Interview: Gjon Camaj and Tim Wheatley on rFactor 2

" Doug: The rejoin capability – which you promised would happen and it did – was a big benefit to those of us who host endurance races of several hours and have drivers running our events from many varied locations. The DQ and UNDQ commands are the other terrific admin tools that have really helped. I thought it was funny that one of the other big sim racing titles announced they were going to have driver swaps – and said they were the first to fully support it – when it has been in rFactor for years unofficially supported and formally supported in rFactor 2 for almost two years.

Gjon: We noticed that. It’s largely the same as every time you buy a racing game, seeing the word “realistic” somewhere in the description regardless of whether it actually is. People forget that as of now, rFactor 2 is still the only way to get day-to-night-to-day racing with driver swaps, a rejoin feature, weather conditions, a variable road surface, pit stops, car damage, tire wear and flatspot damage, as well as with 25+ cars in an event non-stop for hours.

:cool:

" Gjon: I have even seen almost as many mods being kept private as released to the public. People are being paid for their work by people who use our software commercially, and as the sim racing community seems so negative towards paid mods, those mods are only seen by that one paying client. I understand the politics, but wish people would give themselves a choice. "

Is there any way to find out who the other payware mod makers are, I'm willing to pay for good mods :p

" Gjon: We hope that once our stock car is available it should be a solid basis for modders to create many other similarly constructed cars. We are working with outside developers to bring new content to rF2 and are always interested in talking to others about this possibility. "

Does this mean say, a V8 Supercars mod could be developed using the Stock Car as a basis or is this more directed at speedway trucks etc ? Now for all those V8 SC fanatics that are about to jump down my throat about V8s not being speedway cars, when you take the skin off them, they are similar in a lot of ways, and as such the feel and physics of a road course Stock Car would be a good starting point.
 
Tim, you are asking for positive feedback on this interview.
If you want positive feedbach than you have to give positive information!
There are few and most of them we knew already as a regular reader of that forum.
What I find good:
Outsourcing of content-making to create more content and (at last!) the better cooperation and support
with/for modders.
What I find bad:
Still too less stuff members for this ambitious project and therefor slow development
and too many areas under construction/half baked.
Simple as that.

Greets
Pete
 
FatCity said:
Does this mean say, a V8 Supercars mod could be developed using the Stock Car as a basis or is this more directed at speedway trucks etc ? Now for all those V8 SC fanatics that are about to jump down my throat about V8s not being speedway cars, when you take the skin off them, they are similar in a lot of ways, and as such the feel and physics of a road course Stock Car would be a good starting point.
Click to expand...

I guess the mean for the tires. Which is known as the main complexity when developing a car for rFactor2.

All the main 3 series of the American Stock Car Series (you know what I mean :rolleyes:) use basicly the same tire. The other variants of stock car racing such as ARCA, Late Models, Super Late Models and even Mexican and Canadian series aren't far off.

In these terms the V8 Supercar tire has a completly different structure.
 
Hi Tim,

Follows is what I hope is some constructive feedback after the reading the article, actually not really criticism but my thoughts after reading the article.

It would be great to get an ETA on some of the tools/doco that were mentioned in the article (from the article the following were mentioned)

- Regarding Multiview : I don’t really have any issues with it. There was an interface/tool in the works some time ago for helping to set it up, but has yet to be completed....
- Regarding Tyre modelling : We are, however, having active discussions on this very point and are producing a spreadsheet to allow calculations to be quickly made in the same way our physics engineer does it. We also have examples of tires in the Dev Corner, and will update those when time permits.
- Regarding modelling complexity : A new utility is under development to help modders with things we’ve heard about, but things have been stable now for a long time...
- Regarding modelling time : One thing that we probably should have done some time ago was put together something like a quick start guide. That is something that is on the ToDo list.

Updating existing content : I would love to see the existing content updated, I'm even happy to wait a few weeks for new content if the old content gets updated first. I remember when Mores (I think it was Mores) was updated the graphic changes from a user perspective were huge and I think the Track Team tweeted that making the update was the best day that they had spent, so if it's only a few days work per car/track to upgrade the graphics then this would be greatly appreciated. Gjon mentioned that it will be done as time permits but I think anything that can be done to make existing content better looking would encourage new users who may be wowed by other sim graphics to choose rF2.

My general thoughts are that now that rF2 has several serious competitors (where rF1 had few), any work that can be done to make the graphics the same level as the competitors (on comparable hardware) will entice new users, and any work that can be done to release tools and documentation for modders will only help to encourage more modding of a high standard, which will again encourage more users.

