What I believe to be wrong with the RF2 tire model / grip levels / lack of control

I played FR 3.5 @ Sebring with Esteve Rueda this afternoon, the car behavior, grip and tire degradation felt pretty real to me.
We where racing close to eatch other, with similar lap times and nothing stupid happened(apart from my crash ).

 

Thats cool , I might give it ago some time ! I watched your video from ages ago that was cool as well.

As a side point does that not demonstrate that ultimately the solution is still a hack job which then calls into question the validity of the original tire model ? ( which is still in development)

 

Offtopic: Thanks, I was an accident, but see your fight with Grueira (member of my community) was awesome haha.

These lap times and behaviours was the same in 101, I repeat this, because somebody said cars are now more progressive...

 

You get the same exact attitude of people on WMD defending Pcars current model which is known to be massively floored ( designed for consoles slow spec + they are looking to improve it)

Yet there a good number of people probably the majority that think its totally fine and the most realistic out there.

I just like things to progress and always want things to be better allot of people are just happy with what is in-front of them and cannot see past it.

I will send you message in 2 years time and we can see how much more stable sim cars are and how more progressive the car movement and tire behaver is.

 

I could tell you exactly the same thing in two years time and I know naff all about the tires! Fact is sim games are progressing all the time...everyone knows that!

 

I've tried Croft, you're right, under heavy rain, you've better grip in grass.
On Mills, I can take 0.7G at 100Km/h (with lot precautions ) on track and 0.3 on grass. But on Croft I can take some G on grass like on tarmac ?? There are a bug on this track.

 

Progressing in the direction of more progressive predictable cars is what I was saying.

 

Depends how good AC is from the looks of it I probably will play it allot more than RF2 Especially as it looks like allot of the mod scene is likely to move over to AC unless RF2 changes allot ( which it might do).

Mind you I'm sure some decent mods will come out for RF2 that keep it worth while playing and I'm sure a bunch of leagues will stick to RF2.

I own and play all the simulators as well as allot of the more arcade games.

 

yeh, unfortunately they wont, if youve got a bunch of people who think RF2 drives in a realistic way......
it was good about 10 years ago and there are some great mods for RF1 which...go some way towards fixing the game.

ISI are pretty useless at making cars and physics - maybe the underlying engine is good - so im going to reserve judgement frankly, until the mod teams actually start making mods for RF2.

but all i can see them doing is fixing up a bad job, + the fact that RF2 has really lacklustre graphics...well...surely a mod team would want their mod to look as good as possible. Why bother with rf2 when theres AC and GTR3 coming out.

i just cannot believe how you guys think RF2 is like real world driving, in any way. You have to drive in such a linear fashion to get laptime, and its core problem is the slip angles and not being able to 'play' with the car to some degree, when really going for it. It forces you to drive like Jenson Button, basically. No other driving style is allowed.

NKP gives you the option to drive like Button..but also to drive like Hamilton, or schumi, or any other driver. It gives you total freedom to enjoy the car on so many levels, there's almost infinite depth to it due to its stable and progressive nature.

i think the fundamental theme running through this on the 'RF2 is amazing' fanboys side- is that you think every single racing driver all over the world are some sort of amazing driving gods - that no mere mortal can possess the skills they have.
Therefore the game must be as tough as possible - the game needs to kill you if you apply 1% more throttle than required, and if you do apply 1% more throttle, you shouldnt be allowed to control it, not with a simracers ability, oh no.

well its just not true, and you can see and hear this in plenty of videos on the net proving this. Its like youre driving deniers or something. You refuse to believe that sim racers can perform the same feats of control and ability.

i think all the literature jameswesty has dug up on tyre model simulation is fantastic - and goes some way to proving how wrong you all are.

keep clinging on to your ISI worship, and their 'realistic tyre model data'. You can have all the data you want, but if its not used in the correct way, you come out with garbage. this is proven by the driving experience in RF2 currently (again though I'll wait till the product is finalised, and quality mods come out for it - or maybe this F2 car will drive totally differently).

 

When F1 go back with slick. Some drivers said "now will be more difficult to control the car if you overdrive".
With this tire model you can drive like Button or Hamilton if you want, it's just more difficult than non-slick tires, because if you overdrive, the flexibility to retrieve the car is much smaller.
That real thing, I don't understand why you can't accept that.
All of your reproaches it's just because tires work like they will must work.

 

Finally, someone has the correct view of this rFactor2 problem, fact is that ISI mods aren't very good (in my opinion), they just don't are good at making mods, point. We have to wait till some modders start doing content to the game using rFactor2 physics engine so that we can start having good mods and enjoying the game the way we should. It's pretty sure that in real life i can make a corner with a racing megane at 100 km's/h without even feeling it going out of control, but that precisely the opposite what's happening here at rFactor2 and it's not real. You have an excellent example with rFactor1, mods that came with it (ISI mods) were very poor in my opinion but that doesn't mean we can't have excellent mods today because we have, thanks to the modders team! Only time will tell if rFactor2 is a good software or not.

