Does RF2 have plan in improving/tweaking their slip angle physics?

[johndc]

Hello. I have observed how rfactor 2 has some slip angle physics issues. Many pro sim racers and real life racers have said that rfactor2 slip angle is excessive and not close to realistic game mechanics.

Thanks for the devs hardwork and I hope this update would come to rfactor 2 soon.

 

[Lazza]

So just for everyone else's benefit, this also got posted on Discord and basically the same thing on the LMU forum regarding LMU.

There's a bit of assumption going on, plus some confirmation bias, and some lack of understanding of how the game does its physics. Whether there's an ongoing issue with car dynamics rests, IMO, on how people are driving them in order to compete at the highest levels.

It's probably too early to call in LMU, perhaps someone has some input on recent rF2 cars in competitive league racing / RC? (where at least replays are readily available without jumping through hoops, when they work)

 

[RaceNut]

Hello. I have observed how rfactor 2 has some slip angle physics issues. Many pro sim racers and real life racers have said that rfactor2 slip angle is excessive and not close to realistic game mechanics.

Thanks for the devs hardwork and I hope this update would come to rfactor 2 soon.

I have a friend that's driven many track days in some very fast cars; he says no simulation is realistic.

If you want to convince dev's to change the game physics, try using factual data to prove your point.
I've heard it works much better than opinions do.

 

[johndc]

This is not to press against LMU and Rfactor2. I am doing these posts because I want this game to improve and probably be the best sim racing game out. This issue in Rfactor2 is not a myth and this issue still persists in LMU. The game is already good but being good doesnt mean you should just stay stay there the whole time.

Lots of players who reviewed it, including pro race car drivers including gt racers that has enough experience with race cars with advanced downforce technology. Its just a general representation of the specific classes. These cars have a basic behavior that should generally react close around a certain benchmark. I am not sure if the devs sees this as a less important detail in the game but I was just recommending how important this is in my own perspective.

One thing I know is LMU as a serious sim racing game, its has probably the best spot right now in sim racing platform. There are enough great sim racers and real life pro racers that are willing to give their honest inputs to improve the game. They themselves say they are willing to listen to the community and these specific people are the best source to know what is the best way to replicate the game closer to real racing physics.

I might have just taken this out of proportion and maybe I dont have enough scope of the complexity of achieving and developing these specific type of physics but If its possible I hope the devs would look into this and get more inputs from real racers that drive these specific cars.

 

[RaceNut]

This is not to press against LMU and Rfactor2. I am doing these posts because I want this game to improve and probably be the best sim racing game out. This issue in Rfactor2 is not a myth and this issue still persists in LMU. The game is already good but being good doesnt mean you should just stay stay there the whole time.

Lots of players who reviewed it, including pro race car drivers including gt racers that has enough experience with race cars with advanced downforce technology. Its just a general representation of the specific classes. These cars have a basic behavior that should generally react close around a certain benchmark. I am not sure if the devs sees this as a less important detail in the game but I was just recommending how important this is in my own perspective.

One thing I know is LMU as a serious sim racing game, its has probably the best spot right now in sim racing platform. There are enough great sim racers and real life pro racers that are willing to give their honest inputs to improve the game. They themselves say they are willing to listen to the community and these specific people are the best source to know what is the best way to replicate the game closer to real racing physics.

I might have just taken this out of proportion and maybe I dont have enough scope of the complexity of achieving and developing these specific type of physics but If its possible I hope the devs would look into this and get more inputs from real racers that drive these specific cars.

You do realize that many Real-Life racing teams use rF2 (pro version) for testing purposes. While the technology / data is used in very specific ways, the basic physics model in use is much the same. Should that not account for something?
AC is also used for training purposes, yet these two simulations are very different in approach to modeling physics / tires.

Quite a few Pro Race-car drivers also point to iRacing physics as being quite flawed. We can find cases in almost every racing simulation where [Professional drivers + Sim-racers] either celebrate accuracy of physics or rant against them.
Ben Collins (Race-car driver /Test driver / Former Stig / Pcars2 handling consultant) once stated in an interview (when asked about racing sims), "All Racing Sim's are Rubbish". Who's right? Who's wrong? How do we know? Why should we care?

The mere fact that even Pro Race-car drivers who also sim-race cannot agree on which title does physics best should give us a clue. Human judgement of the real-life vs virtual racing worlds is clearly prone to errors within the translation process.

