RENNSPORT Summit | Porsche Mission R Featured In-Game and In-Person

RENNSPORT Porsche Mission R and Goodwood 01.jpg
Porsche's all-electric prototype, the Mission R, was on site at the recent RENNSPORT Summit and was also debuted in game.

The recent RENNSPORT Summit brought together 100 esports professionals and sim racing media members to try out the upcoming racing title. To date, only GT3 cars had been featured in the few press releases from Competition Company concerning their RENNSPORT project.

Summit attendees arrived to the venue to find two real-world race cars parked in the building, the BMW M4 GT4 and the Porsche Mission R.

The former was more in line with what was expected of the title based on what has been shared publicly to date, as RENNSPORT had previously shown renders of both BMW and Porsche race cars.

But the Mission R was somewhat of a surprise. The 1,073 horsepower all-electric prototype was small in form but large in presence at the event, and proved to be more than just eye candy. Day 3 of the Summit gave attendees a chance to drive the prototype in-game.

It was unveiled in RENNSPORT on a track that had also been kept under the radar until that point. Drivers had the chance to set a point-to-point time at the Goodwood Hill Climb track.

Its ferocious power accelerated the car at a staggering rate, while its necessarily heavy design made braking and cornering a much more challenging endeavor.

More than impressing attendees with how it drives, the Mission R's presence in RENNSPORT broke the perception that the title may be limited to GT3 only. This was further clarified throughout the weekend, as the design and business leads behind the racing sim shared their intent to grow the content far beyond GT cars. While no content list was given at this early stage in development, the notion that the title would not be GT cars only earned a collective sigh of relief from those at the event.

RENNSPORT Porsche Mission R and Goodwood 02.jpg


Multiple members of the RaceDepartment team were fortunate to be present at the event, and we will have much more coverage of what transpired at the RENNSPORT Summit and what our impressions of the title were in the coming days.

Let us know your thoughts on the inclusion of the Mission R or Goodwood at the RENNSPORT debut in the comments below.
About author
Mike Smith
I have been obsessed with sim racing and racing games since the 1980's. My first taste of live auto racing was in 1988, and I couldn't get enough ever since. Lead writer for RaceDepartment, and owner of SimRacing604 and its YouTube channel. Favourite sims include Assetto Corsa Competizione, Assetto Corsa, rFactor 2, Automobilista 2, DiRT Rally 2 - On Twitter as @simracing604

Comments

I hope this game actually has it's own physics engine or, if using another company's physics engine, I hope they at-least make their own changes/improvements/additions/interpretation of it. I'm so tired of just essentially "re-skinned" sim racing games over and over again.

Wow just saw your post directly above mine and your link says the following:

"WHAT GAME AND PHYSICS ENGINES DOES RENNSPORT USE?

RENNSPORT is built within Unreal Engine 5 – however, its car physics and tyre models are unique and created from scratch, before being married with UE5.

“We worked on the physics to make them compliant with Unreal Engine, because [I think] Unreal physics are not usable for sim racing. We needed to have a separate code running in synchronisation with Unreal,” explained Szczech."


Awesome! I'm buying this game for sure then!
 
Last edited:
Did you have any expectation for a different feedback? :D
Exactly. These youtubers were probably not asked to give their true opinion after being invited from different countries for an alpha state promo event. It's a promo, it's all good for now :)
 
“We worked on the physics to make them compliant with Unreal Engine, because [I think] Unreal physics are not usable for sim racing. We needed to have a separate code running in synchronisation with Unreal,” explained Szczech."
It's the same arrangement of ACC by the way, and for exactly the same reason: UE has not enough frequency to run car physics simulation without dropping the ball. Nothing really new with this.
Including the interface issues that running a high frequency physics under a much slower engine umbrella carries as was already the case of ACC.
Strange enough Kunos moved out of UE for AC2 and maybe there are good reasons for that? ;)
 
Last edited:
It's the same arrangement of ACC by the way, and for exactly the same reason: UE has not enough frequency to run car physics simulation without dropping the ball. Nothing really new with this.
Including the interface issues that running a high frequency physics under a much slower engine umbrella carries as was already the case of ACC.
Strange enough Kunos moved out of UE for AC2 and maybe there are good reasons for that? ;)
Yes, possibly good reasons for that. Do you know if they're just using the ACC physics engine or is it something else?
 
