Worried about the future of rF2

As the topic suggests...

As a long time ISI supporter and follower, i am now feeling a bit worried for the future.The number of new users coming in to rFactor2 seems to be dwindling.

Also there is a long time between the new official content. And even when there is official content released, it seems to fail to gather an interest (Civics in December) amongst the yet unitiated.

Also, the mod community seems a lot more reluctant than for rF1, with very few members adding content.This is even more worrying as it was the foundation of rF1 and a big selling point for bringing more people to the franchise (race anything you like).

ISI now also faces a stiff competition as the "sim" genre has become "hot" again with more titles in the works, that seem to gather a LOT more interest: AC, pCars etc.

The old veterans like myself are finding ourselves drawn to the likes of GSC, and newcomers are moving towards AC and probably DTM Experience.


I start this topic to see if someone shares my worries, and also to discuss if something can be done to once again bring more interest to rF2?


My personal idea is to go for Steam greenlighting (i actually REALLY like Steam as a platform), to gain exposure and also simplify the purchasing as well as updating.
Connecting it to Workshop makes modding interesting again, like what AC proposes.


I want rF2 to succeed, it is by far the most comprehensive take on simulating the actual race mechanics and based on that it should be the goto title for the serious sim-user, but right now i fear it is not.


Discussions on graphics i will however discard personally, as a) rF2 is pretty enough and b) the prettiest of settings in something like pCars is inaccesible to 95% of users.


So, what is your view of the status of the product?



Points of improvement needed going forward as identified in this thread so far:

* Better GUI (incoming)
* Steam integration and release
* Possible new distribution method that would automate updates and sync, if not steam
* New official content
* More transparent development
* Shorter build intervals
* More efficient code and optimization of codebase
* A possibility to "lock down" the core functionality, to deliver something considered stable and final
* New updater that allows automatic updating of content as well, including adding NEW
content
 
Last edited:
But you still have to buy the PC AND the wheel - that a wheel is less than a PC costs doesn't make the cost any less onerous and if you take the cost of a wheel out of almost any PC budget, you'd have a significantly poorer PC!

My PC owes me <$400 - I'd have to spent at least half-that-again to get a useful gaming improvement (a $250 GPU) - that's the thing with PCs, they just get more and more expensive the more you do to them!

Wheels do that too - I know people who started on cheapie wheels (no FFB, crappy pedals - worse than a pad tbh) then got a Force/DFGT but wanted a clutch so went G25/7 or got Fanatec pedals and then wanted a proper shifter so went G25/7 or a custom shifter or wanted better FFB/an F1-style wheel so went T500 and - you've spent more than my CAR cost at this point ;0
 
But you still have to buy the PC AND the wheel - that a wheel is less than a PC costs doesn't make the cost any less onerous and if you take the cost of a wheel out of almost any PC budget, you'd have a significantly poorer PC!

My PC owes me <$400 - I'd have to spent at least half-that-again to get a useful gaming improvement (a $250 GPU) - that's the thing with PCs, they just get more and more expensive the more you do to them!

Wheels do that too - I know people who started on cheapie wheels (no FFB, crappy pedals - worse than a pad tbh) then got a Force/DFGT but wanted a clutch so went G25/7 or got Fanatec pedals and then wanted a proper shifter so went G25/7 or a custom shifter or wanted better FFB/an F1-style wheel so went T500 and - you've spent more than my CAR cost at this point ;0
I spent 150€ on my G25 (new) and used it for 5 year in that time I already got a new PC and the wheel is still working, so it was really cheap and even a G25 is a damn good wheel. I switched to a wheel which is 5 times more expensive, but am I faster no and that was not the reason why I bought it. Most of the super fast drivers do use G25/G27.
If you are really into simracing, it is cheap because a wheels like the G25 are solid like a tank and mine feels like it would hold up for another 5 years. Of course it is some money, but 3 racing games cost you as much as a G25, so I dont think FFB wheels are extremely expensive. Looking at my G25 I have no idea how that couls sell me all that stuff new for 150€.
 
Here's a thing - by almost complete chance I solved one of my issues - well, sort-of solved it. I visited someone who's both a wheel owner and an rF2 owner to see how it ran for him.

He took the Howston out at Spa and Silverstone and it drove against AI - they raced OK - he raced OK - at this point I'm thinking

a - he has a wheel - perhaps that's the issue
b - the game looks like **** on his PC (which is a bit less powerful than mine)

I have a go and it's MUCH more driveable, there's grip where I had no grip at all - it's ugly tho so I poke into the menus

Traction Control - Low (i had that off)
Stability Control - Low (again off)
Track - 'Green' << Option I'd not noticed before!

I turn-off the first 2 aids and - well, it's still driveable but it's quite-a-bit harder - but the car still has front-end grip which I didn't have - so it's looking like the wheel may be the solution?

I then turn 'green track' off and it's looser again but the AI can still drive it and I'm not crashing EVERYWHERE so almost certainly the wheel then.

I hit Ctrl-F - 200 fps. TWO HUNDRED. That's because it looks like Minecraft - he says it's "out of the box" settings but there's no AA, no FXAA so I enable some - FPS is now in the 50-80 range (big drop!?)

AND - the AI can't drive and neither can we!!!

Didn't really want to tinker longer so I reset it and we drank beers. When I got back I copied the his settings and ran with the pad in 'ugly mode' and the game was pretty driveable.

So that's one issue solved and I'm glad because I feel bad saying something is "broken" when others clearly don't think it is. Not sure of the exact cause and my refund processed overnight so I can't tinker further but suffice it to say that people should look to lowering their settings if they see AI driver issues or find the car slidey or unresponsive.

