Are mods becomming unrealistically fast now?

You seemed to be skipping the obvious and didn't give me much to go on. No addressing the list, no setting priorities. I and many others can't derive meaning from things left unwritten, you know?

We agree.

What follows is not addressed to you directly (since I didn't see the conversation), it's more of a community thing: Just saying "too planted/grippy" isn't enough without context. I think people need to see/feel examples when criticism is provided and we should offer counter examples. Make a tire set or change the aerodynamics and package it as an example; don't offer it as the alternative-true-to-life mod, just as a temporary thing for the modder to consider. There's no guarantee the modder will make changes no matter what, but at least it's done in a manner that helps the community.

 

Thats how it is and will be when the mod maker doesnt get enough data and its not enough just to have all the weight/suspension data, you'll have to understand how rfactor 2 works and how to get it to correllate with the data.
For the same reason I said some time ago that ISI should provide the car content.

 

I don't get it, am I missing something ? I often do that.....


edit: Okay I get it now.............. lol


But dumbing down all cars I do not see what difference that makes.

I mean if that is so critical to realism whatever , then what about aids, auto clutch / blip , virtual mirrors, spotters, devices unsupported in real life cars, unrealistic FOVs , FFB and sensitivity fine tuned to each's personal preference and radically different to someone else in exact same car.

it goes on and on and on

 

Read the OP, skipped the comments.
Thoughts:
Realworld is X, Simulation is x. They will be similar but never the same. The fact that they are different should not come as a surprise, nor as a disappointment. If you scrutinize any two things down enough, you will always find inconsistencies.

FWIW I don't think there is a competition between mods for lap time. I'd guess that difference in laptime is a result of who has realworld data, how the data is implemented, which educated guesses are taken in regard to missing data, and design intent.

 

Also guys bear in mind that the track itself also has a massive say in the laptime, not just the car.. the amount of grip of the road surface is defined by a fraction number in tdf file.. like.. 0.95.... im sure ISI has some accurate way how to determine this number, but modders dont, so they can estimate, also even when ISI has the number spot on in one corner.. the same type of tarmac can be gripper/slidier in next due to wear, dust, etc etc. So.. it really never will be EXACTLY the same. Simply put it all comes down to.. how it drivers, not what times it achieves.. as long as its no WAY off of course. And on cars usually its the tires and downforce numbers that have the largest say.. downforce is google-able usually.. But tyres are mega complicated, complex and unless you have the exact data or the actual tire to cut thru and test yourself, you can only guesstimate. So ye, as has been said.. Just because LW made sub 1:30 on Silverstone in 2013 doesnt mean it should be possible in the sim (it is). Also.. for example the F1 mods... Formula one cars use differend parts on the car EVERY race.. a differend front wing, slight change here and there.. often made specifically for that very track (Compare Monza vs Monaco rear wings - its not just the angle, its the whole design) So.. as long as it drivers realistically, i got all i ever wanted.

 

I've been testing well known car/cars that are being reworked for months now and I remember having an online test at Silverstone with dry weather then wet and times matched almost scarily accurate (yes, even in wet). However that's due to the car being extremely well done. I mean ISI level of care and work. Yet still it is rather surprising since weather is still being worked on (so are the tyres and other aspects of the simulation. It was tested mostly on that beta build 1046 i think it was and then on 1052 so when there were some changes to rain). Still we don't get updated drivetrain model (due to come as we hear) which will change how we drive, so it will affect laptimes. Then we don't have wind. Isn't a big thing for GT cars but still can make a change worth of "something" laptime. Even 0,5 s would be noticeable for sure! Then we have different temps that affect engine performance, tyre performance. Set your temps for 30 C, drive for a longer time. Set it to 10 C and drive again. Night and day not only laptimes but handling changes entirely. People want 1:1 corelation I see. Hamilton did 1:23:8 (I believe) in Melbourne so I want to set the same time to feel like I'm driving sth that is spot on and I'm like Lewis.

Not going to happen. Having times that are seconds faster than fastest laps of a real car isn't a bad thing. Having a car that doesn't react as the real one would is a bad thing. Embrace the fact that MAYBE this particular car could be capable of setting this or that laptime at given conditions and circumstances.

