Comparing rF 2 to ACC

I began my sim GT-racing journey with ACC. Prior to its release I was mostly into rally and road cars. Following it out of early access was uninspiring to say the least. The cars drove like lumbering tanks with no feedback, and I struggled to condition myself to put in the minute, controlled movements necessary to get anything resembling a decent lap.

While it was still in EA, S397 put out their laser scanned Sebring and for the first time I saw an rF 2 video of someone driving a field of GT3 cars. Watching the motion of those cars over bumps and curbs got me purchasing rF 2 immediately. Compared to the broken, static movements I was used to in ACC, it was like a breath of fresh air. I had never seen sim cars take curbs so realistically before, with a rendering of weight transfer, inertia and tyre deformation I only knew from real life. It just looked 'right'. I paid full price for everything and dove in. From that day on rF 2 became without a doubt my favourite racing simulator, despite its many flaws (all of which have been discussed at length on this forum).

Now that we're all locked away, I'm rapidly upgrading my sim rig, as well as developing more sim racing content, I thought it would be a great time to look at where both games are, since ACC is well out of EA, and rF 2 has consolidated a strong collection of GT3 content.



What do you guys think? I've heard it said that the lumbering, vague feeling of ACC is how those cars are meant to feel, but every part of me that's ever driven an automobile screams whenever I compare rF 2 to it. My gut reaction is that the 'data' in ACC is likely more correct, but the fundamental physics model of rF 2 is substantially more advanced, so whereas one has the correct 'figures' but incomplete driving model, the other one has the complete opposite.

 

Very nicely done.

 

Yesterday i did a race on Le Mans 1967 (beautiful and very well optimized track) with 330 P4, MKIV, Lola T70 and other great cars from Endurance 67 Mod with 40 cars on the track, the whole thing by night in VR with no aliasing and good fps.

 

This lumbering feeling of ACC is the typical handwriting of the person responsible for physics, Aris V.
Those who know GT Legends and the Power & Glory Mod will remember. The Power & Glory Mod was a conversion of the original Simbin Content from GT Legends to GTR2 and it was extremely noticeable that the vehicles in the Power & Glory Mod where Aris V. was still responsible for the physics, were extremely lumbering. The reason for this is that the inertia of the modded content was massively increased, which had the advantage that the cars didn't drive nervously in the borderline area anymore, but reacted gently and you could drift better, as you like to do it with old cars. You can also say that you have compensated for certain weaknesses in tyre physics. The whole thing continued in Assetto Corsa.A 1000kg Cobra drives like a 2 tonne bathtub and GT3 vehicles steer more slowly than my 22 year old Nissan Primera on winter tyres. A modder got an insight into the physics files and told me about the high inertia values.
It was so extreme there that the cars reacted late to steering reactions, which you could see well in VR or on the triple screen with real Fov. If you suddenly steered from left to right, the car reacted rubber-like with a significant delay. It is precisely this lumbering reaction, which allows the driver to react in time when there is a loss of grip on the rear axle, that unfortunately also has significant side effects.
I was able to rediscover exactly this behaviour in ACC. If you quickly turn the steering wheel to the right and left in a GT3 on a straight line at more than 200km/h without the car suddenly breaking away but sliding straight ahead stubbornly at times, then you have overdone it imho with the Inertia.
In the old Gmotor Engine before rFactor2 there was an intertia bug, so you had to play with the values there as well, which the Aris did with the Power &Glory mod. Reiza fixed that for Automobilista, which is based on the Gmotor Engine. Because Project Cars 2 is also based on the Gmotor Engine in terms of physics, this bug was even found in Project Cars 2, where Reiza fixed the bug for Automobilista 2 and you can feel it, because the cars react very naturally to the inertia, while in Project Cars some cars drove as if they only weighed 500kg.

I'm just surprised that not many people notice this, but many seem to like the lumbering, easily controllable handling far from sudden weight shifts.

 

Personally, driving a GT3 in rF2 seems boring, instead I really enjoy driving in ACC, I think it is the most realistic thing at the moment, it is what I expect in a GT3, very fast, very safe but beyond the uncontrollable limit. In addition to its driving everything else is brilliant, the sounds are of great quality, the graphic section is brutal, driving in rain is a delicacy, there is nothing more immersive than this simulator. The only downside I can put is its poor performance in VR.

 

I think that's why we're blessed to have so many Sims with each one an interpretation of the Devs idea of "Real", no single Sim will ever be 100% so the next best we can aim for is what is actually as close to reality as possible in those Devs eyes. As for ACC I trust in Kunos and their relationship with Real Drivers & Data from the series, I don't need to question anything as I enjoy it for what it gives me, same with RF2/iRacing/RaceRoom/AMS2 etc.
Therefore I find the constant need to compare Sims a bit redundant, they all have their own individual feel, their own idea of what is real and a vast majority of Simmers (myself included) are in no position to pass judgement. We can all say what we want the cars to behave like, but we'll never truly know ourselves, no amount of Trackday driving or 30minute "Racing Experience" Packages will ever be enough to give us a real sense of the reality of how a racing car behaves, especially in a specific series on different tracks in a multitude of weather conditions.