Automobilista 2: New Preview Video Released

[Paul Jeffrey]

Not satisfied with the last Automobilista 2 video footage? Well wrap your eyes around this one...

Reiza Studios recently revealed a new comparison video of the developing Automobilista 2 simulation, showing the game in direct comparison to its older brother AMS 1, and featuring the work-in-progress Snetterton Circuit in the UK.

Despite obviously being a significant upgrade over the original title, many fans were a little underwhelmed by how development of Automobilista 2 looked to be progressing from a visual point of view, something that Reiza Studios have acknowledged when reading the comments section of the various articles featuring the July roadmap post.

Having another shot at wowing the crowds, Reiza have recently dropped a much improved video of the Ultima GTR lapping around the Snetterton track in various time of day conditions - and it's fair to say the visual improvements are considerable...

Capture has a higher bitrate which is more accurate to the game´s actual graphical quality" said Reiza Studios Renato Simioni.

Other differences in this new video include improvements to track lighting, updated road and foliage shaders, revised textures; smoothed cockpit model edges & updated materials; adjustments to audio code, rebalancing of engine sounds and various sound effects (also replacing a few placeholders used in the original video); updated physics and increased game graphical settings.

Should be stated perhaps that this still isn´t the most exciting car / track combo or settings to promote AMS2 which wasn´t really the point of the original video - obviously we miscalculated how closely people would be looking!

This is a better representation of AMS2 in its current stage of development but it´s still a WIP - things will change as we progress to release and continue to afterwards. Such is the nature of the thing...
​

So, what do you think?

Automobilista 2 will release for PC December 2019.

For the latest Automobilista 2 news and discussions, head over to the AMS 2 sub forum here at RaceDepartment and get yourself involved in the conversation today!

Like what we do at RaceDepartment? Follow us on Social Media!

 ​

 

[Stephen O'Sullivan]

Speaking of AMS1, here is a very nice video of the Ultima (it's inescapable at the moment!) at Adelaide.

 

[Ghoults]

Only in replays is there a difference between physics and graphics, when driving it really isn't hard, the physics tell the graphics what state the car is in, and this gets drawn as far as I know.

That is the assumption but I think it is also a fair assumption that optimizations are made when these things were coded and the older the software the more rough the optimizations tend to be. And if no one complains I don't think the code will be ever revisited.

I will give Niels the benefit of doubt that physics are largely correct. But your explanation makes sense where the "sudden snap" feeling I get, despite being able to drift some cars extensively around the corner. Thanks for this idea.

I am totally speculating as there could be wide variety of things causing it. It is weird though even in iracing which has the difficult to drive cars I can still feel the car better just from the screen. Even if the physics are worse the feel is still better. But like I said it is just speculation. I know it is not input lag, ffb settings, type of car, type of tire, quality of road surface, quality of car.

I think the other big difference between isi sims and other sims is that isi uses vertical fov where others use lateral but if you use correct numbers it should still produce exact same image so that should not make any difference either. I think what is given is that no sim developer will easily admit a flaw in their sim just like it is difficult to prove wrong someone who is not presenting any proofs to support their argument!

 

[David Wright]

That is the assumption but I think it is also a fair assumption that optimizations are made when these things were coded and the older the software the more rough the optimizations tend to be.

This makes no sense. Surely the hard work has already been done? The physics works out exactly where the car is 360, 400 or 720 times a second depending on the physics frequency. The graphics only has to display this say 60-100 times a second. Why would you not visually display where the car is when you've already worked it out?

 

[Marc Collins]

Speaking of AMS1, here is a very nice video of the Ultima (it's inescapable at the moment!) at Adelaide.

Wow...imagine what this editor will be able to do with AMS 2! Great job on the "replay" video. Professional quality. Reiza, please use him for your marketing

 

[Spinelli]

I've still never seen vehicle behaviour in the ISI engine in my life which proves the ISI engine doesn't exhibit the traits I've previously mentioned. I'm not here to flame or troll or anything. The vast majority of my time spent racing the past 15+ years has been with ISI engine-based sims and still is to this day. I wouldn't spend so much time and effort trying to explain these things if I didn't love the games and aspects of the physics engine.

