rFactor 2 and graphics engine (not unreal compared to other MG games), why?

This might be a good time to start creating rFactor 3.

I explain my reasoning :

rFactor 3 would be largely an improved rFactor 2 in many ways (improved rF2) + some major changes developed that would move it to rFactor 3 (new graphics engine + new sounds engine + other major changes + possible choice to abandon modding to devote to a clean/readable/homogeneous/uniform and qualitative game in all areas but diverse in term of content).

The reasoning would be to continue for 18 months or 2 years to develop as much as possible rFactor 2 (that is to say also to develop rFactor 3) and behind the scenes to develop the major changes :

At some point, we would switch to rFactor 3 which would in fact be a greatly improved and more modern rFactor 2.

For example, rFactor 3 could be sold for 60 euros, and only 30 euros for current rFactor 2 users.

Backward compatibility with OFFICIAL rFactor 2 DLCs ONLY could be considered.

This is my idea.

But I am not a decision maker and I do not know all the implications........

 

You are being "back seat dev" at it's final form

My idea of improved rF2, would be improved rF2.

This could be good time to start spending more development power on rF2. However, everybody understands that S397 will spend loads of time, consulting, helping and simply doing stuff for Motorsport Games.

And what will come from Motorsport Games will be basically rF3 in many shapes and forms, you will have rF2 physics + Unreal Engine. Why do you want to sink rF2 ? If you'll basically have all those other games ?

 

If only licensing worked that way.

 

Indeed, I imagined a possible scenario that would probably be to the benefit of us rF2 users and fans, with a view to improving rF2 consistently leading to rF3 in the next few years, which would make sense (not a simple "marketing" rF3).

It's not really an rF2 fan to imagine all of this, it's up to MG and S397 staff to think about it all. Right.

Yes you are right, I did not think of that when I wrote my message. But we can always dream !

 

Have you missed the past 3 (4? 5?) years of graphics improvement? That´s basically all they´ve been doing (also, check the release candidate)

I agree, optimization is urgent; night and rain really suck performance wise and the difference in the visual quality of content is kinda jarring at times. But if there´s one area where this game has had solid, steady, constant improvements its definately graphics.

So I dont think they will and hope they dont ever ruin it by switching over to the UE.

----
Also, am I the only one who finds it really weird that people keep mentioning rf3? I dont think s397 is in a position to ask people to buy a game and a bunch of content from them all over again...

 

@Mitch9

Obviously you misread my message it is more nuanced.

I also did not say (for the second time) that I had a preference for UE4. Could you read the messages more carefully.


Regarding rF3, I have NEVER mentioned it on a forum in recent years.

Indeed I was in favor of a strongly improved rF2.

But if you follow the logic of my post a little further above, in reality it is not antagonistic.

And in terms of pure marketing (which I'm not interested in but probably of great importance), if the simracers knew that an rF3 was in the works, that would be a greatly improved rF2 and much more successful, with some really new elements in the game (eg new engine sound and graphics engine [I have no opinions on it, see my previous posts please], new AI,...), I think the vast majority of simracers would be delighted.

Only fanboys would see "the world that falls on their heads".

Sometimes developers have to make bold and courageous decisions...... and just listen to the simracers not only "VIP/fanboys/discord users".



EDIT :

I add that I have a life next to the forum and that it is hard for me to express myself in English, so I will stop there for this thread, because I gave my ideas and my arguments, I do not have nothing more to say.

The debate is on, and I think it is essential.

I would follow the debate from afar.

 

New sound engine? Better gameplay aspects included like KERS? Hell, that's what many of us playing rF1 thought rF2 was going to be.

Anyway, I thought the graphics engine option, and to a lesser extent the decision to not do rF3 instead, were discussed after S397 took over. The devs take options based on what they think will work best for them, with the knowledge actually having the game code (and dev experience) gives them. I don't think users should feel they can judge these things without a lot of research and still more than a couple of assumptions.

 

I didn't talk about the most important things like the physics engine to improve because it is part of the things that concern rF2 as much as an rF3, they are not rF3 specific things. The sound and graphics engine and AI could be. Maybe I express myself too badly in English to be understood, but don't quote bits of sentences from more complex paragraphs or arguments, thank you.

It's not about JUDGING as you say, just discussing. This is what users like you do morning, noon, and night, and that's normal. It's always better than talking about pizza on discord, right ?

 

It's not 'judge' in that sense. I know English isn't your first language.

 

you too mate

I never said you had a preference for UE4, I think the main question your thread is a valid one. On the post I was quoting you said if s397 decided to keep gmotor, they should work on improving it - which is exactly what they´ve been doing with it.

Regarding RF3, in this case the number is all about marketing and licensing and has nothing to do with the actual features of the game. If it was, adding the new ui & competition system would have been enough to make a new version of the game and call it RF3 (or RFconcurrentie )

 

When rF2 was created, it was not backwards compatible with rF1 content. Sure those tracks and cars could be converted, but the average user was at the mercy of modders particular interests.
With the advent of DLC, is it moral(or just good business) to create an entirely new sandbox that does not allow the use of previously paid content? Just a thought that popped into my noggin' when reading about the possibility of a new rF version someday.

 

The S397 and Motorsports Games strategy is beginning to become clearer for me as we get new announcements and their first collaboration comes closer to fruition.

There is no need for an rF3, using UE as the graphics engine. They already have those games; we'll see the first one as NASCAR 21, then BTCC, then LeMans, then IndyCar. Those will have the rF2 physics + UE graphics. There's some minimal amount of unlicensed championships/series they can go get (so we'll retain some of the cars like GT3, licensed from the manufacturers). But frankly, I doubt there is enough there to get a complete game and certainly not if its PC-only.

So where will rF2 continue for the next few years? The answer is esports. The esports capabilities of the new games won't be there for the first few years. So to have their esports events and championships, they need an infrastructure to do that with. It'll still need some development to keep the graphics looking nice for the broadcasts/streams, but that's about it. This also now explains why there is almost no move to have a "regular joe" competition system, like iRacing have; its because they are only focused on getting the "pro simracer" esports series established, and "pro realracers" having an environment to race in for those "officially licensed" series. Once the new generation of games has been thoroughly built out, and drained all the existing rF2 users, then they'll have the new "average joe" competition system built for them, across consoles and PCs. But it won't be based on the rF2 one.

Here's the proof:

Motorsport Games Inc. 2021 Current Report 8-K (sec.report)

 

Thanks for that form man. You just made my evening by solidfying indycar stuff related to rf2.

 

i fully agree.

 

yes rf2 is better in VR than acc.

 

I believe when a rf3 comes it will be all paid for content similar to iracing along with freebies. Subscription not sure.
But i don't care right now as there is no RF3 so i enjoy what rf2 has to offer.

 

i also prefer rf2 in vr over acc. ue runs a permanent marketing buzz machine, indirectly degrading specialised engines.

 

Interesting that nobody mentions the PC2/AMS2 Madness engine. In terms of graphics it is really the best in terms of quality/performance. Maybe the colours could look better, but everything else is great. If only the ffb/handling could get better, but maybe Reiza can pull it off.

 

No that's not sure at all.

Because this is the way you would react YOU and I would react.

But it is possible and likely that the majority of simracers would react differently.

Probably the majority of simracers would be more attracted by a better user experience, better graphics, more consistent content, a better sound engine, a quality AI, a really good competition system etc...

Realism is surprisingly not a high priority for the majority of simracers, EXCEPT when it comes to pointing out shortcomings in this area and bashing rF2.

Okay after that, I haven't surveyed all the simracers... Lol.

 

everywhere