Automobilista 2 Updated to Version 1.3.3.0, Adds New Cars and Road America

CrimsonEminence · Feb 2, 2022

A man with a Harmonica said:
but the very core of software has severe limitations (FFB, AI behaviour, physics itself).

FFB is a Reiza-own implementation, AI is heavily modified by Reiza too, physics engine itself is largely similar to ISImotor with exception of tires and driveline.

The driveline has significantly more depth in the way it applies, supporting different types of differentials (all of them working like they should now, this was indeed plagued by issues in the past), shaft properties etc...

The tire model might be not of your taste, which doesn't mean it's limited...actually it's the opposite, it accounts for way more types of tires and addition of tire components, than AMS1 was able to deliver. At the end of the day it's a tool for the developer to achieve a result.

AI is based on the same stuff, AMS1 did and has actually more possibilities in the Madness Engine to discover.

Stop sharing misinformation about engine limitations. There are certainly some limitations of course, because all game engines have them, but it's not the ones you are talking about right here. Don't confuse personal preference with general facts. Thanks

RedBarchetta · Feb 2, 2022

Hmmm.....

pai · Feb 2, 2022

Sticking a label and throwing the package to the bin of "don't care" is the easiest thing to do. Not only with sims, but with everything in life. I don't shove AMS2 criticism, but I wish that it was not only about the engine picked for it; we are less than 3 months away from reaching 2 years since the first public beta was released, lots of water have streamed down across the bridge, and the game drives much different now than at that point in time, when it already was a step clear from PC2.

Criticize Automobilista 2 as much as you want, objective pointing of flaws is needed to push forward. We also are a niché hobby, it's not like there are endless amount of sims. But even with that rather limited platter of offerings (compared to other gaming genres at least), seems like many people "wasted" (this is completely relative) countless hours with PC2 so they know all their flaws, but cannot spend 60 minutes with Reiza's latest offering to understand what is different.

/rant.

PhilDjocker · Feb 2, 2022

Mekonrider said:
Seriously, what are you on about? It's never going to do Forza numbers but given the constant developer input and new content it's not 'dead'. If they stopped adding content now, there's still plenty to go at for a long time compared to ACC.

It may not be the best sim for some, but for VR nothing beats AMS2.

CrimsonEminence · Feb 2, 2022

Just to make sure:

Critique and suggestions are very welcome (of course in a civilized way) and the game is clearly also improving due to invaluable community input. There is a balance to find of course and don't forget, that testing and finding bugs/issues is always easier and faster than fixing them. Have to remind myself of that all the time when testing stuff and (if) standing on the edge of frustration.

Gevatter · Feb 2, 2022

HOTFIX TIME!

V1.3.3.1 CHANGELOG:

Fixed excessive helmet cam wobbling
Adjusted FFB for all FWD cars, karts, F-Reiza & BMW M8
Adjusted F-Retro Gen3 AI start performance
Adjusted F3 AI rolling resistance
Road America: Various updates to trackside objects; Added "The Bend" layout; minor AI adjustments
Fixed missing Reynard 98i Toyota
F-Retro Gen2: Fixed tire texture bug
F-USA (both gens): Added damage/dirt texture; Updated rain tire texture
Reynard 2Ki: Added gold wheels to #26 and #27 liveries

MAARTENSWESIM · Feb 2, 2022

Great update! Really enjoy this title

but am i the only one hoping for some more road-cars? Cheers

Luciano Santos Filho · Feb 2, 2022

MAARTENSWESIM said:
Great update! Really enjoy this title but am i the only one hoping for some more road-cars? Cheers

Considering that they don't have endless resources, I hope they keep focusing in improving/ adding race cars. It's a racesim after all.

Luciano Santos Filho · Feb 2, 2022

punto said:
Agreed, but I do think iRacing in HDR on an 38" 4k screen also looks very nice!
But, yeah, i use iRacing for multiplayer AND after that I am having a lot of fun in AM2. I really mis the multiplayer aspect in AMS2. I hope they are implementing something more by implementing simracing.gp or other platform. Or doing something like raceroom. I don't onderstand why no other developer other than iRacing is capable of implementing fun multiplayer racing...

We don't pay Reiza monthly for keeping that up. It's not that difficult to understand...

dave kirk · Feb 2, 2022

A man with a Harmonica said:
AMS2 = PC2 properly developed. Which is a compliment to Reiza but no so much for the game itself. The effort of Reiza is really noticeable and their deserve all merits for it but the very core of software has severe limitations (FFB, AI behaviour, physics itself).

Where have you read about such limitations?

MAARTENSWESIM · Feb 2, 2022

Luciano Santos Filho said:
Considering that they don't have endless resources, I hope they keep focusing in improving/ adding race cars. It's a racesim after all.

