Just wanted a few thoughts on the consensus on mods

Can you give some examples from your experience of good mods vs just chassis?
Just curious as to what you have tried since I see you created a profile about a week ago.

From my experience there are some superb vehicles produced by modders. Some of the best available in fact.

Edit: Not to sound like a dick but Just to head off the often repeated line " none of us have driven a real one on track etc", I have driven front, rear and mid engined cars and front, rear and 4 wheel drive from 200 to 400 bhp on circuits in timed motorsports events. Worked for Porsche and Ferrari for 6 1/2 years, owned an old 911 and driven the exotics hard on the road.
Edit #2; Yep it makes me sound like a dick but oh well!

 

Good example of a mod that will end up just as good as an official car
https://forum.studio-397.com/index.php?threads/metalmoro-mr1.57913/page-2#post-922689
He found someone that owns the real car and the guys is helping him with data.
The GP3 mod is also top notch, developed with an engineer that works in the series.
Both these cars could be easily sold in the store if licensed

 

I have already been quite vocal in a few threads about being provided more complete documentation on tyres and shader information for the new features that have been introduced since S397 took over. S397 know that they need to provide modders wtih that information and more for us to make better quality mods that more closely match their content. I think the minimal posting here on the forums in the modding section doesn't paint a great picture for modding, yes you can jump on discord and ask questions but that doesn't help build a knowledge base for the community like the forum does.

I agree that the current server system works isn't new user friendly, or long term user friendly either. Hopefully the new UI system that is being developed will improve things for everyone.

I personally did a huge amount of research before making our rF1 mod and we spend months testing with different levels of drivers to create the best mod we could to suit our and the interested community needs. Was it an exact re-creation of the real cars, no. It was tested by several drivers from the real category and received good feedback as to capturing the character of the car with allowances to making it suitable for league racing. It was also used on a major TV show for motorsport where various drivers would do a 1 lap sprint race. It isn't the best looking or sounding, but we have had the majority of feedback be positive.

I have been working on the rF2 version for quite some time and have a working version which we are not happy with and have hit a wall, mainly with either understanding the physics within the tyres or ability to tune them to get the feel we are looking for. I won't allow our mod to be released until I am happy with how it drives and at looks somewhat decent and wish more modders would follow that thinking.

 

oh that sounds like the beasts used on RPM , looking forward to it !!!

 

I obviously do not have your technical skills to talk about this subject with the same approach as you.

But I fully agree with you.
This is my reasoning :

- I have little experience in simracing (12 years of rfactor but not intensive). By cons I have experience in driving in real life really consequente for my 32 years.

When I ride with cars ISI / S397, I really have a global impression of deep realism (Physics and FFB, the rest I do not judge it even because it is for me secondary, even if I wear an interest in the sound inside).

Actually, more a car ISI / S397 is recent or has the latest technogies of physics updated, it seem immediately better.
Some old are really impressive despite everything (stockcars, formulas renault etc.).
These last 3 days I retest on at least 21km (1 round of nords) about 38 ~ 42 official cars : even the oldest and not updated cars have real trump in terms of realism.
I have not success to find such incredible quality in the best (realistically) mods I had listed in 2016, even the apex modding mod whose work is really impressive (just an example).

- S397 seems to have the idea to use regularly (all the time ??) of real car data for these DLC.
I hope not to be wrong, because nobody has noted but if it is the case it is one of the best news for the simulation RF2.
On will return in 2018, It is as long as the standard quality the best of the market to do a good step forward :

This will be done by the (too slow) developments in the physics (tires etc.) but also and especially by real accurate data : do not you want the quality standard 2018 includes "obligatory" (in quotation marks) to use real data to build the physics of cars ?
It's good to have a superb 3D modeling especially of the cockpit for the VR ....... we do not use fictitious data for that, we do not make the car "cars" of Walt Disney .... .. can we also use real data in the future, not to build cars with Fiction physics ?? For me it is important.

- Another aspect:
The physics technologies of ISI and S397 have a huge role in the quality of physics (and FFB) cars.
Just compare the GT3 camaro with the S397 GT3 with the latest tires ....

