Anyone else concerned about MSG’s future?

It's like some people think criticizing rFactor 2 gives them award badges or something for being really smart.

Sincerely, I haven't seen anyone complaining about the new tires. There's always someone complaining about anything but not about the new tires unless they do secretely.

 

To me it just comes down to caster. More caster = less/no fall off in force, Less caster = more fall off in force. For example the BMW has a pretty high default caster and you can only lower it to 10°, so I wouldn't expect any fall off. If you could lower it more no doubt there would be a point where you would feel fall off, and you could tweak it to your exact preferences. So it could just be the set up, rather than any changes to the tyre model.

I find the new tyre sound a huge improvement over the previous sound, which to me came in far too early and was like an on/off switch. The previous sound came in well before you'd reach the optimum from slip angle, and it would always leave you questioning wether you where overcooking the front tyres, until you leant to ignore it or turn it off.
The new sound has way more dynamic range and depth to the sound. It's not just the same sound at the same volume. It's very quite if you are only slightly asking too much of the front end, and then quite loud and a different pitch if you are really slipping the front. With headphones it sounds all pretty spot on to me.

 

You said that you didn't play the game for about a year. S397 have released several game updates during this time. Maybe this lack of feedback or delay is caused by some game setting that a year ago was working in a way and now is giving a slightly different effect, causing the difference that you feel. The thing the majority of the people is praising these changes, while you don't, maybe means that depends by something in your configuration. Try sharing your configuration and hardware specs.
Just guessing, don't know.

 

I guess this will be the end of rF2. PC gaming is going through some rough times with PC part prices going nuts. Pay about 5000 - 6000 euro's for a high end machine. That number was half 4 years ago. Cryptominig has ruined PC gaming. A RTX 4090 for 3000 dollar...i mean, the PC game market is ruined. And so i rF2 being the underdog in racesim world. Young gamers want graphics...cheap graphics so the only option left is console and Grand Turismo. Who cares about physics and solid FFB and paying 5000 euro to enjoy it these days. Kunos won BIG time with ACC (console arcade game). I always end up racing rF2 due to the fantastic physics and FFB. I truly hope rF2 survives but im afraid cryptomining will kill rF2.

 

You are the only one loser with this mind.

 

Take it easy mate.

 

What is your complain? That you can't afford a 4090? That you need one to push RF2 the proper way?
I'm playing with a GTX 1070 TI and before this I had less powerful cards. For now deal back your game settings and enjoy the games that you play as you can. Sooner or later the hardware prices will drop, at least a bit. And there is always the used market, guys: I bought and sold hardware in great conditions many times.
Kunos made the console ports with the help of a big publisher: they invested and they won the bet, without compromising the spirit of their game. They did a geat job and the sequels will take advantage of the experience acquired.

 

All I know is that rFactor 2 is the only sim that suits me (physics engine + cars physics fidelity + track physics fidelity + a "realistic Nurburgring").

I am therefore naturally worried about the future of rFactor 2, it is useless to act as if some rFactor 2 fans were not worried (it is not true), on the other hand it is true that I am not interested to the financial details which apparently are the issue, it's technical and I don't want to invest myself in trying to understand something.

Long live rFactor 2 is all that comes to mind.

 

I agree.

And I like to add two thoughts: isn't rF2 immortal because of being modifiable (and so would every other application which is) as all the car creators, track creators, the "modders" in general can add content to rF2 even if it is not being developed anymore but still available? The second is ... someone could argue about rF2 getting more and more looking outdated when it comes to graphics, but tbh if you compare it to nowadays simulations it already is looking kind of outdated ... it is ok and we can see it is being developed in that direction, too, but in comparison to many others (ofc this is a very subjective thought based on personal preferences)?

I would say "yes" concerning first one and "I don't care" concerning second one ...

 

I've recently come to the conclusion that all the usual race sims (AC, ACC, AMS2, iRacing, & Raceroom) are looking dated, whether you consider the graphics engines dated or not. The trend of photogrammetry textures on top of lidar data, however, can update all of them without actually doing anything to their graphics engines. There downsides to doing this, but for a modern track with few trees, the look is outstounding.



And here's a mainstream title that seems to be using photogrammetry (plus a chance to see what you think of raytracing).

