Do you really think that ACE will not have a system similar or better than ACC to compete? In the trailer you can see competition, you can see the simple pleasure of driving, you can see every part of the car in detail... ACE will have everything that car lovers want, it has possibilities to satisfy all car lovers. And what I am most grateful for is having street cars, I love them.
I fully expect it will have every competition mode available in AC and possibly more. But if 80% of the cars are street models, then it's "Assetto Strada" instead of a race simulator. If every race car portrayed has no more than a single competitor from the same year/class, then it's a race sampler (yes, this was a failure of rF2 in the ISI years, but they were fully expecting the modding community to fill the possibilities but they didn't offer adequate support for the tires and then the graphics kept changing). It's great that you love street cars. I have some favorites, too, but it's not what I race and I'm not interested in open world driving or traffic or drifting.
We don't know anything about the list of cars and circuits yet. It doesn't matter what you like, all possibilities are welcome, free driving, drift, drag, racing... You'll have it all and you can choose what you want.
Me too. But I mean what if. In case of Kunos it looks to me, like it is on that path. Really doesn't make me happy too. I am not fixing myself to rF2 or any other sim. Who goes real, and does it best, that one wins, end of story. Maybe it will be rF2 forever.... and iRacing, but that one is not the one to me. There could be more people than ever seeking for realism. It is true. Unfortunately there are two problems. First one is that realism in driving games, is more like an idea and prestigious badge, it is not easily and clearly defined. Second combines with the first, the perceptions of what is realistic and what is truth wildly varies amongst the people. The limits of how low simulation could be pulled and still perceived as good simulation {important}by as many people as possible{important} is not explored yet. We know that PC2 is something that definitely starts falling off, AC stands great even I think it is awesome sim with slight reduction of realism, ACC proved to be too realistic right at the beginning IDK how low they pulled it in later development, I stopped trying it. So IMO the safe brackets for a sim to be still a sim in most peoples view is somewhere in between PC2 and AC. In AC they probably could secretly test a lot through modding, as well as they have done with ACC. So likely they have data what is exact optimum level of realism to aim for, for most good impressions from most people. They probably even knows how it changes over time, and I honestly think it is moving towards appreciation of less complexity and less difficulty. Simulations were great ever since early 2000s - rF1, LFS, RBR. My first one was RBR. I completely couldn't drive the car and didn't touch it for years, till I begun understanding what a car is and how they work, couldn't stop driving it after that. rFactor was always tricky to deal with. LFS was best. rF2 happened - much too much to take for most peoples computers and massively unfinished, even demo version was basically designed to chase people away. AC comes and it is basically perfected out version of LFS, with perhaps IMO little less amazing physics, but also at the same time somehow better physics. It took me 1000+ hours in AC to begin feeling its physics being too limited for me, driving not organic and not dynamic enough. 2000 hours in rF2, I still feel like finding out things and bonding is just getting stronger, just have less time (why do i waste time writing long rants). I don't know where I stand in ability to observe and perceive and understand reality of vehicle dynamics and compare to simulation, but I'd like to think I am above average, just a guess. Assuming I am average at perceiving realism and it took me 1000hours in AC to even begin sense something lacking. It shows that sim probably even has room to be more simple to still please most people - very few people will likely play ACE up to 1K hours.
For the moment in the little that we know, even the very very little that we know, I have absolutely no desire to buy this Assetto Corsa evolution. Nevertheless I will probably do it, as I have always done, that is to say buy the simulations competing with rFactor 2 to test them almost exclusively on the realism and physics engine aspect. I have always done that, I have always retested the simulations concerned when there were big updates on the physics level. The only goal being to make sure that one of them would not be as good or better than rfactor 2 in terms of realism because that is my only interest in a simulator, for the moment that has never been the case, if that is the case for Assetto Corsa evolution, I will play it in addition to rfactor 2 and if it succeeds in the feat of making it more realistic than rfactor 2, I will play Assetto Corsa evolution more than rfactor 2... but hey I think we should not dream, right lol.
