Well, in this case you might be right, but assuming that just because rFactor2 has something LMU will also have it is a stretch. Will LMU have official modding support?
Allowing mods is a unique instance, already baked in features like your Shaker support 'probably' won't be removed. Nor will stuff like PBR/IBL shaders and most of the current rF2 code. The open sandbox of rF2 obviously will not survive but driving features certainly will.
I don't know if LMU will support plugins, and if it does if plugins written for rF2 will be compatible. You would have to ask MSG/S397 but so far very little technical details have been shared. Similarly we don't know if LMU will ship with a dedicated server to host your own races. Maybe Race Control and the new rented servers will be the only way. My guess is that DLC will be done differently as well, hiding or removing the existing package system. The UI might stay mostly the same, and I am curious if the different JSON files we now use to configure details that not even the UI features will still be supported. All in all a lot of questions remain!
Hello Marcel, I don't know that it will be more of a game than a simulator, but to know... do you think it will be physics rfactor or will it be more of a codemaster type commercial game? what do you think?
I have the impression that it will not be accessible and will be blocked I hope I'm wrong, we'll see.
I took Havner's question rhetorically; ie do we just say "If rF2, then LMU"? Does that mean modding? Unlikely, so no. It makes sense to have a locked down game and release updates later, yes, paid. It makes sense financially. There's no point having 2xrF2 with modding support. That's just splitting the userbase. Money and users aren't exactly abundant.
We know it's built on an evolved version of the rF2 codebase, so all of the simulation code is there. Going from a more "realistic" physics model to a more "arcade" one is actually not trivial, depending on how far you want to go. Just to name some examples from past games, when we were doing The Grand Tour Game, the goal was to transform the physics into something "as easy to pick up and play as Mario Kart". This meant, besides changing tracks to widen roads, make turns easier to negotiate, etc, introducing a lot more driving aids. There were "rubber banding" effects that would keep the on-track battles close (the name of the effect coming from a virtual bungee cord that was tied between cars so the car in front would slow down and the car behind would speed up). There were also tweaks to things like grip and downforce so the car would not spin. We even went so far as to remove all of the rotation from collisions so cars would slow down but not spin out of control and end up reversed on the track. Then we had the "hand of god" element that would keep a car on the road over jumps, again to not make it loose control. All of these examples are extra work to create, need a lot of finetuning and are certainly tricky to pull off without being too noticable. So I don't think such things will happen. So what will? I'm just guessing here obviously. One thing to make the game more accessible is to add really good controller support. That also means adding some forms of driving aids as a controller is not exactly "optimal" for keeping a car on the road. Most sticks are not super accurate, or linear, or they need deadzones to overcome problems with them not centering exactly. I'm sure there is a lot of focus on that as there are way more gamers without a wheel than there are gamers with one and you really want that 99% of the target audience to also enjoy the game and be competitive. Then there's another angle on "game" vs "simulation" and that is one about adding gameplay elements. As you know, rF2 focuses heavily on just being a racing simulation and basically all you can do is race (yes, there are practice, qualy and race sessions but that's it). Now games typically add a lot of elements that will keep the player interested. There are single player campaigns, challenges and multiplayer will have stats to improve so you need to start "grinding" to get to certain levels. There is nothing wrong with these, but it's probably going to be a difference between rF2 and LMU. Finally, as discussed here already, LMU will probably be made more accessible. That requires you to get rid of a lot of the options and deep customizability that rF2 has right now. No modding, simpler graphics, sound and controller configuration, etc. All to make the game less overwhelming and with less opportunities to mess something up if you're not confident about what you're doing. And remember, if LMU does well, it will need to be ported to consoles, so any changes you do now, should also work there. The good news is that the physics engine has been ported to consoles a few times already (albeit by developers who are no longer at S397 today). The rest will certainly be a big job, but it's not uncommon to outsource such projects to development studios that are specialized in such things. That just means you need to have a budget to do so. The strategy that Kunos for example uses here is to first develop a game on PC until, code wise, it's feature complete and most bugs are fixed. At that point the PC development switches to a period of only releasing DLCs and (probably) an external studio starts working on those console ports (with some support from the in-house development team, who, at that point, are probably getting ready to start working on the next game). I guess we will all have to be patient until the release and subsequent start of the new WEC season (starting the 24th)!
I still think my favorite is when rF2 got the updated Lime Rock and iRacers attacked it for not having the bumps iRacing had even though the version on iRacing was 6 years older and Lime Rock no longer had those bumps.
The funny thing is that Lime Rock in iRacing was of very bad quality for a very long time with rectangular corner shapes and people still had to pay to get access to content like that what I allways considered as the main argument for me to stop supporting that platform. And even after the update, Lime Rock Park in iRacing still hasn't got the same quality and fidelity as the version in rF2 wich I allways enjoyed and considered a well executed sim track. And we don't have to pay a single dime in rF2 to have continuous access to it. I still would like to see AMP, Nola, Toban or Mills to get all these nice PBR updates at one point. Because it shows with the online system that people enjoy those tracks no matter if they are fantasy or laserscanned to the inch. A good track is a good track.
Reading through this topic, I suppose one question I have is whether LMU will make obsolete some of the terrific LeMans/ISMA/WEC cars for rF2. United Racing Design and other creators have made some terrific vehicles for rF2. I hope LMU is up to snuff and it takes work to learn the sim and its cars together with its tracks. Wouldnt bother me if it is as tough as GPL. Personally, I am excited that a new sim for PC is being brewed. Look forward to it.
Well tbh if you do iracing mainly for indycar then i can understand a bit frustration. That community got killed after iracing wasnt allowed to continue indycars name and main tracks. Participation on the roadcourse series is basically zero. All for a game that will never be completed by msg.
