Automobilista 2 | First Post Version 1 Patch Update Released

[Paul Jeffrey]

Reiza Studios can never be accused of being slow out the blocks, and again the Brazilian team have been quick to address some post update issues with their first V1 release of AMS 2 - Patch 1 is now live.

Deployed quickly following yesterday's full V1 release update, the new hot fix update is a minor initial reaction to some of the key issues that have arisen since the simulation moved out of Steam Early Access status.

V1.0.0.1 Update Notes:

• Fixed loading screen crash when joining in-progress multiplayer sessions.
• Adjusted FFB clipping, aero & default steering ratio for Stock 2020 & corrected minor wheelbase/track width discrepancies.
• Adjusted Ginetta G55 & G58 max FFB force to reduce clipping.
• Bumped up SuperV8 engine output slightly to bring it closer to latest engine specs
• Bathurst: Updated road & trackside ads textures, fixed triangulation glitch in the main road at the pitwall area.
• Added missing Cascais loading screen.
• Fix DRS trackside board issues at Interlagos, Kansai, Spielberg.
• Corrected windshield water wiping animation for the Ultima GTR Road version.

Automobilista 2 is available now, exclusive to PC.

Want help getting the best out of the simulation? Start a thread in the AMS 2 sub forum here at RaceDepartment and let the community help you out!

 

[Fairbanks_ABGF]

I cannot say too much about the game as a whole because I haven't sunk a lot of hours into this yet, but I can see some of the criticism, and I can see some of the refuted criticism.

So far, I have predominantly tried out high downforce cars (Especially the F3, Formula Classic Gen 3, the F-V10, F-V12, and the P1s). In my opinion, the F3 car feels *great*. Unless my memory is playing a trick on me, the car feels just like its AMS1 counterpart. And I'm using AMS1 as reference, not because I "know" how cars should feel, but because it was such a well-rounded product in my opinion, and because I used to race the weekly hosted wednesday F3 races with a bunch of people from this site, so I have a lot of Ks on my odometer in this car. The F3 car is the one whose characteristics I can remember best, and I was relieved to see that it still is awesome.

However: The Formula Classic cars feel weird. Those are the only cars where I can understand the criticisms of the people who complained about the understeer - snap oversteer issue. And I am not competent enough to pinpoint it, but it feels like the differential is behaving strangely. Grip and downforce seem to be alright, and I cannot seem to work out a diff setting that makes a good difference.

Another problem I have, is that with these cars, and some others in the game, the clutch/engine behave very strange. You put the stationary car in 1st gear, release the clutch without applying throttle, and the car will just lurch forward. You can even get on the brakes, and the engine will push so hard against the brakes that you can technically drag the car around the track with slightly engaged brakes and no throttle. This, however, does NOT happen in the F3 car, which will just choke. I feel as if the drivetrain simulation is not consistent all around. If there is something in the patchnotes, I apologize, I may have overread something.

Overall, the only things that really irk me are UI clunkyness (which may be a "getting-used-to issue", to be fair), and the weird behaviour of some cars at low speed and some cars' erratic behaviour in turns.

The F3 and the P1s are, in my opinion, very strong contenders for league/pick-up group racing, because they are not that hard to drive and feel very solid.

One last thing.. I'm also very glad the F-V12 is still awesome. It's so hard to drive fast, but man.. the sound... the feel..

Just my 2 cents, I'm not an expert, I may even be wrong.

 

[Dicra]

• There's no progression elements of any sort other than aimlessly do offline races and maybe join a league I guess.

While I don't think most other points you raise are actual problems (except for not being able to see the race length in the starting screen before the race, that's annoying as all hell; haven't driven a single race online where the chat wasn't chalk full of people desperately trying to find out how many laps there were), this one is, I think, the very core of what's wrong with AMS2.

It's hard to criticize AMS2 for the features it wants to have, as we can be reasonable sure that most of the things Reiza is promising are going to implemented and are going to be functional. I've yet to see such an amazingly communicative and reliable developer.

That makes it even harder to criticize this game, as you simply can't dislike the developers, which seem like a truly nice, reliable bunch of guys. I think a large part of the reason why people are so defensive when it comes to AMS2 is the fact that we want this to succeed, not only because we think it's good, but because we like the people making it.

However, to come back to what you wrote above, there's one core flaw in this.

It's about what this game never will be and never wanted to be. There is a distinct lack of ambition here that's evident in every area of the game.

Just look at the trailer. It looks great, yeah. But what does it actually show? It shows people drive cars, and that's it. That's everything this game wants to be - people driving cars. Using different weather settings, ok, but is that truly special anymore?

AMS2 is not what Project CARS 2 could have been, because if there's one thing you can't SMS accuse of, it's lacking ambition. Reiza seems to lack exactly that.