If they fix all the other stuff I can return knowing that I can actually drive the cars with a pad so long as I don't want too much 'shiny shiny'.

Thanks for the encouragement to check this - sorry to disappoint you that it wasn't the pad - hell, with 'Low' SC and TC the thing was arguably too EASY to drive with a pad, I could even drift it a bit - I may have smiled ;0
 
@trjp, should be impossible, as physics is decoupled from rendering, for obvious reasons. Are you sure this isn't some placebo effect, where you actually did get better at driving said cars, and attribute it to settings?
There are many factors in how we perceive how a virtual car handles - there are a plethora of visual and auditory clues which connect with how we manipulate the controls and so it's all about perception - you're right about that.

Whilst 'Green' road and TC/SC obviously make a difference, we literally saw the difference between a car driving out of the pits AOK and a car driving out of the pits and understeering straight into the bales opposite tho - and the AI seemed similarly encumbered!!

There are a few possible reasons - the most obvious of which is simply that a smoother game is easier to drive of course! I believe many simulations tie input to framerate tho, because it avoids creating perceptible input lag - and that would certainly explain why the higher FPS game felt sharper and more alive.

Another issue may be that whatever settings I chose, my GPU fans never bothered to fire-up - Grid 2 makes them do that IN THE MENU!! - which means the GPU was in no way taxed but my CPU usage/fan DID become noticeable and simulations are usually sensitive to things like CPU availability?

End of the day I can't tinker further (probably for the best - I tend to get obsessed with things like this!!) - all I can suggest is that you ensure you setup the game so that you PC isn't being overtaxed because it does appear to have a detrimental effect if you overdo it.
 
Interesting findings.
Your PC spec is pretty good so I wonder what you've done to get the AI performing so badly - assuming it's a CPU and/or GPU load issue.

Do you have 100 ai on screen, all settings maxed, virus scan or other stuff running in the background, etc?
 
Nah - nothing like that at all - I don't even see more than 2 cores really being used.

The video was taken on a practice session too - so probably only 1-2 cars on-track at the time and none in sight.

End of the day you can't really performance tune a game in a week - I've owned Shift 2 for years and I still tinker with it's settings pretty much every time I play it ;0
 
Since OP was worried about the future of rF2... Today I tried AC 1.0 RC1 at Spa with the Ferrari 458. Looks amazing, but FFB and car physics in rF2 are so much more alive, direct and detailed that it's not even funny.
 
Since OP was worried about the future of rF2... Today I tried AC 1.0 RC1 at Spa with the Ferrari 458. Looks amazing, but FFB and car physics in rF2 are so much more alive, direct and detailed that it's not even funny.

In my opinion AC has more "realistic" FFB, as in how a real car would feel by the wheel. rF2 has the more "direct" FFB as in communicating the forces from the steering rack. The latter feels better in general when racing in a simulation rather than a real car, as many other senses are not providing enough input.

Physics wise they are pretty similiar now, with each title having their respective strenths. rF2 has it's strengths in chassis and tire models, whereas AC has it's biggest strenths in it's weight distribution and roll physics (suspension dynamics).

But they are certainly not "miles apart" in quality as you seem to imply. They have somewhat different approaches.

The best overall package of all right now, in my opinion is actually RaceRoom Experience, since the FFB updates. The vehicle physics on some of the newer pay cars and the new FFB is really, really good. But many other things in RRE are broken or unfinished, so it is not there yet.
 
In my opinion AC has more "realistic" FFB, as in how a real car would feel by the wheel. rF2 has the more "direct" FFB as in communicating the forces from the steering rack. The latter feels better in general when racing in a simulation rather than a real car, as many other senses are not providing enough input.

Physics wise they are pretty similiar now, with each title having their respective strenths. rF2 has it's strengths in chassis and tire models, whereas AC has it's biggest strenths in it's weight distribution and roll physics (suspension dynamics).

But they are certainly not "miles apart" in quality as you seem to imply. They have somewhat different approaches.

The best overall package of all right now, in my opinion is actually RaceRoom Experience, since the FFB updates. The vehicle physics on some of the newer pay cars and the new FFB is really, really good. But many other things in RRE are broken or unfinished, so it is not there yet.
I think the main reason why body roll is so much more noticeable in AC is because they have mainly roadcars with a lot of roll. RF2 improved a lot in the IndyCar and FR 2014 you notice more roll than in the Formula Abarth.
Still for me AC is nice for roadcars, but not for race cars.
In regards of FFB you are right, that it is indeed more realistic to "feel less" unfortunately we have no other way to get a feel for the car except for the FFB. When you drive something like a Kart in anger in the real world and focus on the "FFB" it is actually not that much even without power steering and therefore closer to AC. If you focus on the whole experience rF2 does a better job on replicating that. In the end that replication makes it more immersive for me as I feel like I am driving, but ACs FFB is closer to what a real wheel feels like.
 
The problem with seeking 'realism' from steering FFB is that real cars have a LOT less feedback in their steering than they used-to.

Electric steering, variable ratio steering etc. has a lot to answer for in this respect. Arguably, a lot of real-world cars now have the sort of 'driving aids' which sim wheel-users have moaned about people using for years ;0
 

Latest News

Online or Offline racing?

  • 100% online racing

    Votes: 96 7.8%
  • 75% online 25% offline

    Votes: 130 10.5%
  • 50% online 50% offline

    Votes: 175 14.2%
  • 25% online 75% offline

    Votes: 348 28.2%
  • 100% offline racing

    Votes: 480 38.9%
  • Something else, explain in comment

    Votes: 5 0.4%
Back
Top