While I clearly have doubts about ACE going ultra hardcore. I hope that it will be better at some physics stuff and that will kick rF2 development a a bit to keep up. What that could be ? First of all, actually simulating rain racing lines (vsicous hydroplaning) and puddles properly (dynamic hydroplaning). They will probably have the features, but will they have balls to make it fairly realistic.... AC always had an advantage of actually teaching people to use clutch. Which is just a pathetic joke that rF2 doesn't, I am sorry I am actually mad about it, it is just a game and who cares, I know I know... Another advantage is having tire pressures that can be too low, although in AC it is completely made up, rF2 being built on absolutely different standard would actually have to have actual reasons for that - tires collapsing and going all weird (I think they could just have ring and bristles going noodles mode with lots of resistance for rolling, also too low pressures should be putting on fatigue forces into tire carcass dangerous enough to break the tire, thats I suppose is rather complex problem to simulate.... Now if AC would do rain properly, it could be one more reasons to do it for rF2. Actually in ACC they had rain amazing right on start, they just didn't have rain racing lines at that point. I spent great deal of time and attention studying and learning about wet tracks driving, and ACC at start just simply did it. Later on - not anymore. Here is the reason - rain can only work well with correct way tires develop grip statically (not sliding) vs kinetically (sliding). In rain staying on "rails" mode is the thing, and slips are very pronounced as they are more severe, quicker and more twitchy, obviously it all depends a lot on speed, water depth, tire tread and tire pressures (idk if any sim yet simulated rain tire pressures properly). When a sim is getting a design, a paradigm, of tires that are no where near sharp enough, with static friction too little and sliding friction too good, that alone makes rain driving impossible to achieve being realistic, it is soapy then, lazy and safe in an annoying way that is zero fun, zero reward, no sense of going fast (it actually applies to dry dynamics too, but with way less annoying and negative effect to it). If only people would start demanding good stuff for once. Secretly I imagine, what if stuff could be modded in ACE to actually be hardcore simulation, in case vanilla would turn out to be a little bit detuned. But they would probably ban me from modding for it haha
For me though take puddles. I got told ACC you would be able to prolong wet tyre life by driving in the puddles and off dry line EyeCandy and as for the basic aquaplaning, I could do that in Driver 25 years ago. https://www.reddit.com/r/driver/comments/1b9w0j8/i_wish_we_had_the_raining_in_driver_1_during_the/ All the other engines are no better. Rain physics in all are apalling imho so no matter how good it looks ...well Puddles that don't splash is no puddle at all, just more canned arcade features.
I think some realistic stuff might just not be for everyone. Some will like it a lot, and others not like it at all. Just as it is so IRL. Wet racing. Porsche 911 cars. Cats. Dogs... you name it...
If you want something canned no one has thought of ... "Tear offs" Long race, it's pouring, you go to pull, you have run out ! You can then only do a canned wipe with back of your hand only half cleans it As well have one texture is a muddy smear pops up every 10 wipes or so makes it worse Do you gamble ?
Thousand demands and not realizing that around us companies are closing due to poor profits and bad investments ... give me back my money!
The ultra realistic and very advanced type of simulation that rfactor 2 first and then LMU are part of are niche simulations, they can only interest people who do not have the profile of gamer but profiles of driving enthusiasts who have a deep interest in the realism and credibility of simulated driving. I think you know this very well, and I think you also know very well that the very very large majority of simracers do not quite fall into this category, but rather into the category of players and who don't want something more advanced in terms of realism, they are not at all uninterested in the realism of driving but it is not their ultimate priority. These people are perfectly satisfied with other simulations than LMU and rFactor 2. Mathematically, we can easily understand that as rfactor 2 is a niche "hardcore" simulation, really niche much more than the other simulations that some would describe as more than simcades, the profits that a company can hope for are infinitely less important than Gran Turismo, assetto Corsa, ACC, to name but a few. I think that we cannot be satisfied or find excuses for abandoning rfactor 2, the only true representative hardcore simulation for 11 years, for purely economic reasons that will not concern us as end players. Moreover, MSG's strategic choices are very questionable, 100% questionable from a user and rFactor 2 enthusiast point of view, they may be good or not good in economic POV yes but what does it matter my god it does not concern us and it is their problem.
Peacock? Even the other companies you mentioned would know how to make hardcore sims but would they then be able to sell them and get paid?
I'm not trying to create controversy, I'm giving my reasoned opinion on what was said before. Nothing more than that you don't like what I say. On the other hand, your post is 100% useless, isn't it ? It provides no argument and aims only to contradict my entire reasoned statement with a single sentence. It's simple, isn't it, to respond to an argument that we don't agree with with a single, stupid and simplistic sentence, isn't it ?
More people, more money. More people, less enthusiasts who are on point. Hardcore sim devs are super smart people and they understand it very well. The reason why some fully realistic, no compromises "hardcore" simulations exist is because of niche principle. What happens when the products rocks the niche so well that it is about to break out from it ? Hopefully money, good news for the company. LOL this gives me idea. What if iRacing creates arcade version of their service, something like Fortnite of racing games. They probably will. I am actually voting for arcades to prosper and be highly respected. They are fun, they deserves love when they are fine. If arcades will be respected and have good image, then they will not have to pretend being simulations. I am not calling AC an arcade, by the way, and don't think that ACe will be.