The question is totally simple :
---> Do the most popular mods on RF2 use the latest technologies? The latest tires?
Despite the immense and impressive skill of modders, do they have the ability to make a good tire, realistic, with real data ??
With the lack of help / manuals / information / communications / transfer of skill that modders suffer from (totally unacceptable to me).



Ultimately for me, the ideal would be that RF2 gets closer (closer) to RFPRO's technical specifications for the following things :

* Realroads and all the algorithms on which depends the realism of the environment (aquaplanning, temperatures, wind etc.)
* Physics (and FFB)
*True and precise car data
* Latest physics technologies applied to ALL S397 cars
* Laser tracks scanned with the greatest possible precision depending on resources.

That's what I want for RF2 :

---> A "near" RFpro public, even if prices increase.

On the other hand the graphical improvement (at the expense of a catastrophic performance) + a new UI + the visual damage + the VISUAL effects of rain .............

I do not say no (just not a priority for me), but for me it would have been 100 times more preferable to lead the developments on top of what I mentioned above.
But regarding this, everyone has these preferences, pure realism VS immersion / ergonomics : and with all the nuances between the two.

 

You know you can buy rfpro?

 

I have to tell you that even Codemasters claims to use realistic data in their F1 series. I feel that you seem to believe that all official content uses ultra realistic data. It is not the case. However it is clear that you just want to read about it. Get your own opinion!!!!!!

 

Sarah W. from rfpro sales :

"Thank you for your email, unfortunately we do not supply rFpro for private use - only for commercial installations".

I suspected the answer of course but hey that does not try anything...

I would have been very surprised that the license and especially some content especially "car" can be sold or rented to an individual.

I asked them for a quote by telling them almost what I wanted (the simulator with all the features of realism and the support of my mainstream T500RS + ONLY the nordschleife laser scanned (whole nurburgring if possible) + some car content if possible varied from 3-12 cars depending on the price or the possibilities.

I expected at 99% of the answer but I wanted to try. It only took me five minutes so...

 

Nords is eventually going to file a restraining order against you. You are finding any way possible to take a peek at it through even the smallest cracks. Hopefully you do not live near it as I'm sure you would be in the trees at night singing sweet loves songs to various parts of it. You probably have naughty nordschleife photos on your phone...finish line all uncovered and wet. I'm kidding. Sort of. I'm thinking of who I have to pay and how much to make sure you and just you never get a laser scanned nords anywhere. Again im kidding. I wish you and your nords fetish the best.

 

I prefer this hot and humid track.
Is that what you want to hear?

 

The rfpro laserscan Nords has an accuracy of 1cm, it's impossible to run this on our PC
That accuracy helps professional drivers, we might not be able to tell the difference from 10cm accuracy

 

"naughty nordschleife photos"
Made me chuckle. I have a mild Nords fetish which is currently getting sated by Project Cars 2 due to the rather marvellous day/night cycle. Track and physics/ffb could be better though. And no spotlights into the sky. I love those spotlights on that rF2 conversion.

 

You need to separate mods for tracks and for cars.

For tracks, there is a need for a 3D mesh, and that needs to account for proper distances and elevation/camber/crown, if reproducing a real track. That is very hard to do without laser scanning or some other method for obtaining the geometry, even the most basic layouts from matching to Google Earth and photographs. Then there are the textures, for the road surface, trackside (grass, gravel), further distance (trees, etc.) and buildings. One of the big discrepancies is the quality of the textures for both color and detail. I'd say tracks like the VLM ones are probably as good as the ISI/S397 ones, but most conversions are simply terrible. Finally we have the AI paths, that ensure the cars take proper lines and can pit. There's a lot of variability in these as well on mods. But there is no real reason why modders should not be able to get pretty close with tracks; its just time-consuming and you need a good stock of textures to work with. There's just a very limited number of people who seem interested in building tracks. I did however like the 3PA approach with these.

