Latest Roadmap Update - May 2021

Discussion in 'News & Notifications' started by Christopher Elliott, May 31, 2021.

  1. instinkt

    instinkt Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2020
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    66
    is this possible to speed-up loading times by some engine (or whatever) improvements in the future?
    I'm sure this question was asked before multiple times but can't find any clear answers about that topic
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2021
    Balazs Magyar likes this.
  2. Wanderpoole

    Wanderpoole Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2012
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    12
    Could I have more information on what this means exactly? Does this show the build the connected client is using?

    • "Added SteamID of each client to race results logs generated by a Dedicated Server"
     
  3. Remco Majoor

    Remco Majoor Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Messages:
    995
    Likes Received:
    1,068
    To quote my post on the rF2 discord; "What I notice a lot is that stuff that affect racing (tyre model, gearbox simulation, and now tyre temps affected by track temps) are said that they love (to have it) it in the sim, but they never put it in. In the road map its all about graphics again. Seeing the shadow thing now, I had to squint to really notice the difference. Now that I see it though I can see that its a bit better, but still not game changing. Why are graphics moving at such a quick rate, making big steps, but stuff important to the driving and racing itself is just not happening at all. Just something I noticed"

    On that I got that apparently they dont want to break things for mod content (which has a relatively easy fix IMO). I just find it very weird, and it does put doubts in my head to ever see physics improvements at all before either rF3 or another sim taking physics to a new level
     
  4. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,346
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    Did you get that from a dev or from other users? We could be talking about any of a hundred issues/areas/features, and no doubt most of them could be implemented without affecting existing content (that's why you plan it first).

    I find some users come up with theories on their own, either simply through ignorance or attempting to defend rF2. If a dev said this, and it was regarding something that wouldn't affect content across the board (if done with a little thought), then it's a concern. But this is very specific to the issue at hand.
     
  5. Christopher Elliott

    Christopher Elliott Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Messages:
    4,551
    Likes Received:
    7,538
    It was a very raw example to show just this one aspect, however when you drive it's very noticeable which is why it's being looked at
    Everything is moving ahead including physics dev, but we show what we have in the areas we can for that month's Roadmap, that's the point ;)
     
  6. Filip

    Filip Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    1,208
    Likes Received:
    937
    Tell us more!!!
     
  7. avenger82

    avenger82 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    342
    IIRC it was devs that said track temps affecting tire temps would break mods that’s why it’s still not done. But for mods that do somehow break after this change you could run it at default track temps so nothing would change.

    Also have a feeling that it’s sometimes used as an excuse for not moving forward and fixing legacy (ISI) bugs and issues. Some changes probably will cause unexpected regressions , but it’s not the reason to not even try.

    I wish S397 would hire one or two talented physics guys to work on the physics engine. Like I.e. Sector3 did with Alex Hodgkinson few years ago and look at the progress RaceRoom has.
     
    RaceNut, TJones and Nieubermesch like this.
  8. davehenrie

    davehenrie Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2016
    Messages:
    7,454
    Likes Received:
    4,370
    Not the build, I would think, but it identifies the client. This would be necessary for future enforcement of penalties if nothing else. Allows race admins to identify anti-sporting behavior.
     
  9. Nieubermesch

    Nieubermesch Registered

    Joined:
    May 18, 2019
    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    403
    Yeah! They brought GT3 changes at the time there was such an heated debate on the forums, but some other series need some looking into to, but it seems they worked on it to appease some criticism, but a lot of time has passed and nothing more came. Shame. I mean, so many times have they said they are looking into things but it's not followed trough... Come on guys. I really think you are doing a better job though, so let's get that work done and released - of course!
     
  10. Nieubermesch

    Nieubermesch Registered

    Joined:
    May 18, 2019
    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    403
    Marcel replied to me on discord that 3rd party content can have conflicting problems and it's understandable. Then people also started echoing the same sentiment.

    Marcel also agreed that they are planning the best course of action, not just that it won't be implemented. It still sounds like a bit of an excuse to not work on it, even if it's not as straight forward as one thought.
     
  11. stonec

    stonec Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,399
    Likes Received:
    1,488
    The solution is to do it like iRacing and all the other sims. You have to start somewhere and that's by releasing a new tire model version X (or whatever you want to call it). Only cars that have been updated to this model would support variable track temperatures. The rest of the content and the mods would run on the current, older model and at some point it will be made legacy code. It should not cause any problems as older content will still run like before. Yes, you end up with a bunch of content that needs to be updated (like every time a new major feature is introduced), but there are no shortcuts IMO to do such a big change.
     
    pkelly and avenger82 like this.
  12. 2ndLastJedi

    2ndLastJedi Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,873
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Any news on a AA solution that removes the ugly fence shimmer very evident on new PBR tracks like Portland?
     
    prceurope likes this.
  13. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,346
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    @stonec @Nieubermesch This isn't a new concept. The new rF2 engine is switched on by a new line, otherwise the old is used. The chassis file replaces the .pm file, optionally.

