FIA Vegas eRace - Was it good for SimRacing?

[Chris]

2017 is now well and truly underway, and for many months prior to this day, a select group of SimRacers have been practicing their rear end's off in order to have the best shot at winning the 200,000 dollar cash prize on offer from the inaugural Vegas eRace.

Whilst the chance to see the worlds best SimRacers going head-to-head with real life professional drivers is a tasty proposition, did the Vegas eRace really capitalise on SimRacing's very first mass-market production?

In some respects, yes it did. It gained far and away the largest viewership that SimRacing has ever had, and given the money that was thrown at it, that's not surprising. It had the backing from large corporate entities such as VISA, the FIA and the Formula E teams themselves, which meant that out of all the SimRacing events that have taken place over the decades, this one was far and away the heaviest hitter. Utilising the real life commentary team of Jack Nicholls and Dario Franchitti also helped boost the cause of the event and gave it more credibility. It really wasn't too distant from a real life Formula E race.

However, the driving standards were what the majority of those of us in this little niche were curious to see. In the past, Formula E has run similar events, albeit on a smaller scale, at race events with the fans. A couple of real Formula E drivers would go head-to-head with a fan (or several) at the Simulator-zone, which every single time, would result in a crash-fest so bad it made public lobby racing look cleaner than a vacuum-sealed laboratory, as the everyday fan had no clue what they were doing, and the drivers themselves simply didn't care as it was all a big joke.

Given that 200,000 'Big Ones' were on the line, the drivers taking part no doubt had to take things a little more seriously, but would there be enough time for them to get up to speed with basic SimRacing skills in order to avoid taking someone out and potentially costing them a life-changing amount of money?

Well, the driving standards from the real life drivers had improved. The only massive incident coming when David Greco tried to go three wide through the fast chicane, causing a large pile-up and significant damage. This is no different to any pro-league race you'll find. Driving standards are never going to be perfect. But with so much money on the line, and more eyeballs on the race than SimRacing has ever had, every incident is magnified and scrutinised just that much more.

As for the presentation of the race, well I actually thought it was pretty impressive. The on-screen graphics were well done, the commentary was, as expected, good, and the replays all fed into a nice production that can definitely be learned from and improved upon in future events. However, since Formula E had chosen rFactor 2 as their simulator of choice, the graphics of the actual cars, the track and it's surrounding were simply not up to par with what e-Sports expects and demands from it's productions. rFactor 2 is not the worst looking game, but it's certainly not what you'd call 'Eye Candy'.

Sure, the cars and the track they used were a massive step up from previous e-Races they've done (which, let's be honest, looked like they were straight out of a PlayStation 1 game), the images seen from the race were a far cry from the beautiful images you see coming from the likes of Forza and Gran Turismo.

But rFactor was chosen for one simple reason. It's pretty much the only simulator that can pull something like this off given that iRacing does not have a Formula E car lying around. Had iRacing actually had a Formula E car at it's disposal, then that would have unquestionably been the platform of choice for this event. But even so, the best was made with what they had available.

But already there is controversy brewing. With just a handful of laps until the end of the 20 lap race, Bono Huis and Felix Rosenqvist were running one-two and had amassed a fairly substantial lead over the rest of the pack. However, Formula E uses a thing called "Fan Boost", whereby the fans watching at home can vote for a driver to receive a horsepower boost for a limited period of time.

Enter third placed driver Olli Pahkala.

The average race pace for this event was a 1 minute 28 second lap. This is what the majority of the front runners were able to produce. When Olli received fan boost, it was supposed to only be for six seconds, instead, it appears he received fan boost for six laps. This meant he was able to lap in the 1 minute 26 range. This was not supposed to happen. Either that, or as Dario Franchitti said several times "He must've found a shortcut somewhere!".



As Huis and Rosenqvist left their pitstops very late, they emerged behind Pahkala, who was still lapping at the abnormally quick pace. With only a couple of laps left, Pahkala had well and truly checked out and was on his way to winning the $200k. Why he received fan boost for such a long period of time, you ask? Well, that remains to be seen, but one thing was for certain: Bono Huis was not a happy camper.

The final podium ceremony was cringe-worthy to say the least as Felix Rosenqvist was the only driver to actually look happy. Huis and Pahkala both took hugely long periods of time before coming out on stage and at first I put this down to being shy, or something. But could there perhaps have been some more serious discussions going on behind the stage regarding Pahkala's miraculous pace?

