I'm trying to explain (justify) to my friends why RF2 is so good. Why it's not an arcade game, why it doesn't feel like their grids, gt5s and forzas. Is there not somewhere that explains RF2 in detail? The physics (tires, engine, suspension etc) the models, the capabilities of the gmotor2 engine... Perhaps some propaganda pamphlet that says RF2 can do this, this and this. RF2 can also do "this"! RF2 has the capability of simulating these aspects. Etc... Anything like that available? I've searched ISI's site and can't find any reason why I've invested thousands in this game lol. Help.
Like this: http://www.wikihow.com/Convince-Anyone-of-Anything or: http://thedailylove.com/you-dont-have-to-convince-anyone-of-anything/
Because, if it's good enough for consecutive 4-time F1 team and drivers champions, it's good enough for anyone (even when it's stripped of their proprietary, highly technical, engineering-"only" features):
Where from that video do you get that they are using rFactor. I have read on ISI promo materials that F1 teams have used it but never seen confirmation that they are still using it. Would be interesting to find out though considering all the stick that rF2 gets.
http://www.simracingworld.com/games/312-rfactor-pro/ http://www.virtualr.net/driving-red-bulls-rfactor-pro-simulator
Thanks for the sources. It is interesting to know that there are current F1 teams that are using ISI developed software, shows they have some good credentials. I dont know why rF2 gets so criticized compared to the likes of iracing or even the as yet unreleased Assetto Corsa, I have tried the other 2 and definitely felt some seemingly canned effects. Such as brake locking in an mx5 in iracing makes the wheel vibrate and Assetto has very heavy steering at times like a spring effect (both are good sims I'm sure, just trying to give examples). The physics in rF2 seem completely natural to me, I have read criticisms sometimes but often they are just what people wrongly expect to happen or what they've seen in other games. In response to the OP, the first time I played rF2 it was unlike anything else I'd played, it is not like arcade games where all you have to do is get your lines right and use full brakes and full throttle on corners. On rF2 you have to brake properly, turn in properly at just the right speed, make mid corner corrections to balance the slide, balancing the exit on the throttle using all the curb. Also real road is an excellent feature, you have to react to different grip levels and changes in what the car can do, it really makes you think about your lap.
Just let them drive, they simply should feel the difference. If you need arguments why rf2 is different, there is something wrong, at least the difference on the steering wheel should be enough to feel the soul of rf2.
That's the problem though, not everybody thinks that FFB should be completely realistic. Since we don't feel gforces, canned effects might be actually better and "feel" more realistic even if they aren't. In real life the feedback from steering wheel isn't very important but in sims it's almost all we have so a canned effect here and there to give us better idea might be good. Because of that some cars in rf2 don't tell me anything what they're up to through the wheel. I generally like realfeel + rf1 more than rf2s ffb.
FFB was the big one for me, after coming from GTL/GTR2 etc. And after you play rF2 for a while, to go back to the other titles just feels dead in the steering to me. Like there is so much more info you are missing. The downside to the brilliant FFB is that if you are driving on a poorly converted track surface, it feels like there are corrugated bumps everywhere, which is annoying. I guess thats the downside of taking the FFB from the surface mesh itself. FFB can be very personal though, and some people will never gel with it. The other thing I like is just the general feeling of car balance. Driving the old 60's cars give you a great feel of what you can do to influence the car handling and weight transfer.
rfPro is not good enough for anyone. The reason some professional users are turned away from it is, that it only runs on windows machines and therefore can't easily be used in hard-realtime applications. you need to do quite some dirty tricks to get Windows to work in realtime. The real professional realtime simulators run on linux.
AFAIK not many professional training suites using rF2 except the ones already known of, like Base Performance, though they use any sim that gives them the car, track of experience wanted. What he's saying is that rF2 is an evolution of rF1, and rF1 was good enough for those he mentioned. They're under confidentiality agreements of their own needs for the most part, as are we at ISI. But the page did carry testimonials at one point from Force India, RedBull and Brawn. If you watch the video he posted, you can clearly see the telltale ISI (Pre-rF2) 'rubber line' in the turns.
Some simulators for consumer such as the one on the MS kart center uses rf1 which MS himself represent in the past and he said, sure it is not real but gives you a good idea about driving a F1 on track. I don't know if it is still in use since i wasn't there.
Let your friends drive it and it will do the talking for you. When I tried nKPro (running off my laptop) I packed up my PS3s and sold them with my copies of GT5. Fast forward a couple years and I've gone to the dark side and built a PC for rF2 and the AC preview. The ability to fully customize the sim can be a selling factor as well. e.g. Many of the cockpit positions in GT5 were way off. Too much camera/head shake in some of the cars. Once rF2 gets a few more mainstream tracks (hoping for an ISI modeled Suzuka and Road Atlanta) we'll be set.
Not sure if serious, this is the first time I'm hearing that to be honest... There are even pc's with a realtime operating system, INtime, and that in fact does real time processing, and is based on windows if I'm correct
