iRacing Lotus 49 vs rFactor2 BT20

+1 !

 

ISI should just make a crap load of cars, even if they aren't licensed, does a stupid graphical badge and some letters of text really matter?

ISI should just build more cars for each class and have them all very comparable in lap-time to each-other, but all with varying chassis dynamics, engine characteristics, aero characteristics, etc so that they all have different, but equally brilliant physics (like the current ones), and have all achieve similar laptimes (in general, obviously circuit to circuit advantages/disadvantages for each car can vary).

All the ISI car's from RFactor 1, with all the available individual upgrades (or pre-set upgrade packages) was brilliant too.

It seems now it's just a marketing/sales game because that's how you attract attention and buyers, with official licenses, official cars, etc, official tracks, etc.

 

The cars you like that you have now are based on real cars, that's the point in why they're licensed a lot of the time. The technical info...

We had a verbal agreement for Matra but were not able to confirm it since, so we had to stop using their IP.

You're right though that licensing is partly a game these days, but I try to be different, and I have to be, we have a small budget for them.


Sent from a mobile device using Tapatalk

 

Car companies should come up to you guys and ask you if you want to build their car.
A car being in rF2, a simulator with physics closest to reality, is a way of marketing.
If only I had a car company........

 

I agree they should. The logo and name is the thing of real value. There's better cars than Ferraris out there, for example, but how many would choose them given the choice to own one?


Sent from a mobile device using Tapatalk

 

What else is there to compare than to other racing simulations, and Real life ?

Obviously the real life comparison matters the most, rest of it is to determine has this imitation been succesfull in comparison to other titles of similar nature, or merely stating your personal preferences, which in no shape or form should be taken as anything else than a opinnion of an individual.

For the folks who confuses the word "Simulation" with phrases like "more fun" or "im good at it so it must be better", I have some Oxfordian Linguistics:

- simulate
Pronunciation: /ˈsɪmjʊleɪt/

imitate the appearance or character of:
red ochre intended to simulate blood
•pretend to have or feel (an emotion):
it was impossible to force a smile, to simulate pleasure
•produce a computer model of:
future population changes were simulated by computer

 

They with money wud just test the real car

 

Seems like only General Motors (Cadillac) understood that it is important to let potential customers testdrive their cars for free in simulations (and even pay for this by providing iRacing promotion codes).

Sparks and EVEs are wonderful cars and the simulation is based on real cars, I don't care for names in the sim (as long as the simulation is based on real cars).

 

It is just the marketing and publicity why some people think iRacing must be the only one true Simulator.

The professional online Racing system with laser scan tracks, licensed cars and payware give people more the impression of something special.

Indeed it is but not as good as it is presented to the public. Thats what companys see, just the whole system and popularity not how it drives.

Big manufacturer will see everything diff more as a game than iRacing.

And than there is the budget which make things easyer.

 

a la GPL! It made for (and still does) great competitive leagues. That and 300 tracks!

 

Tried out the Lotus 49 today at Oulton Park... really disappointed. But firstly, I could not use my H-shifter because of iRacings STUPID controller configuration. The reverse gear is broken, and to be able to use H-shifter at all, I need to map 6 gears + reverse. Now when my reverse gear is broken I can't do that, and the game won't allow me to map it to random button on wheel/shifter device/keyboard. LOL.

In RF2 I only map 5 gears, because I don't use more than that. I have reverse gear at 1st gear position, and 1st gear to 2nd gear position and so on, 5th gear to 6th position on the shifter.

So in iracing driving with the wheel's shift paddles is the only choice... No great experience. Wheel rotation is only 180 degrees in the car. Drivers arms stop moving at only 90 degrees, but wheels continue moving to 180 degrees, wich seems to be the limit of this car (at least default setup). Very very twitchy. The car is extremely understeery and the slides are uncatchable (maybe because i find the steering way too twitchy compared to what I'm used to in RF2). The rear is sliding heavily when just braking easily. Not as good FFB as RF2. Overall crappy feeling IMO.... Totally different from RF2's Brabham. I don't understand how anyone can say there are very little difference between them? Maybe I'm too quick to judge iracing now, but the controller system is insane, and with default setup I don't find the lotus handling believable at all.

Brabham BT20 is still the best car I've driven in any sim

 

I'm now a RF2 and IRacing user. I came to IRacing because of the lately added Oculus Rift support (which btw is amazing). Because of that I started to like IRacing, it's a company which seems to embrace innovation and I have full respect. I mention this (OT) because of that I think I'm not biased.

I bought the Lotus 49 ($11) because I like the historic formula (F3 to F1) in RF2 a lot. But I was quite disappointed driving the Lotus 49. I can't judge which model is more real because I have never driven an historic F1, but my feeling is that the Lotus 49 (with the new tire model: NTM) feels like a simple with low resolution FFB and physics simulation, while e.g. the Spark F1 in RF2 feels like a komplex with high resolution FFB and physics.

I still would like to know how to know which simulation model is more real or unreal. ATM I simply have to trust.

EDIT: Is there any way to enhance IRacing's FFB and physics fidelity (maybe hidden in config files) ? Like the FFB smoothness setting in RF2?

 

HEAR HEAR

This right now is the #1 problem with driving rF2. With no clutch simulation it's really only 2/3 of the sim experience. Working the clutch in these older cars was as much a part of driving them as working the gas and brake. Read some old racing instruction books from the 60's. H-Shifter support in rF2 is fantastic and it helps put me in the game, but not using the clutch (or having to) makes the game a bit of a lame duck.

 

Been doing some more laps with iRacings Lotus... The look and the sound of the Lotus 49 makes it interesting to drive, immersive. I still don't like the physics very much... I just wonder wich one is more realistic: 60's F1 in rF2 or iRacing? I think the Lotus have massive understeering going on in medium/high speed corners, while rF2 cars rather oversteer. Anyway, the FFB in rF2 is more alive and better, while in iRacing it's more like a hard spring. But sometimes it feels better than rF2, for example the wheel is heavier to move while standing still, this is something that disappeared from rf2 of some reason. Also the FFB is more distinct in some situations in IR.

Anyway, iRacing looks so good and it sounds so good. The 60's F1 in rF2 has really boring engine sound. I wish it will be improved in the future, and graphically I think rF2 could look as good as this. It's just very frustrating to look at replays in rF2 atm, shadows disappearing etc, and overall I think there's too much out zooming going on + bad camera positions.

Here's a video of me driving a lap online at Zandvoort.. not very good driving, and the drifting in last corner was unfortunately not intentional, I wish I could create oversteer more easily The replays is much more fun to watch than rF2's replays.

 

The Coventry and Murasama physics were still based on real cars, the Cooper and Honda.

 

I think most sims have smoothness forced on.

 

Again, I am hoping rF2 will be allowed the time to develop now after release that iRacing has been after release.

 

I wish they had just done Historics, full stop.

It would have been finished and you do not have to be Einstein to work out if the engine were specifically tailored to a certain type of car it could be better.


That seems the future to me, customized engines and sims to appeal to a specific sort of racer.


Instead of trying to make one sim everything for everyone.

 

If you have a customized engine like that, you don't have good physics, you have tailored physics. A car, is a car, a track, is a track, the world, is the world. Physics work the same way, no matter what car. That seems like a bit of a ludicrous suggestion IMHO.

 

NO! We want everything...NOW!

I said "at the moment", after all

Just a question: Is Zandvoort interesting to you? Have you spoken to them? I think both historic and modern layout is very interesting.