Its interesting to hear some of the feedback here considering many of you were praising it pre 0.9 and now its said that it's different even though absolutely no physics changes have been made or anything that would affect physics.
As to the other feedback about authentic physics etc. The objective of the beta builds we release is to serve a couple things. First and foremost it is to serve the purpose of acquiring feedback. So many sim-racers around the world use different hardware and acquiring feedback on issues that arise for various players helps us look into evaluating how to improve it as we go alone. This does not mean v1.0 will be perfect and why anyone thinks v1.0 is considered the stable or authentic or perfected version I do not know. Through the feedback we acquire we discuss internally to evaluate what is wrong and determine what path we have to go down to make fixes in the areas we deem to be rightfully wrong as stated. Where it concerns physics, sometimes we'll have the opinion of a different way and we may stick to that, but that's our choice. What I will say however is that I see a number of people complaining about certain physic aspect yet they run off the default setup without adjusting anything. This type of feedback is the type we don't even look at twice. We understand the default setup needs to be good, but it does require player changes to be perfected for a track to track basis. You can't expect to get in the car at any track and have it run perfectly to your driving style.
We recommend players to play with the setup, see if the changes they make actually tune out the negatives they have with the vehicle behavior. If a change doesn't affect the car as it should, then report it to us, that helps us maintain a healthy list of issues that are valid for what these vehicles are intended for and we can look at working on them.
The second thing the beta builds serve is the ability to provide vehicles earlier for all of you to enjoy so that you are not waiting for a (for lack of a better term) v1.0 release which may still be bugged and be far further in release than we originally did with the beta's. We feel this system is a better way so that we can also acquire the extra feedback as stated above.
I have some feedback after appr 30 laps of testing on Med Aero BTW
The cars look and sound fine, so well done on the eye candy.
However sorry to say the physics are IMO needing some work. In principal the rear grip seems excessive. Over steer on or off throttle is very hard to provoke. When you run wide its always the fronts that let go. I tried Aero at 14/0 front/rear to test the aero balance in med speed corners but it was still the front that runs wide. Doesn't matter if you are on throttle or off throttle, you cant have lift off oversteer, throttle oversteer, you just cant have oversteer. This lead me to conclude that the mechanical grip is too great at the rear. I played with setup; stiffened the rear, softened the front. Set diff lock at 5% (min). Diff lock is largely superflous as the rear just stays where it belongs. It wont swap ends. I even red-lined it and dropped the clutch in 1st gear and it wont wheel spin, just bogs the engine.
In motec the rear rubber temp are running at a cool 50 deg after 4 laps. So it led me to conclude that the rears just aren't working due to too much grip.
It detracted from what I personally enjoy -the ability to balance over steer and understeer through both mechanical and aero grip routes.
I also seemed to me to detract from the FFB as there is little happening to the rear of the car.
The car had IMO a bit of a dead "URD" feel to it.
I experienced similar sensations in a GT3 Porsche from RF1 that was "updated" to RF2 but the physics not fully optimised.
My personal conclusion: It could be better through a better grip balance as an introduction to open wheelers in RF2 as is its stated aim. This would mean that key skills like throttle control or counter steer are involved.
