Studio 397 Opens Up About rFactor 2 Tracks in Massive Q&A Session

S397 Tracks Q&A 01.jpg
A recent post on the Studio 397 blog had the developer candidly answering a wide array of questions regarding rFactor 2’s tracks.

There is a stigma that communications between players and game developers is a one-way street. The perception can be that marketing teams and publishers issue carefully worded statements and press releases infrequently on behalf of the game dev, while feedback from fans seemingly goes unaddressed. This is, of course, becoming less prevalent as game specific forums give players a direct line of communication to the dev team. But Studio 397 has taken things even further by posting the results of an AMA regarding their tracks.

Dozens of questions were answered in the most recent blog post by Studio 397. While all of the questions centred around the various tracks in rFactor 2, the specific topics and tone varied significantly between the questions. Marcel Offermans bravely took the questions head on, and candidly answered based on current and future projects for the S397 team.

While the questions were too varied to list all the subjects, common themes included inquiries as to whether older tracks be updated, and if lesser-known circuits be added to supplement mainstream circuits like Spa, Monza and Silverstone.

S397 Tracks Q&A 02.jpg


For fans of rFactor 2, this Q&A outlines a potentially exciting future for the title. It wasn’t an announcement thread for future projects, but the knowledge that Studio 397 are hard at work on improving past and present tracks and looking to expand the current roster of racing circuits is reassuring, especially for a sim as old as rF2.

Studio 397 mentioned in their blog that this will be a bi-weekly feature, and the next topic is cars. So, if you’ve got a question to ask the Studio 397 team regarding their cars, you can join the conversation over at the Studio 397 forums or drop a comment below for @Marcel Offermans and @Paul Jeffrey .
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

Everytime you complain about the abhorrent UI of RF2, you can always expect RF2 diehards to come out guns blazing ready to defend their favorite sim. A good sim is a sum of all parts, criticism is helpful feedback. Stop defending bad decisions.
Not defending, but I can't think of a single game, in over 20 years, that I either bought or didn't buy based on the UI....not a one....ever.....
 
I see. So nobody has actually built a car in rFactor 2 and measured how well it correlates to a real one?
Not everything in life can be brought down to sheer numbers and digits. Not everything in life can be measured, regardless of our knowledge and science/tech evolution.
Event the most expensive pro sims built for the flight industry and military purposes can have their flaws. Heck, I've even seen some airplane disaster investigations that were brought to the conclusion bad simulator training was the sole reason for the crash and lives that were lost.
My point is - For me, rFactor2 is the most realistic FEELING commercial sim ever created.
Is it the most accurate, mathematically speaking? Probably not.
But the keyword is the "FEELING".
And I've seen/heard so many real life drivers coming to the same conclusion over the years, that I'm pretty much convinced.
 
Everytime you complain about the abhorrent UI of RF2, you can always expect RF2 diehards to come out guns blazing ready to defend their favorite sim. A good sim is a sum of all parts, criticism is helpful feedback. Stop defending bad decisions.
The whole point of simulation of any kind is to prepare you for the real deal, whether it's a car, plane, space shuttle, or even phobia treatment with VR.
When it comes to driving, a good sim is the one that drives well, everything else is completely irrelevant.
Most F1 simulators run on 1990's graphics with rudimentary UI.
Back in the day, simracers were diehard petrol heads, we didn't care about anything else except the driving feel.
Times have changed, obviously.
 
Not everything in life can be brought down to sheer numbers and digits. Not everything in life can be measured, regardless of our knowledge and science/tech evolution.
Event the most expensive pro sims built for the flight industry and military purposes can have their flaws. Heck, I've even seen some airplane disaster investigations that were brought to the conclusion bad simulator training was the sole reason for the crash and lives that were lost.
My point is - For me, rFactor2 is the most realistic FEELING commercial sim ever created.
Is it the most accurate, mathematically speaking? Probably not.
But the keyword is the "FEELING".
And I've seen/heard so many real life drivers coming to the same conclusion over the years, that I'm pretty much convinced.
That seems to be the sentiment. It's just curious because nobody uses rF2 physics professionally last I checked yet everyone hypes it like crazy. Sure some race drivers like it for casual use, but I've still never heard of anyone actually training on rF2. Correlation seems impossible so that is probably the reason; you seemingly can't make an accurate tire in it so it's a bit pointless because none of the inputs will ever match up to IRL.

