Lolll...how the hell did I miss this thread?!Nice Tim and can't wait to see the new and improved weather effects!
This is a real true statement and I do the the same. Thanks to Tim and ISI for this clear message. Looking forward to it . alex
Hold your horses Fairly soon... Time for someone in the business of developing - doesn't matter if it is games or mods for it - to prove me wrong... Soon is a very loosely slung-around term for many different spandings of time... Betting that the term 'soon' or 'fairly soon' is longer than many expect It's not June but a good bit further out in the distance - I'm pessimisticly sure
Yes, this is what caused so much negative attitude towards rF2 and ISI amongst some people. In it's current state, rF2 is a step forward in most areas, but a step back in some other. Features themselves are a step forward, but some of them that are unfinished actually become more of an issue than benefit. For example - if windscreen is unnaturally lit during night racing, then we can't do night racing in given car, because of visibility issues. And since rF1 had night racing, so we have a step back - all because of one shader left unfinished. As long as this situation remains, I just don't think of rFactor 2 as a product, but as a project under realization, but already accessible. And maybe this is why I don't react to number of unfinished features as bad as some other people. I guess most people don't understand the way ISI does things. That said, ISI doesn't understand how most people expect things to be done It may or may not affect the development process, but it definitely affects what people are saying about rFactor 2. Anyway, thanks for your post. Hopefully things will improve.
Forgive me, When we talk about wet weather and it being incomplete, are we talking about aquaplaning and rain on the windscreen etc? Or is the simulation of a wet track not complete in some way?
Seems to me like there is only one level of wet and no puddles. Just my observation though. Edit: Just re read "one level of wet" and I'm not sure that even makes sense.
Rain visually is on acceptable level. Lots of people cry for raindrops etc, but I don't think it would make a huge difference to the experience, especially as wipers don't work for half of the cars released. The rainspray is fairly well tuned in latest build. Fog is a bit much though. Regarding rain physics, they are a bit broken at moment. From what I have heard, the car behind leader can go much quicker, because even one car will create a dry line quickly. The road transition from wet to dry is 10 times too quick or so. There are also aspects of rain not implemented at all yet, such as aquaplaning. This means most cars have way too little grip under full wet conditions. Etc etc.
Stonec, you can't see sh*t through a windshield/visor under heavy rain/spray... It is definitely a dimension lacking at the moment...
Hm weird, I can see perfectly fine. See screenshot below from Silverstone race with full wet road. In fact I think the rain spray trail could be longer than it is at moment. View attachment 12623
I mean drops... or any sort of water on the windscreen/visor Yes you can see a lot... a lot more than in reality with full wet circumstances and a substantial downfall - missing dimension of wet weather simulation...
Right, misunderstood. I just did race against 25 AI at Silverstone with fully wet track and I have to retract my previous statement. I don't think rain is much broken at all. Granted it was slippery, but slides were controllable still and just like I would expect with fully wet track. Now if only the stupid accelerated drying/realroad could be fixed, this would be perfectly ok rain physics in my view.
Yeah i agree i think if they fixed the dry line ( i can actually see ut dry in replays , meaning see the line get bigger). This may sort the ai coming into pit for no reason for tyres. The line is drying and wetting to quick fir them to decide. And get some sort of drips on windscreen and wipers working. I have been confused and had often thought the wrong tyre i chosen should be more slidey than they were. I.e. inters -wets on a dry track seemed to be gripping well. Someone could test using the opposite tyre opposed to surface conditions. Sent from my RM-875_eu_euro1_260 using Tapatalk
Rain is working decently. IMO, however, the grip in the transition from dry to wet is not realistic or the appearance does not match what it feels, at least. As long as you see wet road, the grip should be already pretty much gone. Actually, it has always been said that the lowest grip is right after the grease droplets come up due to their lowest density. On the other hand when the path looks dry it should feel compleyely dry. Another missing feature that would make rF2 really interesting is wind, especially since realtime weather is available. It does not seem to complicated to implement from my POV. 1) generate a dynamic wind including gusts based on wind static parameters. Use a variety of real patterns. I would suggest not trying to reinvent the wheel. 2) Generate sound effects for gusts to make it believable and more predictable. Due to speed of sound a gust is heard before it fully strikes. 3) Calculate relative car to air speed for aero forces. This would include brake, wheel and engine cooling. enviado mediante tapatalk
As for aquaplaning, if a track is wet enough that cars can aquaplane, the race will be red flagged anyway. It is a non-issue.
Aquaplaning could be a puddle, or a stream across the track in a particular spot, which I agree isn't likely at the moment. But it could also happen to slicks where wet tyres can clear it - so then it's very much an issue.
Does time scale not effect the time of the drying line. ? Sent from my RM-875_eu_euro1_260 using Tapatalk
Sure wind would be nice, so would be realistic altitude effects, humidity, shadows and road temperature lowered where clouds cast shadows.. and.. and.. and.. nothing sounds complicated on paper but in reality it's all huge amount of work.
Altitude effects affect engine already I think. Not sure. Wind is dynamic and greatly conditions gear settings for long straights apart from the fun of lateral gusts. The others you mention apart from being less important (in terms of priority) IMO seem more complicated to implement since they mesh with lighting and realroad technology for example. For protected areas a nowindzone could be made just like for rain. We need to prioritize things using pareto methodology. More fun with less effort. I would vote for being wind next step and forget for a while if in the long straights of several treeful roads we gain or lose some grip in the shadows due to track temp compared to the huge effect of wind in terms of physics. enviado mediante tapatalk
If it is implemented doesn't there need to be adjustments for fuel mixture lean/rich and maybe a choice of spark plugs and maybe timing adjustment maybe ,not sure about the timing . EDIT: I guess all weather variables need to be working ie. humidity , altitude , air temps and even barometer high and low pressure ,not sure about that one either , are needed before this could be added
