Image Space Incorporated Exclusive Interview

Just curious but why not a partnership with a studio (Sector 3 or Reiza)? Isi 2.5 + UE4 + official licensed content (special focus on tracks) + also a sim base for mods = everyone (or almost everyone) is happy.
Probably not that simple but does look simple anyway. Oh well just a racing fan dream

 

This type of partnership does sound like a great idea at first glance and from a customer point of view.

But in the real world what would be the impetus to create a partnership like this? I think it would have to be a very dominant competitor taking the majority of the market share or an owner or entrepreneur that just didn't feel like running their own business anymore. We don't have the former issue with a dominant competitor and my guess is we don't have the latter issue either


Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk 2

 

I think this isn't possible.
Unreal 4 is a game engine.
ISI 2.5 is a game engine specifically build for racing. ISI has a few years of experience with building game engines for racing games.

I think you can't mix game engines.

If you want a accurate racing game. You'll need a accurate racing game engine. So you'll need to e-mail Gjon or build your own.

 

I think this is a simple lack of understanding of how game engines seem to work. I'm not a dev, but I don't think this is realistic.

 

Hehe by saying THAT looks simple you really are showing that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about
-ISImotor content is not compatible with Unreal Engine and it would take reworking it it ALL to make it compatible.
-rFactor2 uses FAR FAR more sophisticated physical calculations than Unreal engine is even capable of at rates that Unreal cant even dream of. It would take some heavy core re-programming to get even close to pMotor. pMotor has been developed for many many years only for this one purpose. UE is meant to be as multi funtional as possible, thats why its bundle physics are rather simplified.
-Official licenced content costs fortune, and than a creation of this content costs fortune and takes forever. Thats why, track wise, there isnt that much official content in rF2. Altho im not complaining. I dont mind having it named Portugal instead of Estoril.
-Sim base for mods makes the platform and content creation even more complicated and the moddability of rf2 isnt that bad. Its just badly documented. Its much easier to just make cars, encrypt them into files and give nobody tools to open those files. If your platform is moddable, the tools and exporters must be far less professional than they would have to be if they were only meant for trained development team.

Now you will ask me why can AC do it? - Well - it cant. ACs physics engine is far inferior to the one used by rF2. Its tire model much simplier and all calculations regarding everything are simplier, in many cases actually canned by look up charts.

Yes ACs graphics engine is somewhat superior to the one used by rF2 because ISI alwayse prioritized physics. Also its not as superior as people would believe, ISIs policies vary widely when it comes to look.

The reason why i am saying this is because people continue to think that rF2 is behind and worse than everything else. But that is mostly true only on those parts that are most visible. Because those are the parts other studios focus on the most. To make it look high end. ISIs ways of things are differend. Thats why you can flatspot a tire and feel it in your steering wheel because your game actually calculated the reduced volume of the tire in the place of the flatspot. Not because the FFB got a command "there is a flatspot here on the tire, make some bumpy vibraty move". Thats why you can feel torque twist in FWD cars based on actually calculated drive train twists, not by a command "pull to a side he is in FWD car and on throttle". Thats why filling in real data from real cars will produce real like behaviour. In other titles you often see values all over the place just so it handles roughly correctly.

No saying that rf2 is perfect, is seriously far from that. But if you are here for pure racing and want it delivered properly, and want to experience what are real racers going thru in a race, than you are on the right place.
Place where nobody is making it easier for you.
If you are here so you can smash you car and admire how great the bent *carbon fibre* looks like, i suggest you to search of other titles.
(In case you didnt get the sarcasm about carbon fibre - carbon fibre does not bend - it shatters, yet you can see bent carbon fibre bodywork in certain *sims* as part of their .. ..damage modelling)

 

Just to add clarification, we use an awful lot of lookup tables as well, otherwise you wouldn't be able to run the software on your system. But we run as much as possible in realtime.

 

In fact LUTs are not canned effects.

 

What is "LUT" ?

 

Look Up Tables

Well it sorta is, depends how you use them. But ye i kinda mispoke there

 

Sorry, stay for Look Up Table, which is an array of values, usually precalculated outputs of given functions/math, to be recalled at specific inputs. This is very useful to avoid wasting power of calculation, especially if you have a dominant of recursive inputs.

 

Thank you! Yes I know what LUT´s are for.

 

Do ISI know what kind of machine would be capable of just running the tyre calcs in realtime?

 

First, thanks Tim and Tuttle for the Q&As.
Since you are so responsive right now, I thought I'll try my luck.

What are the the top priority items right now?
What is the (engine) development team currently working on?
What is the next new feature we can expect to appear in the public builds?
Will the new drivetrain model include flex and backlash?

And again many thanks for answering all the questions.

 

Imagine if ISI made their roadmap read only on this trello.com

 

I hope that if that paid mods thing comes, it had some kind of trial function so you could test the mod for hour and then make the decision wheter to buy the it or not. I think that when money gets involved to modding it could turn to some nasty stuff like spreading false information, so it would be good to let user to test mods by themselves.

Also i hope ISI takes small share from those payment because it sounds like you (ISI) need more money and employees.

Have to say that I wouldn't mind if ISI made some DLC content. I'am in desperate need of new content and i would happily give my money for it.

 

As it'll be endorsed by ISI (i.e. they put their stamp on it like with the 3PA tracks) then it'll be fairly safe to know it's of a decent quality, but having a demo to try out first would also be a good idea I think. Depends on the cost as well, if it's the cost of a pint then most may just buy it anyway as it'll be like loose change, anything more (£9.99 upwards for example) then a demo of some sort should really be included I think.

 

I think the demo would also give some extra motivation for modders to hone the physics of the cars.

 

For the architecture involved, no one. Maybe some clusterCPU but would probably need a different task architecture to run on parallel. And that's for 1 tire.

 

UE4 was just an example.
A partnership like this should happen anyway. Once Forza start securing exclusive deals in their next title some people in the sim market are going to have problems due to being "weak names". Just my 2 cents.

Let me edit my post and add some info I forgot:

Honestly if you guys made something like that happen I would pay 2x more than the packages in Race Room cost atm, would 100% support a business model like that if the sim was more "complete" and attract more people.
Hope it's clear now
This also goes to MikeeCZ, sorry didn't find a reason to read your post after the first line for the reasons above.

 

It can take a PC about 24-38 hours to run through and create the tire (and that is 1 example of each thing the tire can experience). So, nothing available right now could run our tire physics as they are currently, in realtime.