iR has two very important advantages. Tire model and high quality tracks. This two things are more important than any stuff in other sims. I hope rf2 will do big step in this area.
Hopefully this thread has some merit in demonstrating what we we think is best is personal. A key aim of iRacing is accessibility and many people don't want to have to edit ini files or have a myriad of option sliders to select from. It can be a real turn off to some and the time spent tweaking is seen as time wasted, they want to perceive it as being right out of the box. Doesn't mean they are lazy just that is not what they expect from such a product. For some too many tweaking options can leave doubt as to whether they have it set right and having hundreds of "perfect settings" to download can become dauntng. The same applies to downloading add on and mods. Yet we can see in this thread that the lack of these options and features is an absolute show stopper for others and there can be no rights or wrongs about what we like and what it takes to feel immersed in sim racing, the ultimate aim in my view. It is much the same with race structures where an argument for the current iRacing format is that the "instant gratification" approach is to be avoided at all costs to develop a culture of safe driving. iRacing are looking to steer members into events to allow the ratings systems to group drivers together. By making events more important than a drop in LFS race where you wreck on T1 and vote to start again or simply join the next race a minute later, it aims to breed a culture of safer driving. I think it is generally successful and has bought genuine organisation to the chaos of pick up racing. So at one end you have these "serious" sanctioned races and at the other a three lap race in GT or Forza. Of course there are people looking for a quality sim racing experience in between - it doesn't have to be exclusively at either extreme and people don't have to choose to do just one type. Yes, people want to justify their decison to spend money on a sim but equally people want to justify the time they invest in a given sim. Yet that can get confused for wanting all sims to be like the current favoured one and that just isn't the case. rFactor2 will provide a very unique user experience which will be everything some people want and complementary to other products providing a different experience. We don't want them to try to be the same in all respects as we as sim racers would lose out.
Every sim have its own prons and cons, so in the end it's more a matter of expectations. nK Pro is probably the best in terms of graphics and physics. With rFactor is all about modding and customized leagues. iRacing is great for someone who wants jump in and race when he wants. I had a few attempts to somehow compare physics between iR and rF and I find it is almost impossible. First, because we have no idea what vehicle parameters sits in iRacing files and second - different FF (for rFactor that's big con, because we can't really fell how car with good physics works on a track). Of course, you can do overall comparison and say what for example Maxym pointed out - C6.R might have too soft suspension, cars in general have wrong grip levels but until Kaemmer say what's the direct cause of that, we can't be sure if that's because issues with physics engine or "just" vehicle parameters. What is more funny though, is all that "iRacing is the best" hype, probably generated by iR advertisements and underestimating rFactor capabilities (based on typical mod quality... and that's true unfortunatelly, as there are many mods with poor physics quality). Yes, iRacing has the best track quality but on the other hand, it has it's own bugs which many iRacers tend to forget about ;-) If there could be a boxed version of iRacing without need of paying montly subscription just to be able to use it, I'd definatelly buy it and spend $$$ on cars and tracks. I also wish, rF 2 will have very detailed documentation, as now with rF 1 beeing 6 years on the market, there is still some guessing with some parameters
Wow! Tony and Chris over here. Didn't see that one coming... (just joking... ) We are talking totally two different approach of sim racing. Other one is totally closed, controlled and administered by manufacturer to the finest point of every aspect of the product, which leaves user to decide if he/she likes it or not without possibility to impact content or enviroment. Other one is open platform, which can be used to create almost whatever sim racing product you like with support of the manufacturer (tools, documentation etc). We are comparing two totally different products, whose initial release date was on 2005(?) and other one was updated 25th of May. What is the point? Even after rF2 release (with probably much better physics, gfx engine than iR and so on...) this kind of comparing is pointless, because of different kind of approach. If we are talking about quality, accuracy and realism, iR is not superior over rF (and most likely rF2 also). You can archive same (or better) quality, accuracy and realism. It's just matter of resources and money. iR stuff are working at least 5 days per week, 8-10 hours per day, refining their product, collecting data, creating new content and releasing updates. Everybody praises laser scanning technology. It's just a tool. It is not synonym for quality, but it helps. Top quality sim is much more than that. Can we use laser scanning technology with rF to create content? Oh yes, and with excellent results. rF (or industry variation of rF) is widely used in automotive industry as a simulation platform. Tracks and cars are scanned (more advanced scanning technology than iR has, btw... ), imported to the sim with correct physics (provided by automotive industry). This is something which is way beyond average modder or even small commercial companies capabilities. Do you think average modder can put that kind of effort on his/her mod? Average modder has to do something else for living himself and his family. After putting kids to the bed in the evening, he might have few hours to work with his mod before going to bed himself. Maybe he wakes up couple of hours early to work his mod before waking up his kids, putting them to school/kindergarden and going to his daytime job. Is it fair to compare commercial company efforts to private persons efforts, who is working on his freetime balancing with other responsibilities? Without same kind of resources, which (for example) iR has? I think its not... Without taking a stance on which sim is the best, not even because of Tony's "provocative" title of this thread (joking...), every coin has two sides. It's up to us decide what we want to race and which platform. Bashing/waving a brand over another is pointless, because many times it's just matter of taste. It's funny to read threads over the net, which are arguing something about physics accuracy, grip or some other aspect. In most cases those people have never even sit in any kind of racecar or drive it around the track. Point is having fun with simracing, one way or another.