And before someone says rFPro; those are just so that you don't need to spend a few million dollars into developing the UI and graphics and whatnot. Nobody uses the physics engines included with the packages like rFPro or ACPro last I checked; they put in their own.

Not going to argue the "feeling" though. There is no sim yet that does FFB completely correctly so there will inevitably be aspects some prefer. Majority of sims don't even have powersteering to begin with so the "what is more realistic feeling" argument is a bit misguided because they're generally all completely wrong for the cars people use them for.

AC outputs rack-end forces and CSP has support for electronic power steering + correct physics for slip, SAT, gyro etc. so it has pretty good chances to be "the best feeling", but some have argued that the tire behavior is innately too muted above the limit and it can perhaps be true, so there is still a case for using something more "dynamic" like rF2 or perhaps AMS2 even if they generally correlate worse.
 
That seems to be the sentiment. It's just curious because nobody uses rF2 physics professionally last I checked yet everyone hypes it like crazy. Sure some race drivers like it for casual use, but I've still never heard of anyone actually training on rF2. Correlation seems impossible so that is probably the reason; you seemingly can't make an accurate tire in it so it's a bit pointless because none of the inputs will ever match up to IRL.

And before someone says rFPro; those are just so that you don't need to spend a few million dollars into developing the UI and graphics and whatnot. Nobody uses the physics engines included with the packages like rFPro or ACPro last I checked; they put in their own.

Not going to argue the "feeling" though. There is no sim yet that does FFB completely correctly so there will inevitably be aspects some prefer. Majority of sims don't even have powersteering to begin with so the "what is more realistic feeling" argument is a bit misguided because they're generally all completely wrong for the cars people use them for.

AC outputs rack-end forces and CSP has support for electronic power steering + correct physics for slip, SAT, gyro etc. so it has pretty good chances to be "the best feeling", but some have argued that the tire behavior is innately too muted above the limit and it can perhaps be true, so there is still a case for using something more "dynamic" like rF2 or perhaps AMS2 even if they generally correlate worse.
I'm just speaking from my own perspective and my sim/real life experience mate.
Arcade racing games were perfectly fine for me when I didn't have a driving licence.
But when I did pass the test and started driving, they no longer did it for me. I had to dive in simracing.
For a couple of years, Asseto was the best there was for me, but then I got a belt driven wheel and tried rFactor2 for the first time. There was no way going back.
I've barely ever driven power steering cars in real life. I've tried them and didn't like 'em.
And maybe that is the main reason why I like rF2 - it reminds me so much of driving my rack and pinion steered road car. It's just unbelievable.
 
I'm just speaking from my own perspective and my sim/real life experience mate.
Arcade racing games were perfectly fine for me when I didn't have a driving licence.
But when I did pass the test and started driving, they no longer did it for me. I had to dive in simracing.
For a couple of years, Asseto was the best there was for me, but then I got a belt driven wheel and tried rFactor2 for the first time. There was no way going back.
I've barely ever driven power steering cars in real life. I've tried them and didn't like 'em.
And maybe that is the main reason why I like rF2 - it reminds me so much of driving my rack and pinion steered road car. It's just unbelievable.
That's fair. Correlation accuracy aside, everyone does go on about the "rubber feel" in rF2 and it might have a bit more dynamic feeling transient behavior on the edge of peak grip so I suppose it is fair to prefer it.

Out of curiosity, have you tried any Cphys enabled cars in AC lately? Vanilla AC had some objective issues with SAT and gyro which will impact steering feel significantly. SAT dropped off far too quickly which subjective gave a kind of "mushy" or "floaty" feel. Try the NSX (with the hotfix), I at least know it's relatively accurate so the model shouldn't be an issue.
 
That's fair. Correlation accuracy aside, everyone does go on about the "rubber feel" in rF2 and it might have a bit more dynamic feeling transient behavior on the edge of peak grip so I suppose it is fair to prefer it.