Well, they got a road-car class in it so i believe and hope there is some stuff added there in future updates.

Kyuubeey · Feb 2, 2022

CrimsonEminence said:
FFB is a Reiza-own implementation, AI is heavily modified by Reiza too, physics engine itself is largely similar to ISImotor with exception of tires and driveline.

The driveline has significantly more depth in the way it applies, supporting different types of differentials (all of them working like they should now, this was indeed plagued by issues in the past), shaft properties etc...

The tire model might be not of your taste, which doesn't mean it's limited...actually it's the opposite, it accounts for way more types of tires and addition of tire components, than AMS1 was able to deliver. At the end of the day it's a tool for the developer to achieve a result.

AI is based on the same stuff, AMS1 did and has actually more possibilities in the Madness Engine to discover.

Stop sharing misinformation about engine limitations. There are certainly some limitations of course, because all game engines have them, but it's not the ones you are talking about right here. Don't confuse personal preference with general facts. Thanks

"Types of tires"? That's not how semi-empiric models work at all. It doesn't care what kind of tire you're supposedly making. I have my gripes with ISImotor's modeling, but that's still a bit of an unfair complaint.

Although you are correct in that it's not tire model limitations that are an issue, more-so the volatility of the parameters. Although I suppose that is largely due to the interconnected nature of parameters which are potentially allowed to get out of hand, which leads to practical limitations when designing. The more data you have to correlate the tire to, the worse your tire will appear to be; but the emergent features are flashy and give an impression of more functionality. Hence why experts tend to gravitate towards AC/old ISImotor, and the casuals love AMS2 and rF2.

Just2Laps · Feb 2, 2022

Well, so everybody is talking about the new track, the F-GEN2, the MP4/1c, but where are that other new cars ?
Reiza has released 2 cars to the TSi Cup Group : VW Polo GTS and VW Virtus GTS.

If you like to have a look at them, I have placed a video in the Videos section.

https://www.racedepartment.com/media/just-2-laps-automobilista-2-update-v1-3-3-0-new-cars-vw-polo-gts-virtus-gts-tsi-cup.3136/

MadDriver11 · Feb 2, 2022

Kyuubeey said:
"Types of tires"? That's not how semi-empiric models work at all. It doesn't care what kind of tire you're supposedly making. I have my gripes with ISImotor's modeling, but that's still a bit of an unfair complaint.

Although you are correct in that it's not tire model limitations that are an issue, more-so the volatility of the parameters. Although I suppose that is largely due to the interconnected nature of parameters which are potentially allowed to get out of hand, which leads to practical limitations when designing. The more data you have to correlate the tire to, the worse your tire will appear to be; but the emergent features are flashy and give an impression of more functionality. Hence why experts tend to gravitate towards AC/old ISImotor, and the casuals love AMS2 and rF2.

Things are slightly different.
Physical models are based on results from actual proper engineering calculations based on actual measurable properties and design features. Granted, some of the properties are not public and some of the details of the structural design are also not known, but there are ways around those which do not compromise the integrity of the calculations and the entire process that lead from them to the look-up tables.
This means you can simulate easily any architecture you want. Which is what RF2 and AMS2 for instance attempt to do.
Field recorded data instead are just an instantaneous picture taken in a very specific condition that is for the most part unknown as most of the key parameters are not available. Hence it's not possible to have a full point to point correlation. There are plenty variables that can't be either controlled or measured when recording the outputs. This also includes the same unknowns about the detailed properties and design features that manufacturer will never provide as for the physical models.
On top of this, parametrization to extrapolate outputs from the "as recorded conditions" to the conditions that need to be simulated/predicted suffers even more than physical models from the fact that they are even more heavily based on approximations with little to no physical sense.
That is why basing a simulation/prediction on empirical data and extrapolation functions is not done when designing as much as possible: the opposite process is pursued. Simulation/prediction is entirely based on engineering estimations and then parameters of the detailed simulation are adjusted so that the simulation matches the empirical data well and often the adjustments can be double checked for physical sense during the process. The level of correlation is far greater this way.
In simple words trying to do everything through empirical parameters is like trying to build a clone of a house just by the use of exterior pictures. Instead using a physical model is more like trying to replicate it by use of drawings without dimensions: you will eventually figure out what the correct dimensions are if you work hard enough and unlock the entire design, while basing everything on exterior pictures will inevitably lead to inventing broad portions of the design because you have no way on earth to figure them out.

