Would You Recommend rfactor 2 ?

[2scoops]

Hi Everyone,
I've played Project Cars, too buggy at the moment. Just getting in to RaceRoom, which I really enjoy. But what about rfactor2. I want to race online more, not necessarily leagues but a lot a various classes to get variety in the cars you drive.
Would you recommend rfactor2 as a sim and also the popularity of online racing.

 

[Hash_V8]

OK zero might of been OTT, but its certainly so little I give "zero" thought to it,and certainly the least effects in any other sim I play, infact if you dont drive like a nutter in AC that IRL would destroy a set of tyres, and abuse the hell outta the turn/car rotation rate, you wont get enough heat in tyres,let alone destroy em, and although Heating (various effects) has improved in 1.5 (alot has to be fair but still a WIP IMO, 1.1 should of been where 1.5 is now IMO), its still far from ideal and heating still feels very canned, especially the I/M/O still.

 

[Radu Oros]

The turn rate you can get away with in AC is astronomical compared to not only ISI sims but iracing too,If I drove RF2 like I did in AC, ID have shot my tyres in 2 laps, the moment I expect the slip angle adn tyre load to give in, on AC or at least "cook" my tyres, I just keep rotating the wheel and car keeps rotating, with zero adverse effects, regardless of car setup (lets ignore the ridiculous amount of camber and front brake bias on default setups).

Comparisons with iracing and rf2 to test validity are senseless. You assume iracing and rf2 are correct, so if AC doesn't do what those two sims do then it must be wrong in AC?
Before making such affirmative statements, make some analysis with real life, preferably with videos between ac and irl, or telemetry between both.

 

[Hash_V8]

Comparisons with iracing and rf2 to test validity are senseless.

Oh ok, maybe you need to tell others too?

Everything is imprecise and like it's from a different planet. It's like the physics are of a different universe. In Assetto Corsa, you can tell the physics are trying to simulate actual vehicles, and on planet Earth at that.

To describe everything as "imprecise" and not of earthly physics in rf2 but in AC as "trying to simulate actual vehicles...on planet Earth", just blows my mind, I mean he must be right because AC is the first choice for professional applications adn the top sim racing leagues right?....oh wait.

 

[hitm4k3r]

Comparisons with iracing and rf2 to test validity are senseless. You assume iracing and rf2 are correct, so if AC doesn't do what those two sims do then it must be wrong in AC?
Before making such affirmative statements, make some analysis with real life, preferably with videos between ac and irl, or telemetry between both.

While driving AC and rF2 behave very different in terms of tire management and they are basicly the exact opposite of each other. In AC I don't really take any care for my tyres as I just see health points for the tyre getting lower, so after a certain time I just have to stop no matter how I drive - again that's my personal impression. In rF2 you need to have a real tyre strategy, wich does not only incorporate the timeframe for a set of tires and pitstops, but how you attack and when you attack. Preserving tyres is crucial to be successful, so it is even more important to avoid spins or lockups.

I remember the first FSR season with rF2 and it was pretty damn intersting to see how the drivers manage their tyres. There is no way you will see something similar in AC. And it reminded me of the real F1 season when the drivers needed to preserve their tyres (2013 I think) as Pirelli built them to fall off pretty fast and they were really sensitive for any form of wrong imput.

Anyway, I will not say that either of them is perfectly right or wrong. I think a middle way of both would be good, especialy for endurance tyres in rF2. But again, the behaviour in rF2 especialy for OW tyres is pretty realistic. After all it is black magic to get tyre models and physics right for every car in each sim. Both have a strenght or weakness somewhere.

 

[Radu Oros]

Oh ok, maybe you need to tell others too?



To describe everything as "imprecise" and not of earthly physics in rf2 but in AC as "trying to simulate actual vehicles...on planet Earth", just blows my mind, I mean he must be right because AC is the first choice for professional applications adn the top sim racing leagues right?....oh wait.

Of course is senseless. You don't test a sim's realism by comparing it to another sim. Especially when you come up with things as no effects when you're turning too much. How about understeer, loss of speed, more tyre wear, tyre damage, tyre temperature increase.

