Don't need Michelin to tell you how to fix tyres wearing too fast. Just a change in thermal deg curve will sort that. Anyone with a basic modding understanding for rF2 can solve that - if that now is the issue of course. I never understood this argument. Because X game isn't good in Y area it's ok to let your own standard and ambitions slip? Always look within your own environment and look for the best possibility (within reason) that the current ability available can produce. And don't forget the details! IndyCar title may be coming, and then WEC title. If this would be the scenario, rF2 will lose development for another 4-6 years. At that time I think even the most patient man will have lost his hope for the game to reach its potential.
Didn't need them to tell the obvious, but they did tell it. Must point out that later on S397 produced three cars with much improved tires logic, but it stopped there. I would argue that issues about those tires are more likely related to abrasion wear curve. One interesting thing about abrasive wear is that it has an impact on sliding friction, if rubber doesn't stay on tire then it does not develop traction. So once tweaked, the grip composition of tire has to be readjusted in case to keep net friction correct. It also transfers a lot into handling feel. But it also could be other way around - the issue could be that friction composition is just too biased on sliding, so sliding has to be used too much to achieve quickest performance at the race track. Its probably exactly what will happen if NASCAR game will have any success. Hard to predict how it will really be, but if whole studio will be redlining on new projects, then definitely rF2 will be left with tiniest possible updates if any for years to come. Even though about rF3 is just sign of lacking awareness about the situation. But if rF2 stagnates for 4-6 years and goes to coma, then I guess rF3 could be expected, and I think it just wouldn't be what naive people expect.
Picking up on scattered sentences loses the big picture of what was meant on my message. I did not mean to say - as it becomes clear from the rest of the post - that rF2 should stay put. But the first order of the day is making it accessible to play - ie. booting all the time, with people joining servers all the time. This is paramount to INCREASE the player base and KEEP it. Only after this: "Then you have a laundry list of tweaks, some larger than others (some very important to rebuild rF2's reputation as a sim), but ALL of them requiring resources." Personally I have little doubt that the base we have with rF2 can be improved without needing a "complete rebuild".
IMHO RF3 is yrs away it should be done like AC stop all updates for RF2, untangled the code and start fresh with the knowledge to go forward for the next decade.
again, how come Sector3 and Reiza can release constant - and often substantial - updates for their sims while being equally small, if not smaller, teams?
Yeah like he told a friend of mine on discord at the end of 2020 their would be a VR update in 1st quarter of 2021 never happened. Also if they could bugs fixes ect.. would be rolled out more frequently and ppl would not be whining & this is the biggest complaint about RF2. IMHO more BS and that's because so much said but not followed through with and no explanation why which = bad communication loss of trust.
I see lots of people wishing for an "rF3" because somehow they think the rF2 code is old and crappy. So let's analyze what would likely be changed if they did it. When we look at the new Motorsport Games titles, they will all be based on "new" code which is a combination of a reworked gMotor core for the physics (likely reduced down) combined with UE4 for graphics, plus lots of additional code to provide a UI which doesn't seem to follow the same model as rF2 (namely HTML/JS over the top) and that has a different multiplayer back end. We already know the "new" rF2 UI has had lots of problems, and the underlying engine had to be rewritten to communicate with the new UI via "messaging" because the underlying engine wasn't thread-safe. That has comprised a lot of the work that got done by the programming team, and this doesn't mean it was spaghetti code, it just meant that the UI and engine were no longer to be intertwined in the same way. I'd be really interested to know if the Ignition game uses the rF2 physical tire model or the rF1 empirical model (which is also used by the AI). That will tell us just how likely this new engine for the MSGS games could be utilized in any updated rF3. The primary change would appear to be in the graphics engine as UE4, but this will mean either completely updating all the content or somehow writing an in-line converter for current content; and in doing so you lose all current mods. We've already seen issues with them updating the graphics engine for PBL, lighting and shaders affecting content, and this will just make it all the larger scale. This would be needed to have cross-game compatibility between rF3 and the other MSGS titles. This is especially important for tracks, which rF2 is severely lacking in. Further, does this address the community complaints over the fact that devs are already too focused on graphics and not enough on physics improvements? It just makes this worse. No, coming up with an rF3 which is more closely aligned with the other MSGS titles is a major, long term proposition. Not saying its not necessary or desirable, but if it took them 4 years to do DX11 version of the existing graphics and UI, imagine how much time and resources it will take to do it all again with different tools. Frankly the future is bleak for rF2. They need significantly more resources than MSGS can probably afford to generate. It's got to have new content even if its to be used just for esports events; in the next 2 years we are going to see new LMH/LMDh cars for WEC, and if they want an IndyCar esports system then they'll need a car and tracks for that. Plus the Gen3 FormulaE car. We need to see some cross-licensing from MSGS or commitment for new car content for rF2 until I'll feel confident in it's future. Never mind creating an rF3.
