If it was just a program for making rf2 tracks, that should take long at all to make. If ISI were smart, they would already have made one to make tracks for them selves. A track editor doesn't need the features that 3ds max has. Bobs track builder was a basic program that is a good example of what I'm talking about. It didn't have that much code in it.. If you look at the UnrealEd from ut24k fps game as an example, you will see what a wise move it is to make an editor that can do all, use it to make a few maps then SELL the program that has pre-made maps as well as the actual editor used . The result is tons of content. Now game makers can just but the Unreal engine to make many different sorts of games. rf1 should of done this. Instead, an Aussie guy made a track editor and sell it and makes a LOT of money doing it. I suspect he is living on a tropical island somewhere. I would love to know how much money he made in comparison to rf.. Its ok to fall in love with ISI, but please make em do some good work for us. We want lots of free content. ISI wants to make a profit. They conflict each other. Communication will help us all.
Absolutely correct. If you want to keep the total control on your work you need pro software. Considering the experience, the budget, the enormous team of Autodesk and the time spent to build the software as it is (and it's far from perfection after 15 years of development)....there is no need at all to waste other time to build another software to do the same. Those standalone track tools are nice as a first step into modding...unless they're connected to a pro software (like trackmaker with maya commands).
Go ahead and create Monaco od Long Beach with Bob's Track Builder - once you're done you would see what I meant And yes, you would have to use 3D Studio or other software somewhere in the process. Bob's Track Builder alone wouldn't be enough. Maybe, but I wouldn't bet on that if I were you He would need to sell like 50000 copies if he wanted to retire. I seriously doubt we have that many trackmakers out there. Otherwise we would have like 50000 tracks made for rFactor And as for Unreal - they make their own tools for 3 reasons: - they have bigger team and can afford it - and yes, it took them years - their engines have specific features difficult to support from within software like 3D Studio, especially if you want your editor to be WYSIWYG type. - their engines are general-purpose and for sale to other companies - they need tools they can rely on without being dependent on other companies like Autodesk
It is pretty shame that Bob's trackbuilder will probably not be developed to have rF2 support because of stupid pirates, it was really nice tool that allowed even me to create drivable tracks from GPS data very quickly. Of course tracks still are lot of work, but those tool have their places too. With 3ds max price is always an issue, so it might be beneficial to have free alternative and as Blender starts to be quite nice tool in these new builds it would be nice to be able to use that. With my poor skills, I can create mesh a lot faster in Blender than in Max, which is bit odd as basic operations are very closely similar, but so it just is.
This works other way too, do drivable 200km long point to point track that is relatively accurate to real road in max. I have not found way how to get gps data to max so that it forms drivable surface, few clicks and terrain next to track so you can export it to rfactor and have a go. Also Legend as made really great tracks (MyBackyard etc) with BTB and he has said that without BTB those tracks would not be. I believe that both have features that we could use in another, to make perfect ultimate tool?
All i will say is i hope it's not an obvious track. I love Algarve personally and it gets ignored way too much in sims. Awesome elevation changes and just a real rollercoaster. It's on the F2 calender so fingers crossed. I really do hope rF2 does do something different with tracks and doesn't just go with obvious tracks that every other simulation will have. Classic track, it HAS to be Kyalami for me or the old Mosport
Autodesk softwares are FREE for non-commercial purposes. You don't need to buy anything if you don't make money with it.
Me too. If you have 3 minutes - look at this recap from 2010 GT1 qualifying race: LINK Commentary was hilarious in this one - "4 cars... well, 3 and a half cars wide" Or: - "That is Marc Basseng, who spun out." - "Or... was he pushed?" - "Who knows... Who cares, quite frankly - this is fantastic!" Or even better: - "(excited) Keep that Maserati ahead of the Corvette!" - "(dissapointed) No, he's pulled out of the way..." (that was about a lap down MC12 in front of top 3 cars ) You can get very creative with racing line on this track.
But don't you need to be enrolled into school to get free student version, or is there 3ds max personal now too? I have student version now, also years ago I bough full thing $$$$ for modding purposes and still can't use it, talk about money down the drain... To bit less offtopic. I really like Mario's Mountain Forest track, anyone thinking fantasy tracks are not interesting should give it a go, nice annoying corners which give you great feeling of success when you manage to do them right, also there are hills, I don't like much from flat tracks, there need to be hills, so that track is my current favorite, Mills is quite good too
I really like the options of the poll although I really would like to see this added, I don't agree that it must/should be the next thing. There might be other GREAT tracks and/or cars comming, that make you forget about Toban for a while (who knows, just don't really know what ISI are working on appart from FIA Formula 2). but don't take to much notice of my opininion, because 'no, I'm just a loser'
I'm not sure what part of those tracks would be hard for BTB unless your talking about the buildings. Even though I have made a few non dirt tracks for rf, i leave that real stuff to the experts like Legendsatlunch (who should be employed by ISI). I like building dirt tracks and rally stages. As for the creator of BTB and how much money he made, Well your guess is as good as mine. As for 3ds max, I assume you would also want to use maya and a few other programs if you wanted to do a real good job. Just like you would if you where making content for a fps level. As for the Unreal engine, they binned lots of code and re wrote it many times.The original unreal torrnament changed a lot in every version. ut2003 was completly different to the original and ut2004 was completly new. same with the next version. Ohh yeah, I didn't see any pirates with BTB but they did have every Autodesk product. That link -re-cap was cool btw.
Yes crofty is a great commentator, he does the F1 now over here for Sky with Brundle, great combo. Great racing aswell, i would love to see that track in rF2.
I could tell you hundreds of places around my place that are equally interesting, I bet you could too around your place. In fact I believe every real road is tons interesting taken ar racing speeds. I dont know why people dont do just that, turn an everyday road they know well near them, into a race track. Regardless of location, I would be very interested to race there. I suppose it is very costly in working hours to recreate a real place? If so, I sympathise, otherwise fantasy tracks leave me quite uninterested, same as fantasy cars, I really cannot see the point. btw, the questions of this poll, err...nvm but I really cannot vote on this...
Can anyone give examples of or know where I can find a list of flowing, roller coaster type tracks? My problem is that I simply can't stand going straight Examples I know of are Toban (my favorite), Birmingham, Algarve and Knutstorp + other STCC tracks.
Yep, if an F2 track Algarve is easily the best one. Agree with Mosport, or any other tracks similar; Road Atlanta, Road America, Mont Tremblant..
