Lot of hot air on here too lol Vote with your feet and buy it Support your studio. See still here in just this page we have people bagging rF2 12 years later for no better reason the they can.
I can't try it until the weekend, but I'm definitely not pleasantly surprised by what I've seen. I was expecting a more polished base. Supposedly this game is going to be very focused on an offline race... I haven't seen a worse AI in any simulator, the "I" of "AI" is totally non-existent. The optimization seems to be very necessary, this was expected. The graphics look very nice, the night is sublime, not so much the rain, which I think needs work. The sounds are at a high level, as expected since ACC already had this. And about the physics and ffb I'm reading very good comments, at first glance it seems that the inertia of the vehicle has improved a lot.
If you want slippage and braking feedback what you have to do is to look with your eyes with great attention and concentration to see as soon as possible if car is doing things that you were intending it to do by your driving, and if it doesn't then you do things to bring back it to doing things that you have intentions for it to do. This is a simple loop of actions and reactions which is called "driving". There may be or may not be various effects to steering torques while doing braking and experiencing slides. It depends on hundreds of variables. You can't just expect a car to simply give you commands through force feedback if it is sliding in some particular in UNIVERSAL FASHION. Just use your eyes and brains more when driving cars, and watch less of GamerMuscle. ******************** Spoiler: woopsie wrote a book, now too lazy to edit it to make it readable I was watching some of Jimmy Broadbent. Some interesting things he was observing. One was that he was missing the way cars IRL are way more prone to neutral steer dynamics, while it is not really a thing in AC. And another was how he was not satisfied by cars snapping back to grip too fast. These two things might be semi related. Although I must say that I know for a fact that cars can be perceived to be snapping back to grip faster for these few reasons unrelated to physics: driver getting tired and reactions becoming slower and concentration weaker, performance of game being weak and game not receiving commands from controller soon enough. Few things out of many many things related to physics would be: high aerodynamic sensitivity to angles, small tire slip margins and steep slip curves, weird car setups, slow steering rack especially in combination to heavily loaded steering... The neutral steer dynamics is very interesting subject. In AC it was never much of a thing, perhaps ACC tried to have that at first, but people did not understand all new dynamic for them. Much like they don't understand snap oversteer due being late to correct understeer and turning it into wild oversteer, and also they don't understand tail slappers - how can they not unwind steering early enough before rear catches grip ? The reason why there aren't very much of these dynamics in AC might be that AC devs always were trying to isolate the most flashy and obvious fun part - simply drifts, oversteer, powerslides call it whatever it being just loosing rear end grip, but still keeping car under control. It is most fun, most obvious and everyone understands it happening when they see car oversteering. Neutral steer and understeer snapping to oversteer to some degree are complicating things. This is when rookie driver has no idea what is happening, looking for FFB settings to end this suffering of constantly loosing control and not just having lots of WOOOHOOO and HAHA. The understeer snap to oversteer "issue" seems to be effectively tackled by just making understeer to be very bad and hard to escape. If front end looses grip, rear end gets really overpowered grip and car just plows. While IRL it could easily be that car is understeering just mildly, and too strong correction of it might instantly send rear end to strong oversteer, imagine it like front end literally swaps sliding with rear end, but then you also apply throttle and keep turning in hard and very quickly the rear end just slides very badly. It can't really happen without tires being sharp enough, severely lacking bite, because then the swap of grip might be so slow and delayed that it might be possible to experience snap oversteer only if you are very new to driving and without talent. Tank slappers are similarly related to tire sharpness, the way they can possibly bite into the grip fast, much faster than you can point front wheels where they should point. Also strongly related to aerodynamics and car power. As well as polar inertia moment. Speed of steering. Just to mention few main ones. Neutral steer is very complex, even though the principle is very simple - just have roughly equal amount of sliding front and rear. Perfect neutral steer can be observed in such cars like old Porsche 911s racing cars. What happens is that there is certain gentle amount of oversteer that rotates the car so gently that minimal or no steering needs to be applied. It is most beautiful and exciting car dynamic. usually these aren't huge sliding angles, but as a driver you sense them very strongly, because car turns but you steer it without steering much or at all. If car is made to be extremely proactive to responding to yaw rotation you are much less likely to have neutral steering happening - so lots of caster, rapid steering rack. If car tends to have very strong rear end grip - it makes car lot less likely to have four wheel drifts - so particularly strong downforce and no drop of it, very high mechanical grip at rear, lack of power to break grip at the rear, extremely responsive and sensitive steering (so very fast steering ratio and big caster).... So as a dev to give a very likeable car that will make most gamers feel good and not FFBsad, you have to make it not too dynamic. So either choose cars to include that are/were designed in a way that they are not too hard to drive. If you get car that is a challenge to drive then give it properties that makes it more predictable. Not responding/reacting too quickly, leaving least possible amount of guessing what to do when driven over the limits (great to have car either understeer or oversteer, but nothing more fancy than that). Avoid absolutely everything that will make people spend more than five minutes to work out how to handle the car. Be OK with 110% of push at all times without trouble staying on optimum performance always. Take in account that people playing are probably super tired after hard day/week and has zero concentration for whatever reasons, just let them have woohoo moments.
Nope, I don´t watch GamerMuscle at all, I don´t like his Insight. I mostly use rF2, or LMU for my racing needs and both do transmit cues on the above mention to some extent, If you push the limits.
