heres a 15 page thread about rf2 from the iracing forum in 1 post.

There are some good and very goog tracks in rF2, LRP, Poznan,Croft, Med-ohio, old Monza,Sennirton park-great and underrated circuite-, Mountain Forest...

 

iRacing have a great online system which works flawless, but to me racing there is not as great and thrilling as it is in rF2.

iRacing is sterile and rF2 raw

 

The post isnt about sim vs sim

Its about the mind set of sim racers and their general opinion of rfacto2

To me its quite worrying to think rfactor2 may never (or take a very long time) to really get off the ground so to speak, i think its in danger of failing before it even starts due to the problems, lengh of time things are taking and not to mention the other sims coming soon with modding capabilities, good physics and pretty graphics

I hope i am wrong tho, because rfactor2 has great potential im just scared its never going to get chance to shine.

 

if you have an opinion thats cool but don't pretend to know what 80% of sim racers think. Rfactor2 is alot newer and not even close to finished, it's developing still. i like iracing but i think i'd rather rfactor2

 

I read a lot of forums and I guarantee you it's what's going through most peoples minds, there's even evidence all over this forum. It may still be new but is it really? When we go gold is it going to feel new? Nope it's just another update, we will see an anitial influx when it's released onto steam etc but the mojority of people who plan to buy this already have beta so no it's not really new is it?

If a new guy comes from gt5 to pc what's he gonna buy rf2 or assetto corsa?

It's only a tiny percent of guys who buy them all.

 

Yes, that is the problem. Maybe not for me, but for most customer, yes.

I'm waiting for a sim that will offer me good physics and dynamic environments for endurance racing. None of existing or upcoming titles will offer me that anytime soon. AC will be a solid piece of work, but initially it will not have features I'm looking for. iRacing is a solid product but still doesn't have features I'm looking for. rFactor 2 has these features, but many of them aren't mature enough to be really practical.

So it's all the same to me whenever rF2 gets it's features polished up or AC will have them added. I have to wait anyway.
But my approach is based on a certain goals that I'm looking to be acheived by either title. Most people dont judge by work progress, but by quality. If you offer half the features but twice as mature, you're going to make better impression and win, even if quality * quantity is the same.

 

Content does not block other stuff, different people work on different things.
So the RC car does not cost much time in the end, and hey its a good aprils fool, isnt it?

 

Lolol yes it was

 

What ever are the issues that people have with rF2 at its current state, doesnt change the fact that when done, rF2 is going to be the King of the hill. How do I know that? Go and drive 3 laps with any car on any track and you have the answer.
Theres nothing out there that matches the experience of driving rF2... Fact.

 

+1

 

I was able to try iRacing free for 6 months, and in that time, I doubt I drove it more than 1 hour total, it just felt "blah" to me. Graphics were nice, and performance was great on my PC, well over 100 FPS pretty much all of the time. But, in the end, it's the "feel" where RF2 kills iRacing, in MY opinion.

 

Yet. But the potential of Assetto Corsa could be there is a serious contender.

 

True, but I think its going to be running more along side with the rF2 rather than against it. The nature of their project is more "Turismo Like" with the streetcars and all. Obviously it has potential and how the modding in it turns out may end up turning the table, but still I do believe that most here will own both, and play both.
I cant say the same about iRacing though.

 

Feels3 is working on interlagos!?????

 

I think rF2 is not concerned bout AC, but iracing might be! Cause they r the same product selling business (i dont know how to say it in english, but u guy know what i mean.)

 

I think it's worth pointing out how severe some of the criticisms of the rF2 graphics are in that iRacing thread. In the last 6 pages of it, I've just (quickly) counted 11 different people saying that the graphics are astonishingly bad (basically) - with specific references to ISI content. Four of them used the word "cartoon/ish/y" as well. It's difficult to dismiss these because most of them also said that the "feel" (physics and/or FFB) was better than iRacing.

Part of it is surely that at very high settings rF2 can look pretty good (there are some great elements that add immersion IMO), but at low settings it does look really bad. I'd say worse than anything else I've seen. The point is that you can turn the iRacing graphics down a lot and it still looks like 'professional simulation software' (mostly) and not a game, nor at all "cartoonish". Personally, I don't like the look of iRacing (too clean/computer generated), but the 'cartoony' aspect, as perceived, is an issue.

 

Another useless thread

 

Hard to compare these two titles, eventually they are quite different.

rF2 definitely feels better to drive, FFB is very immersive.

I like environment graphics of iRacing more, tracks and surroundings etc. They are very well polished and natural looking. Then again car cockpits look worse in iRacing than in rF2.

When it comes to online competition, there is no comparison. iRacing beats all titles by large margin. But then again it is not NEVER as fun as in rF2. It is like comparing F1 series to grass root demolition derby.

But you can't have mods in iRacing, so it is just lame simulator.

 

The credibility of that thread the OP is referring to is lacking terribly. Just another "let's only give the game we don't like props when we absolutely have to and over glorify the game we love" example.

The thread talks about "crap tracks" and he mentions a small few that he likes YET there's no mention of two of the TOP community mod tracks , Sebring and MidOhio, out there. And IMO I put those two tracks up against what iRacing has now. Those tracks are done beautifully. As mentioned before they make no mention of progression of day/night nor weather. I don't know but I'll take a rain model that's decent but needs obvious work over absolutely no rain at all.

And if they think rFactor2 has cornered the market in bad drivers online I'd like to introduce them to some replays I have in iRacing right now. Which leads to the other thing, bad drivers don't even get a chance to be better drivers on their own since there is NO A.I. to race in iRacing. They take the "i" out of A.I.

And I don't like the money grab that they have setup there at all. Well at least they don't charge you to read the forums...oh wait... I guess that's why we have the Cliffs Notes version of the thread instead of an actual link.

 

Just having a giggle at Gaza's comment, The post isn't about sim vs sim. You might need to read over your initial post or am I missing some thing? Of course this thread is about Sim vs Sim

Not sure what your on about in terms of virtual mirrors and it affecting driver skill. You can run three high res mirrors across the top of your screen, two side mirrors and last but not least you can assign a look back button and see everything. How much time do you spend looking backwards whilst moving forwards? Peripheral skill plays a big part.

Can you collaborate iRacing threads when rfactor 2 is a finished (for god sake stop saying Gold people) product because at the moment is seems pretty unfair to be comparing (which is what your doing) a finished product with an unfinished product.

iRacing are worried about new titles and they should be. Their number one problem is members who try the product and never come back, not a good thing in business.

Every now and again we need to slap ourselves across the face and say, It's beta.. relax and enjoy what you've got thus far.