 

As said - I am not familiar with GFX techniques nor I am a track or car builder and referring to graphics is very subjective IMHO - some like AMS2 e.g. because of its graphics I am saying it is looking kind of comic style at some settings.

But this is a discussion about detailed gras at 200 mph ;-) as I call it in general. What do we recognize and see if we are hunting our opponents?

I think rF2 has a good chance to live another couple of years (there are still people racing GTR) because it is high modifiable; I like the UI much more e,g, than the one of PC or AMS and so on.

I assume that concerning GFX you could use a lot of techniques which are based on the GFX cards and drivers and do not rely on the graphics / application engine itself ...

 

We have mods that introduced 3D grass and daisies and every time I end up in the grass it's a joy.
RF2 will live at least 10 more years thanks to the modding. Even more if the sequel and AC2 won't have the same kind of modding support offered by their predecessors.
Look at ACC: if the devs would have offered modding support, by this time the community would have done hundreds of cars and tracks and abandoned AC.
Unfortunally that's not what game developers and publishers want nowadays: they want to make money with DLC content. And I'm not so sure that S397 and the company behind them is any different. Afterall S397 inherited the game's structure from ISI: it wasn't them that decided that RF2 should be based also on modding.

 

Me too ... every time I started a new simulation in the past I ended up looking for highest details in the graphics settings and how to achieve it

One of the performance eaters in PC2 is detailed gras I think I needed to learn that it is a nice feature when you are off track

I agree - economically speaking it is a disadvantage to have an application which could be extended with "modding content", but I would say it is an advantage, too and it is balancing act or a thin line between both aspects.

With the ability of modifying the application / simulation I think there will be more attention but at the same moment there is no need to buy content ...

Hard to judge about MSG's future and I think I am not deep enough in details to do so ...

 

We seem to be putting a negative spin on MSG's problems and assuming that if their business fails then that will be the end of rF2 ( and its other titles ). That need not be the case. The developers and game titles are MSG's only real assets of value - as far as I can tell anyway.
I'd expect these to be sold off to other firms TBH...

 

Unreal Engine 5.1 using Lumen and Nanite...


The thing Is that you need a powerhouse to run that, but as you can see It´s already Included In UE5.1. I have The Bus (Aerosoft) which recently update to UE5 and can say It runs (performs) much better, but then you´re stuck with the UE5 engine.

Personally I like how rF2 looks, and better graphics are for schoolboys In most cases, unless you´re driving In 3rd. person view, or we are talking about a flight sims. I would rather see Improvements In other areas of the sim. Aside from that, the cost of hardware Is over the roof now and has also become a fast paced consuming trend. We have had a RTX gen each year since the good old days of the GTX gen 10, and It doesn't seem to slow down. It will get to a point were It wont be sustainable IMO.

Sure I would like better graphics, I think most would. But at what price? Taking Into account manpower and hardware here.

Cheers

 

Maybe the balance could be that DLC content should differ as premium content based on real data such as laser scanned tracks and real data based cars.

 

I have no clue - I do not know which resources are available to people making tracks or cars and if laser scanned track data is public available.

I think this is the main difference between modded tracks (if scans are not available to the public) and 'DLC' tracks e.g. Question is: what advantage do laser scanned tracks have? And how do the advantages count?

I have to say I was always much more interested in simulations / games which could be modded / extended by the public with additional levels, tracks, cars, characters etc.

I remember skin packs for GP2 which made it last for a very long time and same to GP3, GP3-2000 and GP4 (not to forget the f1gp ones) and I drove GP since release of GP2 until 2008 or 2009 ...

 

I think, payed content should be offer more authentic in contrast to moded one so people are willing to pay for it, e.g. mods of historic cars with ABS.

 

What Incentive would you have buying a paid model over a modded one, If the modded one can be just as good, or better and free?

There has to be something that makes the paid content better, at least that´s what I like to think.

 

That's what I meant with 'advantages' ...

But I think MSG is not dependent on rF2 only.

Economic models like that of R3E or iRacing seem to work most of the time - amazingly people are willing to pay monthly fees (iRacing), although most applications / simulations failed on such an economical model in the past (and I think ISI tried it with rF2 in the beginning, too).