While driving AC and rF2 behave very different in terms of tire management and they are basicly the exact opposite of each other. In AC I don't really take any care for my tyres as I just see health points for the tyre getting lower, so after a certain time I just have to stop no matter how I drive - again that's my personal impression. In rF2 you need to have a real tyre strategy, wich does not only incorporate the timeframe for a set of tires and pitstops, but how you attack and when you attack. Preserving tyres is crucial to be successful, so it is even more important to avoid spins or lockups.

I remember the first FSR season with rF2 and it was pretty damn intersting to see how the drivers manage their tyres. There is no way you will see something similar in AC. And it reminded me of the real F1 season when the drivers needed to preserve their tyres (2013 I think) as Pirelli built them to fall off pretty fast and they were really sensitive for any form of wrong imput.

Anyway, I will not say that either of them is perfectly right or wrong. I think a middle way of both would be good, especialy for endurance tyres in rF2. But again, the behaviour in rF2 especialy for OW tyres is pretty realistic. After all it is black magic to get tyre models and physics right for every car in each sim. Both have a strenght or weakness somewhere.

So you raced in the FSR league in rf2, to what is that comparable in a league you raced in AC? To ford escort? To which cars and which tyres you're comparing the cars from rf2's FSR league on AC?

 

[Niki Đaković]

While driving AC and rF2 behave very different in terms of tire management and they are basicly the exact opposite of each other. In AC I don't really take any care for my tyres as I just see health points for the tyre getting lower, so after a certain time I just have to stop no matter how I drive - again that's my personal impression. In rF2 you need to have a real tyre strategy, wich does not only incorporate the timeframe for a set of tires and pitstops, but how you attack and when you attack. Preserving tyres is crucial to be successful, so it is even more important to avoid spins or lockups.

I remember the first FSR season with rF2 and it was pretty damn intersting to see how the drivers manage their tyres. There is no way you will see something similar in AC. And it reminded me of the real F1 season when the drivers needed to preserve their tyres (2013 I think) as Pirelli built them to fall off pretty fast and they were really sensitive for any form of wrong imput.

Anyway, I will not say that either of them is perfectly right or wrong. I think a middle way of both would be good, especialy for endurance tyres in rF2. But again, the behaviour in rF2 especialy for OW tyres is pretty realistic. After all it is black magic to get tyre models and physics right for every car in each sim. Both have a strenght or weakness somewhere.

Could not agree with this more. Even on most basic of mods and shortest of races tire role is vital. I just did a Porsche SuperCup race with simracing.club today on Croft. The track is notoriously hard to pass on. So I decided to hang back. I mean I turned into the maximum load of the tire a little easier and made sure I don't have the oversteer from applying the throttle. After 15minutes the guy ahead gave me a chance. His Rear Left tire just didn't provide as much traction any more as mine did and I had a run and instant pass. For anyone that doesnt know, Flat6 is the least of tire punishing mods in rF2.
If you want to see if tires play a role in real life Porsche Supercup, look no further then Austin 2014, back when Bamber raced with the series.

 

[Ace King]

The Flat-6 mod doesn't use the CPM so this feature will be nice when they have it implemented.

 

[SLuisHamilton]

Would you recommend rfactor2 as a sim

yes

 

[Spinelli]

@Spinelli: I can't stop but ridicouling at your point how 1/5th of steering is needed to replicate real life in rF2. First your arguments sound like you want the cars to be stuck down to the ground. This can only mean one thing, you've never driven real life car over 80% or 90%, yet you speak and post as some kind of driving expert, how your driving confirmed things. I've never even heard of you in any league. You have no idea how light the car gets on the limit and how to use the car to achieve the impossible.

Further more, I've seen your video about this "hole" where you accelerate out of hairpin under lock and spin it, an Fr3.5 car. If you want to see what a good setup can do for you, just youtube some of rFactor2 pole position laps. Also, it seems as if you've never heard of power-oversteer. But, lets assume you google to find what it is, depending on setup and throttle input not every hairpin on fast lap, actually not majority is under power-oversteer. They also sometimes use up to 180 degrees of steering lock and 90ish very often. Which is the same thing which happens in real life with the same cars.