    For a particular item you could choose to have a suitable default for legacy content, or where that won't work (or potentially could break something) you just don't implement it if the new parameters aren't there.

    This can be judged on a case by case basis. I don't see how this can be a blocker for all potential improvements, but again it depends on the improvement.

    Physics is relatively easy in this regard. It's not like graphics.

    Example to avoid backlash as a non-dev: wet rubber groove effects currently doesn't exist. Its addition is (almost completely without doubt) a simple operation, replicating the current groove effect parameter with the 1 added datum of track wetness (already used elsewhere, so readily available). Legacy content without the new parameter could just not use it (set the values for no grip change, done. New physics code runs either way with no detriment), or use a "reasonable" default, or base the wet effect on the dry effect (more tread, less gain from dry rubber, assume less loss from wet rubber). Damage? None to negligible. Difficulty? 2/10. Are wet racing lines fixed? No, workable worn aggregate effects (surface roughness) either needs work or working examples for track makers to use, and if there is physics work involved it may be more complex to implement without breaking existing content. But it would be an improvement.

    There has to be low hanging fruit. Even as users we know there is.
     
    avenger82 and Nieubermesch like this.
  14. Christopher Elliott

    Christopher Elliott Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Messages:
    4,551
    Likes Received:
    7,538
    Let's all please stay on topic and keep it civil, just a reminder because I see where this is going. Thanks
     
  15. Nieubermesch

    Nieubermesch Registered

    Joined:
    May 18, 2019
    Messages:
    792
    Likes Received:
    403
    Good good good! :)

    Not only tires though, aero needs revisions from the ammount of observation of people who seem to know what they are talking about. Bring it on S397!! Wishing you all the best!!

    Next should be a more complete package for RF2 for a reasonable price and you will bring lots of people on the fence to this great plataform! Think not just how expensive you can sell, but how much you can sell by making the price lower!
     
  16. Remco Majoor

    Remco Majoor Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Messages:
    995
    Likes Received:
    1,068
    inb4 its pirelli haha
     
  17. Christian Wolter

    Christian Wolter Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    237
    If you ask 100 sim racers what is the most important thing, 90 will say physics and 10 will say graphics or number of cars, etc. But the reality is that the 90 buy the game that has the best graphics and not that has the best physics! In this respect I can fully understand the priorities, especially since RF2 still has one of the best physics and especially FFB (somehow belongs together) that there is out there. So first make pretty and then clean under the hood....is understandable….
     
    Nieubermesch likes this.
  18. Remco Majoor

    Remco Majoor Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Messages:
    995
    Likes Received:
    1,068
    you found the joke :D

    The most important when starting from scratch, or the most important now? I can tell you its not as easy as saying X is the most important. You can have great physics, but nobody will play your sim if the graphics sucks and the other way around. They need to be good at everything. When one falls behind, they need to catch up on that part.
     
    Sim_Player and Christian Wolter like this.
  19. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,926
    Likes Received:
    3,876
    Aaa, thats not about physics. At least not about physics of rF2. It is about physics of some particular content in rF2.

    At least it is that. Otherwise Physics and S397 begins to sound strange in the same sentence :D
     
  20. hitm4k3r

    hitm4k3r Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,320
    Likes Received:
    3,121
    I would be carefull to use RaceRoom and their physics improvements over the last couple of months as a benchmark for anything. If your've read the discussion on RD you will notice that Alex started from a physics model that was - let's formulate it in a friendly way - very basic at best and they are still miles away from the leading products. If you start from a very simple model you can make fast progress relatively easy and it seems that one studio is lazy while drinking Gin on a golden yacht while the other studio seems to be working night and day. Raceroom has a strong focus on Endurance content while there is still no word about full dynamic TOD cycles, while there are sparks - so much about questionable priorities.

    With rF2 it's quite similar btw. Most people complain about how the sole focus is on graphics and that there have been many fast improvements in that area while physics development seems slow. It is what it is: any sane developer, no matter if we are talking racing sims or completely different markets, needs to weaken their products weaknesses at first. We can now get into the never ending circle of death while we talk about what should be prioritized and in wich way. Fact is, the success of rF2 throughout the last five years, especialy with the Le mans virtual was the result of S397 focusing on graphics development and the crawling shadows have indeed be one of the most prominent issues that users complained about.

    I allways bring that argument for people who complain that there is too much focus on new content and graphics, but I would give you the advice to boot up the last ISI build and answer for yourself, if that would have been good enough to get us to this discussion here right now. I don't think so, even though there are areas that drive me nuts like new UI and some of it's fundamental flaws. The things is, I forget it as soon as I take stuff like the F5000 cars to the updated Lime Rock.
     
    Christian Wolter and pkelly like this.

Share This Page