Where are all the 3rd party tracks?

As you said I3bullets its free and easier for ppl to get into modding. no brainer for ISI to get on board with that software. this should be put in wish list...

 

Sad thing is, I guess SPASKIS is right. They won't do it. They didn't do it for rF1 either. On the wishlist, we should probably put "We need an explanation why you shun Blender as a modding tool"... No answer yet, though Tim has been in this thread before.

 

ISI are using 3dmax and therefor have made an exporter and plugins for it - you can't expect them to "just" make all new ones for another program.

However, if ISI take a look at how the MOD-tool for AC works then they'd develop further on the rf2-viewer so it can both import from a 3d file standard and add features such as material/shader modifications - and an export from the viewer to .GMTs

Then modders can use 3d-program by choice for modeling and mapping.

As a bonus it would make tuning textures and materials much more intuitive, as you'de get what you see in the "viewer" with correct shaders and graphics engine.

 

Does anyone disagree that this is the sensible/superior approach?

 

Your idea of an importer with mapping capabilities with the viewer rendering options would be an interesting starting point.

I would also add the possibility of an AIW editing tool. Except for the fast lane which is difficult to trace without driving, for the rest of non driving paths it should help a lot.

 

It is just a different approach, being more sensible or superior, not sure. Especially with the AC approach, it feels a bit in-between things. People who have worked with unreal and the likes will probably know what I mean.

the rFactor handles everything in the source is way easier to manage, update, fix, change, etc. Tweaking is maybe less intuitive, but you will not get any difference in source vs target platform. Also, if you in AC change a shader, you
have to go back to source, maybe add a channel, or change the mapping. With rFactor1 and 2, you can stay in 3dsmax to fiddle with the shaders, mapping and meshes. For example in UDK, you build your own shaders (materials) to your liking. The
reason I said AC feels like it is in-between things, is that offers a ready to use list of shaders like ISI does, only to change them in realtime doesn't make much sense to much unless you can edit your own shaders in realtime as well.

So all in all, for me, it's all or nothing, either the ISI approach, or the modern game engine approach (where I like the latter one better)

3dsmax.exe

Some of the things you guys are requesting, really, those aren't even possible with today's modern game engines, let alone a relatively small niche product.
The rF2 viewer does exactly what it says it's going to do, lets you view your track, it's not an importer, not an editor, merely a viewer.

Come to think of it, Bobs TrackBuilder still seems to suit your wishes better than the AC tools you are looking at

 

Because we support 3DS Max as our tool.

Feel free to ask Turn 10 why then shun Playstation, Polyphony why they shun XBOX, why Apple shun other digital media applications, or why if you own a Fanatec, you shunned other manufacturers. Seems a bit selfish towards Thrustmaster. How dare you, etc, etc, etc.

The ludicrous nature of asking for a more complex tool on-par with the features of a commercial tool, except the ones you don't want to use, and expecting to get it from us, means this thread was doomed from the start. You already have that tool in 3DS Max, and can choose not to use features you don't want. Sure, we could make one. How much is 3DS Max? Well, considering we would be starting from scratch, probably 10x their price would be our asking price. It's honestly an insane suggestion, an immature discussion at best, and now it's over.