Let me give you an example. Abu Dhabi 2010 I believe it was. Last race of the season. After that one there were few days of testing for youngsters. Straight after the race on Monday. I remember seeing Daniel Ricciardo setting laptime that was MILES faster than fastest Q3 time. 1’38.102 comapred to 1:39.394 set by Vettel. Someone that was fully used to the car against a youngster that was starting to feel what it's like to drive F1 cars. Sets over 1 s faster time than full time race driver. With a more used to the car driver have been put there it could be in 37s. This just shows what sort of difference different conditions, more refined setup or whatever does to a car. People really should stop seeking for 1:1 correlations whereas we may never get one because too many variables are in the place. Seek matching handling and general behaviour, not ultimate time. If damper values, height restrictions, diffuser stalling at the same point, torque curve is the same, weight, distribution and 3291312 other things are like it is in the real car then you should let the car do it's thing. If you are given conditions that allow this car go faster then why you feel bad about it? I'm gonna say it again: Embrace the car and what it can do at CERTAIN conditions, because one day luckily conditions can be exactly the same and telemetry data will show overlaying lines. That's what it is all about.

 

Fantastic responses. Thank you all for your opinions.

The instant gratification of being able to drive a car fast off the bat is the motivation and reason for many "sims/games" of the modern era and their popularity. Also the prettiness of a mod and a track seems more important to many also. Its why rFactor is important as it leans more to the particulars of the "Sim" rather than the "game".

Half of the experience is the work involved to learn how everything interacts, setups, track surface, tyres. I am only hoping that ISI do make more "basic" information available to modders so the frankenstein physics don't become the norm as IMO it detracts from the nature of what rFactor is about. Woody's tyre repository is an excellent idea and more of the same for other areas would be beneficial also.

I'm just old school. I like to work to achieve a goal, not have it served up or gifted to me as is becoming the normal expectation of the later generations. A shame.

 

Those we should get rid off indeed, just having what is in the actual cars, great! The rest is down to the people I'm afraid...

But Durge, this is THE topic for you to pitch your separate pro version again, you haven't let that one go have you?

 

Yeah, ive been around rF2 for well over three years and i am still learning how are things interacting with each other

 

Never will till I get a bit more backing at least lol

You would still have a Normal version to buy...

Rookie buys normal version, stops using aids and buys the Pro version as well.
You would get a discount for buying both.

The extra money per person could pay for the extra server.

More people buying better pedals and shifters to run Pro ..........that could not be a bad thing for the industry.

Anyways I see it as a logical progression ( but a decade ago )

Does rFactor Pro have aids ?


P.S. People wrongly think this it's about vanity , ego, or some bullcrap. lool p

Could not be further from the truth, imho it would raise overall class of drivers.

..........and it would get rid of some many keys and menus and buttons.

 

rF2 is already as pro as it can get basically, at least on a PC. The teams that use rF Pro inject custom physics into rF core and it runs on some kind of supercomputer. Could rF2 use more realtime processing in tire model instead of lookup tables? Sure. But all that would cost CPU power.

 

Try this year's FSR mod and FSR Melbourne, and if you can come within a second of the real F1 Melbourne laptimes, I'll give you a cookie.

 

I have been racing the 2013 F1 mod for a few years with my brother. We make our own setups and follow the series throughout the season. Our setups probably suck but we have put a lot of laps in over the years and we are still working to get close to the real world times. We drive without any aids. Somebody has to really be hoofin' it to beat the real F1 lap times by 3-4 seconds in the mod imho.

There are too many variables to make a true comparison. But RFactor 2 is great fun in its pursuit to be realistic.

 

Maybe in decades to come and tech gets cheaper developers could commission a joint SuperComputer......" Share the Cores " p

McLaren use Tianhe-2 costs 390 million US ?

Bet you could do some tyre comps with that sucker.

 

If it was so easily attained, the goal you previously set was not grounded well enough in the reality of the simulation, you should set a better goal. If you are faster than anyone else on track, try using less fuel and tires. Those things are more important in racing than hotlapping and breaking track records any way. The goal should always be to minimize the loss given the situation. Weather,Car,Track,Competition are all situational, therefore comparing one lap to another is NOT a fair comparison.

You say you like work, and consider it a shame how easy a certain mod is to drive to realworld times? Start dissecting. Figuring out why a mod/track is built a certain way and doing a certain thing should keep you busy for the next 10 years or so. Best of luck!

 

Thank you

It is entirely my aim to have all of the above and as previously stated, modifying the cars I drive and ultimately a complete physics/suspension altered mod set? who knows . Not dumbed down, just , so they are not simply go karts and must be driven well to achieve the best overall. AKA Flat6 ( funnnnnnn car ) is a go kart in a porsche body. The strangest thing I see is many faster guys using all available driving aids. Really? Yes they are in the real cars...I know..........but really??? The real quick drivers generally aren't. Don't get me started.....

It is a very steep learning curve, but am getting my head around it, at least with all things suspension. <- My area. Aero I may/will tackle when I really need headaches.

I am NOT faster than everyone else on track, and yet, which is the whole point of the post. It is a very satisfying process although, as you say will be a long term project. As far as tracks go, way beyond what I have any interest in.

Ps I don't drive open wheelers, as I simply don't have the necessary reflexes required.