Sure, it would be nice to have a definitive answer to the questions of physics & tire-model accuracy for once and for all but, unless you are a Real-life race car driver / team using simulation for training purposes, does it really matter?

 

[Taranta]

... does it really matter?

Oh yes ...

 

[Lazza]

You do realize that many Real-Life racing teams use rF2 (pro version) for testing purposes. While the technology / data is used in very specific ways, the basic physics model in use is much the same. Should that not account for something?
AC is also used for training purposes, yet these two simulations are very different in approach to modeling physics / tires.

Quite a few Pro Race-car drivers also point to iRacing physics as being quite flawed. We can find cases in almost every racing simulation where [Professional drivers + Sim-racers] either celebrate accuracy of physics or rant against them.
Ben Collins (Race-car driver /Test driver / Former Stig / Pcars2 handling consultant) once stated in an interview (when asked about racing sims), "All Racing Sim's are Rubbish". Who's right? Who's wrong? How do we know? Why should we care?

The mere fact that even Pro Race-car drivers who also sim-race cannot agree on which title does physics best should give us a clue. Human judgement of the real-life vs virtual racing worlds is clearly prone to errors within the translation process.

Sure, it would be nice to have a definitive answer to the questions of physics & tire-model accuracy for once and for all but, unless you are a Real-life race car driver / team using simulation for training purposes, does it really matter?

All the significant error aside, I would be wary of equating rFactor 2 with rFPro. They are entirely different product lines, and any professional teams using rFPro are running their own physics parameters (at the least), or their own physics code - including for things like tyres.

 

[RaceNut]

All the significant error aside, I would be wary of equating rFactor 2 with rFPro. They are entirely different product lines, and any professional teams using rFPro are running their own physics parameters (at the least), or their own physics code - including for things like tyres.

Yes, thank you for that clarification. My memory module may be a little slippy these days.

 

[avenger82]

To answer your question in the post title : I don’t think so. The devs have so many long standing core issues to solve and the one you’re describing is one of them, but I guess it has low priority or hard to solve (or both). for the foreseeable future they will be busy patching and working on LMU. If the fix is in the common code the there’s a chance it will eventually be backported to rF2. But I’m not on the official Discord so I may by wrong.

 

[Xorezzz]

You do realize that many Real-Life racing teams use rF2 (pro version) for testing purposes. While the technology / data is used in very specific ways, the basic physics model in use is much the same. Should that not account for something?
AC is also used for training purposes, yet these two simulations are very different in approach to modeling physics / tires.

Quite a few Pro Race-car drivers also point to iRacing physics as being quite flawed. We can find cases in almost every racing simulation where [Professional drivers + Sim-racers] either celebrate accuracy of physics or rant against them.
Ben Collins (Race-car driver /Test driver / Former Stig / Pcars2 handling consultant) once stated in an interview (when asked about racing sims), "All Racing Sim's are Rubbish". Who's right? Who's wrong? How do we know? Why should we care?

The mere fact that even Pro Race-car drivers who also sim-race cannot agree on which title does physics best should give us a clue. Human judgement of the real-life vs virtual racing worlds is clearly prone to errors within the translation process.

Sure, it would be nice to have a definitive answer to the questions of physics & tire-model accuracy for once and for all but, unless you are a Real-life race car driver / team using simulation for training purposes, does it really matter?

First of all the op question was, "is the slip angle physic improved", not "is LMU better than Iracing or other sims".
You say then that Real-life teams use Rf2 pro version for testing, you don't mean Rf pro right? Then "data is used in very specific ways" but "basic physics model in use is much the same", can you tell us how important the basic physics model is versus the specific use of technology / data for the sliding angle problem?
Also, you say basically that no real data mean no proof, but how can someone here collect "real data" on the slip angle?
See, you ask the op to use only objective and data proofed reasoning but on the opposite you use only subjective points to not answer his question at last.

Also, you can't say that, because no every experts (pro drivers) agree on "what sim is better", there is no consensus of valid opinion on the fact that the "slip angle is wrong", because, the question is not the same (here we talk about the slip angle, could you find any pro driver that said that the slip angle in rf2 is correct?), secondly in every matter in the world you'll find an expert from your advice even if total opposite from the consensus.