Why should anyone, at this point, buy AMS2? To have Brazilian cars? You've got AMS1 for that. To have dynamic weather? Go to ACC. Good graphics? PC2 und ACC have got you covered. Great physics? Ah, come on, at this point we're talking about nuances. I think we can mostly agree that every simulation except for PC & PC2 (and maybe iRacing, don't want to open that can of worms) has at least serviceable physics and isn't actively annoying to drive.

The selling point of this game is "you can drive cars here". That's great. But it barely breaks any new ground. I'm playing it, because AC and ACC don't support my input device properly, and it's an improved version of the core aspects of PC2, but these aren't reasons that many people are going to pay any money for.

What I'm wanting to get at is this: Reiza, you have, from now on, several years to support this game. Bring the new content, bring the Ring, bring the GT3's, and fix the bugs - but, please, don't stop there.

Just - try to distinguish yourselves.

Suggestions
What about a weather system that can produce so much rain that the whole track becomes like a big puddle and the race has to be stopped, combined with an opportunity to call for a red flag via a button on the wheel? We see this in real life all the time.

What about red flags in general?

What about Safety Cars, at least for modern series?

What about a proper weather forecast, told to you by the racing engineer, combined with varying lengths of rain, so sometimes it's better to stay on dry tyres despite the track getting wet? Localised weather, with one sector being completely dry?

What, and that might be the most important thing, about a proper career mode? Project CARS 2 has a brilliant base for this! The thing that impressed me the most about Project CARS franchise was the "ultimate driver journey" approach. It was, sadly, destroyed by woeful AI and a missing sense of progression, but the underlying structure was great.

And it's just - gone in AMS2. Why?

Here's my personal suggestion on how to fix this. The details might be up for debate, but please, bear with me, and try to imagine a career mode like this:

1. Driver Journey
This aspect I would keep. It's a nice idea to progress through the categories and, in the end, go to the big series. You can already do that with AMS2 as it is now, for example:

Shifter Karts –> Formula Rookie -> Formula 3 -> Formula V12 -> Formula V10 -> Formula Reiza -> Formula Ultimate

Shifter Karts -> Formula Vee -> ARC Camaro -> SprintCars -> Copa Montana -> StockV8 2019/2020

Shifter Karts -> Copa Fusca -> Puma GTB -> Ginetta GT4 -> Ultima Race -> SuperV8

That's what PC1 and PC2 had, but it still doesn't have a proper sense of progression. So, let's work on that.

2. Positions Matter
I don't know whether that was in PC2, however, what I mean with that is something like this: If you win the Shifter Kart championship, you're immediately able to climb to Formula 3. If you get 5th, you're eligible for Formula Rookie. If you're 20th, you can only drive in Copa Fusca. Something like that in order to make results matter.

3. Performance Differences Within a Series & Team Names
This is a big part of the sense of progression. Maybe the biggest one, and PC2 was sorely missing it. Even in a one-chassis-series like GP3, we're seeing Prema dominate everything, because they're simply better at preparing their car.
Why not replicate that in the game? Why not make different teams have different paces, so, say, a fictional "Prima Force Team", commonly known as the best of Formula Rookie, is a second quicker than a fictional "Minor Racing Team", commonly known as the slowest of Formula Rookie. You could do that, for example, by programming the "Minor Racing Team" to have a bit less downforce in career mode, or a slightly weaker topspeed, or something like that.

And of course, if you enter a series, if you only barely make the necessary position (see 2.), you're going to go to the worst team, and have to work your way up.

That way, in-series-progression becomes possible. That way, especially categories like "Formula Ultimate" aren't just things you can win in your first year.

To round this out, you could do something like "If you were at "Minor Racing Team" in Formula Rookie, you'll have an easier time going to "Lutos Racing" in Formula V12, but it'll be harder to get into "Prima Force V12 Team"".

4. Changing Race Calendars

You've got a shitton of tracks in AMS2, and that's a great thing. Because that way, you can change the calendar around for each season in each series. The way I imagine it is this: You've got a certain pool of tracks for each series. The number of these tracks is higher than the number of races in each season. Now, either the game or user defines the individual calendars.

Two examples:
Formula Rookie's calendar has 7 race weekends each seasons, consisting of two races. The pool of tracks includes:
Brands Hatch Indy, Velopark, Kansai West, Oulton Park Fosters, Taruma Chicane, Goiania Short, Campo Grande, Spielberg Short, Curvelo Short, Cascavel

Now, the calendar for "Season 2020) could be:
03.04: Brands Hatch Indy
24.04: Oulton Park Fosters
22.05.: Taruma Chicane
22.06.: Goiania Short
13.07.: Curvelo Short
31.08.: Spielberg Short
14.09.: Campo Grande

And the next season, it'd be:
03.04: Brands Hatch Indy
24.04.: Velopark
22.05.: Oulton Park Fosters
22.06.: Cascavel
13.07.: Curvelo Short
31.08.: Goiania Short
14.09.: Campo Grande

Another one: Formula Ultimate's calendar has 16 race weekends each season, consisting of one 305 km race. The pool of tracks includes:
Azure Circuit, Bathurst, Adelaide, Kansai GP, Ibarra, Curitiba, Goiania, Velopark 2010, Spielberg GP, Imola, Kyalami, VIR Full, Interlagos, Hockenheim GP, Donington GP, Londrina Long, Montreal, Estoril, Brasilia GP, (Spa-Francorchamps, Nürburgring GP, Silverstone GP)

Now I'm not going to write up another fictional calendar, but I think you get the gist. If something changes from season to season, you don't feel like you're stuck doing the ever-same things again. If you then can progress within each series from weakest to strongest car, you feel like you can actually achieve something.