I've still yet to see anyone replicate the F3 video I posted and, even in that very beautiful Ultima video (props to whoever made it), you see some typical ISI-engine physics oddities that break the immersion during the slides or during the recovery ("return-back-to-centre") phase of the slide (like the front not swinging back to re-align with the rear but rather the slide sort of vanishes while the vehicle continues in the new path that the front-end is pointing to, or how the slide horizontally slides a big amount but the actual vehicle's angle relative to the slide is oddly small).

P.S. Saying Michael Schumacher is a great driver is definitely true but that's a bit of a scapegoat as this is about vehicle behaviour not about achieving incredible laptimes with vehicles that have no business being there. You can see tons of big slides and laying down of rubber from all sorts of racing cars, series, drivers, etc. Even driver's that aren't Michael Schumacher can do that sort of stuff but Michael Schumacher can do it while still achieving incredible laptimes. He knows when to do that and when not to. How to do that while loosing the smallest amount of time. How to put the car in a state of being highly on the limit before he even gets the car in those situations (whereas other drivers may be more under the limit before putting the car in those situations). He can do that while still achieving incredible laptimes whereas most wouldn't/can't (as Schumacher's brilliant performances over his career proved).

Project Cars 1 apparently uses a tyre model that's not only brand new, but apparently was built from scratch (rather than using the ISI RF1 tyre model to evolve from or as a base starting point) and I literally noticed some of the stuff I've been talking about within the 3rd corner of the 3rd ever time playing without even knowing it was ISI engine based.

Also, a lot of times you'll go and apply opposite lock and the car will hardly respond. It's like it ignores that you're even applying opposite lock unless you also combine the opposite lock with a big, sudden throttle lift. I don't know how so many of you guys deny this stuff or overlook it or don't notice it. You should be able to smoothly and controllably get a nice angle under power-oversteer while, during the angle, you can play with the wheelspin and throttle while the tyres are spinning and different amounts depending on how much throttle you modulate...all this while you can sense and hear the tyres' friction trying to "claw" or "bite" back into the track rather than being extremely prone to increasing wheelspin dramatically by just the smallest amount of throttle increase.

When rear grip is lost, there are tons of times in real life where you can keep the throttle hammered down and the grip of the tyres sort of causes slight little "hiccups" of wheelspin for a bit but then the tyres sort of grip/slip, grip/slip and "claw" back the grip...Keep the throttle hammered down in the ISI engine (especially racecars) and you'll just get the revs and wheelspin either instantly shoot to redline and get crazy wheelspin in an instant or it'll just keep rising and rising until it reaches that point. It's kind of like, once the rear looses grip, 99.9% of grip is lost...or...once the rear looses grip, it's as if the rear tyres are in the air and there is hardly any resistance/friction.

Anyways, this is probably not going anywhere so I'll leave it as that. I'm only writing all this cause I care and am passionate about the ISI engine, not because I'm trying to attack it.

Of course I agree with you because I have been arguing with @Spinelli about this for years.

But intended in a non-confrontational manner and yes, even more off-topic than AMS in an AMS 2 forum, has anyone tried ACC? I can only assume @Spinelli absolutely hates that title because the issues of lack of rear grip and spins that seem to happen too frequently and with too-little to no ability to recover are at least 10 times worse in ACC than in AMS (for me, at least). Even the most skittish cars in AMS feel more planted and are more controllable than the cars in ACC.

How do we explain that this totally unrelated sim has the same problems that concern @Spinelli about ISI-based sims, but to a much greater extent?

Hi Marc. I can't comment much on PC2 and ACC as they're basically the only sims I don't have and I haven't watched many videos of them.

 

[Richard Wilks]

So with your own words, you say that iRacing and ISI games have this "problem". Then you say that Pcars1, with a totally different tire model, still has the same "problem"... then you come back and say this is not how people implement cars, but an engine problem... disregarding what me and Niels said already... you see where this is going don't you?

If you don't want to drive ISI based games, give it a rest then. Like Niels said, you have been spouting the same nonsense for years, and nobody ever listened to you. Doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity, unless your true objective is something else.

 

[Spinelli]

So with your own words, you say that iRacing and ISI games have this "problem". Then you say that Pcars1, with a totally different tire model, still has the same "problem"... then you come back and say this is not how people implement cars, but an engine problem... disregarding what me and Niels said already... you see where this is going don't you?

Yes, PC1 with a different tyre model...therefore even more evidence it's intrinsically linked to the ISI physics engine and not specific vehicle implementation. What part don't you get about that? Why are you repeating all that and trying to twist my words and make it sound like I'm implying something else? That's probably the 3rd ot 4th time you've done that in your replies. I've not disregarded anything you or Niels said. I've read it all.

