Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by baked bean, Oct 15, 2016.
It's like the sim-racing gods are reading my mind
The radical is my favourite sim car in iracing (along with the f1's)
It's the type of car that translates to simulation incredibly well due to being lite weight and yet quick & highly strung due to using a high powered motorbike engine
I can't try until VR compatibility but this something to look forward too
I've thought many times that using a radical in VR in rf2 would be like a dream experience
Iracing Radical has about the best ffb in Iracing IMO
Fingers crossed the ETA Q1 VR release goes well
Ps anyone not got into sim-radicals are in for a massive treat
Excellent news, and great way to keep the community informed
+2, it seems a new era for rF2 is beginning.
If I had to speculate though, I'd say this development is likely to be in large part what ISI had been working on, bar VR, DX11 and the Steam related work.
That doesn't mean it's less exciting
+3 Nice work
Just the right amount of detail there. I like this new approach Thanks.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn XT1562 met Tapatalk
Thanks for the update. This is a very welcome initiative going forward.
Radicals - very nice!
I learned to not be excited when I see an interesting car licenced for rF2. There's a long list of cars that had a licencing announced, screenshot released in various stages of development (from early screenshot as above, to looking almost finished) and then no news - nevermind release - for years.
I don't think that previous post is fair. The initiative and good will of the new people making decisions deserves a vote of confidence. Thanks to everybody involved in this new challenge.
Enviado desde mi ONE A2001 mediante Tapatalk
While I agree with Euskotracks that S397 deserve commendation for continuing development of rF2, I believe jpalesi's comments were fair.
May I share some figures in regards to content releases;
Last Build v1098 was released 6 June 2016
Last new official car was released 24 March 2016 (Howston Dissenter)
Last official car update was released 7 January 2016 (Stockcar)
Last new official track was released 13 July 2016 (3PA Matsusaka)
If you only count first party content then the last release was 24 Mar 2016 (Toban)
Last official track update was released 15 August 2016 (Mores)
I do not include 3PA Gasoline Alley released May 16 2016 as it was released publicly without 3PA label only 24-48 hours previous. I know - I had publicly downloaded from the modding section of this forum and driven it before the ISI release and without 3PA labels attached.
So it has been over 6 months since any official new vehicle release and a new ISI track release, about 3 months since any official new track release.
It has been about 2 months since any form of update. In fact when the big announcement was made, the community would have thought some form of release would have been made(update or new content) considering there have been roughly monthly updates for approximately the last 2 years. In fact my thought was it would be the "Steam build" and we would see an end to some of the issues that 2 concurrent builds(steam and non-steam) have had. One example, servers showing up for one group and not the other.
Now lets look at some of the licenses that are held, not a complete list, just the ones I can remember off the top of my head. Indycar licensing including Reynard, Eagle, Cooper vehicles plus historic version of Indianapolis. A blanket license to all March vehicles. And probably the most prominent one recently, a car teased back in 2013 and seen in various track teaser screenshots recently, the Nissan GT500 SuperGT. It was annoying to see the pictures from the Sim-Racing Expo and seeing visitors to the rF2 stand getting the chance to drive a vehicle that has been floating around such for a long time and still not in the public's hands. I would have thought that this vehicle had been released with Matsusaka(considering it featured in the teaser screenshots) or even at the time of the major announcement(considering they were using it to promote the sim at the expo).
In regards to tyre model(as it is something that I have been working on recently), one of the things that I don't fully understand. S397 are considering opening up the use of the rF1 tyre model, while any of their content will be rF2 tyre model. And there are many cars that are still on various previous iterations of the tyre model that all react in different ways that require updates to bring all current variables to the model. Now the tyre I am working on I have done 4-5 complete tests starting with the pre-CPM tyre up to the version with all current variables, unknown number of various real-time tests in ttool. 100's of tests in devmode making real-time changes to understand how things work, multiple testing updates to run in game with some having up to 15 iterations of a tyre for the testers to provide feedback for future updates. I would say I have run around 2-300 in 6-8 months and I really know very little. All trying to find a similar feel to what our team achieved with the rF1 version. Using the historic open-wheel vehicles as an example, these were released in 2013, and there have been many requests on this forum to see an update to their tyre. I believe the direction S397 are taking in relation to tyre model needs to be locked down as soon as possible regardless of decision(everybody's preferences are different and have been discussed in other threads so I won't go further here).
This is called a Roadmap update, yet I can honestly say that we have not seen a roadmap. We've seen announcements and interviews with bits of interesting information in regards to vision and direction, yet still very little specifics. A roadmap should clearly show a direction. Start with 3 columns. Column 1 is the features that they(S397) consider definite for inclusion. eg. Steam only build to be released by end 2016, DX11 expected Q1 2017. Column 2 is the features that maybe possible to add; and Column 3 would be features that will not be a part of the project whether not possible due to game engine incompatibilities or beyond the capabilities of the studio. Now features can be moved between the columns as long as reasons are given eg. you may have had energy recovery system implementation in column 2, but after research found that is is not possible so it gets moved to column 3 with an explanation why. That way if there is an intelligent member of the community that figures a workaround, they can inform S397 and share their findings, which in turn could see the workaround added to column 2 or 1. Also with a system like this, only column 1 items would possibly require some form of completion goal(much like the DX11 goal of Q1 2017) depending on what that item is.
Effectively; and considering I have posted much the same a few times recently; we need more communication and documentation if you want rF2 to succeed as an OPEN racing simulation. Without it, we are pretty much where we are now.
The speed at which ISI releases new vehicles and updates old ones has always been painfully slow. rF2 seems to get a new vehicle roughly at same rate as it gets a new track, whereas other sim DLCs usually contain one track and 4-5 vehicles at least. The rF2 tire model makes building a new vehicle slightly more time consuming, but a vehicle should still finish a lot faster than a track, the 3D modeling work is so much less. With the recent change of ownership the content artists moved over to Studio 397, but this move alone is not going to speed up things at all. What they need to do is hire new people working with vehicle modeling, as I assume Studio 397 in its current form is mainly programmers, not artists.
Why not licence the vehicle modelling to respected groups like UnitedRacingDesign? Same too for track modelling. That would deliver additional quality content at a faster rate. Racing sims drivers are voracious consumers of content - need to keep the machine well fed.
3PA program would be an ideal candidate indeed, though so far every 3PA release has been unlicensed content. It might be that ISI are not allowed to share license sensitive data like track survey data or certain vehicle performance numbers with third parties (almost all licensed ISI cars have encrypted MAS packages).
Could you imagine, the superiority of Mercedes F1 would be endangered if Marussia 2012's mas weren't still encrypted.
Separate names with a comma.