5. Trophy Room
That doesn't need to be anything special. Just trophies for every race you've won, and every championship you've managed to snack, so there's actually a sense of accomplishment.

6. Rule Changes from series to series
Reverse grid races in Junior categories, longer races in the bigger ones, different points systems from series to series, something like that.

7. Request Team Order Button
Self-explanatory.

Now, what I'm proposing would surely be difficult to do. You'd have to have a balanced AI, which is exactly what Project CARS always lacked. But honestly, even at the thought of the possibilities such a game would have, I'm salivating. And you are, too, just admit it

While I don't presume to have any influence on the game development process over at Reiza studios, or on their plans for the game, what I'm saying is this:

Don't just try to be that game that drives a bit better than the other game.

Be the game that everyone has to have, because it's something new, something that sails unexplored waters. Be the next generation.

That's what impressed me about Project CARS 1 & 2, and what's sorely missing from this one.

 

[b)b]

Just look at the trailer. It looks great, yeah. But what does it actually show? It shows people drive cars, and that's it. That's everything this game wants to be - people driving cars. Using different weather settings, ok, but is that truly special anymore?

What's special is that it does not kill framerate.

 

[CrimsonEminence]

While I don't think most other points you raise are actual problems (except for not being able to see the race length in the starting screen before the race, that's annoying as all hell; haven't driven a single race online where the chat wasn't chalk full of people desperately trying to find out how many laps there were), this one is, I think, the very core of what's wrong with AMS2.

It's hard to criticize AMS2 for the features it wants to have, as we can be reasonable sure that most of the things Reiza is promising are going to implemented and are going to be functional. I've yet to see such an amazingly communicative and reliable developer.

That makes it even harder to criticize this game, as you simply can't dislike the developers, which seem like a truly nice, reliable bunch of guys. I think a large part of the reason why people are so defensive when it comes to AMS2 is the fact that we want this to succeed, not only because we think it's good, but because we like the people making it.

However, to come back to what you wrote above, there's one core flaw in this.

It's about what this game never will be and never wanted to be. There is a distinct lack of ambition here that's evident in every area of the game.

Just look at the trailer. It looks great, yeah. But what does it actually show? It shows people drive cars, and that's it. That's everything this game wants to be - people driving cars. Using different weather settings, ok, but is that truly special anymore?

AMS2 is not what Project CARS 2 could have been, because if there's one thing you can't SMS accuse of, it's lacking ambition. Reiza seems to lack exactly that.

Why should anyone, at this point, buy AMS2? To have Brazilian cars? You've got AMS1 for that. To have dynamic weather? Go to ACC. Good graphics? PC2 und ACC have got you covered. Great physics? Ah, come on, at this point we're talking about nuances. I think we can mostly agree that every simulation except for PC & PC2 (and maybe iRacing, don't want to open that can of worms) has at least serviceable physics and isn't actively annoying to drive.

The selling point of this game is "you can drive cars here". That's great. But it barely breaks any new ground. I'm playing it, because AC and ACC don't support my input device properly, and it's an improved version of the core aspects of PC2, but these aren't reasons that many people are going to pay any money for.

What I'm wanting to get at is this: Reiza, you have, from now on, several years to support this game. Bring the new content, bring the Ring, bring the GT3's, and fix the bugs - but, please, don't stop there.

Just - try to distinguish yourselves.

Suggestions
What about a weather system that can produce so much rain that the whole track becomes like a big puddle and the race has to be stopped, combined with an opportunity to call for a red flag via a button on the wheel? We see this in real life all the time.

What about red flags in general?

What about Safety Cars, at least for modern series?

What about a proper weather forecast, told to you by the racing engineer, combined with varying lengths of rain, so sometimes it's better to stay on dry tyres despite the track getting wet?

What, and that might be the most important thing, about a proper career mode? Project CARS 2 has a brilliant base for this! The thing that impressed me the most about Project CARS franchise was the "ultimate driver journey" approach. It was, sadly, destroyed by woeful AI and a missing sense of progression, but the underlying structure was great.

And it's just - gone in AMS2. Why?