How the hell can you put yourself as a measuring stick and come up with such wrong ideas, conclusions and lead an entire sea of bullshit based on that is astounding. Please man, if noone else, let me educate you at least on things related to driving, on the limit and cars reactions. For things deeper in engineering sea, data comparisons, calculations and general programing and engine side of the game I can't claim to be any sort of expert. I'm not a moder or developer of anything other then car setups. But, if anything these test that you've proclaimed through driving are utterly utterly driver and setup mistakes.

I don't want the cars to be stuck to the ground, of course not. The lack of steering lock (because oversteer is flawed and all too often results in the direction of travel being the slip angle rather than the slip angle being relative to the direction of travel) is there and has always been there and is easily reproducible especially if you push the car.

First of all, it doesn't matter if I've ever pushed a car to 80% or 90% (as you say) in real-life, this has nothing to do with that.

Second of all, FYI, I have done 4 days and around 75 laps or so of a (wingless) F1600 at infineon raceway, around 750 or 800 laps of various other F2000s at various tracks across North America, and a 2-day 450-ish HP prototype-style car test in in Italy (don't know name of the track, smaller, old track in central Italy). I was leading a "mechanics/student" F2000 championship of about 30 people until the last two races where it rained and I had little experience in the rain compared to some of the other racers (1 was a karter for 10 years and some of the others were experienced as-well). I still ended up 3rd in the championship with the season's lap record and 3 wins out of 7 races (knocked out of the lead of 1 race causing a DNF).

But all my experience listed above is irrelevant. The physics issues I speak of have been evident in the ISI physics engine since the 1990s and one does not need to be a professional racer to see this. It is evident in almost any video of anything ISI based. I've even have been able to tell from many, many videos that the video is of an ISI engine game before even reading the title or knowing which game the video was about. I even could tell that PCars was based on the ISI engine (different tyre model though) before actually knowing it was based on the ISI engine just from driving it for literally half-a-lap. Near and over the limit, the physics are all wonky ad many, many people have been vocal about this over the past 10 or 15 years.

I never said Assetto Corsa is perfect, I just said it does some of these issues to a much less extent (so do Netkar Pro, KartKraft, Live For Speed, and even some non-sim games). One thing to keep in mind is that Assetto Corsa's physics engine is new (not updated Netkar Pro, but new) while the ISI engine has been around since the 1990s and these vehicle behaviour aspects are still there 20 years later.

Anyways, everything in the list I made a few posts back is easily and consistently repeatable.


P.S. I wouldn't be suprised if half the people flaming me in this thread were told to do so by Associat0r considering he used to send me sometimes 5 or 10 links at a time of threads all over the internet and asking me to sign-up and post to defend RF2 and attack other sims.

 

[David Dominguez]

Anyways, everything in the list I made a few posts back is easily and consistently repeatable.

No it isn't, and it has been demonstrated. Repeating a lie 1000 times won't make the lie a truth.

Near and over the limit, the physics are all wonky ad many, many people have been vocal about this over the past 10 or 15 years.

Many people have been vocal about this and many other issues in every single sim ever made, so please...

 

[David Ignjatovic]

AMS and rf2 are the 2 best at simulating the driving experience.

 

[Adam#81]

Can't we all just get along?

 

[Niki Đaković]

I don't want the cars to be stuck to the ground, of course not. The lack of steering lock (because oversteer is flawed and all too often results in the direction of travel being the slip angle rather than the slip angle being relative to the direction of travel) is there and has always been there and is easily reproducible especially if you push the car.

First of all, it doesn't matter if I've ever pushed a car to 80% or 90% (as you say) in real-life, this has nothing to do with that.

Second of all, FYI, I have done 4 days and around 75 laps or so of a (wingless) F1600 at infineon raceway, around 750 or 800 laps of various other F2000s at various tracks across North America, and a 2-day 450-ish HP prototype-style car test in in Italy (don't know name of the track, smaller, old track in central Italy). I was leading a "mechanics/student" F2000 championship of about 30 people until the last two races where it rained and I had little experience in the rain compared to some of the other racers (1 was a karter for 10 years and some of the others were experienced as-well). I still ended up 3rd in the championship with the season's lap record and 3 wins out of 7 races (knocked out of the lead of 1 race causing a DNF).

