you are about the tire. If there isn't a notion that there are some limiting factors in one model, then why try to pursue other model ? So it is probably a personal thing. To me personally, in physical model everything seems more intuitive, more logical, makes better sense, and possibilities are higher, so an obvious choice in my mind, although I probably still have 2/3 of it to learn.

 

Understood.

Yeah, I'd tend to agree based on pure logic (I've never made a car in any sim, but similar conversation exists in flight sims, table based FSX and fluid dynamics based x-plane). I was merely saying what I think Niels commented on the matter But without actually finding that fragment I don't want to put words into his mouth. I might try to find that later on.

 

My 2 cents on the niels comments you guys are talking about: I will watch it again eventually (I have a league race tonight), but I've watched it when it first came out and actually even discussed it with my teammates,and I remember that I got his point, and once again, I do agree that maybe the tires do allow too much slip, but I believe the way he described aliens drove in rf2 - something like let the front end lose in corner entry then use power on oversteer to exit the corner right? - matches what driver61 suggests to find the limit of the car in the video I linked earlier in this thread

I will review that once again as I've thought about this a few times since that (didn't rewatch niels vídeo since watching Scott's)

@mantasisg, going back to the "complaining" briefly, I would take real drivers saying the sims are harder because of lack of Sop, like @davidporeilly said (which actually fits very nicely with other opinions I've seen), as a compliment! Because what they are saying is that, while it is indeed harder because you don't have as much feedback (which they accept we just can't have it with our current state of technology) the same input will still produce the same output (similar enough to allow you to transfer skills)

 

Not trying to belittle iRacing but this is what real Indy drivers think of it:

“And the car’s not even close to the real thing. That’s thing I’m worried about. We were talking at Spring Training, and Felix said he thought his sim was teaching him bad things when he drives our real cars. I can see where that’s the case.”

In another parallel mentioned by other IndyCar drivers taking their first crack at iRacing, Dixon says using multi-million-dollar driver-in-the-loop simulators at Honda Performance Development, or Dallara, has made the transition to Esports harder than expected.

“I remember my first sim test this year; I spent the first three hours just trying to get the tire model right before we did any testing,” he added. “That’s the level of realism you’re dealing with. Then you start on something like this with iRacing, that is a real game, where you need to learn the tricks to cheat it. It’s interesting, but also uninteresting to me.

“It’s like driving a version of the real thing, but it’s more of an impression than anything real, and it’s nothing like the actual sims we use. This is a bunch of drivers training to be their best at iRacing, really, instead of it being IndyCar drivers using their experience to carry over and go right to the front in sim racing. Two completely different worlds. I’d say this is fun, but only as long as I go in approaching it as something fun to do.”

Source:
https://racer.com/2020/04/02/esports-bringing-fun-and-frustration-for-indycar-drivers/

 

I would very much like to know if their opinions were specifically for iRacing, or for consumer "sims" in general.
One thing I notice nationally is: we have a bunch of Leagues /communities, pretty much all different sims, and we have quite a few SIM drivers who also race IRL. Nearly all of them race mainly in rF2, some of them exclusively rf2. These same drivers usualy are also among the top in each cup, or the top, period. This is in stark contrast to what I know of iRacing, internationally, where RL drivers usually get their asses handed to them.
We also have examples of drivers who never tried SimRacing before (consumer level at least), and in the all-stars event, got to the top Very fast (Alonso being the biggest example I think)