Here's my personal suggestion on how to fix this. The details might be up for debate, but please, bear with me, and try to imagine a career mode like this:

1. Driver Journey
This aspect I would keep. It's a nice idea to progress through the categories and, in the end, go to the big series. You can already do that with AMS2 as it is now, for example:

Shifter Karts –> Formula Rookie -> Formula 3 -> Formula V12 -> Formula V10 -> Formula Reiza -> Formula Ultimate

Shifter Karts -> Formula Vee -> ARC Camaro -> SprintCars -> Copa Montana -> StockV8 2019/2020

Shifter Karts -> Copa Fusca -> Puma GTB -> Ginetta GT4 -> Ultima Race -> SuperV8

That's what PC1 and PC2 had, but it still doesn't have a proper sense of progression. So, let's work on that.

2. Positions Matter
I don't know whether that was in PC2, however, what I mean with that is something like this: If you win the Shifter Kart championship, you're immediately able to climb to Formula 3. If you get 5th, you're eligible for Formula Rookie. If you're 20th, you can only drive in Copa Fusca. Something like that in order to make results matter.

3. Performance Differences Within a Series & Team Names
This is a big part of the sense of progression. Maybe the biggest one, and PC2 was sorely missing it. Even in a one-chassis-series like GP3, we're seeing Prema dominate everything, because they're simply better at preparing their car.
Why not replicate that in the game? Why not make different teams have different paces, so, say, a fictional "Prima Force Team", commonly known as the best of Formula Rookie, is a second quicker than a fictional "Minor Racing Team", commonly known as the slowest of Formula Rookie. You could do that, for example, by programming the "Minor Racing Team" to have a bit less downforce in career mode, or a slightly weaker topspeed, or something like that.

And of course, if you enter a series, if you only barely make the necessary position (see 2.), you're going to go to the worst team, and have to work your way up.

That way, in-series-progression becomes possible. That way, especially categories like "Formula Ultimate" aren't just things you can win in your first year.

To round this out, you could do something like "If you were at Minor Racing Team in Formula Rookie", you'll have an easier time going to "Lutos Racing" in Formula V12, but it'll be harder to get into "Prima Force V12 Team".

4. Changing Race Calendars

You've got a shitton of tracks in AMS2, and that's a great thing. Because that way, you can change the calendar around for each season in each series. The way I imagine it is this: You've got a certain pool of tracks for each series. The number of these tracks is higher than the number of races in each season. Now, either the game or user defines the individual calendars.

Two examples:
Formula Rookie's calendar has 7 race weekends each seasons, consisting of two races. The pool of tracks includes:
Brands Hatch Indy, Velopark, Kansai West, Oulton Park Fosters, Taruma Chicane, Goiania Short, Campo Grande, Spielberg Short, Curvelo Short, Cascavel

Now, the calendar for "Season 2020) could be:
03.04: Brands Hatch Indy
24.04: Oulton Park Fosters
22.05.: Taruma Chicane
22.06.: Goiania Short
13.07.: Curvelo Short
31.08.: Spielberg Short
14.09.: Campo Grande

And the next season, it'd be:
03.04: Brands Hatch Indy
24.04.: Velopark
22.05.: Oulton Park Fosters
22.06.: Cascavel
13.07.: Curvelo Short
31.08.: Goiania Short
14.09.: Campo Grande

Another one: Formula Ultimate's calendar has 16 race weekends each season, consisting of one 305 km race. The pool of tracks includes:
Azure Circuit, Bathurst, Adelaide, Kansai GP, Ibarra, Curitiba, Goiania, Velopark 2010, Spielberg GP, Imola, Kyalami, VIR Full, Interlagos, Hockenheim GP, Donington GP, Londrina Long, Montreal, Estoril, Brasilia GP, (Spa-Francorchamps, Nürburgring GP, Silverstone GP)

Now I'm not going to write up another fictional calendar, but I think you get the gist. If something changes from season to season, you don't feel like you're stuck doing the ever-same things again. If you then can progress within each series from weakest to strongest car, you feel like you can actually achieve something.

5. Trophy Room
That doesn't need to be anything special. Just trophies for every race you've won, and every championship you've managed to snack, so there's actually a sense of accomplishment.

6. Rule Changes from series to series
Reverse grid races in Junior categories, longer races in the bigger ones, different points systems from series to series, something like that.

7. Request Team Order Button
Self-explanatory.

Now, what I'm proposing would surely be difficult to do. You'd have to have a balanced AI, which is exactly what Project CARS always lacked. But honestly, even at the thought of the possibilities such a game would have, I'm salivating. And you are, too, just admit it

While I don't presume to have any influence on the game development process over at Reiza studios, or on their plans for the game, what I'm saying is this:

Don't just try to be that game that drives a bit better than the other game.

Be the game that everyone has to have, because it's something new, something that sails unexplored waters. Be the next generation.

That's what impressed me about Project CARS 1 & 2, and what's sorely missing from this one.

For me it's just....driving AMS, but suddenly weather says hello and i balance the car on throttle, refusing to go into the pits, staying on slicks, keeping it on the fast line.
(Unfortunately so many sim racers are still afraid of weather, so you find rain servers rarely, but i'm okay with doing pointless single player single races so nevermind)

A career is not that unlikely to happen (was already considered by the devs, if i understood correctly, but some steps have to be overcome first to free the way). The Madness Engine provides a way, to make player progression less "pointless".