Yeah, I did some testing with the Mercedes GT2, the foundation is good, the physics/way the car behaves feels more closer to LMU and rF2, more natural than ACC.. The FFB stills lacking, it's more closer to ACC, you need to add dampening to generate weight in the center and vibration effects to feel the surface of the track. Understeer effect is non existent. Simagic Alpha Mini 10nm.
The thing about FFB is that a lot of it is tied to physics, like a lot, like almost all of it. Technically. But in practice of simracing a lot of FFB also is tied to expectation of a simracer, like a lot of it, like almost all of it. Overwriting its true origins - physics. Never underestimate power of perception, placebo effects, nocebo effects. The only true thing is physics and what car actually does which is a visual fact, you just can see how car moves and how it responds to drivers actions and what actions driver has to do to respond to cars actions. There is no physical basis to claim universaly that every car should have this and that feel and cue from FFB, so top thinking about it this much and think more about what car is actually doing when driven. Then also get to know real car and try understand how well matching they are. It is that simple. First of all you can't compare pineapples to cherries. rF2/LMU is not AC. Secondly, GT3 and LMH cars are not cars like cars in ACE. Alright there might be few high performance race cars in ACE now, but they are still different cars. A lot to do with the center weight of steering will have overal grip, steering ratio, caster and obviously how heavy the steering is overall. Vibration effects get enhanced with chassis, tires and suspension stiffness as well as steerign related geometries too, also remember yo uaren't sitting in actual real car, but this is up to debate if these fine vibrations count as steering forces. Understeer effect will be non existant if there is a lot of caster. You also can't have very strong oversteer cue with very low caster, so bascially you are doomed to be forever unhappy about how cars FFB is if physics are set to be realistic. But I believe this is impossible to expect for thousands of simracers to understand these things, because you don't want to understand, it conflicts with feelings. I must say a good proper simulation developer will never pay attention to peoples feelings regarding essential details unless they are backed up by decent logic and arguments. Unfortunate it could lead to commercial losses in case peoples ignorance becomes too high. So in a way marketing and technical simulation directions might oppose at some point. And I think it has happened with ACE.
The only car in ACE currently that interests me very very much is S2000. But after seeing how it drives I loose any interest: Now look how real one looks, this is on semislicks: Do you see differences ? A real one is a lot more neutral, and requiring fine balancing on the limit. Look how frequently driver exits the turns on short neutral steer, almost an oversteer, but not quite. Some oversteer moments too, look how direct and fast he needs to be with steering. You watch it and you know that this is a fast lap and you can perceive how zippy the car is. Look at how it looks in AC. It is either understeery or oversteery, there is no balancing. Sometimes driver mashes steering left right imagining he is doing something, while realistically it should probably just unsettle the car. Car seems slow and boring. Driver frequently overcorrects slides, or/and returns steering too slow and nothing happens, no loss of speed, stability.
Yep, those OS feels unnatural and the corrections are exaggerated, yet no problem to keep the car on the path. Not sliding at all.
Kunos franchise must have sold over 30 million units by now. imho no prediction is necessary, it's forgone conclusion. imho ISIMotor2.5 is still King ( don't forget LMU ) imho ACE is on another level to it's predecessors, it took me T1 T2 T3 Bathurst in a Bambino with clunky gearbox ( fixed it ) to realize that.
Has anyone driven the rf2 S2000 that Advanced Simulation did some time ago? I'd like to know how both versions compare.
Fact ! Btw not even open wheel cars so far in ACE. Even graphics in rf2 feel better, except maybe for some car details. Confusing Video options. Faster loading times is the only pro. Will lay ACE aside for a while...
it's the tires, they are way ahead of the competition in rf2. to me this is what makes it more realistic. ACE is like AC ACC in this area, it might have been improved but it's still the same foundation. after seeing all these new sims come and go, i strongly believe rf2 and LMU will have better tire model than any future sim for at least a decade. LMU is coming along great and I love the driving experience.
LMU is just the proof that if rF2 had received the attention it deserved it would be on another level comparing with its rivals.. Unfortunately LMU is too limited, let's see if future brings us some kind of "rFactor3", until then i'll stick with iRacing...
As Boosted Media said In a recent video, and I agree with that, Is that ACE has that "slight" simcade feel to It as AC had/has. It´s a lot more on the sim, then on the cade side, and personally I don´t see anything wrong with that. It´s on EA so a lot of changes can and will happen. At least (for me) It outplays ACC of which I never got along with, and It´s a step above AC. I don´t compare ACE, or any other sim to rF2/LMU, I use them as reference as for me they are the bar that other´s have to meet, or surpass In some way. Which I don´t think Is gonna happen any time soon. The AI Is pretty bad right now In ACE, but so was It In AMS2 not to long ago If we all like to speculate, which In IMHO Is a no go In any EA title. Let´s give them space and time to work things out. LMU needed It´s time too, and had a way worst release, but almost a year later we can all be pretty happy to see It at the stage It´s in now. Yes things could be a lot better for all our sims, but hey that´s the nature of the beast as I see It. Just my 20% of rubber here
I know I will sound like a piano accordion but imagine if ISI was really supported. We would at very least by now have ISIMotor3.0 Not done by some ring-in ( no offence meant ) but done by the Godfather himself. I mean what he must have / had in his mind for future. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it everyone and ask yourself how we let that happen