Whether or not the details come out remains to be seen. There were some things that definitely need improvement for subsequent holdings of the event, like the unbelievably awkward post-race awards ceremony along with it's poor execution, but by and large, this was a positive boost for SimRacing to gain traction (pun intended) in the eSporting world, and to be taken more seriously. If real drivers are beginning to take it more seriously, then the rest of the motorsport community will sit up and take notice.

In terms of getting the sheer number of eyeballs on the event, yes it absolutely was a success, however the overall presentation of the race along with pre and post-race events, definitely needs more work. But it was a decent first go at it, and there is definitely the potential for a huge improvement in what is delivered at the next event.


Over to you!
What did you think of the Vegas eRace? Was it good for SimRacing, or are we destined for niche-ism?



***Update: Olli Pahkala has taken a post-race penalty, demoting him to third place. This means Bono Huis takes first place for the Vegas eRace.

 

[The_Grand_Duchess]

Pretty much all mods are poor quality, converted from something else or just poorly done. URD Endurance GT was the only one I liked so far. The rest is meh... at the best.

Refer to my earlier post about converted content. Most of the conversions are actually done properly but there are plenty scratch made mods of decent quality.

 

[whatdahello]

...if you only choose the things you want to see and what not. That's pretty much pointless discussion, really.

Open minded people might see several different platforms to be much closer to each other than than the "tip of the major iceberg" keeps telling you.

They are close in some areas, but in physics, rF2 is around 3 years ahead even compared to iRacing in development time, which is the closest of all the competing sims. And that 3 years goes to higly physics-focused coding.
Sims, like AC would need everything to be rewritten in order to be able to catch up. That didn't happen from NetKar to AC, and probably wont happen from AC to AC2.
We know programmers, they don't like throwing away all the old code, so there's a good chance that physics wise AC will pretty much stagnate.

 

[whatdahello]

I think people are totally missing the point, they got a comercial license to use rF2 so I guess no code access as they did it all with plugins. You mean you really want more plugins being injected in AMS? Are you crazy?
Anyway crapy work would still be crapy in AMS, plus they'd actually licence isi2.0 from ISI to make it (which would work if well done, and still be crapy if bad done), not AMS.
Is Reiza even allowed to do this kind of license?

I don't like this "sim is better than xxx" thing (even tho some are indeed more advanced than others) and how always Associator starts this bull**** (dude please get a life!) but please... check physic files from rF2 and compare to anything rF1/AMS out there, do the same with the software itself and features present on them. No need to understand much, just do a quick read in files with the comments, take a look at the physic dev blogs ISI started if you can.

I don't find correcting obvious misconceptions a bad thing. That's what this comment section is for.
But it seems like there's a group who always starts the unneccesary FUD of comparing software to software in a highly unreasonable fashion.

 

[aka2k]

Refer to my earlier post about converted content. Most of the conversions are actually done properly but there are plenty scratch made mods of decent quality.

Keep telling that won't magically turn meh mods into great stuff. rF2 seriously lacks good content, no matter how competent is the base engine.

 

[Peter Kerényi]

This may be a bit off topic, but I'm gonna ask those arguing about the physics... Would you rather have a sim that simulates most aspects of driving with very little approximations (so very precise), but the cars wouldn't handle well with our "toy" steering wheels and static office chairs (those who have motion rigs, ignore this, but this is the majority), OR a sim that has all the wrong physics under the hood but the result would feel more realistic with our "toy" steering wheels... blah blah blah.

This is a general theoretical question, not against rF2 which offers OBJECTIVELY the best simulation. I myself can't choose either for certain. From a car enthusiast perspective though the bad physics/better handling option seems more obvious, and we are probably all car enthusiasts first.

(I am not stating rF2 is the good physics/bad handling case, this is purely theoretical)

 

[Will Mazeo]

Keep telling that won't magically turn meh mods into great stuff. rF2 seriously lacks good content, no matter how competent is the base engine.

I agree, depending on mods is a thing of the past. And with new graphics coming how long till these mods are updated...

 

[whatdahello]

This may be a bit off topic, but I'm gonna ask those arguing about the physics... Would you rather have a sim that simulates most aspects of driving with very little approximations (so very precise), but the cars wouldn't handle well with our "toy" steering wheels and static office chairs (those who have motion rigs, ignore this, but this is the majority), OR a sim that has all the wrong physics under the hood but the result would feel more realistic with our "toy" steering wheels... blah blah blah.