Anyway, the article was appreciated and the above is just my 2 cents...
 
64r said:
Hi Tim,

Follows is what I hope is some constructive feedback after the reading the article, actually not really criticism but my thoughts after reading the article.

It would be great to get an ETA on some of the tools/doco that were mentioned in the article (from the article the following were mentioned)

- Regarding Multiview : I don’t really have any issues with it. There was an interface/tool in the works some time ago for helping to set it up, but has yet to be completed....
- Regarding Tyre modelling : We are, however, having active discussions on this very point and are producing a spreadsheet to allow calculations to be quickly made in the same way our physics engineer does it. We also have examples of tires in the Dev Corner, and will update those when time permits.
- Regarding modelling complexity : A new utility is under development to help modders with things we’ve heard about, but things have been stable now for a long time...
- Regarding modelling time : One thing that we probably should have done some time ago was put together something like a quick start guide. That is something that is on the ToDo list.

Updating existing content : I would love to see the existing content updated, I'm even happy to wait a few weeks for new content if the old content gets updated first. I remember when Mores (I think it was Mores) was updated the graphic changes from a user perspective were huge and I think the Track Team tweeted that making the update was the best day that they had spent, so if it's only a few days work per car/track to upgrade the graphics then this would be greatly appreciated. Gjon mentioned that it will be done as time permits but I think anything that can be done to make existing content better looking would encourage new users who may be wowed by other sim graphics to choose rF2.

My general thoughts are that now that rF2 has several serious competitors (where rF1 had few), any work that can be done to make the graphics the same level as the competitors (on comparable hardware) will entice new users, and any work that can be done to release tools and documentation for modders will only help to encourage more modding of a high standard, which will again encourage more users.

Anyway, the article was appreciated and the above is just my 2 cents...
Click to expand...
It is indeed. :)

It's very difficult to give dates. Impossible, actually. The tire spreadsheet has been WIP for months (and fairly solidly worked on - he's trying to do a lot with it). Multiview is behind other things so no start/end yet. And the problem with a guide of any sort? Someone has to stop making cars and tracks to make a guide on how to make cars and tracks. :) No date was given because even when you ask me for specifics on dates, there are none.

We'll keep hopping back and forth between new and old, always have.

Understand the comment about gfx entirely, and I agree. But our funding sources are different, staffing sizes are different and initial dev priorities are different. You'd be saying the same thing about physics right now if we'd focussed on gfx first. :) Track team have said in their own Q&A that they were learning a lot with our first tracks about how to make tracks for rF2. It's not obviously just about the engine.

A lot of the things like the tools, even the older track work, happen to fill gaps. Then you go back to main items after gaps in their development. That's why there's not much chance of giving exact timing on how much free time there will be to work on them. Until they become main items, you just don't know.
 
peterchen said:
It don´t seems obvious that I refer in my earlier post to this although I posted it in "Interview: Gjon Camaj and Tim Wheatley on rFactor 2" - thread. Strange!
Click to expand...
I was referring to my own previous post, the one you quoted. I am not sure you understood it, or parts of the Q&A, as what you posted really doesn't have anything to do with what I said. Perhaps I'm not clear, perhaps you're not understanding, no idea. I made an effort to refer back, hoping you'd read it again and perhaps understand. I now realize that's a fruitless exercise, sorry for wasting your time in that attempt.
 
The problem with ETA's is the disappointment they bring when not met. I can't blame ISI for not giving us them as we already know what will result if they don't make a feature on time.

I guess some sort of general roadmap of what the next few things to be worked on might be good while not mentioning ETA's. But having said that I guess the whole dev process is dynamic as such that if a big name circuit or vehicle where to be signed, that would change anyway. If this already exists, my bad.

As for the triples discussion. Getting them setup isn't hard. The only things I've noticed is funky things happening with reflections and lighting on the outer screens as well as animated objects, such as in car fans, not being animated on the outer screens.

Having said all that, I am still thankful for the article :)
 
Tim Wheatley said:
He's been eating Sushi for five years, according to his Twitter.
Click to expand...

Oh no, I'm a hardcore martial arts fan but the food................, he should try some oriental food/turkish specialties such as Adana Kebap, Köfte, Döner, .......etc. :D

I've seen there are now food trucks in the USA, maybe he can find one offering that. :)

edit: even she can't ignore the fact, that the Döner has the force. :D

View attachment 14277

http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=...r=1726&page=1&start=0&ndsp=34&ved=0CFMQrQMwEQ
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hello tim

hope your okay..

