iRacing Review

[OverTake.gg]

Bram Hengeveld submitted a new blog post:

iRacing Review

More than five years after its initial release, I feel it’s finally time to give iRacing the professional review treatment. Five years is more than enough time for one game to sort out all of its issues, the game costs several times more than your traditional boxed PC game available on the shelves at Best Buy, and deciding whether to take the plunge based on biased forum ramblings is never a good idea. Six hundred million laps later, it’s time to finally take a look at iRacing, and determine...

Continue reading the Original Blog Post

 

[Austin Ogonoski]

Yep, I got banned because of iRacing politics. The forum post linked goes into detail on that. The moderation isn't consistent and is plagued by favoritism, something I touched on in the review. Since the moderation team plays a real role in the racing experience, any form of bias takes away some of the positives of having real life stewards looking over incidents and complaints.

But that doesn't take away almost 1000 starts, a series championship, and a couple prestigious World Tour event wins. Is there a conflict of interest? Probably. But if this review is so far off, why are half of the comments here (mostly from active iR users) agreeing with it? The only ones defending iRacing, upon investigation, seem to be guys who have either just subscribed to the sim or simply don't race enough to be able to make a fair judgement.

There are some killer-app aspects of iRacing, but the physics just aren't that good. For what they charge and how they promote themselves compared to other sims, they don't live up to the hype at all. It's still impressive when it works, but it's nothing near what the "fanboys" claim it to be.

 

[Patroclus]

I would take this review with a grain of salt. Austin got banned, and is upset. Because he was too stubborn to change his bloody paint scheme. He knew what he was doing.

That may be true (only he knows for sure), but the thing is: from what you read (you did that, no?) is he right or not? Dismissing the review entirely on a "conflict of interest" seems a bit of a case of "sour grapes" between you and the author of the review. If that is not the case, then what exactly is wrong with the review?

I think what you said applies to the author of this review. He definitely had a taste of sour grapes on iracing after he got banned. From the "review" and posts by the author one can feel he has a palpable, visceral sense of hate for iRacing.

If this "review" was listed as an editorial or letter to the editor it would have come off much better.

 

[Austin Ogonoski]

I would take this review with a grain of salt. Austin got banned, and is upset. Because he was too stubborn to change his bloody paint scheme. He knew what he was doing.

That may be true (only he knows for sure), but the thing is: from what you read (you did that, no?) is he right or not? Dismissing the review entirely on a "conflict of interest" seems a bit of a case of "sour grapes" between you and the author of the review. If that is not the case, then what exactly is wrong with the review?

I think what you said applies to the author of this review. He definitely had a taste of sour grapes on iracing after he got banned. From the "review" and posts by the author one can feel he has a palpable, visceral sense of hate for iRacing.

If this "review" was listed as an editorial or letter to the editor it would have come off much better.

Ok, so what would have happened if this exact same review was posted by a completely different person?
Everyone is quick to jump on the "conflict of interest" bandwagon, but people who have actually read it and are active iR members all seem to agree with it.

 

[Hey_Zues]

I would take this review with a grain of salt. Austin got banned, and is upset. Because he was too stubborn to change his bloody paint scheme. He knew what he was doing.

if you read the post bakkster linked to (here it is again: http://www.racedepartment.com/forum/threads/the-other-side-of-iracing.66234/), you'll find he was not actually given a chance to change the paint scheme. he was banned, for 60 days, then told what the problem was. this was after he contacted the head of the paint division to get he exact guidelines for what he could and could not do, and used the paint scheme for weeks without any issues.

i heard recently there was a guy running a pornographic image on his truck, was protested, and the next day was running without a problem.

i fail to see how 'mother****ing foof', which is apparently a fan group or something, is so much worse than a pornographic image that one gets told to change it, and then let go, and the other gets a 60 day ban, with no change to fix the problem, which according to the guidelines is not a problem at all.