For me the tracks and obscure car combinations alone make the difference in the AMS series. I absolutely want to push a Copa Truck or Fusca around Santa Cruz do Sul or drive a Brabham BT44 at Curvelo. I'm tired of the everyday rear-ending fest with GT3 at Monza.

AMS2 is embodying the "experiencing driving" component, like AC or AMS1 for me personally, without becoming overly competitive or frustrated.

This is not a thing for everyone, but as soon you drive a well calibrated single- or multiplayer event with a beautiful car in front or behind you in a shivering mirror, while steering a car on throttle, taking attention to the tyre and what it tries to tell you, things become understandable.

Unfortunately, many users still sit in the sunny weather + fixed setup side of things, which (almost) always lead to boring experiences...

 

[sonicviz]

Everyone wants to be a game designer but nobody wants to make the game themselves

 

[Dicra]

AMS2 is embodying the "experiencing driving" component, like AC or AMS1 for me personally, without becoming overly competitive or frustrated.

That's what I was getting at. I know that for most people on here, that alone is a selling point, but to me, it's just a missed opportunity to add upon what's already there.

It's not only the missing career mode - you could go the next step with the weather, as outlined above, or introduce Safety Cars, or Red Flags, or just -
Just anything. Anything you know you're breaking new ground with.

Everyone wants to be a game designer but nobody wants to make the game themselves

Indeed. Also, I'm not able to, even if I wanted. If I had any credentials to apply as creative director (or anyone that's able to put a few ideas here or there), I would, but I doubt an unfinished law study serves as reasonable qualification...

 

[CrimsonEminence]

That's what I was getting at. I know that for most people on here, that alone is a selling point, but to me, it's just a missed opportunity to add upon what's already there.

It's not only the missing career mode - you could go the next step with the weather, as outlined above, or introduce Safety Cars, or Red Flags, or just -
Just anything. Anything you know you're breaking new ground with.

You mean like you could drive an actual grassroots FWD Fiat Uno on a "Grade-absolutely-not-One" track, while rain is kicking in? This is actually not that widely approachable for many sim-racers, but in AMS2 it is, even in single player.
In so many sims, you are not able to experience actual series in reach of even "non-rich-people", but in AMS1/2 you are. Also driving stuff in an endurance series, that doesn't rely on BoP and conventional prototype categories. But people often refuse to get into it, because they feel alienated into it and this is okay. But it's definetly a point to be considered, why this is a different deal.

Btw. Safety Car is a very discussable point. I'm pro-SC in racing sims because of change of pace and strategy but i also get the points about hindering flow in race situation.

 

[CrimsonEminence]

Everyone wants to be a game designer but nobody wants to make the game themselves

I just want Reiza to success in their business. I could never archieve that level of number-sorcery, game devs deliver...

 

[J1_1nior]

Reiza is the Dr. Dre of Sim games, did you guys really forgot about Dre?

Maybe AMS2 is not what really everybody expected, But since Game Stock Car, Reiza neve stop develop, Reiza is not only a game studio, but a Developer, look AMS1, who imagine ISI gmotor2 will that many features, flatspot, dirt tires, better graphics, and go on...
Is not like the game is done, they will continue the developement and probaly go on for some years, make a constructive criticism, apoint bugs, but called it PC2.5 doesn't make sense, people probaly call Game Stock Car a expensive rFactor mod, back in the day, but see what came out of that.

 

[CrimsonEminence]

Reiza is not only a game studio, but a Developer, look AMS1, who imagine ISI gmotor2 will that many features, flatspot, dirt tires, better graphics, and go on...

Just speaking of implementing a "true" turbo model in the ISImotor foundation, making and trying out to implement a drift mode with points on this base and fixing the sticky magnetic walls issue of the Madness Engine by a PhysX hack.

Reiza were often calling themselves a "content creator" instead of a developer, but this doesn't do much justice anymore to their work...

Like mentioned earlier...clocks are ticking a bit different with this products development schedule (already was with its predecessor). Give 'em some time and as much it doesn't save from critizism, when releasing a 1.0 version, AMS2 was never meant to be fully fleshed out and fully polished in this state, but aimed to be a long term project, which will succeed over time, what was also communicated more than once in the past.

 

[BillGuy]

Real minor question: Was there any past mention from Reiza about player helmets? I’m guessing it might be addressed in any work to make skinning more user-accessible if it’s on their radar at all. On totally superficial level I’m just kind of tired of seeing the “Vader black” helmet in all the external views. Again, trivial matter. Just something I’ve been wondering about.

 

[CrimsonEminence]

Real minor question: Was there any past mention from Reiza about player helmets? I’m guessing it might be addressed in any work to make skinning more user-accessible if it’s on their radar at all. On totally superficial level I’m just kind of tired of seeing the “Vader black” helmet in all the external views. Again, trivial matter. Just something I’ve been wondering about.