If you don't want to drive ISI based games, give it a rest then. Like Niels said, you have been spouting the same nonsense for years, and nobody ever listened to you. Doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity, unless your true objective is something else.

Once again, twisting my words or just flat-out lying about me. I just said in my previous post that the only reason I talk about this is because of my passion for the ISI engine and it's games which are the sims I play 95% of the time and yet you reply with that statement about not wanting to play ISI based games. And many people have agreed with me. I used to almost viciously defend the ISI engine years back from players saying the same or similiar things about until maybe 5-ish years ago so I'm not the first one to say this stuff and I've had many people agree with me including 3 racecar drivers / karters in person at my house and many people on many different forums.

Lying about me, facts, and about what I'm trying to imply, personally criticizing me, and basically telling me I'm wrong and to shut-up is not the way to go about things. Enough with the aggressive & passive-aggressive comments, please.

If you can't respond and talk to others in an honest, genuine way without trying to sneakily twist others' words around and if you're not able to speak in a non-confrontational manner then I'd appreciate it if you don't even reply to me. There's no need for you to use such dishonest and aggressive "tactics" when responding to others here.

 

[bmanic]

Have you ever considered the possibility that you are falling victim to the placebo effect? It is _extremely_ strong and nothing to laugh about. Basically it works like this: If your brain has decided "Yes! This is how it is!" you will not be able to have any different opinion, no matter how much you get evidence to the contrary. This also works the other way around, if somebody else has the exact opposite opinion and they too suffer from the placebo effect then you have an endless completely non-factual argument about basically nothing.

You can learn to counter the placebo effect though, by studying facts and NOT relying on your instincts. The word "feel" is the most common placebo metric. So whenever you describe something that you "feel" or "think should be like this" without actually using factual metrics to back up the claims, you are most likely tricking yourself into believing things that aren't really there.

This is how strong the placebo effect is:

As an audio engineer I know mathematically and 100% factually that two signals are identical. Yet my brain sometimes refuses to believe this. For instance if these identical audio sources play at a slightly different volume level, it instantly tricks my brain into thinking they are not at all the same. Even worse, even if they are at the exact same volume, I can still be tricked by simply having the color of the audio track be different on my screen.. this is enough to sometimes trick the brain into thinking that you are hearing two subtle variations.

TL;DR: Do not underestimate the placebo effect and how stubborn ones own mind can be. Don't give into the power of it.. counteract it with facts and verifiable knowledge.

 

[Richard Wilks]

@Spinelli Playing the victim card? Really? I wasted pages trying to have a reasonable conversation with you. You kept ignoring all that me and Niels said, people who have worked with the engine, and even seen the code. What else do you expect from me? To keep validating your need to tell the same things over and over while ignoring the other side of the conversation?

Don't worry, i won't make the same mistake twice.

 

[bgil66]

4 months till we see what we get

 

[Spinelli]

@SpinelliI wasted pages trying to have a reasonable conversation with you. You kept ignoring all that me and Niels said, people who have worked with the engine, and even seen the code. What else do you expect from me? To keep validating your need to tell the same things over and over while ignoring the other side of the conversation?

Don't worry, i won't make the same mistake twice.

I never ignored anything you said, I don't know why you said that in your previous message... and I don't know why you're still accusing me of it even after I already just stated in my previous message that I haven't disregarded anything you wrote. You keep on twisting things or lying. I just mentioned in my previous post that you have a habit of doing this and what happens in your very next reply? You do it once again (lying about me ignoring). Unbelievable.

Have you ever considered the possibility that you are falling victim to the placebo effect? It is _extremely_ strong and nothing to laugh about. Basically it works like this: If your brain has decided "Yes! This is how it is!" you will not be able to have any different opinion, no matter how much you get evidence to the contrary. This also works the other way around, if somebody else has the exact opposite opinion and they too suffer from the placebo effect then you have an endless completely non-factual argument about basically nothing.

You can learn to counter the placebo effect though, by studying facts and NOT relying on your instincts. The word "feel" is the most common placebo metric. So whenever you describe something that you "feel" or "think should be like this" without actually using factual metrics to back up the claims, you are most likely tricking yourself into believing things that aren't really there.