 

[Chronus]

if you read the post bakkster linked to (here it is again: http://www.racedepartment.com/forum/threads/the-other-side-of-iracing.66234/), you'll find he was not actually given a chance to change the paint scheme. he was banned, for 60 days, then told what the problem was. this was after he contacted the head of the paint division to get he exact guidelines for what he could and could not do, and used the paint scheme for weeks without any issues.

i heard recently there was a guy running a pornographic image on his truck, was protested, and the next day was running without a problem.

i fail to see how 'mother****ing foof', which is apparently a fan group or something, is so much worse than a pornographic image that one gets told to change it, and then let go, and the other gets a 60 day ban, with no change to fix the problem, which according to the guidelines is not a problem at all.

Wow.

I'll say upfront that, as an iRacer, I will never accept "porn images" or foul language in anyone's paint scheme. There is a chance children are using the service and, to be honest, I don't think exposing them to that in such an environment is a positive thing. At all.

However, if Austin was NOT even given a chance and in between he tried to contact iRacing about it and was nevertheless banned...

Still, whatever happened, people ought to read the review through and through and comment on it (agree, disagree, etc) and not dismiss it outright as "sour grapes".

 

[Bakkster]

Yep, I got banned because of iRacing politics. The forum post linked goes into detail on that. The moderation isn't consistent and is plagued by favoritism, something I touched on in the review. Since the moderation team plays a real role in the racing experience, any form of bias takes away some of the positives of having real life stewards looking over incidents and complaints.

But that doesn't take away almost 1000 starts, a series championship, and a couple prestigious World Tour event wins. Is there a conflict of interest? Probably. But if this review is so far off, why are half of the comments here (mostly from active iR users) agreeing with it? The only ones defending iRacing, upon investigation, seem to be guys who have either just subscribed to the sim or simply don't race enough to be able to make a fair judgement.

There are some killer-app aspects of iRacing, but the physics just aren't that good. For what they charge and how they promote themselves compared to other sims, they don't live up to the hype at all. It's still impressive when it works, but it's nothing near what the "fanboys" claim it to be.

No, you got suspended because you used profanity. Everyone on iRacing knows that's the #1 thing Nim doesn't tolerate.

 

[Austin Ogonoski]

Yep, I got banned because of iRacing politics. The forum post linked goes into detail on that. The moderation isn't consistent and is plagued by favoritism, something I touched on in the review. Since the moderation team plays a real role in the racing experience, any form of bias takes away some of the positives of having real life stewards looking over incidents and complaints.

But that doesn't take away almost 1000 starts, a series championship, and a couple prestigious World Tour event wins. Is there a conflict of interest? Probably. But if this review is so far off, why are half of the comments here (mostly from active iR users) agreeing with it? The only ones defending iRacing, upon investigation, seem to be guys who have either just subscribed to the sim or simply don't race enough to be able to make a fair judgement.

There are some killer-app aspects of iRacing, but the physics just aren't that good. For what they charge and how they promote themselves compared to other sims, they don't live up to the hype at all. It's still impressive when it works, but it's nothing near what the "fanboys" claim it to be.

No, you got suspended because you used profanity. Everyone on iRacing knows that's the #1 thing Nim doesn't tolerate.

And yet there are much bigger problems to worry about than someone using a bad word in-game... But I'm sure they will all be classified as "racing incidents" and offending users will get little more than a slap on the wrist, but alas, there is an entire forum discussion on that already.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

I must say, I did enjoy the iracing forums when I was on last, lol.

 

[Jack B]

I think being banned from iRacing should be reason enough not to write a review. Seems like that taints the objectivity.

If this were jury selection you wouldn't be allowed on the jury. You raced a few hundred road races and then say it's not worth trying???? No one does hundreds of races without enjoyment.

You also are saying is favoritism? You were banned and you don't agree. I get it. You sound like your marriage broke up after 15 years and you struggle to remember the good times.

What could have been a good review has some exaggerated comments. The road cars are plenty fun and well worth driving. The service is split 50/50 road and oval and the road side is growing just as the oval side is every month.

You were banned. This is your way of getting payback. I get it. Unfortunately many reading this won't understand your motivation for writing a review. Too bad Race Department allows a moderator to post a review after being banned. Poor judgement IMO.

 

[Jari Vinnari]

Its always great to read other people´s opinion about the game but the truth is that the only opinion that really matters is your own. Just simply try it. You dont need to worry what the other over 7 billion humans think about it.
Please write your own review and publish it if you think the review was unfair and biased.