No mention about this.

I find the livery/driver editor in ACC to be pretty underrated btw., because it gives your car and team an own identity, even if just on a basic level. I love to drive my car in a whine to crimson red livery, having it fitting to my preferences, even choosing my own number. But this is still a pretty rare fulfilled topic in sim racing.

 

[Spinelli]

Is vr worldscale in the pipeline by any chance does anyone know? I thought this would come in the full release version. The cockpits in the stockcars are massive and unplayable for me but i am loving the v10s i have to say

That's what worries me about VR and 1 of the reasons why I'm still using Nvidia 3D Vision with 3x 1440P screens (& Track IR sometimes).

How do we know if each particular game's devs have set the proper FOV/"VR worldscale" for every single brand & model of headset out there with all the different combinations there are of lens/screen sizes, lens/screen aspect ratio and shapes, lens/screen distance to user's eye, etc.?

Also, even if there's a VR worldview adjustment option, how do we know what the correct 1:1 FOV/worldview setting would be? It's easy with regular screens because there are calculators where you enter in the physical screen size, screen aspect ratio, and distance from your eyeball to the screen - then the calculator spits out the correct in-game FOV to use for a correct 1:1 FOV/"worldscale." Are there calculators to do the same for all sorts of different VR headsets?

 

[Mekonrider]

Just got some free time and driven Bathurst. It's bit 'underwhelming' looking, a bit like mod?

 

[CrimsonEminence]

Just got some free time and driven Bathurst. It's bit 'underwhelming' looking, a bit like mod?

The track is in WIP state, as communicated, it's a Beta version of the finished product.

 

[PicoBp]

That's what worries me about VR and 1 of the reasons why I'm still using Nvidia 3D Vision with 3x 1440P screens (& Track IR sometimes).

How do we know if each particular game's devs have set the proper FOV/"VR worldscale" for every single brand & model of headset out there with all the different combinations there are of lens/screen sizes, lens/screen aspect ratio and shapes, lens/screen distance to user's eye, etc.?

Also, even if there's a VR worldview adjustment option, how do we know what the correct 1:1 FOV/worldview setting would be? It's easy with regular screens because there are calculators where you enter in the physical screen size, screen aspect ratio, and distance from your eyeball to the screen - then the calculator spits out the correct in-game FOV to use for a correct 1:1 FOV/"worldscale." Are there calculators to do the same for all sorts of different VR headsets?

In VR the only variable is the FOV, which is usually handled by the interface, not the game. E.g. SteamVR sets the FOV for any headset that's used with it, which will naturally support all SteamVR compatible products. Same goes for Oculus with their own service. Screen size, eye distance, etc. is irrelevant, as that's all physically transformed by the lenses themselves.

World scale is a strange option in this context. With R3E, they default it to 0.9 instead of 1.0 (which you have to fix via key bindings), for no apparent reason. Either they're compensating for their engine's inaccuracies, or there's a stylistic choice behind that. But normally there should be no reason to deviate from a 1:1 world scale in VR.

 

[Flip-Flop Driver]

Is there a command from the pcars days to keep the game from pausing when the window loses focus?

 

[M D Gourley]

Perhaps if I type in ORANGE people will take note? I've just removed a whole host of posts made by those completely ignoring my request, and will continue to remove any further off-topic posts. Please, stay on topic and keep the discussion about AMS 2!

Type it in RED, increase the FONT Size....then it will really stand out on the page of posts....this post is not meant to be funny.

 

[Renato Simioni]

While I don't think most other points you raise are actual problems (except for not being able to see the race length in the starting screen before the race, that's annoying as all hell; haven't driven a single race online where the chat wasn't chalk full of people desperately trying to find out how many laps there were), this one is, I think, the very core of what's wrong with AMS2.

It's hard to criticize AMS2 for the features it wants to have, as we can be reasonable sure that most of the things Reiza is promising are going to implemented and are going to be functional. I've yet to see such an amazingly communicative and reliable developer.

That makes it even harder to criticize this game, as you simply can't dislike the developers, which seem like a truly nice, reliable bunch of guys. I think a large part of the reason why people are so defensive when it comes to AMS2 is the fact that we want this to succeed, not only because we think it's good, but because we like the people making it.

However, to come back to what you wrote above, there's one core flaw in this.

It's about what this game never will be and never wanted to be. There is a distinct lack of ambition here that's evident in every area of the game.

Just look at the trailer. It looks great, yeah. But what does it actually show? It shows people drive cars, and that's it. That's everything this game wants to be - people driving cars. Using different weather settings, ok, but is that truly special anymore?

AMS2 is not what Project CARS 2 could have been, because if there's one thing you can't SMS accuse of, it's lacking ambition. Reiza seems to lack exactly that.