For cars, there are again several factors. First is the 3D models (LODs), along with the graphics overlaid on that model. I'd say by-and-large, the modders have done an increasingly good job with these and have high-poly. Early ISI cars tried to keep the poly count down, and often looked like paper, but the latest from S397 have much higher fidelity and look solid, and generate decent shadows, highlights and reflections. You've got sound samples also - most don't have access to real ones or good sources, so the quality here is questionable. But then we have the physics, and its here the modders work breaks down. I think most understand how to build basic suspensions and can even allow for chassis twist etc. (though many don't). It ought to be possible to guess weights, springs/dampers and suspension/steering layouts even without access to 'real' car data or telemetry. Aero data isn't available. The engine performance is a black hole for most as well, but the beauty of the older versions meant some simple torque curves could produce interesting and fun if not necessarily real-world-accurate results. But the big unknown are tires. Without real tire data, its mainly a guess and all the moreso since the move to a physical model of the tire with rF2. Most mod teams won't have access to real telemetry data and even if they did, the likelihood of them matching the output of the model to that telemetry is about nil. Even iRacing can't get there, and they get way more data than most sim makers never mind modders. They also had access to tire machines to test theories. So once again its rather subjective, like engines, but this is so much more crucial. Therefore I would think it is essential that S397 produce several 'reference' tires from which modders can work, tweaking inputs and viewing resulting outputs. But it still takes a leap of faith to believe that they really know what the outputs are/should be. Frankly, its a miracle the modders are able to produce any cars with any level of physics accuracy given the data/knowledge they have. But this is why there are so few good ones other than graphically. But everyone wants their own 'favorite' car.

In summary: I probably would not be driving rF2 at all were it not for mod tracks; and I think modders can create good ones so long as they have decent textures. For cars, there are going to be incredibly few that can get close, so I'd rather have them built by S397 based on decent data, and also properly licensed. I still drive the odd car mod (Cart98, IndyCar 95/96) where its unlikely S397 can get data/build one, but I'd rather drive cars with better data.

 

There's more out there than you realize...

If you're looking for full aero maps, no, probably not going to find it. However, I've found front/rear lift and drag for many cars. It can be as simple as visiting www.mulsannescorners.com or reading a few books.

 

@burgesjl There are 2 different sets of tires that ISI/S397 have provided over the last 4 years, the problem is that there have been several tire updates/changes that are not documented as well as new entries that aren't covered in any documentation. This leads to the problem of not knowing how some of the data interacts with other data as well as knowing how the changed/updated changes the data required. Even with the tires provided, it is extremely hard to adapt them to suit a purpose they are not designed for especially without knowing exactly what it was designed for. The tire blog they did a while ago provided some information but there have been at least 2 or 3 changes to the model noted in patch notes since even then which was 12 months ago. Trying to get information about them has been like pulling teeth from someone without any, I have been trying for at least 2 years.

 

S397 is ahead of rF2 for a year and have been updating stuff, let's be honest... make no sense to release documentation now when updates aren't finished. And if they have to make them from 0 (because ISI didn't make it) then it's even worse...

 

I haven't done any "modding" for rF2, other than a read of some of the documentation provided by ISI. I used to run in leagues for rF1 where we would often take the work of a mod group, and then tweak it. We used CART, Champ Car and IRL mods. This would include the cars by folks like iDT (Doug raced with us), Michael Peters for IRL cars, and zero-g (he also raced with us) for many of the Champ Car tracks like Denver, Monterey etc. Having direct access to the actual mod makers meant we could often get things fixed by them, but often we had to resort to our own changes for things like mirrors, tire behavior/torque curves, track AI (pit stalls, fixing crossing start-finish etc.). I would not deign to call myself a modder, I fiddled with a few things, the ones who do that amaze me with their skills and dedication. So in the days of rF1, virtually everything I raced relied on the work of modders. But now, when you look at the quality we desire and the amount of time/effort it takes to get to that level of quality, I'm not sure one or two individuals can do it justice; you need a much bigger team. Because things were much simpler, by asking a few questions I was able to figure out a number of things. But now, you'd need much more comprehensive documentation and samples. I used to also write code. In those days, you had the basic Pascal/C library and used that, plus bought a couple of books. Now, there are so many classes and such you need to know to even start, and much more complex structures than we used to need. GitHub didn't exist. You kind of need that sort of thing for making mods, and I don't think it exists.