A+ ... agree 100% !!! Some sort of a Technical Reference. But everybody also knows that writing documentation sucks ...
The tyre model in rfactor is what modders make it we have pirreli tyres in our f1 mod we managed to get 1-2 sec difference from the hard to supersoft like real life. As for tracks rfactor can run all the tracks (even cars) from f1 2010 or nfss and you wont get any better made tracks any were even spa from iracing works on rfactor the problem with rfactor some mods and tracks are not utalizing the full potential of rfactor but you can fix this easy by downloading mods and tracks that do eg CTDP 2006
I never saw the appeal in laser scanning. 99% of the sim racers will never set tyre on those real circuits in real life in a real car. Then you have to consider time. That tracks minute details are going to change constantly. Every repave and patch makes the laser scan inaccurate and useless. The real issue is that there is almost no way to match the signature "grip" of a real circuit. Different patterning in the asphalt or concrete, rubber compounds and temperatures variations that make up the real fingerprint of a track are lost and can only be guessed at.
For me it's not physics, tracks or graphics. It's racing realistically and sportsmanlike. For me this is realism I can find that in leagues with Gtr2 and Rfactor, but race schedule can become a problem. I practice and then have to skip race because some real life issue. I've been member of IR for 1,5 months, Ir is like public server( for those who have payed for it), i can go to server and i can race when i have time. All drivers respect others on track. Gtr2 is the sim that i like most, it's sad that online races are full of crashers , wreckers, cheaters and people who drive in wrong direction. This is what i have not seen on Ir. If we talk about physics, i found flaws on every sim and IR is no exeption.
Never saw the appeal? Accuracy...and why not? What's there to lose from having the most accurate tracks? Nothing. You seem to just be making excuses on why it's not important when if rFactor had more Laser Scanned tracks it would be vice versa. Have you even driven on one of their tracks? If you have then you would undoubtedly full of appeal. 80% of the reason I am with iRacing now is strictly because of the tracks and FFB. I have yet to see a track on rFactor remotely close to quality as iRacing's tracks are...and that's not a knock (well for the most part) on the track creators, it's just laser scanning provides 3d artists with a huge advantage over someone working from a Google Earth image or self taken images.
you can download iracing tracks converted to rfactor and you wont no the difference well you get to pick what car you want to race on it and when look alway a bonus when you can drive 2011 mercedes gp car not a 2009 williams
First of all, you are talking about iRacing tracks for rFactor... and you put a video with track converted from F1 2010. Yeah, no difference at all ;-) Unfortunatelly for you, I'm a big fan of Spa. Did many laps on iRacing version, have converted it from F1 2010 to rFactor to work on it and make as realistic as possible. Yes, it is better than SimBin's Spa but still it's far from iRacing, especially with details - track elevations, corners profiling etc. Don't belive? I don't care, but don't say there is no difference compared to iRacing, because that is simply a lie.
I think this is iracing track the person who converted it says its just textures from f1 2010 and iracing track but still never cost me a load of money in fact was free. i think iracing is good in some ways but i am an rfactor fan i have had many years of amazing mods and tracks and alway go back to rfactor. i got codemasters for pc and ps3 but was to arcade like for me the tracks and graphics are good many txtures in dx11 it is good for my graphics card but i went back to rfactor within a few weeks. same as i racing i payed 3months payed some tracks and f1 car i dont no what graphics you have but iracing on nividia 480 looks the same as rfactor (with the graphics mod) both dx9 my lap at spa and again i went back to rfactor after a few weeks .all i seem to do on iracing is wait ages after each race the online game play cars were invisible i was driving through them the f1 cars is like so old . now i have to find a way to justify the amount of money i spent on iracing i would rather use rfactor and spend my money putting my son into karting. and i race can not do this
It's not about what your are playing. We (me and Lesiu) just disagree with your statement that there is no difference between Spa versions done by SBT and iRacing team. There are may differences starting by huge ones, ending with details like bumps and other irregularity of a surface. Note also, that the last ones cannot be moved from iR do rF in process of 3D conversion, because are not represented by 3D model. So after conversion surface is just flat. Another case is lighting and reflection model. Any sim comparing to F1 2010 is just weak.
yes i agree but codemasters are far more advanced in graphics (DX11) than any sim and if you go online with codemasters there is simulation mode (not in the cracked version) but is still too easy . i dont see anyting great about iracing as you can see from my video(s) iracing graphics are not eye catching is easy and the damage is poor like codemasters and were are the bumps at spa looks and feals flat to me but for me i am an f1 fan and iracing is no good for me is only rfactor that can do anything for me.
No, it is not iRacing coversion... for someone who raced on both tracks (from iR and F1 2010/converted to rF) the differences are just too obvious.