Why should anyone, at this point, buy AMS2? To have Brazilian cars? You've got AMS1 for that. To have dynamic weather? Go to ACC. Good graphics? PC2 und ACC have got you covered. Great physics? Ah, come on, at this point we're talking about nuances. I think we can mostly agree that every simulation except for PC & PC2 (and maybe iRacing, don't want to open that can of worms) has at least serviceable physics and isn't actively annoying to drive.

The selling point of this game is "you can drive cars here". That's great. But it barely breaks any new ground. I'm playing it, because AC and ACC don't support my input device properly, and it's an improved version of the core aspects of PC2, but these aren't reasons that many people are going to pay any money for.

What I'm wanting to get at is this: Reiza, you have, from now on, several years to support this game. Bring the new content, bring the Ring, bring the GT3's, and fix the bugs - but, please, don't stop there.

Just - try to distinguish yourselves.

Suggestions
What about a weather system that can produce so much rain that the whole track becomes like a big puddle and the race has to be stopped, combined with an opportunity to call for a red flag via a button on the wheel? We see this in real life all the time.

What about red flags in general?

What about Safety Cars, at least for modern series?

What about a proper weather forecast, told to you by the racing engineer, combined with varying lengths of rain, so sometimes it's better to stay on dry tyres despite the track getting wet? Localised weather, with one sector being completely dry?

What, and that might be the most important thing, about a proper career mode? Project CARS 2 has a brilliant base for this! The thing that impressed me the most about Project CARS franchise was the "ultimate driver journey" approach. It was, sadly, destroyed by woeful AI and a missing sense of progression, but the underlying structure was great.

And it's just - gone in AMS2. Why?

Here's my personal suggestion on how to fix this. The details might be up for debate, but please, bear with me, and try to imagine a career mode like this:

1. Driver Journey
This aspect I would keep. It's a nice idea to progress through the categories and, in the end, go to the big series. You can already do that with AMS2 as it is now, for example:

Shifter Karts –> Formula Rookie -> Formula 3 -> Formula V12 -> Formula V10 -> Formula Reiza -> Formula Ultimate

Shifter Karts -> Formula Vee -> ARC Camaro -> SprintCars -> Copa Montana -> StockV8 2019/2020

Shifter Karts -> Copa Fusca -> Puma GTB -> Ginetta GT4 -> Ultima Race -> SuperV8

That's what PC1 and PC2 had, but it still doesn't have a proper sense of progression. So, let's work on that.

2. Positions Matter
I don't know whether that was in PC2, however, what I mean with that is something like this: If you win the Shifter Kart championship, you're immediately able to climb to Formula 3. If you get 5th, you're eligible for Formula Rookie. If you're 20th, you can only drive in Copa Fusca. Something like that in order to make results matter.

3. Performance Differences Within a Series & Team Names
This is a big part of the sense of progression. Maybe the biggest one, and PC2 was sorely missing it. Even in a one-chassis-series like GP3, we're seeing Prema dominate everything, because they're simply better at preparing their car.
Why not replicate that in the game? Why not make different teams have different paces, so, say, a fictional "Prima Force Team", commonly known as the best of Formula Rookie, is a second quicker than a fictional "Minor Racing Team", commonly known as the slowest of Formula Rookie. You could do that, for example, by programming the "Minor Racing Team" to have a bit less downforce in career mode, or a slightly weaker topspeed, or something like that.

And of course, if you enter a series, if you only barely make the necessary position (see 2.), you're going to go to the worst team, and have to work your way up.

That way, in-series-progression becomes possible. That way, especially categories like "Formula Ultimate" aren't just things you can win in your first year.

To round this out, you could do something like "If you were at "Minor Racing Team" in Formula Rookie, you'll have an easier time going to "Lutos Racing" in Formula V12, but it'll be harder to get into "Prima Force V12 Team"".

4. Changing Race Calendars

You've got a shitton of tracks in AMS2, and that's a great thing. Because that way, you can change the calendar around for each season in each series. The way I imagine it is this: You've got a certain pool of tracks for each series. The number of these tracks is higher than the number of races in each season. Now, either the game or user defines the individual calendars.

Two examples:
Formula Rookie's calendar has 7 race weekends each seasons, consisting of two races. The pool of tracks includes:
Brands Hatch Indy, Velopark, Kansai West, Oulton Park Fosters, Taruma Chicane, Goiania Short, Campo Grande, Spielberg Short, Curvelo Short, Cascavel

Now, the calendar for "Season 2020) could be:
03.04: Brands Hatch Indy
24.04: Oulton Park Fosters
22.05.: Taruma Chicane
22.06.: Goiania Short
13.07.: Curvelo Short
31.08.: Spielberg Short
14.09.: Campo Grande

And the next season, it'd be:
03.04: Brands Hatch Indy
24.04.: Velopark
22.05.: Oulton Park Fosters
22.06.: Cascavel
13.07.: Curvelo Short
31.08.: Goiania Short
14.09.: Campo Grande

Another one: Formula Ultimate's calendar has 16 race weekends each season, consisting of one 305 km race. The pool of tracks includes:
Azure Circuit, Bathurst, Adelaide, Kansai GP, Ibarra, Curitiba, Goiania, Velopark 2010, Spielberg GP, Imola, Kyalami, VIR Full, Interlagos, Hockenheim GP, Donington GP, Londrina Long, Montreal, Estoril, Brasilia GP, (Spa-Francorchamps, Nürburgring GP, Silverstone GP)

Now I'm not going to write up another fictional calendar, but I think you get the gist. If something changes from season to season, you don't feel like you're stuck doing the ever-same things again. If you then can progress within each series from weakest to strongest car, you feel like you can actually achieve something.

