[REL] Endurance Series rF2

I am pretty sure that they are aware of it by now, so why repeating it for the 10th time? Version numbers don't matter anyway. A mod is done when it is done and there are clearly updates planned so why keep going with your harshness? People are too damn spoilt these days. What do you think what "your work is an insult" means? They made a mistake so what? Does it mean that you can sit on a high horse?

I agree with the intention of your original post, but not how you appraoched them. There is no need to call anyone out or to insult people.
 
I encourage anyone who feels they're not getting what they want from a mod to join a team and work on their own release. Once you're on the other side of the wall and providing content to end users, you will get a taste of how much they appreciate your work. :) I've been on a couple of mod teams, and no matter what you do there will be people who disapprove. Ultimately, you have to have to be able to decide when good enough is good enough (because you will never be able to prove that it's "right"), and move on, or else you will be responding to requests until the end of time.

I only wish that there was a way to edit the physics for local offline use so that people so inclined could tweak things to suit themselves and not harangue the developers to change the data for everyone else (who may feel differently).
 
Meh this is a poor excuse. The problem is not doing a mod, the problem is saying it is realistic when it isn't. Just release it without the false propaganda (hello Kunos) and the amount of complaints decrease.
I enjoy the P2 in this mod a lot, tho I wish it would behave more like rF1/AMS since all the values in the hdv are the same/near same as those versions but I guess rF2 tires won't let it happen.
Btw why there is no HPD cars?
 
Will Mazeo said:
Meh this is a poor excuse. The problem is not doing a mod, the problem is saying it is realistic when it isn't. Just release it without the false propaganda (hello Kunos) and the amount of complaints decrease.
I enjoy the P2 in this mod a lot, tho I wish it would behave more like rF1/AMS since all the values in the hdv are the same/near same as those versions but I guess rF2 tires won't let it happen.
Btw why there is no HPD cars?
Click to expand...

Compared to what rF1/AMS cars?
 
They started going on the "wrong" way with SP3 on rF1, I remember telling some guys working for them (GR...) on TS during race event, with a lot of others drivers, we were quite precise about our concerns and how we needed to exploit the mod to be fast, and how that was wrong.
"We know what we do, are you sure about your FFB settings ? Racing teams in contact, we do it for free etc...".
Ok, but if you don't want constructives comments, well, it's complicated.
They had the same feedbacks from some guys that know their stuff about Flat 6 release.
And now it's bigger because more people where expecting them the deliver something like Endurance Series V1 on rFactor.
But, for some reason, and we can't fully blame them, I'm sure there were some big moves inside the team, some newbies etc..., they can't do it again.
Everybody (okay, maybe only 95%) there is saying thank you for your work, it's great to give so much, but also, for some reason, the mod disappoint because any vanilla content from AMS is a lot better on every aspect. And there were a lot less teasing too.
Talking about attitude, enduracers' guys can't say others people aren't doing that good (remember doing some comments on URD back then ? :) ), tease about how it's going to be the best mod with everything more accurate than ever, and then complain about people not being nice because they found out it's just padder and effect (actually, 3D and skins).

Sorry, but the community of rF2 users is not to blame, some of them did a lot of work, also on their free time, also for free, to try to give enduracers answers about where to look at.
 
Lots of poo-slinging going on about a mod where the cars react in a fairly believable manner for 4-wheeled things that have actual weight to them. I've got a fair amount of real-world experience driving a pretty diverse selection of cars around parking lots (SCCA Solo II Autocross) for the last 13yrs.

In terms of weight and ride stiffness, the most "racy" cars I've driven aren't too much softer than a GTE car. The most common trait of both of them? They move. Like...despite how stiff and light the car is, it actually moves around. Suspension travel, body movement, tires at the edge of adhesion, etc. This is how a car in real life will feel. To me, while the GT cars aren't perfect, they're believable. Spend some time watching those cars circulate around Sebring during a tag and you'll see lots of movement and a fair amount of wallowing around as the chassis reacts to the bumps and various imperfections in the road surface.

My 2 cents: Enduracers just need to keep doing what they're doing. I can't help but wonder many judge negatively on a virtual representation of a car because it's all too easy to forget you're missing the sensation of actually being *in* the car. Taking that sense away will naturally make a car *seem* off in one way or another now that you're relying only on what narrow visual window you have, what your wheel communicates back to you, and what audio feedback you're provided. Not being in the car is HUGE.