Yes, possibly good reasons for that. Do you know if they're just using the ACC physics engine or is it something else?
As far as I could read they are going for their full scale engine. Whether this is going to inherit something from ACC for the physics part or not it wasn't specified. It would be funny if AC2 would come out with physical tires model though. :D
 
Last edited:
Good they are using their own coded physics engine. This means business. They seem
passionate about what are developing with the help and input of many sim racers,
eSports competitors included. This is the way to go. This project is looking very good.
 
Premium
I'm not seeing anything interesting, innovative, or even new. UE5 will require a heavy computer and Kunos already passed on it for AC2. One area PC sims need serious attention is sound. I'm not hearing anything about sound. Yes, that's a pun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NDG
Totally agree with the post above me. Like everyone asking for VR support etc... Maybe it's just me, or a few of us. But I struggled to keep myself interested in new sim titles since ACC. Like I was happy running a GTX 970 during my iRacing days. Then moved on to a Vega 56 and this card still struggles in ACC. Pretty hard-hitting to PC hardware these new titles, while nothing is wrong with old API engines and physics. UE5 is no different than UE4, only harder to run. I saw some gameplays from that event and I can totally see the distance-based rendering similar to ACC. Like objects popping in when it gets near the car. Very annoying!

UE4 vs UE5
" In short, the installation file of Unreal Engine 5 is larger than Unreal Engine 4. In short, the similarity rate is almost 90%. Only the biggest differences are Nanite and Lumen technology. If N/L technology becomes important to you in the future, you should choose UE5. If you are not thinking about developing a game with high graphics and detailed graphics, you can continue with Unreal Engine 4."
 
Is there no one feels like me, that we needed a universal sim engine a decade ago ?

Can't believe everyone I listen to in 2020's is still happy with half assed engines, yes I include ISI as well

Unreal is for shooters, studios need to build a "UE" for sims from scratch which has all the tools for UI, tyre modelling, sound

Yes it may take a decade but if you never start ..................

" we are trying to work out which technology is better "

Without collaboration we would still be trying to work out how to get to the moon
 
Is there no one feels like me, that we needed a universal sim engine a decade ago ?

Can't believe everyone I listen to in 2020's is still happy with half assed engines, yes I include ISI as well

Unreal is for shooters, studios need to build a "UE" for sims from scratch which has all the tools for UI, tyre modelling, sound

Yes it may take a decade but if you never start ..................

" we are trying to work out which technology is better "

Without collaboration we would still be trying to work out how to get to the moon
The madness engine is your answer, still being refined by Reiza. If S397 keep on refining rfactor2, it's another answer. And AC2 should bring something right on the table if critical features are included.

I still hope Raceroom will move to another graphical engine and bring different weather conditions.

Unreal engine is for everything, absolutely not only for shooters, if mastered. It is too advanced to have any competitor. It is in its own league. Using it for simracing is a good idea, but the execution may be harder than it seems. It makes sense to focus on the physics engine instead of working on the physics and the graphics engines. I don't know why Kunos dropped UE, maybe their skills with it came to their limits (not bashing Kunos, mastering UE must be a huge and expensive task, it is used by dedicated teams for blockbusters productions), maybe they understand, thanks to the modding community, that their proprietary engine can do much more than AC, being much more cost effective to develop further.

Isi engine behind rfactor2 has been used for Nascar ignition with UE for the graphics. Although it is a bad game, I haven't read many negative points about the graphics.

A universal engine in physics is not rhe best thing. Remember the flaws of the former isi engine (from f1 challenge). Many games shared the awful behaviour at slow speed (car uncatchable spining).

Different engines, different possibilities. The madness engine seems.to be complete but really complex, and not.any devopper is able to use it. Reiza have been achieving many great things with it but still working on it. It's a long and passionate task. Maybe in the hands of another developper the madness engine would be a loss of time. It is good to have multiple engines. Even some monster games' titles, although not advanced sims, do really interesting things. And what about codemasters' ego engine ? It proved to be a vers1tile and interesting engine (for arcade racing, sim racing, FPS...).