 

Other truth... +1 I think this discuss will have no end haha

 

That probably depends from goal, do you want to go by what feels best or do you want to go by what is correct by data, that is cool thing about rFactor that you really can get anything out from it, only thing standing on way is how to achieve that desired result, which can be something that needs lot of experimenting to figure out how to get right feel to it.

Of course then we can't say such mod would be perfectly realistic, but it can be very real like and provide really great driving sensation, so it is not always needed to have that mathematically perfect realism to have fun, one just have to be careful and state so when making mod so that people don't get false impression which then leads to excessive flaming.

However if one can make mathematically perfect mod it should really drive perfectly by data, but for example FFB feel can be something like in GTR, so many tweak a bit of suspension so that it gives nicer feedback and then tweak tires to get correct feel, there then one can go badly wrong if care is not taken to have car still perform at least close to real data.

I don't think there can be one truth or one way for making cars in rF2, however I know that if you have car that looks crap or performs totally out of this planet, you will get flamed by 12 year olds, if 70's passenger car pulls 1.5G at corners and feels nice very few will point that issue out if it is just pretty.

It is easy to make car feel nice, but to make it perform correctly and feel nice, there lies challenge, but once you get hang of that stuff it becomes quite fun and there is always something new to discover, also different ways of doing things etc.


From modder's point of view this discussion that surrounds mostly tires is bit funny actually, when learning more of how cars are made in rF2, one learns that there are so many other possibilities too, it was same in rF1 too, surely tires are important, but once I made changes to ISI ZR car and did not touch tires, it was really fun car to drift around corners. Inertias and suspension stiffness, dampers, engine, all are also possibilities that cause unwanted behaviour, but discussions always surround the tires.
Difficult with adjusting things to feel right is that when you make one change it affects other things too so one need to learn how settings relate to specific behaviour, it is so easy to mask true issue with changing something else that it tends to happen quite a bit, then one ends up with frustrating issues that are hard to fix.

Going with real data is bit easier route and if enough care is taken, it does make car to feel good too, if car just has such front suspension that it 'tells' lot to steering, not all cars are such.

 

again, dont know how you ended up with this conclusion, that F1 drivers said that

The nature of removing grip by putting grooves in the car was jjust that...........to reduce grip. It made the cars nervous, less controllable, less predictable, more difficult to drive on the edge - its one of the reasons why schumacher excelled.
im sure if i googled i could find some f1 sources saying that same information, but i cant be bothered.


When the slicks came back...that OBVIOUSLY increased the contact patch with the road........why on earth would that make it more difficult to control the car?

I remember villeunueve was at Monaco in 2009, saying that he wanted to come back to F1, because the cars looked more fun to drive and you could slide them easier, with more confidence, Because of the nature of slick tyres versus groove.

so i mean.............what are you on about. i just dont understand how some people come to their opinions.

i'll forgive you a little bit because it says youre french and english isn't your first language, so i guess its more difficult to make your point clearly (That is not a diss by the way.... i wish i could speak another language)

actually i dont really understand the point of your post either. sorry if i misunderstood.
also...........pretty sure all the cars in RF2 currently, apart from the 1960's F1 cars...are running slicks.

If you are saying this: 'the tire model is difficult to drive because of non-slick tyres'....then i dont know what youre on about.

 

There are no single slicks tire, there are for example radial slicks and bias slicks, even today, later ones are better for guys with less experience and first ones are faster, that is what I have learned when studying tires for racing.

Structure of tire makes quite bit of that easy/hard thing.

 

That's cool but how can you say that your tyres are mathematically perfect, for example?

Let's say that you made it perfect from rF2 point of view (material properties, positions, coefficients etc) ... you have still to trust on rF2 engine, maybe it will make a good tyre, maybe no, what if it's perfect on the paper but the tyre gives different lateral forces, load sensitivities, and so?

 

There is no 'perfect', if you could create mathematically perfect tire for rF2, it would be mathematically perfect, despite how faulty is code that makes that perfect tire do something.

FR3.5 tire was from my memory almost exactly same weight when created in rF2 than what real tire is, also if I'm not mistaken car does perform very close to real car in terms of lateral force.
Surely not perfect, but is it close at enough?

What I have seen is that when using real data from paper, car seem to perform very closely to specifications, for me this tells that there are no major faults in code. There are always room for improvement of course and we have been told there will be improvements so I look forward for those, but so far I have not seen any data which would clearly show something to be wrong.

 

ughhhhhhhhh, yes it is lol