I want to keep my response short and on point. These are all video games first and foremost that aim to replicate real life, and I think the majority of them do a hell of a job honestly. However, in certain video games the actual video game is missing. People don't go to AC or ACC over rF2 because they are mechanically illiterate, they go there because it's a more accessible package as a video game, not necessarily as a simulation. Most of us are working, have finite time, sometimes it is just not desirable to spend hours setting up the perfect AI aggression setting to not have boring or catastrophic races.@Ryan Soucy Hey, thanks. I don't say anything is unimportant. But I don't like when important things get compromised, and more importantly I am worried by the attitude. I get the fun and immersion part, but at least for me real thing physics looks like it couldn't be more fun than that, so any noticeable principally incorrect observable mismatch is surely not desirable by me. The problem is that these things has to be observed to be understood. There are plenty of interesting details to pay attention in real thing, and they should be expected to be happening very similarly in simulation. I use a word "principally" because I am not that fanatic, I can live with inaccuracies, but if I suspect and see evidence of a car simply not doing something right and not being anywhere close to how it should work, then it is not what I want to have to use my time with. Basically what I am trying to say is that the realism in consumer market simulation inevitably depends on what the average guy will feel and want to believe being true. And if there will be more mechanical illiteracy and if there will be less observant guys then the bar of "realistic enough" physics will go down, and will switch more into "likeable enough" rather than "realistic enough", and it has been already happening for few years. Basically every barely realistic simulation already can be considered as "state of the art". I am worried about rF2 because, not only S397 does not seem to extract best from rF2 physics IMO, but also the underlying physics of rF2 are getting nivelated with less advanced simulations by common simracer more and more often. It is a signal of physics not being desirable anymore, most likely because most guys expectations for physics realism are fully fulfilled and has settled down as "correct" versions of alternate reality.
On more topic I would like to say that the new UI is a step in the right direction, they just need to find a way to make it more responsive. I really welcome all track updates including this one in the thread, their PBR tarmac shader is very good in my opinion, the way it reacts to light seems very realistic. I root for S397 as well as all other dev teams.