Kyuubeey · Feb 2, 2022

MadDriver11 said:
Things are slightly different.
Physical models are based on results from actual proper engineering calculations based on actual measurable properties and design features. Granted, some of the properties are not public and some of the details of the structural design are also not known, but there are ways around those which do not compromise the integrity of the calculations and the entire process that lead from them to the look-up tables.
This means you can simulate easily any architecture you want. Which is what RF2 and AMS2 for instance attempt to do.
Field recorded data instead are just an instantaneous picture taken in a very specific condition that is for the most part unknown as most of the key parameters are not available. Hence it's not possible to have a full point to point correlation. There are plenty variables that can't be either controlled or measured when recording the outputs. This also includes the same unknowns about the detailed properties and design features that manufacturer will never provide as for the physical models.
On top of this, parametrization to extrapolate outputs from the "as recorded conditions" to the conditions that need to be simulated/predicted suffers even more than physical models from the fact that they are even more heavily based on approximations with little to no physical sense.
That is why basing a simulation/prediction on empirical data and extrapolation functions is not done when designing as much as possible: the opposite process is pursued. Simulation/prediction is entirely based on engineering estimations and then parameters of the detailed simulation are adjusted so that the simulation matches the empirical data well and often the adjustments can be double checked for physical sense during the process. The level of correlation is far greater this way.
In simple words trying to do everything through empirical parameters is like trying to build a clone of a house just by the use of exterior pictures. Instead using a physical model is more like trying to replicate it by use of drawings without dimensions: you will eventually figure out what the correct dimensions are if you work hard enough and unlock the entire design, while basing everything on exterior pictures will inevitably lead to inventing broad portions of the design because you have no way on earth to figure them out.

I'm not gonna reply to all of that, but effectively nobody uses physical models for a real-time use last I checked. There are perhaps some exceptions internally in the manufacturing side, although I will take a guess that they are not real-time.

Can you give a more specific example when a physical model was better correlating in a real-time application?

speedx357 · Feb 2, 2022

So many things updated so often... this sim has massive potential, but there's still too much going on in terms of content and quality across the board. Dont like the "active" development approach, look forward to when this sim is actually somewhat complete.

dreamer al · Feb 2, 2022

Like the updates. Road America looks great. LeMans track is on my "wishlist"

MadDriver11 · Feb 2, 2022

Kyuubeey said:
I'm not gonna reply to all of that, but effectively nobody uses physical models for a real-time use last I checked. There are perhaps some exceptions internally in the manufacturing side, although I will take a guess that they are not real-time.

Can you give a more specific example when a physical model was better correlating in a real-time application?

They do not use them for real time calculation, but rather for creation of the look-up tables.
Physical calculations are performed offline to create the tables as part of the tire model creation.
You may want to give a look at this

https://www.politesi.polimi.it/bitstream/10589/153184/1/Optimisation of the tyre model in rFactor2 environment for AVEHIL professional simulator.pdf

You may find out that professionals do not use AC and single point of contact models based on Pacejika invented parameters and they find RF2 tire models insufficient for proper true drivers training.
Which explains also why F1 teams are spending millions and many months of data correlation process to create much more accurate simulators.

Kyuubeey · Feb 2, 2022

MadDriver11 said:
They do not use them for real time calculation, but rather for creation of the look-up tables.
Physical calculations are performed offline to create the tables as part of the tire model creation.
You may want to give a look at this
https://www.politesi.polimi.it/bitstream/10589/153184/1/Optimisation of the tyre model in rFactor2 environment for AVEHIL professional simulator.pdf

You may find out that professionals do not use AC and single point of contact models based on Pacejika invented parameters and they find RF2 tire models insufficient for proper true drivers training.
Which explains also why F1 teams are spending millions and many months of data correlation process to create much more accurate simulators.

What? I don't know anyone who uses rF2's tire model. Although I have heard of rF2 in dev mode to access the rF1 tire model. It is not possible to correlate tires in rF2's model, at all.

Literally everyone uses mostly AC, and some rF1/rF2dev. Is it just different in your region? Most the people I know about are in North America.

Kurupt CDN · Feb 2, 2022

Track looks fantastic but the track side barriers are useless at the moment as you can pretty much drive through them and fall off the track.
Not a big deal in single player practice but will cause chaos in mp.

New cars drive nice.

Rain tires on several cars are useless as hards are still faster.

Ai has improved in single class races but need lots of work in multi class as the faster cars struggle to pass slower classes.
Ex. Daytona, they ride up behind slower ai cars and ride there ass for a while trying to figure out how to pass on the oval, very hesitant on the infield too.

Gonna test the new patch and see how the improved ffb is on the listed cars...M8 feels better.

Automobilista 2 Updated to Version 1.3.3.0, Adds New Cars and Road America

Comments

Article information

Share this article

PC

PC Hardware (ram, gpu etc)

More games (sims)

Wheel

Shifter

Brake pedals

Wheel, shifter and brake in bundle

Rig

Something else?