This is how strong the placebo effect is:

As an audio engineer I know mathematically and 100% factually that two signals are identical. Yet my brain sometimes refuses to believe this. For instance if these identical audio sources play at a slightly different volume level, it instantly tricks my brain into thinking they are not at all the same. Even worse, even if they are at the exact same volume, I can still be tricked by simply having the color of the audio track be different on my screen.. this is enough to sometimes trick the brain into thinking that you are hearing two subtle variations.

TL;DR: Do not underestimate the placebo effect and how stubborn ones own mind can be. Don't give into the power of it.. counteract it with facts and verifiable knowledge.

I completely agree wholeheartedly. I put lots of effort into trying to notice or not get tricked by the placebo effect with regards to all aspects of life.

This is over a 15ish year period of noticing things that stand out very easily. It's not even close to placebo. Even if it could be placebo, that's way out of the question because I've seen many random simracing videos over the years where I spotted the issue/s while not knowing what game was being played in the video and every single time I noticed, I would later find out the video was of the ISI engine. Same with PCars1 as I mentioned a couple times: I had no idea PC1 is based on the ISI engine so I wasn't expecting nor looking for any of the typical ISI-engine stuff I've been talking about. Well, within the 3rd corner of my 1st ever lap playing it, I noticed some of the behaviors and only then did I immediately think it was exactly ISI-engine based behaviour. Only after did I then find out PC1 indeed is based on the ISI physics engine. There's been way too many instances over the years ruling out placebo.

 

[Kenny Paton]

SpinelliRichard Wilks I think this conversation has more than ran it's course and has occupied enough of the thread.

 

[Spinelli]

[pls delete]

 

[Marc Collins]

I never ignored anything you said, I don't know why you said that in your previous message... and I don't know why you're still accusing me of it even after I already just stated in my previous message that I haven't disregarded anything you wrote. You keep on twisting things or lying. I just mentioned in my previous post that you have a habit of doing this and what happens in your very next reply? You do it once again (lying about me ignoring). Unbelievable.

I do think the suggestion to stick to facts is a good one. Lots of us are very passionate about our sims, but the problem arises when opinions get miscommunicated as more than that. Then, people get offended and start suggesting others are lying or having some ulterior motive.

@Spinelli, the only real issue is that you are repeating the same points that you already know many knowledgeable people have considered seriously and disagree with. When it inevitably comes to blows, you are offended. Just accept that your impressions are valid for you, but that there is not a factual basis for your claims. I never liked AC physics/handling or FFB because to me it felt like its predecessor that I also thought was lame. ACC still carries over some issues, but there is a serious attempt to improve it. I prefer the direction of ACC, but many, many people who preferred the old FFB and handling think its a step backwards.

These disagreements are healthy, since no sim is the best in any absolute sense. But attempting to declare that an entire foundation sim engine is flawed because not 100% of the cars have a quirk or characteristic that is unrealistic is going to get interpreted as trolling, especially when you bring it up at every single possible opportunity.

I was in investor in PCars. Happily, because I made more money than it cost me, which was helpful from my perspective. It paid for the time I wasted fiddling to try to get it configured properly. As soon as I read others having the same issues and repeatedly read about a couple of cars being great and many being terrible, I knew it was a classic case of poor implementation. I am not about to waste my time resetting settings every time I want to drive a different car when I can hop in AMS and have a polished and integrated experience. For me, the inferior graphics of AMS compared to PC was perfectly acceptable as a trade-off. The majority don't agree with me on that--I could not care less.

PC 2 turns out to be the exact same mess as PC in terms of inconsistent implementation. When I knew Reiza were considering Madness as a sim engine for AMS 2 (well before the official announcement), my first thoughts were horror, but then I quickly remembered that a few respectable people in the community proclaimed PC 2 to be good if you knew how to configure it (I couldn't be bothered with the amount of effort required) and picked certain vehicles and tracks (I asked, but ultimately could not be bothered compiling the list of what was worth driving and what was not). What that told me was that the engine may very be great, but the content put in it was rushed and/or not implemented by people with enough knowledge to exploit the engine. So, maybe I should trust Reiza...

The more I thought about it, the more I realized that Reiza was the only dev that did not have unacceptably (to me) varying quality of vehicles and tracks in their sim. They were the only dev that applied important sim-related updates universally to all their cars and tracks.