Out of curiosity, have you tried any Cphys enabled cars in AC lately? Vanilla AC had some objective issues with SAT and gyro which will impact steering feel significantly. SAT dropped off far too quickly which subjective gave a kind of "mushy" or "floaty" feel. Try the NSX (with the hotfix), I at least know it's relatively accurate so the model shouldn't be an issue.
Haven't fired up Asseto for ages to be honest. Will give it a go as soon as I fix my pedal set!
Thanks for the suggestion friend!
 
Haven't fired up Asseto for ages to be honest. Will give it a go as soon as I fix my pedal set!
Thanks for the suggestion friend!
No worries, I' m just curious what someone who used to prefer AC, then now prefers rF2 would think about "new AC". Not too often you find that scenario. I'd appreciate it if you could drop me a DM or something once you do try it.
 
No worries, I' m just curious what someone who used to prefer AC, then now prefers rF2 would think about "new AC". Not too often you find that scenario. I'd appreciate it if you could drop me a DM or something once you do try it.
Will do buddy!
 
Not defending, but I can't think of a single game, in over 20 years, that I either bought or didn't buy based on the UI....not a one....ever.....
Just one more reason I don't play RF2, despite liking how the cars handle, some of the content, etc., is that I think that I will have to navigate that UI for quite a while just to find my car. Then I need to think of a way and be very careful to make sure the opponents will be the kind of car I expect to race with. And that the race will be in the conditions I want. I get tired just thinking of it and I decide to go for iRacing or AMS yet again.

And I am not buying more RF2 official content (despite enjoying what I see in some YT videos) because I am not playing it anymore

And if I knew how all that stuff works and had not yet bought RF2, I would probably not buy it today.

Yes, sorry, but the UI maters in the business of making games/race sims.

Oh, excuse me, just realized, there's something cool starting in iRacing in a few. I can still make it, it will take a few clicks, see you....
 
Last edited:
The AI is just ridiculous. Can't finish any race (after trying several combos) because I quit.
Studio 397 should care about this. It is not the first time that there are complains about AI.

rFactor2 is in hybernation mode corner, inside my HD.
It used to be the better AI by far. Nowadays, it's a pure joke. rFactor2 was took by a company that can't code, if ISI was still on the command all the issues would be fixed. Currently the "developers" are a DLC poor quality seller.
 
It used to be the better AI by far. Nowadays, it's a pure joke. rFactor2 was took by a company that can't code, if ISI was still on the command all the issues would be fixed. Currently the "developers" are a DLC poor quality seller.
All the issues fixed? You do realize ISI ran away from rF2 because they couldn't fix it...at least not in a time sensitive or cost effective method. ISI began working on 'Not rF3' long before it gave up on rF2. (but you are correct in the better AI assessment)
 
Probably a third-party track integrated officially into rF2.
It used to be the better AI by far. Nowadays, it's a pure joke. rFactor2 was took by a company that can't code, if ISI was still on the command all the issues would be fixed. Currently the "developers" are a DLC poor quality seller.
397 did a lot of great work to refresh rF2 and make it viable, and then threw it all away by becoming "a DLC poor quality seller".
 
online can repeat myself, this is the best simulation on market! They spent a lot in physics that you can feel in your wheel and in your motion - rig. THX a lot for not let fall down this code!
 
I tried it today for the first time in months.
The new beta release has actually reduced the track loading times quite a bit.
I'm not sure if it is the case for the regular release.
It was also the first time in about three years that I was able to join an online server without the dreaded 'component missing' message.
It was actually fun again.
The faster loading times are only in the Release Candidate at this time. However, that will all migrate to the regular release at some point in the future.
 
All the issues fixed? You do realize ISI ran away from rF2 because they couldn't fix it...at least not in a time sensitive or cost effective method. ISI began working on 'Not rF3' long before it gave up on rF2. (but you are correct in the better AI assessment)
Lol... ISI has created the code itself from the very scratch, if they can't fix, nobody will.
 

Latest News

Article information

Author
Mike Smith
Article read time
2 min read
Views
14,002
Comments
83
Last update

Are you buying car setups?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.
Back
Top