 

[Chronus]

I think being banned from iRacing should be reason enough not to write a review. Seems like that taints the objectivity

[...]

What could have been a good review has some exaggerated comments. The road cars are plenty fun and well worth driving. The service is split 50/50 road and oval and the road side is growing just as the oval side is every month.

While I understand the "beef" you have with critics and in particular with Austin for writing a review after being banned...

Will there ever be a "good review" that contains the slightest hint of a critique to iRacing in your opinion? There have been many debates here, at NG and the official forums and that is not something that fits your stance in this regard.

You may be right his objectivity...may, but you seemed to miss the point.

You talk about "fun" and service "splits", but that is not what the author of the review focused on. In regards to cars, he obviously focused on physics. Period. Not on fun, but physics. But even if we accept your "fun" factor, what may be fun for you may not be for others, in particular for those that have track experience and find these cars "barely drivable" or for those that were expecting realistic behaviour (which gets destroyed by slow speed slides, snap-oversteers or issues with temperatures and pressures).

And then there's the matter of costs, the protest system, etc, which in itself leads to an entirely new discussion about the service.

The service may be growing (your source being, if I'm not mistaken, statistics put forth by the service itself) , but that does not mean a thing in regards to what the author complains about. Now, you may say, "ok, in spite of the obvious flaws, it is growing and makes for a joyful experience", and that is most acceptable and probably mirrors the thoughts of many (including me) who haven't given up on iRacing entirely.

I am also curious about what part of the review you thought was "good" (as per your words).

 

[Jarninho]

>>Getting started in iRacing costs just as much as buying a new video game console, if not more, and some people just aren’t financially stable enough for that kind of investment.

It cost me $12 to start. For 3 months.

>In short, if you’re a road racing fan, there is zero point in even trying iRacing.

I have done >150 road races. I beg to differ.

Yes, the cars are not perfect and have some flaws. The biggest one is obviously the 'tank slapper'. The developers have acknowledged the problem they have with sudden weight distributions. They have also done that with some other things.

But those things make the sim not undrivable. It's easily the best sim out there. Maybe AC will be better, but it's not out yet and I couldn't get it to work properly when I tried the demo.

>These are two problems that have plagued all road racing cars to some extent since the introduction of iRacing’s “new tire model” upgrade a few years ago, and entire road racing series have been abandoned because of it.

Really? Which cars that were once popular are now not anymore?

>This isn’t cool to just piss fifteen dollars away and find out that nobody has driven the car you just bought in two months, aside from eight European guys who run races at three in the morning, once a week.

You can ask it in the forums, or you can look it up before you buy a car. It's really easy to look up. Doesn't take more than 5 clicks I think.

>The bias towards NASCAR is quite unfortunate, as many people were hoping iRacing would be an all-encompassing motorsports simulator and not just a NASCAR simulator (which it does VERY well) with a few half-finished road cars on the side.

There's more cars on the road side than on the oval side. The Truck was broken for months before they fixed it.

>to the point where most people speak of it as if it’s some sort of genuine obstacle to overcome when trying to make your way into one of the two year-long “Pro” series,

Most people? I have never heard a single person say that. This review is the very first time I am hearing of this.

>Yep, I got banned because of iRacing politics. The forum post linked goes into detail on that. The moderation isn’t consistent and is plagued by favoritism, something I touched on in the review.

Prove it or get out with your conspiracy theory. You had a cuss word on your car. Yes, that's an instant ban. Everyone knows that. Has nothing to do with favoritism. The only reason you could drive around for so long is no one protested you sooner.

I had such a word on my profile page. Got me in trouble as well. But the 2 protests I filed myself were also handled in a good way.

>I don’t see how this review is objective. I’ve got almost nine hundred starts, two series championships, and a 2.4 Hours of Daytona overall victory. This is on top of real-world track day experience, and virtually every other "big" racing sim installed on my computer.

You won the 14th split in the daytona 2.4. Not even close to the overall victory.