*puts on flame suit for actually typing any sort of observation*
 
ucfquattroguy said:
Lots of poo-slinging going on about a mod where the cars react in a fairly believable manner for 4-wheeled things that have actual weight to them. I've got a fair amount of real-world experience driving a pretty diverse selection of cars around parking lots (SCCA Solo II Autocross) for the last 13yrs.

In terms of weight and ride stiffness, the most "racy" cars I've driven aren't too much softer than a GTE car. The most common trait of both of them? They move. Like...despite how stiff and light the car is, it actually moves around. Suspension travel, body movement, tires at the edge of adhesion, etc. This is how a car in real life will feel. To me, while the GT cars aren't perfect, they're believable. Spend some time watching those cars circulate around Sebring during a tag and you'll see lots of movement and a fair amount of wallowing around as the chassis reacts to the bumps and various imperfections in the road surface.

My 2 cents: Enduracers just need to keep doing what they're doing. I can't help but wonder many judge negatively on a virtual representation of a car because it's all too easy to forget you're missing the sensation of actually being *in* the car. Taking that sense away will naturally make a car *seem* off in one way or another now that you're relying only on what narrow visual window you have, what your wheel communicates back to you, and what audio feedback you're provided. Not being in the car is HUGE.

*puts on flame suit for actually typing any sort of observation*
Click to expand...

Nobody talked about that kind of movement. Also, regardless of your experience, even if you were Lewis Hamilton, what has been talking about is totally objective, they are elemental physics. As for the last paragraph, I think most of us here have years of sim experience to know about lack of seat of pants feeling...
 
I'd love to at least privately try the physics out. Also liked in rf1 they were unlocked and people could add their own cars using the good physics but now you've stopped any chance of that happening. The car handling doesn't seem bad, it's just there is no feedback from the wheel. I really hate the use of steering ffb upgrade, I don't get why modders use it when rF2 allows users to adjust the strength themselves. Use rF2 features and put in a good setting ffb in the hdv, it's so weak on anything and I'm not getting any response when the car spins. It has potential, but it's not being used. I understand time went into this, but I'd like to see something a bit better from the physics, it's handling and grip seems okay but I can't feel the car shift or when it's going loose, just goes round sadly.
 
Just a quick bit on FFB from me. I have only tried the LMP2 cars, and only on a handful of tracks. I read that the default FFB setting is meant for the G25 while I use the t500rs. Default setting represents 20 Nm, the 2 upgrade options are 30 Nm and 10 Nm. After test driving and checking telemetry I noted the cars put out a peak steering torque of around 30 Nm. My conclusion is that wheels with more available torque (t500, fanatec and up) will see a more linear FFB using the 30 Nm upgrade. While lesser wheels will have stronger ut less linear output using the default setting.
TK

PS. I believe this also adds to MaD_King's findings. If using a t500 with default FFB setting you get 100% output from your wheel when the game outputs anything over 66%. If on top of that your profiler setting is above 60-70% (linear for t500rs) your FFB wheels almost turns into an on/off switch.
 
Last edited:
BobDobbs said:
I encourage anyone who feels they're not getting what they want from a mod to join a team and work on their own release. Once you're on the other side of the wall and providing content to end users, you will get a taste of how much they appreciate your work. :) I've been on a couple of mod teams, and no matter what you do there will be people who disapprove. Ultimately, you have to have to be able to decide when good enough is good enough (because you will never be able to prove that it's "right"), and move on, or else you will be responding to requests until the end of time.

I only wish that there was a way to edit the physics for local offline use so that people so inclined could tweak things to suit themselves and not harangue the developers to change the data for everyone else (who may feel differently).
Click to expand...

I have to add to this and say Yes! Try it yourself. Modding I mean.
I've also been in now 3 groups.
Two in the rFactor1 days that both tried to stay together but failed during the early rF2 days when the format was a BETA for the want of a another word. Not that I can't think of one that wouldn't be censored out anyway. But both have gone by the wayside.
The third and last had high hopes and good intentions to do things with rF2 but over the few years I worked on stuff for them it wasn't focused on anything. The words hit and miss, Willy, nilly come to mind. With no real goal for a team to achieve it didn't really achieve that much. Well not of note anyway.
I'm not a fan of one off's. Though ISI set the depressant for this form of mods.
And not a big fan of open wheel cars or those that were racing when my Grandparents were on their first date either! Though it seams most that post here and/or use rF2 are.