I read and correct me if im wrong, but is wet weather and all the elements of it, being pushed aside so to speak..

For me that's a big factor in this game, more so than having more "fake tracks and cars".. I Do like RF2 don't get me wrong, but think some decisions going forward are not helping this sim. As others said theres a lot of competition out there, and im not sure you can use the excuse of "were a small team" anymore, look at reiza their no bigger, and kunos, even simbin are going through tough times. Imo these devs are achieving more wit their titles.

I think you need to get that wet weather function up n running as that's a part of rf2 other sims haven't got. Then get a series format into the game to enable us, not just a hot lapping game or few laps with AI. Also the HDR which makes most cockpits turn yellow!! You have all the parts here to easily make a sim no one can touch. But I fear theres other sims that will excel sooner than Rf2 can. Rf2 has always been preached as a hardcore sim, (that's what drove me to your product) with pure realistic elements (tyre deformation etc etc) so why not concentrate on those elements that WILL make this serious sim.? ie: wet weather, AI with proper pit strategies and multi/endurance style racing... and what not...

Forget more tracks and cars,,, these are all being modded anyway..

I know im sure theres the big suits that have the last say, but in the end we buy your product, which at this point in time., im not sure where its going :(

Thanks Tim

dan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Decent wet simulation is needed... So rF2 can brand itself as being such a thing :)
It is high up on my list too
 
msportdan said:
I read and correct me if im wrong, but is wet weather and all the elements of it, being pushed aside so to speak..
Click to expand...
Here is what was said:
Updates to the weather system is not currently on our priority list. Like with many of our systems, accessing the files directly can give you control of things not available through the UI
Click to expand...
Said in the context of the settings available for weather in the UI. There was absolutely no mention of any other element that gives a wet racing element to a sim. Pushed aside? No. Top priority? No. Obviously if it is your top priority, then we are indeed putting consolidation of dry racing experiences ahead of it right now. Yes.
 
msportdan said:
hello tim

hope your okay..

I read and correct me if im wrong, but is wet weather and all the elements of it, being pushed aside so to speak..

For me that's a big factor in this game, more so than having more "fake tracks and cars".. I Do like RF2 don't get me wrong, but think some decisions going forward are not helping this sim. As others said theres a lot of competition out there, and im not sure you can use the excuse of "were a small team" anymore, look at reiza their no bigger, and kunos, even simbin are going through tough times. Imo these devs are achieving more wit their titles.

I think you need to get that wet weather function up n running as that's a part of rf2 other sims haven't got. Then get a series format into the game to enable us, not just a hot lapping game or few laps with AI. Also the HDR which makes most cockpits turn yellow!! You have all the parts here to easily make a sim no one can touch. But I fear theres other sims that will excel sooner than Rf2 can. Rf2 has always been preached as a hardcore sim, (that's what drove me to your product) with pure realistic elements (tyre deformation etc etc) so why not concentrate on those elements that WILL make this serious sim.? ie: wet weather, AI with proper pit strategies and multi/endurance style racing... and what not...

Forget more tracks and cars,,, these are all being modded anyway..

I know im sure theres the big suits that have the last say, but in the end we buy your product, which at this point in time., im not sure where its going :(

Thanks Tim

dan
Click to expand...

The people that make the cars and tracks, may not be the people that code the wet weather? Ever thought of that? :)

If they hadn't have mentioned the priority of wet weather then it wouldn't be too much of an issue. People whined that the core features weren't worked on enough, then they whine that their is not enough content. The phrase is true: "you can't please all of the people, all of the time".
 
Tim Wheatley said:
Said in the context of the settings available for weather in the UI. There was absolutely no mention of any other element that gives a wet racing element to a sim. Pushed aside? No. Top priority? No. Obviously if it is your top priority, then we are indeed putting consolidation of dry racing experiences ahead of it right now. Yes.
Click to expand...

I don't think that was made clear enough then. To me, Gjon's first sentence clearly is a reply to the first part of the question ("While the weather engine is working, it tends to be as unpredictable as… the weather. Does it have a place in the update line of things to be done, or is it a lower priority while other things mentioned in this interview get resolved first? Can you tell us if the feature set for the weather is complete?") and the second part deals with the question about the 5 varied sub-sections vs. what is possible within .wet files.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top