The LMH/LMDh powertrains for the WEC game will have to be developed by S397. I am pretty sure that they will first come to rF2. As I am also pretty sure that the Virtual 24H Lemans will continue to be held on rF2 as the WEC game - surely - will be a simcade, devised to be attractive to the masses, with cinematic transitions and "filler". Also, I have not yet seen any game featuring cars within a UE environment behaving and moving naturally and properly interacting with the scenario. ACC in slow motion looks horrible. And at standard speed, more often that not, cars are floating and gliding over the landscape, within a detachment between how the car moves and the how much of the track (and what in the track) it has gone over.
I paid $36 for rf2 then bought a few tracks and cars. My teenagers have taught me how to respond. I should firmly project how entitled I am and list all my demands to the developer
Interesting point. I've never played around with the abrasion curve since according to the TGM Gen sheet all tyres run with roughly the same shape. I keep it more basic and just pay attention to the wear vs grip values, where abrasion grip barely loses anything. The thermal grip however has these huge steps in initial wear, which to me would explain that huge grip loss you get in most cars after 2-3 laps. Could also explain some of the balance issues mid-race if ex. rear tyres reach a thermal step before the front tyres. I've noticed that the abrasion/rubber also doesn't seem to fully behave as I think they do IRL. With less rubber, you should generate less heat into the tyres, but in rF2 it usually results in the opposite. Yeah, I must've skimmed through your text way too fast. Missed your full point there. However, I'd say that the point I made still applies to many, at least when you skim through the rF2 Discord. Many start to deflect when issues of the game is brought up, looking for other titles to justify the game's shortcomings.
Yes, I know, we should shoot for the best possible rF2 and take no solace on other title's shortcomings. However, a bit of perspective is needed from time to time. Lack of progress on rF2 on issue which has been signaled for long can generate frustration, but people also seem to lose sight of how good rF2 (still) is and wish for something completely new, when in fact incremental progress on something that is a solid basis is by far more sensible and a better allocation of resources. Now, looking at the other more specialized point of your message, not addressed to me, from my non-specialized point of view, I would like to chime on, when you say that "with less rubber, you should generate less heat into the tyres, but in rF2 it usually results in the opposite." could it be that having less rubber means having less mass to which heat/energy can dissipate? If you scrub 1 cubic cm of metal against an abrasive surface, won't it get hotter faster than 2 cubic cm of metal? (this, keeping the same amount of surface in contact with the abrasive one)
I would agree with your post if instead overusing the word sure/surely you'd written hopefully. The truth is MSG is here for the money. I'm not saying this as a negative, this is true for every company. They probably bought S397 for the technology they want to base their future sims (for which they bought licenses). I would even risk a statement that rFactor2 as a product might not really be much interest for them outside of the technology it brings. The only sure thing here is that Nascar release was an unexpected bucket of freezing cold water on their hot heads. From the marketing point of view it makes completely no sense to release a WEC game with beautiful graphics and still run Virtual Le Mans on the old product. Doesn't really matter if the new one will be simcade or not. Such an even is a game seller. It makes no sense to allow your older product to cannibalize on the new one (which you make to sell it and to make money out of it). Whether they succeed in such a plan or not is completely another matter (whether the new game will even be able to handle such an event). But I wouldn't be so *sure* about their plans.
Fair game. I tend to be an optimist and to try to find a logic on how things will progress going forward. I am firmly convinced that the WEC game will end up being a simcade and that, consequently, that wouldn't attract real world drivers if selected for the Virtual24H, which would empty the event of any attractiveness for the ACO.