Enduracers have manage to at least to stay together and spend the past years trying to produce a "Multi car" mod for all of us. rF2 isn't multi car or series friendly, though a bit better now it's still not the greatest. But out of all the newest titles, What is?
I'm a artist, Painter, Textures guy. Physics are over my head and I wont pretend to be anything else but what I do know and understand is it's not easy. Producing good physics is hard, Producing great physics is (going from the comments here) impossible! Doing physics for a multi car mod were all the cars are different but competitive......
No matter who you are or what you think, others will disagree. No matter how hard you work on something you will get those that don't appreciate it for what it is. Not what "they" wanted or expected it to be.

You soon learn fast when your in a mod team to grow a thick skin and take the crap some dis out. But in saying that I can be, and have been abused for giving negative feedback on mods. Though not really on physics because I've never driven a real race car. Never driven a car on a race track. Never driven a car at 100% of it's ability and I really doubt many here can say any different. I'm more on the 3D and art work. In-game look.
Otherwise what is feedback? I learn from it. My harshest critic is myself. I'd suggest other to do the same.
We all have our opinions on things. Good, bad or indifferent don't stop saying what you think. No feedback is useless. All just good feedback is worse. We learn and build on the negatives!
If your not in the mod team, Don't get involve in a grudge match with a person that has a differing opinion to you! Allow the team to respond and discuss it with that person. It's their work after all and you never know, they may even agree with it!

We all could be so lucky to work with a team that has stuck it out for so long and had a end goal along with it.
 
Slamfunk3 said:
Just a quick bit on FFB from me. I have only tried the LMP2 cars, and only on a handful of tracks. I read that the default FFB setting is meant for the G25 w.
Click to expand...
I have a G25 and find I'm not quite getting the ffb I want with the default settings from the URD LMP2 cars. But, having said that, the URD LMP2 is probably the easiest, most predictable car I've driven in the last few weeks.(I was getting very tired of swapping ends with various GT3 cars)
So, if I want to lap consistently for an extended period, the LMP2 from URD is currently my choice. But I still want a little more resistance from the wheel.
 
StrawmanAndy said:
I'd love to at least privately try the physics out. Also liked in rf1 they were unlocked and people could add their own cars using the good physics but now you've stopped any chance of that happening. The car handling doesn't seem bad, it's just there is no feedback from the wheel. I really hate the use of steering ffb upgrade, I don't get why modders use it when rF2 allows users to adjust the strength themselves. Use rF2 features and put in a good setting ffb in the hdv, it's so weak on anything and I'm not getting any response when the car spins. It has potential, but it's not being used. I understand time went into this, but I'd like to see something a bit better from the physics, it's handling and grip seems okay but I can't feel the car shift or when it's going loose, just goes round sadly.
Click to expand...

I can feel the car fairly well with my CSW, but I agree with your suggestions regarding the implementation of FFB in mods.
 
Marc Collins said:
I can feel the car fairly well with my CSW, but I agree with your suggestions regarding the implementation of FFB in mods.
Click to expand...
I accept that my PC/wheel are not working correctly, perhaps I'm losing some feeling. But I've talked to others and they say the feeling is weak and bad too, so it can't just be me. And equally when I drive other car mods I know the feedback is there and I know what the car is doing. So I don't think it's a wheel issue but rather the torque steering and stuff being too weak.

It's like adding an ABS option in the upgrades file, why? We got the option in game to select it if needed, and it's the same with the FFB. If the game has the option then use it, it's just old fashion rF1 stuff still. I still maintain that the car physics seem good, considering how difficult it is to mod the cars, and equally feel if the physics were open you would find people might find a solution and make it better. But they've blocked themselves off against the community from at least trying. Really don't like it when physics are locked out, car body models I can understand but everything else locked I don't get.
 
StrawmanAndy said:
. I still maintain that the car physics seem good, considering how difficult it is to mod the cars, and equally feel if the physics were open you would find people might find a solution and make it better. But they've blocked themselves off against the community from at least trying. Really don't like it when physics are locked out, car body models I can understand but everything else locked I don't get.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There are already safeguards against online racing with modded physics, so why lock out the people who want to experiment with different values offline?

I bought rF1 from the earliest days and have a lifetime sub to rF2, but in a few areas like this, I feel rF2 is a clear step backward in accessibility.
 
Fantastic mod, for me one of the best ever. Flat 6 too. I have g25. thank you.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-12-10_19-40-26.gif
    upload_2016-12-10_19-40-26.gif
    43 bytes · Views: 369
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top