I'm a simracing player since '90. I played mainly F1-sims up to the last decade, than I switched to sims with prototype cars (from 917 to R18). I don't play online, thus, since 2010 I played mostly GTR2, thanks to the huge amount of mod and the availability of critical featurese such as dynamic wheather/time and in-game saving. It was a very good platform, with a very active community till now.
But time goes on, and GTR2 showed his weakness, mainly due to the old graphic engine and physics (eg. tire model). Obviously, since release of AC and rF2, I tried these sims but I was not convinced, mainly due to the impossibility to reproduce time-accelerated endurance race (AC, up to most recent mod), small grid (AC), poor graphics (rF2) and generally unbalanced cars (AC/rF2, in terms of performance and quality). I also tried PC1. A disaster, the feeling with the cars was almost zero. However, the aim of this post is not to critics other sims and I know that they have strong points.
Since mid-2018 (after Le Mans DLC) I become a full-time PC2 player. But it was fortuity, because the web was full of comments like:
1) the AI was bad and inconstant (and I am a single player...);
2) about 50% of races are under rain condition, with a very slow AI;
3) no custom grid/livery;
4) very bad FFB;
5) lots of web discussions reported that car feeling of PC2 was almost the same of PC1. It was the worst scenario.
Good reasons to avoid the game, beside well-know strong points (graphic, list of cars/tracks, dynamic wheather/time...).
However I tried the game, but my response was different, at least after the latest patches, because:
1) the AI was no more inconstant after some patches and it was not bad. I play 100-120% strenght (it depends by classes) and 100% aggressivenes and: a) laptimes are consistent between qualy and race and during races (you have to use race setup in qualy, as AI); b) AI strenght need to be adjusted according track, but it is not difficult to understang which track need a +5/+10 or -5/-10 (see my guide in this forum); c) it is very good in offensive manouvers, with few ramming (do you remember rF2/GTR2?)... and ramming generally did not interfere with you becouse rarely damage your car/laptime; d) it is very good in overtaking lapped cars (very important in multiclass races); e) not so great in defending manouver... but not bad, generally AI try to close the door in the middle of the curve with no defensive manouvers in the straight. Concluding a quite good AI, not worse of AC, maybe not perfect for sprint races where close battle are essential, but ok for endurance.
2) There is an app to reduce the chance of raining: AI was speed was improved but is still a bit low, but it depends on tracks/cars.
3) There are mods for that, to create totally custom grid: new livery are not so easy to include, but it is just a matter of understanding which text file to edit.
4) I think is a matter of taste, wheel and cars. Raw setting with an entry level wheel (g29) was quite good but I agree that custom setting are better. I use a common t300rs with Jacks setting and I found it ok in terms of car weight and road feeling. I tried AC, ACC and rF2: every FFB is different, so what is the better? The one you like.
5) The most debated part, even considering the launch of AMS2. I should agree with someone that wrote that "the physic engine is ok, but the car data are wrong". I try to explain: if you spend some time with PC2 you can find a very complex tire management, where few changes in pressure have an impact in temperature (in terms of increase and maintainance) with feedback in grip and speed. But also brake radiator influence tire temperature! And so on... Technically, the car setup is very complex and every change you made have an impact that you can find in laptime. So, what is the problem? In my opinion the problem is a) the stock setup and b) some cars. As I said, I just play prototype, old as new, and I found this type of car very well designed. In fact, most of negative comments are relative to other type of cars (e.g. monoseat, road cars), so maybe they are really badly done. But for prototype the story is different. If I play a Ligier JS P2 in PC2 and rF2 they are different, but not so much and I was not able to say which was most realistic! They are just a bit different. Then the setup: many standard setup are totally wrong and you will feel most of the problems that are reported in the web. E.g. anti roll bar stock setting are generally wrong, and you will feel the oscillations frequently reported by user: but it is not an engine problem. With some cars you have to work hard on setup (not so strange, if you are a sim racer), than you will feel the car properly.
Finally, I think that one of the main problem of PC2 was PC1, SMS reputation was gone among many simracers. Than, the first release of PC2 need some patches, so reputation+bug+wrong stock car setup=mediocre game.