Also, that's a road race. And you just claimed that there's no point in road racing in iRacing. If you have virtually every other big racing sim installed on your hard drive, why did you do that race? Surely, you must have had a better alternative.

 

[Austin Ogonoski]

iRacing fanboys will do anything to defend their glorious leader... er... Sim... judging by the comments in here.

I didn't openly trash the game, I simply said what was good and what was bad. If you completely ignore the name of the author, is still a large portion of the review accurate? A lot of you seem to think so. That says it all right there.

"Fanboys" are still hung up on who wrote the article... Let them be that way. A lot of their comments have only further reinforced what's already been stated in the review. Comments like "a lot of stuff needs work but I still have fun with it and it is the best sim ever" don't help their cause.

 

[thejwooly]

Ok, so what would have happened if this exact same review was posted by a completely different person?
Everyone is quick to jump on the "conflict of interest" bandwagon, but people who have actually read it and are active iR members all seem to agree with it.

I've read the review and at points it is not a bad review and I agree with some of the things. I just wish you would stop playing victim. Did you seriously not expect your paint scheme to be the point of some controversy? I did a read through of the sporting code and couldn't find anything on paint schemes so I may be in the wrong, but I can't believe that you weren't aware "mother****ing foof" would be offensive by any standard.

 

[Chronus]

>>
Yes, the cars are not perfect and have some flaws. The biggest one is obviously the 'tank slapper'. The developers have acknowledged the problem they have with sudden weight distributions. They have also done that with some other things.

But those things make the sim not undrivable. It's easily the best sim out there.

I beg to differ. The tank slapper, the ice skating, have been around for years. How many times will you accept "acknowledgement" before you finally realize that given the time they had, it should have been fixed long ago?

 

[Chris Partridge]

Not a good review if I'm honest.

I read the review but didn't understand the context. Has he experience of real racing on track with these cars? It wasn't said (or possibly I missed it). His point about blatant American favouritism is a rather tired cliche trotted out on the iRacing forums. I wish he had a look at my telemetry graph videos I created for the MP4 12C at Silverstone to understand truly how advanced the physics work in iRacing. Numbers don't lie.

He writes: "All road racing cars on iRacing have a tendency to spin wildly out of control in between the speeds of 60mph and 125mph, or, for a much friendlier description, any low to mid speed corner. The sensation is like hitting a patch of ice, and most cars just can’t be saved once this slide starts." -- no, that's just a worrying lack of control and another tired cliche trotted out in many forums (including this one).

EDIT EVIDENCE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=25oVqE1k3j0

Top two lines represent wheel slip front and rear -- which is which is obvious.

From my three years heavily involved in iRacing -- and following the forums -- there is a definite and pronounced emphasis towards sportscar racing and in particular the European market; iRacing's biggest customer base after the US and rapidly growing. The most extraordinary glaring omission from the review was the multiplayer aspect -- its structure, stability and level of completeness which sets the standard and yet is only mentioned in passing. Why was that? That's a major strength of the sim!

He's right in that it is a real pain in the ass to start with (I nearly gave up and that is something the management team seriously need to rectify). It feels too boring to start with.

I don't agree that iRacing is photo-realisitic -- it is very good and the latest tracks and many of the cars provide that excellent visual sense of immersion. But it's not quite there for me. I think this is due to the static nature of the lighting system.

And that brings me to the real weakness of iRacing -- the dynamics. I feel for too long too little has been focused on changing lighting and changing environments, as well as other changing aspects of the sim. Thankfully this is now a high priority for iRacing and before the year is out those dynamic changes of day -- to support and complement the full and comprehensive driver swaps functionality due very soon -- will be in place.

 

[Chronus]

no, that's just a worrying lack of control and another tired cliche trotted out in many forums (including this one).

EDIT EVIDENCE:

Top two lines represent wheel slip front and rear -- which is which is obvious.

Yes, it is obvious. Of all corners viewed, all show considerable wheel spin peaks for the rear, which is also one of the things people complain about. Wheel spin after hitting a curb, ok, but some of the peaks (and their length) cannot be explained by hitting curbs.

Again, the same old tired (and not accurate) analysis of telemetry. This came up several times in the past and sometimes there it is again.

Look at the graphs, again.

From my three years heavily involved in iRacing -- and following the forums -- there is a definite and pronounced emphasis towards sportscar racing and in particular the European market;

"Pronounced"? Not quite, though I agree that road racing is coming up nicely (numbers wise). But the protocols with NASCAR ought to tell us how vital they believe oval racing, in particular, NASCAR racing, is for them.

He's right in that it is a real pain in the ass to start with (I nearly gave up and that is something the management team seriously need to rectify). It feels too boring to start with.

That is something I never felt about iRacing. Boring?! There is a lot of things one can do in order to get going up the ladder. Problem is, however, some series/cars hardly get any attention (I remember many races with the V8SC and the Jetta which ended non-sanctioned (points wise) because only a handful of us would join.

I don't agree that iRacing is photo-realisitic -- it is very good and the latest tracks and many of the cars provide that excellent visual sense of immersion. But it's not quite there for me. I think this is due to the static nature of the lighting system.

Now there, if you'd written your own review (are you up for it?) and said this, a lot of people would disagree with you. Lighting is one of the strengths of its graphics and probably why people view it as "photorealistic".

I'd recommend you take a look at a shader programmer's views on the subject (the creator of SRPL stunning shaders).

And that brings me to the real weakness of iRacing -- the dynamics. I feel for too long too little has been focused on changing lighting and changing environments, as well as other changing aspects of the sim. Thankfully this is now a high priority for iRacing and before the year is out those dynamic changes of day -- to support and complement the full and comprehensive driver swaps functionality due very soon -- will be in place.

Dynamics of what, mate?

Vehicle dynamics: suspensions, collisions do strike as fantastic. Tires? The weakest link, for the reasons given by many. Aerodynamics? A lot of work to be done, as a ISR piece hinted at.

Race track dynamics? It'll come. Not a weakness at all, only something that, according to their roadmap, would come later.

The real weakness of iRacing, no matter what some say, is twofold:
- cost
- tire models (OTM and now NTM)

Cost? It is basically up to any of us if we accept it or not. I accepted it and spent more than the cost of 3 PS3. Others may not and in the end will be put off by it (as the author said).

Tire models: THE weakness, but hey, hope should be the last thing to die, maybe Dave Kaemmer will solve the issues soon. We can only...hope.

 

[Austin Ogonoski]

Ok, so what would have happened if this exact same review was posted by a completely different person?
Everyone is quick to jump on the "conflict of interest" bandwagon, but people who have actually read it and are active iR members all seem to agree with it.

I've read the review and at points it is not a bad review and I agree with some of the things. I just wish you would stop playing victim. Did you seriously not expect your paint scheme to be the point of some controversy? I did a read through of the sporting code and couldn't find anything on paint schemes so I may be in the wrong, but I can't believe that you weren't aware "mother****ing foof" would be offensive by any standard.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the review, and if you wish to discuss that topic, there is already a thread dedicated to it.

 

[Bakkster]

From my three years heavily involved in iRacing -- and following the forums -- there is a definite and pronounced emphasis towards sportscar racing and in particular the European market;

"Pronounced"? Not quite, though I agree that road racing is coming up nicely (numbers wise). But the protocols with NASCAR ought to tell us how vital they believe oval racing, in particular, NASCAR racing, is for them.

Don't forget that NASCAR pays a significant amount of money to be on iRacing, not to mention their articles on nascar.com. The Gen 6 being completed on time for the DWC was their condition for sponsoring the series this year. I figure under those circumstances it's understandable the effort that gets put in.

 

[Chronus]

Don't forget that NASCAR pays a significant amount of money to be on iRacing, not to mention their articles on nascar.com. The Gen 6 being completed on time for the DWC was their condition for sponsoring the series this year. I figure under those circumstances it's understandable the effort that gets put in.

I agree. Actually, the protocol with iRacing (more than just NASCAR payment) is, in my opinion, a breakthrough for simracing. Maybe in the future, more than just paying a license as SIMBIN did with FIA, devs & publishers can exploit this avenue, which could open doors for many (devs and simracers).

There is a danger, however, that sanctioned content by NASCAR becomes THE sole factor for attracting the masses (if).