TL;DR I agree, there might as well never be anything that will push physics further than rF2 did. Although I agree with
@Nieubermesch too, simulation also includes things that are being simulated, not only depth of simulation for each of those. However, I'd argue that simulation of things such as tires and aerodynamics and engines are just simply so huge, most of other things are incomparable, they are so much less important, although still very important especially for specific cars.
@AlexHeuskat ^Nobody can. And nobody likely will. Perhaps could, but most likely won't even attempt. The reason for that is demand of people who are simracers. And that demand is low bar, short sighted and simplistic when it comes to physics. Average guy who is simracing, or even advanced... can't tell the superiority of rF2 physics so certainly. There are guys, like mclarenf1papa who is very knowledgeable, experienced and skilled physics guy, or Niels Heusinkveld, who can't see how rF2 is greatest or has never expressed any support of that way. I am not entirely sure how is that, they have their fair arguments, such as for example them not liking physical tire models as much as "magic" ones. In my opinion this is such a push back, physical tire simulation is definitely the way. Perhaps it is less convenient to work with data, but I guess that depends, as this new tire modeling logic for this BMW and Formula Pro seems to have worked rather well so far and it was promoted that it comes with help of tire manufacturer, I thought it was Hankook, but Formula Pro said it is Goodyear.
Other huge advantage, at least in my personal view, is that this rF2 physical tire modeling is a lot more intuitive if you have a somewhat developed vision of how real tire should work outside just some mathematical output data, which IMO also is great way to base physics especially if you can combine it with sufficient amount of data... I think it is not as complicated, at least till you start to pursue very high level of accuracy. Speaking of accuracy, these "magic" simulations aren't capable of that in the first place, because they are too artificial in the first place. Physical modeling such as in rF2 with its brush model allows a possibility of so much more natural tire action. Many bristles that represent tire contact patch in highly realistic manner replicates state of rubber, which ones are static, which ones are sliding, loads and temperatures distribution and so on and on... Others just can't do it, they approximate too much, they just can't have contact patch working that well in all situations.
Actually IMO other non-physical tire simulation using simulations still can achieve way more than they do usually, but the last limiting factor is demand of people. Automobilista (first one) is great, but it always was small comparing to AC, and as simulation AMS is better. ACC in early access in beginning was impressive after hotfix, but it was too different to AC, and it was bashed down backwards. This alone is enough of the proof that demand of people for physics is low enough that non-physical and rather simplistic tire simulation can do the job for most. There are more physics picky people there as well, but they go along with quality of design, content and popularity which has always propels itself, more popularity leads to more popularity, especially if it comes so naturally. Many people doesn't care, they just want go fast and compete. Also many people don't want their fun to be hindered by their lack of skill, but that leaks into everywhere, including rF2.
rF2 could possibly remain in the level of its own forever as fundamental simulation available in consumer market. But it might as well hardly use most of its capabilities, for example lets say if people just don't ask for it, and don't care for it. In that case what's the point of this simulation power ? In such case I could see developer of most sims not ever even attempting increasing any depth of simulations further than it is profitable, focusing simply on what they can use to mention by marketing the product and also providing satisfaction to as much simracers as possible, which unfortunately sometimes means not letting them taste the reality that they are not in fact good enough to go that fast with some particular vehicle in some particular conditions - thats the real reality.
Thats why I wish so much for this BMW, I'd hate this step forward to be pushed back, I have seen it happening before. These things happen. And then how could you possibly expect any sort of evolution is simulation games market ? More sales maybe, nothing more.