 

I don't think the OP intended this to be a thread about if modded cars/tracks are up to scratch quality wise. I read it as more of an issue about creating a divide in the user base between those who are right into all aspects of the sim (mods etc), and those who are just casually stumbling across rf2, and that this divide is potentially preventing rf2 from gaining the popularity it deserves. I consider myself somewhere in the middle, and even though I have some experience and many hours of play, I still find it too much of a hassle to be up to date with all the latest mods and be able to easily join a server and race. Either way I think criticism of the way things are now in regards to online play should probably be put on hold until the new UI etc is released.

 

This is bang on the money. Like @Carr I've been asking for about 2 years for a 'generic' CPM tyre library.

My wishlist:
14", 15", 16" 17", 18" Performance road tyres - Toyo Proxes, Conti Sport Contact, Goodyear F1 Assymetric etc
14", 15", 16" 17", 18" Track day tyres - Toyo R888, Yokohama A048R etc
14", 15", 16" 17", 18" Racing slicks - Toyo RS1, Yokohama A005 etc

Barring the NSX tyres and the Corvette tyres, there is very little out there that has the latest CPM physics for road or track day types. If I had an example of just one of each of the categories above I could release a few cars within a couple of weeks. As it stands I'm stuck with either no suitable tyre for a car, or a bodged NSX or Corvette one.

Please @Marcel Offermans @Christopher Elliott @Michael Borda help us out!

 

Interestingly, about every 3 months, some genius on the iRacing forums comes up with the brilliant idea that, they would get more splits in official sessions for the more popular cars if iRacing were to eliminate the official series with the least popular cars, to put them out to grass; the thinking that the users will suddenly fall in line and race what they are told to race. This is for series like the Lotus 49, which gets an average of 30 people per week, or the Lotus 79, which gets 80; or even the IndyCar which gets 120. This isn't how it works; people won't suddenly go race something just because they've been denied an opportunity to race something they do want to race. Rather, they stop racing at all. Now, there is nothing stopping S397 putting up 'arrive and drive' hosted sessions for say the GT3 Pack, FE or (when we get them) the Tatuus open wheelers, but this doesn't mean to say everyone will suddenly stop racing all the mods they currently race, even if there are only one or two leagues doing so. That is the benefit of mods; you can make anything you desire with them, and hopefully, will find some like-minded people to race with. But there is always a danger of over-fragmentation - e.g. maybe 100 people want to race IndyCars, but they all want different tracks and different race lengths etc. so you end up with 20 leagues of 5 people (not viable) rather than 5 leagues of 20 people (viable). There is always some element of compromise.

The beauty of iRacing is, you pretty much know if you want to race the Skippy, MX5, Porsche Cup or GT3 cars you'll have a race within an hour. But you have to work harder if the series is less popular. About a year and a half ago, we changed the IndyCar schedule to end up with about 12 timeslots per week at those times we knew people had chosen to race. The result? Just about every timeslot split (matchmaking with iRating works better), and we averaged about 280 people each week. Management elected to change it back to every 2 hours. Now they average 120 per week and are lucky to get one timeslot to split, and management refuse to see the error of their ways. Even when tried and tested with provable positive results, there are still some people who cling to a belief or persuade to create something worse than what you have (in this case, a few people complained they couldn't make any of the 12 timeslots). iRacing have tried to come up with a notion of 'favored series' each quarter, but there's nothing behind it other than saying it (and usually it is attached to new content).

You have to understand what your goal/objective is, and then structure things to help achieve it. In the past, diversity was a goal in itself and modding was the entire path forward. Now, it isn't necessarily and I think we'll see more licensed/official S397 content and hence hosted racing, and that will help out anyone just getting into rF2 or returning from a long absence.