5. Trophy Room
That doesn't need to be anything special. Just trophies for every race you've won, and every championship you've managed to snack, so there's actually a sense of accomplishment.

6. Rule Changes from series to series
Reverse grid races in Junior categories, longer races in the bigger ones, different points systems from series to series, something like that.

7. Request Team Order Button
Self-explanatory.

Now, what I'm proposing would surely be difficult to do. You'd have to have a balanced AI, which is exactly what Project CARS always lacked. But honestly, even at the thought of the possibilities such a game would have, I'm salivating. And you are, too, just admit it

While I don't presume to have any influence on the game development process over at Reiza studios, or on their plans for the game, what I'm saying is this:

Don't just try to be that game that drives a bit better than the other game.

Be the game that everyone has to have, because it's something new, something that sails unexplored waters. Be the next generation.

That's what impressed me about Project CARS 1 & 2, and what's sorely missing from this one.

We have actually been very open, if not so specific about what we are doing with AMS2, and deliberate about having focused and continuing to focus on developing the core of what we believe makes a good racing sim - the physics, the sounds, the FFB, the AI, the simulation features, and assembling a large and diverse selection of cars and tracks built to reasonably consistent standards. That is still an ongoing process but is fundamentally AMS2´s USP at this point - no other sim offers this level of diversity, with this level of production consistency, with so many core simulation features in place.

Everything else - the offline championships, the career mode, the multiplayer ranking system, the organized online structure - are gameplay features that rely on that core being solid and developed into a cohesive whole to actually become enganging features - you seem to realise yourself how that takes time, and that if that core isn´t there, all the rest is a bunch of somewhat shallow features that amount to little more than gimmicks packed into a game that doesn´t quite delivers what it aims to.

We´re very aware about what AMS2 achieves and doesn´t at this point, who is it intended for - if you are the type of sim racer that enjoys this sort of racing buffet where you can snack on pretty much any type of racing, for a fun quick race against the AI or against friends, you´ve got it already; If you want something that goes beyond that, delivering a single player campaign which brings context and another level of engagement with the content, or multiplayer features and competitions that engages the player on a competitive level, then AMS2 does not offer that - yet.

The mistake you and others seem to be making is assuming those features will never be there, or that they are required for the sim to be released - that may be the case for it to earn your purchase, but as a sim racer myself I´d have killed for something like AMS2 if I weren´t developing it myself and we have just enough people that feel similarly to make the game a worthwhile release at this point.

This is where we begin - we´ll do our best to attract other subsets of sim racers from here, well aware that Rome wasn´t built in a day

 

[UMC 22]

That's what worries me about VR and 1 of the reasons why I'm still using Nvidia 3D Vision with 3x 1440P screens (& Track IR sometimes).

How do we know if each particular game's devs have set the proper FOV/"VR worldscale" for every single brand & model of headset out there with all the different combinations there are of lens/screen sizes, lens/screen aspect ratio and shapes, lens/screen distance to user's eye, etc.?

Also, even if there's a VR worldview adjustment option, how do we know what the correct 1:1 FOV/worldview setting would be? It's easy with regular screens because there are calculators where you enter in the physical screen size, screen aspect ratio, and distance from your eyeball to the screen - then the calculator spits out the correct in-game FOV to use for a correct 1:1 FOV/"worldscale." Are there calculators

You're over-thinking the issue. Generally speaking, racing sims work pretty well in VR when it comes to world scale. At least, they have for me on two different headsets. As far as AMS 2 goes, I don't think it needs a worldscale setting. They all look fine to me, and the one exception... the aforementioned stock car... only looks "huge" because of the very unusual seating arrangement. The driver's seat is much farther back than usual, around the centre of the car, making the cockpit seem a lot bigger than it actually is.

That said, R3E doesn't cope so well. As PicoPB said, the default is 0.9 though that doesn't mean much because we don't know the scale... 1.0 doesn't necessarily mean "real" with 0.9 being 90% of it. But in that sim the scale of each individual car feels different... some feel tiny, others feel huge. I vary the scale setting between 0.8 and 1.0, depending on what I'm driving. (Pain in the rear!)

Type it in RED, increase the FONT Size....then it will really stand out on the page of posts....this post is not meant to be funny.

Yeah, but I hate it when self-important people use massive text to draw attention to themselves. I almost deliberately didn't read your post just because it was so huge.