rF2 biggest challenger?

AFAIK the thread title says "rf2 biggest challenger?" and NOT "Tips & Tricks for AC"

 

At the moment the biggest challenger of rF2 is Thrustmaster who keeps giving me broken wheels. I'm at the point where I dont care anymore what game it is, I just want to drive.

 

this "imho" has become a bad joke for a long time now. many say "imho" at the end of their posts and i keep asking myself what this means. it can be
1) that one diminishes his/her own opinion by stating that it's just him/her saying that. but then i ask myself why even bother saying anything at all if it is so "imho" and you dont wanna discuss it.
2) a strategy to make the one saying it immune despite of saying things which clearly trigger discussions (and one knows that).
3) an annoying empty phrase ^^

at the end this is a forum where people who love racing games (and rf2 especially) come together to exchange and discuss stuff. you can't pull yourself out after saying something by saying "imho". if you are in a forum then you should expect that people read your stuff and choose to react on it, nevertheless "imho" or not-imho.

 

I find it OK and it can be constructive to talk about other sims
and compare them to rF2!
For everyone there is something more to learn! Even for ISI (maybe), and expecially for the community.

Haven´t tried the AC Tech preview, but when I compare the vid´s, AC has - expect from the shiny car skin -
no advantage graphics-wise over rF2. In youtube vids it´s pretty similar!

Nevertheless interesting to see the differences in game development-philosophie at different companies!
SMS and Kunos first build the graphics and ISI does it last. (?)
For me it´s the more logical order...

Greets
Pete

 

i think it's ok how isi does it. graphics are for a sim not as important as nice physics. as long as graphics are decent in pre-release phase i have no probs with them not being shiny and gloomy.
besides i have seen so many videos and think from time to time that rf2 looks more realistic than other sims despite the engine itself maybe being old-er than the one from the other 2013-sims.

 

I think that there are many other aspects that are important as well, for instance ergonomics. The GUI, wizards, tripplescreen setup options, apps function, constant 60fps on tripple screen with single 7970... are really well solved in ac. If they stay on this level for the online racing, it will be very promosing. For the physics, I think they are pretty good at the moment. (csw bmw rim) Difficult to judge as there is no similar car in rf2 at the moment.

 

I agree with Peter. This forum is also where the rf2 community congregates and if we want to discuss AC then why not? Most of us love rf2 and AC both and Kunos and ISI respect each other and all can learn from each other and ISI can learn from how we perceive AC, etc., etc., etc.

So let's just be a community and love rf2 and each other and flowers and peace and all that.

I believe those uptight folks are seeing things that aren't there. It's not rude. The rules you expect others to live by simply don't exist. It's the internet. Relax.

 

Let them eat cake!

 

LOL. The uptight guys almost made me forget what I was going to say. I give AC an A+ but that Lotus although admirable for what it is is just a wimpy car. I need a 60s F1! Even with wimpy car, AC has grown on me. Really looking forward to faster car with more wheelspin, etc. to test physics more.

 

Kk, I didnt know that you were a hopeless romantic.

 

i love the TP of AC but the track is really way flat and the car as boring as it can get. i only can guess how great physics are. i need a 'proper' car to throw around some other tracks. for example the f40 on imola. ffb can be judged better imho if you have a stiffer car (singleseater openwheel would be best)
in rf2 i came to love the physics after trying formula renault on mills motorpark. a blast!

 

A video from FONismo

 

rFactor 2 and Assetto Corsa : Cake and Ice Cream. I'll have both. I particularly like the loss of grip feel in AC. I like the mod community participation in rFactor (1&2) ...

 

That's not good for rF2 and Pcars because their challengers will have like over 5million more potential customers. But I don't think iracing will gain much with their overpriced model unless they change it or make really good special deals on Steam.

 

What is a bad joke is making an essay out of a sentence and giving lectures about usage of imho.
I suppose you dislike imo and loose change in my pockets too.

As for my views on subject, I have discussed them repeatedly on this forum all last year, I wont go all over it again, I do have the right to express my opinion though, imo in this case.

(sorry for late response, house connection is dead nowdays, no way to lap around Max)

 

i never said you dont have the right to express whatever. not talking about rights here (boring anyway) i just said that it is not in your hands to decide whether one reacts on it or not. this was my only point.
and it was not a "lecture", it was supposed to be also a little bit of fun to show the form of absurdity of this "imho" phrase

 

AC looks pretty and all, but until it has rain and dynamic weather I don't want to drive it.

Even though rF2 weather is not perfect, it is very good. Racing is an outdoor sport and you cannot separate weather from racing. Anything without weather is a half of a sim. If you think rain does not make the driving difficult in rF2 (I know someone is going to come out with something to that effect!) then take the Corvette for a "spin" at Toban in the rain and get back to me on your theory of rFactor 2 having equal or more grip in the rain LOL.

 

While searching for info about Kyalami I was drawn at 1977 South African Grand Prix and Tom Pryce's tragical death.

Also I found out some interesting info about lap times in rain VS dry.
Pryce did the best time in wednesdays practise, held in wet weather, which was 1:31:57 while eventual champion of season, Niki Lauda, was lapping at second place a full second slower.

Fastest lap of the weekend was James Hunt's, a 1:15:96 in the dry.

Now I believe this is a proper difference between wet and dry, and this does not happen at RF2 atm, afaik.

 

Comparing AC to rF2 is a bit tricky.

The way I see rF2 - lots of features but most of them far from being complete.
The way I see AC - much less features, but much closer to being complete.

So AC gives better impression at first glance, but then it cannot offer much more (at least not the tech demo, but that's to be expected of tech demos ).
rF2 doesn't give such good impressions, but it's hard to deny it's growing potential, when you consider all features being worked on.

For me, there's no clear winner and I enjoy both, but I'm not fully satisfied by either.

And I don't think this comparison will start to look different anytime soon. AC will have more and more features added, while rF2 will have existing features more and more improved. Overall score will remain pretty much the same, I guess.

 

i will own and play both of them anyway, so i don't really care which is 'best'.
i think that both games will serve different purposes. when i want to race a more road car around tracks, then AC may be a better choice with those bmws and ferraris. and also rf2 is a better choice if i want to race real touringcars or open wheelers of different classes.