I was then reminded by one of the many repeat claims (in multiple threads all over the net) about defects in the ISI engine from you that it really annoyed me that devs release half-finished or poorly implemented stuff and get away not only with that, but also with never going back to fix or finish it.

In this not-so-veiled attempt to get the thread back on topic, I would suggest that you try other sims, like ACC, so you can see that the issues that concern you are actually worse in a not-ISI engine. I suggest you save-up for some better quality hardware. I am no alien, but I do know that in real racing the throttle and brake are used in conjunction with the steering wheel to direct the car where you need it to go. Just switching to a higher resolution throttle and a load cell brake controller improved my lap times (via more fluid control of the car) instantaneously. There was no talent increase from me whatsoever. You cannot save a car from a spin or severe slide without a sensitive throttle (foot and hardware combination). If others cannot "feel" the same issue you do, it does not mean it isn't real for you, but it also does not mean that it is real in the sense that it is a universal problem. It could be a characteristic of your hardware/rig, or, it's just the way your brain works. My brain prefers certain sim feedback--so much so that Reiza cars in AMS mostly feel better than the same cars in rF2. I know objectively they should feel better in rF2 because it is more sophisticated, but the combination of head movement, audio, FFB peculiarities, etc., mean that the AMS versions feel more natural (aka "better") to me. If 99% of the world thinks the opposite, I will just have to live with that.

You are a great contributor to the community, just give up up the warrior component on the ISI engine topic and everyone, especially you, will be happier

 

[Renato Simioni]

I actually agree to an extent with what seems to be the gist of Spinelli´s ongoing argument, that generally sim tyres (ISI or otherwise) often are a bit too sharp on the edge, making it more difficult to sustain slides and more likely for them to turn into tankslappers than they should be in reality.

The issue with the argument as he poses it is that you can´t actually address or even isolate a problem by just endlessly repeating one exists it´s not something you can diagnose with conjecture or short videos lacking the context of tyre and track conditions (as lower grip generally brings the tyres to more manageable peaks). You have to actually have data, be able look under the hood of the physics engine and understand what´s going on, and that´s where it gets tricky.

As previously suggested, it´s possible to develop tyre physics in the rF1 - AMS1 tyre model to be better in that particular aspect, the challenge is doing so without creating or exacerbating other flaws, such as a loss of precision, more understeer or just a general excess of slip which can make the tyres feel less connected. Physical tyre models like in AMS2 or rF2 don´t offer the same scope for this type of "design" work which can be limiting, but if the model is working well it can also make things a lot easier because you don´t actually need to be endlessly crafting tyre physics.

Ultimately I believe tyre models and our understanding of them are at a much higher level now across most racing sims than they were a few years ago, but none of them are quite perfect yet and all have their own quirks, it can still be slightly subjective to what one likes or perceives to be right... but a very hard argument to objectively win

 

[Marc Collins]

I actually agree to an extent with what seems to be the gist of Spinelli´s ongoing argument, that generally sim tyres (ISI or otherwise) often are a bit too sharp on the edge, making it more difficult to sustain slides and more likely for them to turn into tankslappers than they should be in reality.

The issue with the argument as he poses it is that you can´t actually address or even isolate a problem by just endlessly repeating one exists it´s not something you can diagnose with conjecture or short videos lacking the context of tyre and track conditions (as lower grip generally brings the tyres to more manageable peaks). You have to actually have data, be able look under the hood of the physics engine and understand what´s going on, and that´s where it gets tricky.

As previously suggested, it´s possible to develop tyre physics in the rF1 - AMS1 tyre model to be better in that particular aspect, the challenge is doing so without creating or exacerbating other flaws, such as a loss of precision, more understeer or just a general excess of slip which can make the tyres feel less connected. Physical tyre models like in AMS2 or rF2 don´t offer the same scope for this type of "design" work which can be limiting, but if the model is working well it can also make things a lot easier because you don´t actually need to be endlessly crafting tyre physics.

