Bring back (+ or - ) part of LMU improvements to rF2 (ONLY most profitable for users + MSG)

[Lgel]

Can someone tell to someone who hasn't tried LMU, what are the improvements ? Are there many ? At least tell a few most significant ones.

It is my feeling in October, in May I had many frustrating stability issues and I stopped using LMU.

They are many little things improved, graphics, sounds, physics (tires allowing less slip angle), recent versions improved performance (I can run 64 cars fields smoothly).

It is not night and day, but when I compare racing at Sebring with the Oreca P2 available on both sims, I much prefer LMU.

I still use RF2 because there is a lot of content I like, but even in it's incomplete state, there is no doubt that LMU is a more appealing sim.

Cheers.

 

[mantasisg]

Manta I generaly see you as a very sensible person with enough intellect to have a reasonable discussion. What I don't get is, that you simply can't believe that LMU is differerent eventhough people tell you that it is - people who have spent enough time with both products - or that you throw around stuff like that there is nothing significant over rF2. People throw around buzzwords like significance completely ignoring the fact, that you can actually meassure significance. So now please explain to me: how are you going to meassure that significance if you haven't even played the title?

Significance is measured by common sense IMO. And it can be measured in literally every units, because everything is more or less significant, but obviously at the end it is up to individual perception to agree if x amount is significant or not.

As an example. To me it was very significant improvement when S397/MSG made track temperatures influence grip in rF2. There were many other significant improvements made to rF2 through the years.

Another example. Fine simulated wet weather would be extremely significant, actually every separate functionality to achieve that is significant.

It is my feeling in October, in May I had many frustrating stability issues and I stopped using LMU.

They are many little things improved, graphics, sounds, physics (tires allowing less slip angle), recent versions improved performance (I can run 64 cars fields smoothly).

It is not night and day, but when I compare racing at Sebring with the Oreca P2 available on both sims, I much prefer LMU.

I still use RF2 because there is a lot of content I like, but even in it's incomplete state, there is no doubt that LMU is a more appealing sim.

Cheers.

Yes I see all these little things improved might combine into significant sense of improved experience. The tires thing sounds just like slight redesign of how tires are parametrized - which also might be significant to someone, but in terms of development it is probably mostly just a matter of decision, it is probably not due to some physics code breakthrough.

Improved performance sounds like it could be significant improvement.

For modern Endurance racing people should choose LMU indeed. No question about it. But I am more concerned about how much further software was pushed forward besides content.

Sure, anyway. The more it will be, the more it will be depressing how rF2 is just left there, not being developed further. But it is how it is. I wish LMU goes as great as it can.