Q2 2023 Early Update and DLC Released

Give it a whirl today, seems I recall some time back there was a bug making AI smash into the back of you , then that bug went away? Its back, but now they also rear end each other. Over a handfull of tracks and cars today i seem to get rearended a LOT, i tried adjusting AI agression all the way down but still the same for me.

A good track to test it was Sachsenring from the workshop with some GT3's, at least a crash a lap when i was on it (AI into AI i mean)
 
pkelly said:
X2 - Let it update via Steam...not in background...no problemo:)
Click to expand...
That's best way to do it IMHO as files which are opened by rF2 may not get overwritten / replaced because permission is denied by operating system (best way to see this is to run a dedicated server and to try to update the DS by SteamCMD e.g.).
 
CeeBee said:
Give it a whirl today, seems I recall some time back there was a bug making AI smash into the back of you , then that bug went away? Its back, but now they also rear end each other. Over a handfull of tracks and cars today i seem to get rearended a LOT, i tried adjusting AI agression all the way down but still the same for me.

A good track to test it was Sachsenring from the workshop with some GT3's, at least a crash a lap when i was on it (AI into AI i mean)
Click to expand...
Don't want to be negative but this is first update in the last two years that made the game complete mess. Ai and performance wise. I did a clean install even formatted the pc but game is not in a state pre this update. I own almost all the content but I seriously think if I should invest in rFactor 2 anymore until they optimise the whole stuff.
 
CeeBee said:
Give it a whirl today, seems I recall some time back there was a bug making AI smash into the back of you , then that bug went away? Its back, but now they also rear end each other. Over a handfull of tracks and cars today i seem to get rearended a LOT, i tried adjusting AI agression all the way down but still the same for me.

A good track to test it was Sachsenring from the workshop with some GT3's, at least a crash a lap when i was on it (AI into AI i mean)
Click to expand...
I have to agree with this. I made a back to back test with the Group C mod at Le Mans. In the current version AI has still issues manouvering in the pits, especialy when hitting the track. Half of the field doesn't set a timed lap in qualy wich worked flawless before the update. This also seems to affect official content, but not as drastic. And in general AI is more erratic and prone to rearending or causing pileups. The old AI but with slipstreaming would be just about perfect. With the current AI it's simply stressing and I don't know if they will have a closer look at my tail lights. :p
 
hitm4k3r said:
I have to agree with this. I made a back to back test with the Group C mod at Le Mans. In the current version AI has still issues manouvering in the pits, especialy when hitting the track. Half of the field doesn't set a timed lap in qualy wich worked flawless before the update. This also seems to affect official content, but not as drastic. And in general AI is more erratic and prone to rearending or causing pileups. The old AI but with slipstreaming would be just about perfect. With the current AI it's simply stressing and I don't know if they will have a closer look at my tail lights. :p
Click to expand...
That was noted by the guy who has been working on the Group C Community update. Keep an eye on on this thread:
https://forum.studio-397.com/index.php?threads/mak-corp-group-c-community-update.74114/
 
Hello. Somebody can explain the new feature :

Package Management
  • Server now verifies that connected clients own the content they are using

It was already the case before o_O
Previously content not owned was not selectable.

What has changed exactly ?
 
Now the game with grids of more than 50 cars runs super smooth. What changes did they make? It runs excellent. :eek:
 
darkojovanoski1986 said:
I don't know why but with every update game is more and more graphically demanding. Running around 23 AI cars and fps get big hit. I am not having latest tech in my pc but also users with new cpu/gpu struggle in some scenarios. Optimising the game is a must in near future or everything will become huge mess very soon.
Click to expand...
Optimisation/performance of the sim has been talked about everywhere, but latest its not even in the pipeline or on MSG/s397 radar
I guess they have their own ways to do things but it will cost them users, sooner than later as cost of living around the world is on the rise and a lot of ppl wont be updating their hardware just to play this sim.
 
I am currently running black flag rules only because this is what I have had the best success with in terms of running races against the AI. Does Studio 397 have an official position on what flag rules should be selected for races against the AI? I don't want to be negative, but I'm having a hard time understanding how this latest update was supposed to be an AI improvement. For context I have been running mostly the Indycar IR18 at Indy road course and long beach. I have found the AI behavior to be worse at each of these venues after the update. IMHO the AI seems way to fast at 100% settings and also have the tendency to punt you even more than before. Also AI tend to pile up more behind each other at the scene of crashes and entering the pit lane at the end of a race. Would love to get an answer on what AI settings and flag rules Studio 397 would give for best performance.
 
GeraArg said:
Now the game with grids of more than 50 cars runs super smooth. What changes did they make? It runs excellent. :eek:
Click to expand...

I'm particularly interested to know if anything has actually been done to optimize performance when using a lot of AI.

Please, if a developer comes by here I'm interested to know.

Thanks!
 
<lengthy diatribe removed>

For nearly 3 weeks now a fresh rF2 buyer can't run the game (black screen, CTD) because no workshop items are subscribed and the game doesn't handle it gracefully. This sort of issue, and the length of time it takes to fix, makes rF2 look bad, because it is bad when it has issues like this.
 
Lazza said:
<lengthy diatribe removed>

For nearly 3 weeks now a fresh rF2 buyer can't run the game (black screen, CTD) because no workshop items are subscribed and the game doesn't handle it gracefully. This sort of issue, and the length of time it takes to fix, makes rF2 look bad, because it is bad when it has issues like this.
Click to expand...
Biggest issues i read from new users & old users: is out of box experience, performance, optimisation, old content not up dated stops them from trying buying or continuing to play rf2.
What surprises me is when ppl mention this, they get told bullshit you need to spend more time setting it up, its the best sim, what hardware, rf2 is CPU bound ect... Honestly & with the issues you mention its time something was done to correct them.
 
Binny said:
Biggest issues i read from new users & old users: is out of box experience, performance, optimisation, old content not up dated stops them from trying buying or continuing to play rf2.
What surprises me is when ppl mention this, they get told bullshit you need to spend more time setting it up, its the best sim, what hardware, rf2 is CPU bound ect... Honestly & with the issues you mention its time something was done to correct them.
Click to expand...

Performance wise... even tough when you benchmark the game it may seem like the overall performance is good (enough).
The game suffer some pretty bad 0.1% lows (micro stutters)... and very bad performance on start of grid (bad most of the time and horrible on some combo/time/weather.)... EVEN (and it's a very important point to note)... on lowest setting possible.

Even tough this old engine still suffer some obvious 'hanging'... on the graphic side itself everything was already optimize... as much as they could...

What worries me is one of the last comment from Paul Jeffrey... where he said that 'they were happy with the current performance... and didn't plan to explore it further'.

Disappointing to hear... but at the same time, make sense... they already tried to optimize the thing... maybe they were focused on specific features (only) while optimizing and didn't bother with old stuff... but I doubt that... usually you'll make a frametime analysis of the all thing... anyway...
So they probably know where the time lost come from by now... just couldn't (or didn't make sense in their mind) to try harder... (especially when benchmark looks good enough when you focus only on averages...)
 
Last edited:
Kahel said:
Performance wise... even tough when you benchmark the game it may seem like the overall performance is good (enough).
The game suffer some pretty bad 0.1% lows (micro stutters)... and very bad performance on start of grid (bad most of the time and horrible on some combo/time/weather.)... EVEN (and it's a very important point to note)... on lowest setting possible.

Even tough this old engine still suffer some obvious 'hanging'... on the graphic side itself everything was already optimize... as much as they could...

What worries me is one of the last comment from Paul Jeffrey... where he said that 'they were happy with the current performance... and didn't plan to explore it further'.

Disappointing to hear... but at the same time, make sense... they already tried to optimize the thing... maybe they were focused on specific features (only) while optimizing and didn't bother with old stuff... but I doubt that... usually you'll make a frametime analysis of the all thing... anyway...
So they probably know where the time lost come from by now... just couldn't (or didn't make sense in their mind) to try harder... (especially when benchmark looks good enough when you focus only on averages...)
Click to expand...
What's a bit annoying in all these discussions is that there is a common trend to generalize things. Like "rF2 has bad perforamance", "VR performance is bad" or "it's a pain to set up and get running". I get that some people have different hardware and software and that people might find different things more challenging depending on their experience with software, but alot of time those generalizations are thrown around with basicly no detail. Like in your example for example @Kahel, I as a dev would have no idea what's the issue and why you get micro stuttering. That's a perfect example for an issue that is on your end.

Little example: I run the sim with a GTX 1070, i7 6700k @4GHz and 32 GB Ram at 1920x1080 with a mix of high low and medium settings with grids of 40 or 50 cars at Le Mans and have very few issues or noticable performance drops that mostly happen when all light sources get switched on. I have the feeling that some people don't have a) the required hardware to run this sim full beans but expect 2023 graphics or that there isn't enough time spent to configure the graphics settings so that people can keep it at a stable framerate. As long as I have been playing video games on PC it's a requirement to adjust the software according to your hardware and not the other way around. Wich is also a common way of thinking that everything needs to be on a silver plate.

Please don't take this post offensive, but if I would generalize my experience with the sim as the typical experience with rF2, everyone would think that it is an easy plug and play experience, wich is quite frankly not possible due to the sheer complexity of this product. People expect a racing game but forget that we are in the simulation side of things where stuff might not be as straight forward. I am all for a smooth user experience but there comes a point when a developer can only do so much. AC never had a wizard to setup the controls and people got along with it. Why isn't that the case for rF2?
 
There are plenty of games over the years that had poor performance but people did their best to play them anyway, I'm not saying performance doesn't matter but I think it's a relatively rare reason to stop playing (or stop trying to play). Things that actually stop you running the game, happen for apparently no reason (or an obvious bug), and with no direct communication to the user, are things that will cause a refund.

We can argue about performance and physics and AI behaviour and appearance, but can we just get a game that works for people?
 
hitm4k3r said:
What's a bit annoying in all these discussions is that there is a common trend to generalize things. Like "rF2 has bad perforamance", "VR performance is bad" or "it's a pain to set up and get running". I get that some people have different hardware and software and that people might find different things more challenging depending on their experience with software, but alot of time those generalizations are thrown around with basicly no detail. Like in your example for example @Kahel, I as a dev would have no idea what's the issue and why you get micro stuttering. That's a perfect example for an issue that is on your end.

Little example: I run the sim with a GTX 1070, i7 6700k @4GHz and 32 GB Ram at 1920x1080 with a mix of high low and medium settings with grids of 40 or 50 cars at Le Mans and have very few issues or noticable performance drops that mostly happen when all light sources get switched on. I have the feeling that some people don't have a) the required hardware to run this sim full beans but expect 2023 graphics or that there isn't enough time spent to configure the graphics settings so that people can keep it at a stable framerate. As long as I have been playing video games on PC it's a requirement to adjust the software according to your hardware and not the other way around. Wich is also a common way of thinking that everything needs to be on a silver plate.

Please don't take this post offensive, but if I would generalize my experience with the sim as the typical experience with rF2, everyone would think that it is an easy plug and play experience, wich is quite frankly not possible due to the sheer complexity of this product. People expect a racing game but forget that we are in the simulation side of things where stuff might not be as straight forward. I am all for a smooth user experience but there comes a point when a developer can only do so much. AC never had a wizard to setup the controls and people got along with it. Why isn't that the case for rF2?
Click to expand...

I agree. I think there's a lot of prejudice when it comes to rF2. Every game has issues on some computers, but when those issues happen on rF2, no way, it has to be perfect. In other games, almost everyone understands that they have to go through whatever they have to go through to play, they won't dare blaming the game which is working well for thousands of others.

Many times I see people complaining that a lot of research and setup is needed to make it work. When asked about it they usually change their narrative from "doing a lot of research" to "well, I had to setup the controls although it took me like 10min".

I agree with @Lazza that the subscription issue should be solved as soon as possible although I don't know if it happens always or if it's something more hard to reproduce. In any way, that's an important issue. But there's always those who jump to the bandwagon to beat rF2. It's a sport.
 
I think we deserve most of the blame as one of the disorganized hobbies going.
There are no charters or official organizations.
We give sims a score out of 5 or 10.
There are no rules, guides or standards.
Check out how show cars are judged.

Painters & Modders Co-Op
College of Painting and Modding
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top