But all my experience listed above is irrelevant. The physics issues I speak of have been evident in the ISI physics engine since the 1990s and one does not need to be a professional racer to see this. It is evident in almost any video of anything ISI based. I've even have been able to tell from many, many videos that the video is of an ISI engine game before even reading the title or knowing which game the video was about. I even could tell that PCars was based on the ISI engine (different tyre model though) before actually knowing it was based on the ISI engine just from driving it for literally half-a-lap. Near and over the limit, the physics are all wonky ad many, many people have been vocal about this over the past 10 or 15 years.

I never said Assetto Corsa is perfect, I just said it does some of these issues to a much less extent (so do Netkar Pro, KartKraft, Live For Speed, and even some non-sim games). One thing to keep in mind is that Assetto Corsa's physics engine is new (not updated Netkar Pro, but new) while the ISI engine has been around since the 1990s and these vehicle behaviour aspects are still there 20 years later.

Anyways, everything in the list I made a few posts back is easily and consistently repeatable.


P.S. I wouldn't be suprised if half the people flaming me in this thread were told to do so by Associat0r considering he used to send me sometimes 5 or 10 links at a time of threads all over the internet and asking me to sign-up and post to defend RF2 and attack other sims.

I don't see your point. You've raced all this, you've had fantastic experiences, yet it doesn't matter if you've gone over 90%. I, for one, can clearly see, especially on old Senna era onboards where a driver gets the tires to slip to such extent that it completely changes resistance which car hands back. And then he uses this for extreme grip. Let's face it, it's impossible to explain. I could try, not that even I'd understand what I had said. But, I have seen many many times "direction of travel being the slip angle" there. I'm sry, it must be your driving mate.

EDIT: This whole point just reminded me that in some bad mods like Ferrari Challenge you can sort of wait for the slide to buff out. It's a very weird sensation, but it feels very scripted. This is also something that comes from Assetto Corsa's physics in my experience as well. All too often the car feels as if though locked into an angle, (whilst extreme oversteer), where behavior is very scripted.

 

[Eric Bergeron]

@Spinelli
According to this blog, rFactor does not seem to take into account Mz in calculating FFB .is perhaps this weakness you feel?
https://drracing.wordpress.com/2013/10/27/self-aligning-torque/

 

[David Dominguez]

Where does it say that?

 

[Adam#81]

@Spinelli
According to this blog, rFactor does not seem to take into account Mz in calculating FFB .is perhaps this weakness you feel?
https://drracing.wordpress.com/2013/10/27/self-aligning-torque/

No I think you misunderstood something. It only mentions the way in which Mz is represented in rFactor FFB with a graph, comparing raw data (real data) with the Mz torque graph from the rFactor Mz.

 

[Eric Bergeron]

No I think you misunderstood something.

probably because english is not my native language
thanks

 

[David Dominguez]

Plus rF is not rF2, which also generates Mz as can be seen in their tyre tester tool.

 

[David Ignjatovic]

It only took ISI 4yrs, but it seems like they've finally fixed the ffb float on most of the cars, so now I can drive the F.35 and F1 Marissa with plenty of confidence.
So those with G25/27/29 should be right to buy/reinstall....

 

[Jokeri]

But all my experience listed above is irrelevant. The physics issues I speak of have been evident in the ISI physics engine since the 1990s and one does not need to be a professional racer to see this. It is evident in almost any video of anything ISI based. I've even have been able to tell from many, many videos that the video is of an ISI engine game before even reading the title or knowing which game the video was about. I even could tell that PCars was based on the ISI engine (different tyre model though) before actually knowing it was based on the ISI engine just from driving it for literally half-a-lap. Near and over the limit, the physics are all wonky ad many, many people have been vocal about this over the past 10 or 15 years.

Why cannot you just show data of the problem since its physics issue?