This is a general theoretical question, not against rF2 which offers OBJECTIVELY the best simulation. I myself can't choose either for certain. From a car enthusiast perspective though the bad physics/better handling option seems more obvious, and we are probably all car enthusiasts first.

(I am not stating rF2 is the good physics/bad handling case, this is purely theoretical)

There's a wrong assumption in the theory. Precise physics wouldn't mean that it would be incompatible with existing hardware and display equipment. Rather the opposite in fact.

Realism is like a watertube and the flow in it. Always the thinnest part defines the flow rate. If software realism becomes so advanced that our equipment counts as obselete, than we have to buy a new wheel.

 

[PartyPePe]

rFactor 2 has a majorly advanced thermo-mechanical tyre model, iRacing has a fundamentally flawed physics engine.

 

[Peter Kerényi]

There's a wrong assumption in the theory. Precise physics wouldn't mean that it would be incompatible with existing hardware and display equipment. Rather the opposite in fact.

Realism is like a watertube and the flow in it. Always the thinnest part defines the flow rate. If software realism becomes so advanced that our equipment counts as obselete, than we have to buy a new wheel.

Putting Bernoulli aside, you have a valid point of course. But that's not exactly what I had in mind. Driving is more than looking at a screen (be it VR or a monitor), rotating a wheel and pushing pedals. IRL drivers rely on butt-feel primarily. By simulating "everything" properly, I think we could all agree that driving the sim car would be harder than driving that car IRL due to the lack of feedback from other sources.

To summarize my points - IRL we would rely on butt feel and G-forces, which are not available in a sim for the average consumer. That would make the perfect sim harder than real life, thus making a less advanced sim feel more natural.

To offer an example... every road car I have driven (not many, cheaper spectrum) the steering wheel is pretty damn numb compared to my T300 at home. IRL I feel the bumps with my butt, in the sim everything is channeled through the wheel. Since our "perfect" sim must simulate everything perfectly, the sim wheel would be numb as well, thus more realistic, but a lot less natural.

 

[Chris]

Hey guys, let's remember that this is about the eRace. Not physics. Obviously discussions change course through natural progression, but let's get back to the topic at hand, eh?

 

[P*Funk]

One person is the world's richest person, one car is the fastest, one mountain is the highest. And yes, one simulator is the most advanced in vehicle dynamics. And that's rF2. Wether you like it or not.

But this isn't about which has the best vehicle dynamics, it was a discussion of which was the best sim and specifically which would sell simming best, which itself doesn't really rely on which has the best physics at all. That's a necessarily arbitrary concept anyway though, this best thing, particularly when we're not discussing consumer end product use but the packaging of sim racing as a public spectacle where the differences in the various platforms and their qualities as realistic sims have little meaning to grabbing people's attention. Nobody watching can tell the difference between different physics tick rates or whether they're witnessing the result of proper chassis flex and tire deformation.

In reality they were just watching some racing, and in the end they only remembered the spectacle and also the crummy graphics and the fact that it glitched out on them.

None of that has to do with the dick measuring that people get into with respect to arguing false objectivity over sims and their value. Realism is a made up idea, but even when you're arguing it you have to place it in context. You can't just copy/paste a rote argument about which sim is better when we're not talking about Joe Schmo in his bedroom with a plastic wheel.

Why are you insisting on the fact that rF2 isn't polished enough to display what simracing is capable of? Take a look at where the big names from that event come from and where the most professional leagues come from. That's rF2 and iRacing with the quickest driver coming from rF and rF2. If that's not one good selling point for rF2 then I don't know.

What makes you believe that AMS would have worked any better in the hands of Cloud Sport?

I think the argument some were making was that if they hired Reiza to actually make the software for the event, using a base they knew how to work with, it would have definitely presented far better. History is replete with the best technology and the best option in a marketplace being a loser against its competitors entirely because it didn't perform well in its demonstrations. For the sake of selling the notion of sim racing you're not selling any one sim, you're selling the whole idea and that relies on putting a good foot forward.

There's no discounting the fact that whomever it was supporting this event through creating the sim environment they did a pretty mediocre job and managed to in the process make rf2 look worse than it could have, and insodoing the message to the masses is that sim racing looks appalling and that's rather important for selling soap. I don't think any marketing major would call that a coup for the PR campaign.

You are aware of optics right?