So yes, the fact that Daniel Morad said in one video that the slip angle for him is wrong, that you have to throw the car "far too much" in the corner to be fast, and that he also heard that from many other pro drivers, is a very valid argument.
I often watch GT3 race, onboard videos of quali laptimes, and you can see the slip angle because it's objectively visible (difference between where the car is pointing in corner and when the car is going), you could draw two line and make the calculation.
In Rf2 when you compare onboard video of top player qualifying laptime (saw recently a merc AMG on spa), the slip angle is far higher than in reality, like 2 times higher at least. On some cars it makes just no sense (Porsche Cup for example).

Sadly on this aspect specifically, iracing's onboard seem more realistic.

If I have the time I'll to a video on it with 2 quali on spa.

I don't see the same problem with btcc for example.

And yes it matters because it takes over the precision of driving.

Love the feel of the sim and the input corrections you have to make in the corner unlike another where it's very clinical and you basically never have to correct inputs on the fly, and where every lap feel the same. I think moving 100% on Rf2 LMU if the problem is solved. But the risk is that iracing takes the lead by implementing some Rf2 ideas in the physics, as they keep talking about upcoming tyre overhall improvement.

 

[Lazza]

So yes, the fact that Daniel Morad said in one video that the slip angle for him is wrong, that you have to throw the car "far too much" in the corner to be fast, and that he also heard that from many other pro drivers, is a very valid argument.
I often watch GT3 race, onboard videos of quali laptimes, and you can see the slip angle because it's objectively visible (difference between where the car is pointing in corner and when the car is going), you could draw two line and make the calculation.
In Rf2 when you compare onboard video of top player qualifying laptime (saw recently a merc AMG on spa), the slip angle is far higher than in reality, like 2 times higher at least. On some cars it makes just no sense (Porsche Cup for example).

Daniel Morad also(?) said that about LMU, while not driving very fast, in a very obvious case of confirmation bias.

One of the devs said LMU has slip angles that are not achievable in rF2, so assuming that's not an outright lie (or mistaken) we should be able to presume there has been some advancement in this area there. Whether that ever comes back to rF2 is another matter entirely.

As you imply though, it is somewhat vehicle specific in its nature, so some cars are better than others.

I think we can all agree no sim has it perfect, will probably ever get it perfect, and while rF2 will at times reward obviously unrealistic driving something like iRacing requires (up to this time) an unrealistic degree of discipline, it's just not so obvious (and games make it easier to spot things like slip angle, than watching real life, thanks to various 'camera' angles). One thing is for sure, when people come in to rF2 hearing social media talk about slip angles and then drive a car sliding around without spinning they immediately point at it, without considering how fast they're going. Not many drivers are actually able to drive very fast, consistently, with those more extreme slip angles, but every player and their dog will complain about it even though they aren't near the limits driving any which way (and I certainly include myself in that one).

I'm all for maximising realism, but we shouldn't blow things out of proportion either. IIRC the GT3 tyres never got overhauled in the same way the GTE ones were, so they're among the main offenders here.

 

[Xorezzz]

I wasn't very precise, Daniel Morad said this in a video about LMU, with some Rf2 background and pointing some other pro driver advices. He says that the more he plays the game the more obvious the problem is.
I think we go past the "subjective point" and the confirmation bias here. I make the // with iracing some years ago when there was a denial on the grip limit problem, some pro drivers pointed that and it was quite helpful for the game improvements.
But okay I guess the best way to quantify it is to make a comparison between onboard videos, and make sure the difference is not in driver's technique.
I did not discover Rf2 threw social media, I'm pretty much "new" in social media reading. I've played Rf2 since the first public build, even if it wasn't my main sim, and saw the massive progress on driving physics (to me).
The slip angle thing to me is really obvious in GT3/GT3 cup, less with GTE, not with BTCC and some other cars (lastest open wheelers) and yes it was much more obvious before tyres updates.
I discovered D M's videos while searching for a way to reduce it, even looking for mods like assetto's RSS that totally change the feeling with assetto's slip angle for example.
I don't think it's related to camera angles, there are plenty of fixed cam onboard on YT, and it's a good camera to feel it, at least you can see it immediatly with this cams on RF2 but far less in reality. I'll think about a way to calculate it.
Iracing has his own problems that you describe well and that are (generaly) well accepted like real problems in the community. In the last dev update they talk about future improvements on this and (unlike some time ago) they seem to recognise it and work in the good way.