Ultimately I believe tyre models and our understanding of them are at a much higher level now across most racing sims than they were a few years ago, but none of them are quite perfect yet and all have their own quirks, it can still be slightly subjective to what one likes or perceives to be right... but a very hard argument to objectively win

And here is an fascinating experiment in sim tires that, among other things, allows for greater ability to save/sustain slides instead of them becoming tank slappers. And remember, these are rear-engined!

https://www.racedepartment.com/downloads/hso-f1-1971-historic-edition.22976/

I cannot say how realistic it is or whether there are trade-offs as @Renato Simioni mentions, but the driving experience is one that should be interesting to anyone concerned about this little tire modelling off-shoot conversation

 

[Marc Collins]

And here is an fascinating experiment in sim tires that, among other things, allows for greater ability to save/sustain slides instead of them becoming tank slappers. And remember, these are rear-engined!

https://www.racedepartment.com/downloads/hso-f1-1971-historic-edition.22976/

I cannot say how realistic it is or whether there are trade-offs as @Renato Simioni mentions, but the driving experience is one that should be interesting to anyone concerned about this little tire modelling off-shoot conversation

I am also interested to understand if the Blancpain series tires are on hyper-edge? Because ACC sure makes it seem so. It is possible that the series wants that sharp-edged drop-off in grip to make it more challenging for the drivers, but it sure is immediately noticeable (and annoying to me) while sim driving them.

 

[hotak]

@Spinelli did you try the drift 240sx mod for rFactor2? I think it does exactly what you ask, and is my favourite street car among all the sims.
Also V8SC, LMP2 and LMP3 in pCars2 to a lower extent may satisfy you.

 

[patchedupdemon]

0:31 - 0:35
2:01 - 2:06

16:26-16:30

0:25 - 0:28
(harder to see, schumi floors it on exit over the curbs and gets wheelspin and a nice slide on exit)
0:45 - 0:49
(flooring it, getting sideways, keeping lots of throttle and wheelspin on during the slide, lays rubber 1/4 of the way down the whole straight)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nuMIL0rmmU
1:37 - 1:41

The only sims I've seen even remotely close to being able to deliver those types of oversteer/wheelspin physics behaviour are Live for Speed and Netkar Pro. The real car in those videos is an F1 car so very stiff & darty, very direct and on edge - and even more so because of how Schumi used to set his car up, especially when he had bad handling cars - yet at the same time the rear-angle along with wheelspin/revs are able to be modulated and manipulated during wheelspin. It's not an on/off moment, it's not a "snap opposite lock, snap lift throttle, and then snap steering wheel back to centre" moment. You can get the rear out on exit while the car continues on it's original path towards the outside of the corner all while the angle of the slide remains and while you're holding that angle with your opposite lock....then, you can add a bit more power to increase the rear-angle even more as long as you also increase the opposite lock even more....all the while the car's direction of travel is still continuing to the exit of the corner....then you can hammer the throttle while still in an angle (but less so or else you can spin) and leave huge strips of rubber on the track. The car's rear rotates accordingly depending on whether you add more throttle or not and you can control that rotation accordingly with throttle and steering modulation. When you get wheelspin, or add throttle to increase/adjust wheelspin, the revs don't instantly skyrocket to redline as if 100% of grip is lost like in most sims (the worse in RF/ISI & iRacing physics engines), nor does the car start almost horizontally wondering all over the track as if there's no inertia or mass and unlimited front-grip. You're able to adjust the rear-angle as well as the wheelspin throughout the rev-range. It's not just some on/off moment where you apply opposite lock the instant the rear comes out and then from there you just wait for the slide to finish (almost like the oversteer is canned from that point on). Also notice when throttle/wheelspin is adjusted mid-slide, the wheelspin and revs don't suddenly burst to redline as if all grip was lost or as if the car suddenly gained thousands of hp.

I really hope the PC2 physics engine is capable of improving on this. I believe it's not just purely core tyre model related but also something to do with mass/inertia or some sort of other combination of forces acting on the vehicle. The reason I believe it's more than just tyre model related is because RF2 and PC1 have updated or different all-together (PC1) tyre models yet the issues remain.

I've seen and played some mods that have improved on this aspect but the cars (or tyres) seem to drive more sloppy and mushy. It's like the entire car's character has to be changed in order to try and compensate. What should really be happening is the cars' physics keeping the stiff, responsive, on-edge character while also behaving much better at and over the limit. It's like one area has to be compromised in order to try and mask another area's issues.

I've read Alot of your posts over the years and have agreed with most, but I can't agree with this one, I regularly have these seemless and most enjoyable moments of power sliding out of the corner when you get a kick of oversteer, in rf2.
In iracing it is most definitely a case of grip being on off, but rf2 is way better on this front, I'll try and upload some videos when I get chance, to support my ckaim

 

[FeltHat]

https://forum.reizastudios.com/threads/reiza-august-2019-development-update.6597/