 

[ThatRacingGuy]

Jezus can't we never stop B4tchin about which sim is the best? We're all one kind of people, Simracing is what we do. no matter what service.

 

[JoeNathanYouTube]

whenever someone suggests a sim with good graphics, AMS is definitely not one to come to mind...

 

[ThatRacingGuy]

whenever someone suggests a sim with good graphics, AMS is definitely not one to come to mind...

And what exactly has this do to with this?

 

[P*Funk]

whenever someone suggests a sim with good graphics, AMS is definitely not one to come to mind...

Better than rF2 a lot of the time and definitely better than what was seen in this event, but apparently keeping track of whats actually being said by people specifically in the context of a discussion is boring, because it always circles back to the out of context, snippy, totally not constructive zero sum game that is measuring which sim is better than another.

 

[hitm4k3r]

But this isn't about which has the best vehicle dynamics, it was a discussion of which was the best sim and specifically which would sell simming best, which itself doesn't really rely on which has the best physics at all. That's a necessarily arbitrary concept anyway though, this best thing, particularly when we're not discussing consumer end product use but the packaging of sim racing as a public spectacle where the differences in the various platforms and their qualities as realistic sims have little meaning to grabbing people's attention. Nobody watching can tell the difference between different physics tick rates or whether they're witnessing the result of proper chassis flex and tire deformation.

In reality they were just watching some racing, and in the end they only remembered the spectacle and also the crummy graphics and the fact that it glitched out on them.

You are aware of optics right?

I am well aware of optics. But they don't make good competetive sim racing if that's what you are trying to say. They have to be good enough to make the broadcast easy to watch wich is perfectly possible with rF2. If you take the time to watch the VEC or FSR broadcasts you will notice that those broadcasts look alot better than what we've seen from Vegas. My best argument is still, that games like WCIII, CS, Starcraft or anything else for that matter have been really successful in eSports despite being some of the most ugly games on earth for a long period of time for the simple fact, that they offered good competetive gaming and have been proven to work stable and balanced. And that's the aspect where Cloudsport failed. Two people couldn't start, the damage system was implemented poorly so people could make their crazy wallrides and a glitch in a plugin gave one of the racers an unfair advantage, wich is the worst thing to do in eSports. Content quality was poorly optimized so they had to lower settings, wich was increased by the fact that they didn't use strong enough hardware as it seems. All this has nothing to do with rF2, Studio 397 or ISI and people need to get this into their heads. The sim devs offering the platform were not involved in this event. How hard is that to understand?! That track would have glitched on AC, AMS or anything else.

Again, I am not saying that AMS wouldn't have been an option. But so is rF2 and people are trying to argue about it, although this point isn't really up to debate.Or do you think that it is a coincident that the worlds best sim racer comes from a sim that has been used and broadcasted by different leagues for years now?

If your argument is that sim racing isn't about physics we should go with a Need For Speed shift or trackmania mod next time around. Sim racing is about many different aspects, physics simulation being one of them and it makes me wonder why we are even discussing this.

 

[Ernie]

Quite disappointing to see such a big event, with so much money involved, fail on the sim part big time, which should have one of the main focus. What a wasted opportunity to make simracing more attractive to a wider audience. But the graphical presentation was off-putting, even for rF2 standards. And the buggy fanboost plugin was an unacceptable mess.

I see many rF2 leagues doing a way better job with their race events. Mostly organized by people spending their freetime to make a league season as enjoyable as possible. Hats off to all league admins!

rF2 wasn't a bad choice for this event. But using one of the most advanced simracing physics engine doesn't give a bad car mod magically a realistic behaviour. A bad mod stays a bad mod to a certain extend. I wonder who has given his Okay to this mod, which is obviously a sub-standard-rF1-conversion.

 

[Hash_V8]

Edit: oh it all got deleted again, im out....

 

[Chris]

I restored the thread to it's previous state. Simply not worth the hassle or absurd accusations.
----------------------------------

As for the event itself I think there's a lot of potential there, just needs to learn from some of the mistakes made (i.e. presentation). Definitely blocks to build on though.

 

[ratrunner]

Different question - are we all disappointed because of what we are used to in sim racing? For the most part, I thought it was commentated like a Formula E race. For the most part it looked enough like a Formula E race (Some dopey camera work at times excepted) I'd be interested to hear from non-simracers what their thoughts were.
Remember the commentators noted the differences between real life and sim in terms of physical feedback, and also thought the real life guys were disadvantaged - all other things being equal