I think that the best way to evaluate PC2 is to take a good PC for VR, choose a Group C car, prepare a good setup and race a 24h-accelerate time at Le Mans or Daytona. In my opinion, I doubt someone can say that is not a great experience.
But time goes on, and GTR2 showed his weakness, mainly due to the old graphic engine and physics (eg. tire model). Obviously, since release of AC and rF2, I tried these sims but I was not convinced, mainly due to the impossibility to reproduce time-accelerated endurance race (AC, up to most recent mod), small grid (AC), poor graphics (rF2) and generally unbalanced cars (AC/rF2, in terms of performance and quality). I also tried PC1. A disaster, the feeling with the cars was almost zero. However, the aim of this post is not to critics other sims and I know that they have strong points.
Since mid-2018 (after Le Mans DLC) I become a full-time PC2 player. But it was fortuity, because the web was full of comments like:
1) the AI was bad and inconstant (and I am a single player...);
2) about 50% of races are under rain condition, with a very slow AI;
3) no custom grid/livery;
4) very bad FFB;
5) lots of web discussions reported that car feeling of PC2 was almost the same of PC1. It was the worst scenario.
Good reasons to avoid the game, beside well-know strong points (graphic, list of cars/tracks, dynamic wheather/time...).
However I tried the game, but my response was different, at least after the latest patches, because:
1) the AI was no more inconstant after some patches and it was not bad. I play 100-120% strenght (it depends by classes) and 100% aggressivenes and: a) laptimes are consistent between qualy and race and during races (you have to use race setup in qualy, as AI); b) AI strenght need to be adjusted according track, but it is not difficult to understang which track need a +5/+10 or -5/-10 (see my guide in this forum); c) it is very good in offensive manouvers, with few ramming (do you remember rF2/GTR2?)... and ramming generally did not interfere with you becouse rarely damage your car/laptime; d) it is very good in overtaking lapped cars (very important in multiclass races); e) not so great in defending manouver... but not bad, generally AI try to close the door in the middle of the curve with no defensive manouvers in the straight. Concluding a quite good AI, not worse of AC, maybe not perfect for sprint races where close battle are essential, but ok for endurance.
2) There is an app to reduce the chance of raining: AI was speed was improved but is still a bit low, but it depends on tracks/cars.
3) There are mods for that, to create totally custom grid: new livery are not so easy to include, but it is just a matter of understanding which text file to edit.
4) I think is a matter of taste, wheel and cars. Raw setting with an entry level wheel (g29) was quite good but I agree that custom setting are better. I use a common t300rs with Jacks setting and I found it ok in terms of car weight and road feeling. I tried AC, ACC and rF2: every FFB is different, so what is the better? The one you like.
5) The most debated part, even considering the launch of AMS2. I should agree with someone that wrote that "the physic engine is ok, but the car data are wrong". I try to explain: if you spend some time with PC2 you can find a very complex tire management, where few changes in pressure have an impact in temperature (in terms of increase and maintainance) with feedback in grip and speed. But also brake radiator influence tire temperature! And so on... Technically, the car setup is very complex and every change you made have an impact that you can find in laptime. So, what is the problem? In my opinion the problem is a) the stock setup and b) some cars. As I said, I just play prototype, old as new, and I found this type of car very well designed. In fact, most of negative comments are relative to other type of cars (e.g. monoseat, road cars), so maybe they are really badly done. But for prototype the story is different. If I play a Ligier JS P2 in PC2 and rF2 they are different, but not so much and I was not able to say which was most realistic! They are just a bit different. Then the setup: many standard setup are totally wrong and you will feel most of the problems that are reported in the web. E.g. anti roll bar stock setting are generally wrong, and you will feel the oscillations frequently reported by user: but it is not an engine problem. With some cars you have to work hard on setup (not so strange, if you are a sim racer), than you will feel the car properly.
Finally, I think that one of the main problem of PC2 was PC1, SMS reputation was gone among many simracers. Than, the first release of PC2 need some patches, so reputation+bug+wrong stock car setup=mediocre game.
I think that the best way to evaluate PC2 is to take a good PC for VR, choose a Group C car, prepare a good setup and race a 24h-accelerate time at Le Mans or Daytona. In my opinion, I doubt someone can say that is not a great experience.
Last edited:
