Pales
Registered
It's increasingly worrying that third party modders are sometimes better than official content released.
Porsche GT3R - Wrong implemented Dash
It's increasingly worrying that third party modders are sometimes better than official content released.
Will Mazeo
Registered
StrawmanAndy
Registered
I could be wrong, but I believe rF2 setup is per rpm throughout all the gears. So it's not individually setup per gear. So some LED's many stay on in 7th gear, but in 4th they light up because the rpm range is greater in lower gears. The Cosworth CCW MKII can be setup individually per gear to suit each RPM. So that makes the LED's work for how the driver wants and ensures a unique setup per gear. It's hard to get perfect, so I understand the frustration but unless you have the software capabilities of Cosworth software applied (which requires a logger processor in a car) you won't get perfect LED's like real life.
Will Mazeo
Registered
I know that......... and like I said some mods with open gear/rpm (that mess up with this even more) managed to get this right. No excuse to have this poor implementation. I never said it has to be perfect as IRL (I know you can set it as you wish in real life, these wheels are just computers in the end duh) but should not be this poor. Check the Oreca (1k rpm left) and I think the M8 (700rpm left). But then if they cant get refuel flow right let alone such a minimal detail like this
StrawmanAndy
Registered
I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. They're working on some many new features, cars and tracks, it's easy to make a few mistakes or get it slightly wrong. I understand it's not good, but I don't know a team like s397 that has developed, created some many new tracks in a short period of time. I mean, the LMP2/3 are awesome driving cars and look amazing. New rain feature done miles quicker than ISI could do. I get it's an area they need to improve on making things more perfect, but I'm grateful they're developing modern content.
Considering I've been doing basic modding for years, people always find a way to find an issue or mistake with your work. That's just life. s397 are doing a lot with not a lot. I think we should back them and help rather than criticise negatively. We're all human.
Bjørn
Registered
How can people complain about a stretched gear indicator when there isn't any of the following in place for our beloved sim such as: an ERS system... Or temperatures on track and ambient affected by sun rays or 'proper' rain with aquaplanning or a better online competition system? I just can't fathom that fact.
Will Mazeo
Registered
Some stuff like refuel flow is part of the BoP tho, should not go unnoticed let alone not fixed after a year of pack release (GT3)
I dont buy this "they are too busy". They are professionals, a basic check list would prevent cars from being released with these issues.
Well I dont care about ERS, the track temperature stuff they said they are doing but used this "we wont break mods" excuse which I think makes no sense, with a few extra lines in tire files you can activate the feature, if the lines are not present then it works as it is now, looks easy to me but hey I'm not the one writing the code lines
And they are building the competition system so why complain? I cant fathom that.
Bjørn
Registered
How can you not not care about ERS-systems? If you want to properly simulate some of the most raced cars, endurance prototypes and F1 cars, on the platform you have to have it and it's been absent for waaaay too long, every other title has it.
They hinted on building everything (also ERS with screenshots of hybrid-era FISIs years ago), but we don't have it. It could/should be core features, yet people complain about a stretched out gear indicator. You get my point, I sincerely hope.
They hinted on building everything (also ERS with screenshots of hybrid-era FISIs years ago), but we don't have it. It could/should be core features, yet people complain about a stretched out gear indicator. You get my point, I sincerely hope.
Will Mazeo
Registered
I dont care about driving F1 or current LMP1 cars, they both are too fast for me, having the P1 cars to fill the grid if racing against the AI is ok, but then no need ERS for that. Next rules with the "hyper cars" maybe they'll be nice but personally I dont see any need for that right now and looks like S397 dont see that either (thank God so they can focus on other more important cars)
But then this is off topic, no more on this.
