This sounds like ACC! It's got all the eye candy and empty servers. Sadly it seems we as Sim racers need everything and still not happy.
ACC got its issues and very limited content. While GT3 is the most used cars you wont go far with 10 tracks (you are also limiting your user base to people that like to drive these cars 24/7). Had they released the game working perfectly and included GT America + Asia + Int Cup (and did what they promised: a "Blancpain GT experience") it would be more popular then. IMO if you are putting this much effort into a series may as well go for multclass stuff, you attract more players since they can use all classes or only GT3
It seems as much as people say they only like newer cars or older one's or only race cars, the more they like to drive a variety of cars and tracks. AC is perfect except for the physics. iRacing has great physics and online but completely missing everything I love about AC. rF2 is a young AC, I hope, will be polished into everything I like in AC but with good physics? In the end, it seems, people want a variety.
One of the great strengths of Assetto is its content of road cars...... with actually very bad physics (IMO). Exactly the opposite of rF2, unfortunately. I would dream of driving a Ferrari road car for example, but only with the physics of rF2. The physics of PC2 do not suit me either, even if I find them better than Assetto.
I made a suggestion in RD about helping AC's physics, which I thought was pretty good. Increase FFB and road sound with speed, to help with sense of speed. Possibly a mod. Well, it didn't go over very well. https://www.racedepartment.com/threads/sense-of-speed.172812/#post-3037049
Did you even read what I explained? Talk to any AAA environmental artist and they will tell you the same thing. But I will stop here as we aren't going anywhere with this.
Thats not a serious argument Just a preference of an user. Why do you invest in top notch monitors and hardware if your idea is that rF2 is nto a simulator of [something visual, insert trees this time] I don't even care as much for better trees as people voicing no need for that makes me do because it is just easy to get. And as a somewhat track artist myself, not a pro or perfect, but I understand that it is important for things to look right, especially when they are often seen - large quantities, or takes a lot of screen space. And trees are often seen, large in quantities and takes lots of screenspace too. And looks does alter driving experience, because IMO traveling through environments and observing them is a part of driving. Even in heat of racing, you still acquire all visuals, and perhaps you don't think about tham, but simply just see anyway, also use visual information as a references for various car control events, and better environments should actually add to driving.
Having a discussion about trees or number of leafs in a SIMULATOR makes me think people have great lifes here...
@Ari It is actually unexpected announcement, as I see no reason for that. Well, anyway... I think it is your problem if you can't take even slightest opposing arguments, and have to be agreed with. I think this should be taken a bit as offensive thing to say, but it reminds me Donald Trump who just fires staff who doesn't agree with him. @Rui Santos I agree, I shouldn't even be here, I am no where as old and achieved so much in my life to be wasting time here talking about video games vs reality. Doesn't matter the subject... discussing graphical presentation of a tree, discussing features of track surface or discussing how tire mechanics are... doesn't matter. I honestly shouldn't even be here, or in any simracing forums from the past 5 years, I also shouldn't have spent time on modding. I wonder why S397 has been mostly spending time on improving visual quality of this SIMULATOR. And why you all freak out if some visual feature simply could be just a little better ? There was even a post recently from someone who perhaps is beta tester ? that lemans should receive an improved trees, I guess it doesn't matter because this is not a "nature simulator" as you guys have invented. Anyway, I really shouldn't be here, I am not cool enough. Feel free to ban me out, I don't care, will be better for me.
Some don't understand the point here. Criticizing some small aspect does not imply neglecting general satisfaction with other (more important) aspects. People criticizing trees and leafs could seem as nitpickers but could also be that they just enjoy the cake and would like that cherry on top. Nothing wrong with that. Devs will determine their priorities anyway so don't be endangered by request that don't conform your preferences.
Can we steer a topic from not very well going trees topic ^^^, to perhaps shadows topic ? IMO way more important, and serious thing. So do you think that perhaps rF2 is not a "shadows simulator" just like it is not a "tree simulator", so shadows just isn't important and mature topic to talk about, or perhaps they are fine in your opninion ? For example the controversial subject of a shadow darkness ? This will be quite a thing in Nordschleife, right ? Or maybe you'd prefer to talk about not such first world problems, but a bit more simple stuff like a good pizza ? We shouldn't get stupidly radical when talking about it, should we ?
Oh you'll get many radical reactions to this pizza . First it looks vegetarian. Don't you eat meat? Now you'll say you like sound of electric engines more than V12 and are regular follower of Formula W?