Diversity is good. I understand the need of a good and solid engine once for all, but several already exist. Mastering them to bring a complete sim, with all the features any title should include, is something else...
 
Is there no one feels like me, that we needed a universal sim engine a decade ago ?
Why would you want to have a universal physics engine? Then every game would basically just be a re-skinned version of each other and we'd all have to live with and be forced to play only one type of physics despite how good or bad it may be.
 
I still hope Raceroom will move to another graphical engine and bring different weather conditions.
This would only be possible if they start making a new game from scratch. You can't just port everything you have into a new engine. Cars, tracks and physics are intertwined with the current engine and built around it.

I do feel however that its time that ACC gets a new competitor in the so called "next gen" Simracing genre. rf2, iRacing, AMS2, R3E are by now at their core 10 years old. So i welcome the likes of Rennsport despite the controversy and also look forward to see what the next Kunos game will look like if they use their proprietary engine. Wonder if it will be an evolution of the AC1 engine or something completely built new from scratch.
 
Last edited:
This would only be possible if they start making a new game from scratch. You can't just port everything you have into a new engine. Cars, tracks and physics are intertwined with the current engine and built around it.

I do feel however that its time that ACC gets a new competitor in the so called "next gen" Simracing genre. rf2, iRacing, AMS2, R3E are by now at their core 10 years old. So i welcome the likes of Rennsport despite the controversy and also look forward to see what the next Kunos game will look like if they use their proprietary engine. Wonder if it will be an evolution of the AC1 engine or something completely built new from scratch.
AMS2 is more next-gen to me then ACC because of the way better VR implementation and the more alive feeling/driving experience, for flatscreen drivers/non-dd users this could be different and it's all personal. AMS2 is 2 years old not 10 years and it's based on the PC2 engine, not PC1, the PC2 engine is 5 years old. You cannot say that PC2's engine is the same as PC1's engine, if you explain it that way then you can say that ACC is in it's core 24 years old due to the used Unreal Engine.

But yes, new competion is always welcome and it looks like Rennsport made a good impression already so it can only get better.
 
for flatscreen drivers/non-dd users this could be different
and i am one of those flatscreen drivers (and use CSL DD), so yes, to me ACC feels and looks more 'next gen' than AMS2. i was a backer of pcars 1 and i just see too much in ams2 of what i also saw 2013 in pcars 1 when development started, i cant shake this feeling.
maybe if i would've never known pcars 1 and 2 then my view would be different. but it isn't.
 
Last edited:
and i am one of those flatscreen drivers (and use CSL DD), so yes, to me ACC feels and looks more 'next gen' than AMS2. i was a backer of pcars 1 and i just see too much in ams2 of what i also saw 2013 in pcars 1 when development started, i cant shake this feeling.
maybe if i would've never known pcars 1 and 2 then my view would be different. but it isn't.
When did you try AMS2 for the last time? There is zero PC feeling left in AMS2 since the big PC bugs are fixed. I hated PC2 from the start, I could never enjoy a single race in it but AMS2 is my favorite sim racer with for me the most believable physics/car handling together with rFactor 2. As I said it's subjective because ACC feels to me way more artificial then AMS2 in it's current state.
 
When did you try AMS2 for the last time? There is zero PC feeling left in AMS2 since the big PC bugs are fixed. I hated PC2 from the start, I could never enjoy a single race in it but AMS2 is my favorite sim racer with for me the most believable physics/car handling together with rFactor 2. As I said it's subjective because ACC feels to me way more artificial then AMS2 in it's current state.
I played it couple days ago for an hour.
Its ok mate, we can agree to disagree, we dont need to think the same. Cheers.
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Mike Smith
Article read time
2 min read
Views
16,552
Comments
102
Last update

What's needed for simracing in 2024?

  • More games, period

  • Better graphics/visuals

  • Advanced physics and handling

  • More cars and tracks

  • AI improvements

  • AI engineering

  • Cross-platform play

  • New game Modes

  • Other, post your idea


Results are only viewable after voting.
Back
Top