But then this is off topic, no more on this.
patchedupdemon
Registered
All content under S397 has an air of rushed about it, I wouldn’t mind if things were put right not long after release, but when they aren’t the list just keeps growing and then some stuff never gets fixed
This is not a good look for rf2
This is not a good look for rf2
Will Mazeo
Registered
That's why I dont believe this "waiting for manufacturer approval"
Bjørn
Registered
So because they're "too fast for you" an ERS system is not vital for a serious racing simulator... Duly noted LUL
The Iron Wolf
Registered
I won't be popular saying this, but unfortunately I have to agree with that. In my view "Official" content should set an example of quality, polish and use engine features to the max. But that does not seem to happen. One example is no detachable parts on M8 GTE. Another is "Self in Rearview" feature not implemented, while supported by the engine, and I believe it is possible to make it work correctly even in a tin-top. Other weird thing is strange use of vehicle class string in some content, that does not allow proper association to a class. No detachable parts make that content uninteresting to me, and I prefer community content that has that working correctly.
However, in my view rF2 is not as much as a game like iRacing or Raceroom, where content is closed and controlled, but it is rather open platform for content creation, and that one of the reasons I really like rF2. So I kind of never understood why there's so much desire for official contant - official content is content of one of modding teams, really. It is a bit strange that "Official" content is the way it is, but as long as game still stays open I am personally a happy camper
Good to know some series support LCD Pages, did not know that, will map button.
Last edited:
Will Mazeo
Registered
Correct, to me it isn't. There are other areas I'd rather see them focusing. Plus everything requested in this thread is basics of the basics. If they aren't doing the basic....
Alex72
Registered
What is detatchable parts, mate?I won't be popular saying this, but unfortunately I have to agree with that. In my view "Official" content should set an example of quality, polish and use engine features to the max. But that does not seem to happen. One example is no detachable parts on M8 GTE. Another is "Self in Rearview" feature not implemented, while supported by the engine, and I believe it is possible to make it work correctly even in a tin-top. Other weird thing is strange use of vehicle class string in some content, that does not allow proper association to a class. No detachable parts make that content uninteresting to me, and I prefer community content that has that working correctly.
However, in my view rF2 is not as much as a game like iRacing or Raceroom, where content is closed and controlled, but it is rather open platform for content creation, and that one of the reasons I really like rF2. So I kind of never understood why there's so much desire for official contant - official content is content of one of modding teams, really. It is a bit strange that "Official" content is the way it is, but as long as game still stays open I am personally a happy camper
Good to know some series support LCD Pages, did not know that, will map button.
The Iron Wolf
Registered
Hi Alex
It is feature when you lose front aero parts, doors, wings. They fall off, form debree on track. URD, Apex, KartSim content has that. I won't call out which, but in one of those loss of front aero causes very realistic drop of front downforce, which is awesome. Without that feature... I feel like I am traveling to Raceroom world of indestructible blocks, which I do not enjoy. Of course, it is not _that_ bad, some performance impactinng damage is here, just not visible. Still, it is a step backwards from what engine is capable of, hence, disappointing. Not a huge deal though, as community content still works correctly.
Last edited:
Nabil El Khaldi
Registered
If we are talking about Dashboards and rF2, it is serious problem. During the years, and watching a lot of onboards of real cars that they are in rF2, is the wrong information of the dash.
Here is an example:
rF2
iRacing (real information)
iRacing is one of the few that shows you the real information in the dashboard, and unfortunetely rF2 is not on that list
But at least it can be changed because all the information that appears in the dash is possible to add it.
For example, the indicator of speed it can be changed to revs indicator, laptimes also, the diff between the laptimes in Seg Diff etc...
(Also the steering wheel is not modelated like the real one)
Hope Studio 397 could work this better
Here is an example:
rF2
iRacing (real information)
iRacing is one of the few that shows you the real information in the dashboard, and unfortunetely rF2 is not on that list
But at least it can be changed because all the information that appears in the dash is possible to add it.
For example, the indicator of speed it can be changed to revs indicator, laptimes also, the diff between the laptimes in Seg Diff etc...
(Also the steering wheel is not modelated like the real one)
Hope Studio 397 could work this better
Last edited:
Will Mazeo
Registered
The irony of your post is that to have stuff like ERS properly implemented they need extra into on the LCD/leds
+ stuff like pre set activation areas using GPS (which could be already implemented for TC/ABS). hehehe but yeah we are nitpicking.
Alex72
Registered
Ah gotcha. Wait, official content dont do that?! I thought they did...Hi Alex