Rate The Sims: Community Edition | Assetto Corsa Competizione

[Paul Jeffrey]

We are looking to crown the 'RaceDepartment Community Favourite' racing game - get your votes in now for our next game on the list... Assetto Corsa Competizione!

Our dear RaceDepartment community. You folks are the most mighty fans of sim racing, often displaying an immense amount of understanding and depth of knowledge when it comes to our favourite hobby.

With sim racing and eSports in such a wonderful boom period of late. Gamers looking to have some fun with their virtual racing machines have never before had such a wide and robust variety of software to enjoy.

Now occasionally I've been in a position to rate new racing titles that have come my way, and almost every time I've received a wide variety of folks agreeing, or strongly disagreeing with my own opinions.

Opinions are great, but sometimes the opinion of one person, with their own likes and dislikes taken into account, can often give a bit of a skewed picture (intentional or not) to the greater cause in which said person is trying to explain.

As such, rather than doing one myself, and in the spirit of engaging some interesting community discussion, I thought it could be fun to let our own community rate each of the key sim racing / racing games available today.

As always with these things, please do try and respect each other and their opinions, and let's try to see if we can give a fun, but fair shake of the stick to each of the games included in this poll.

For transparency, I'm going to be featuring the following racing games over the next weeks:

• Assetto Corsa
• Assetto Corsa Competizione
• Automobilista (AMS)
• DiRT 2.0
• F1 2019
• GT Sport
• GRID
• iRacing
• NASCAR Heat 4
• PCARS 2
• RaceRoom Racing Experience
• rFactor 2
• WRC 8

I'm going to launch the article each Monday evening, and keep the poll running for a full week until the next new article is pushed live. So get your votes in quick!

Once I've completed the full list of games, I'll publish a final results feature, and we can award the winning developer the lofty title of 'RaceDepartment Community Favourite'!

Have fun, stay sensible and let the voting commence!

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

 

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

IRacing has to have the infrastructure to support 4000 simultaneous racers but for ACC you would only need to support 300. Unless it took off of course but then you would get new customers.

I'm not an expert on maths but doesn't common sense tell us that in order to do it well you'd have to have a few more players than the 300 players mentioned here (which on most evenings in Europe are actually about 100, so even less)? I would surmise that at everything under 1,200 players one needn't bother because you would need a certain basic stock to prevent spikes in the system. I might be totally wrong, though, because I have never dealt with that sort of maths in my life.

 

[PickABetterUsername01]

I'm not an expert on maths but doesn't common sense tell us that in order to do it well you'd have to have a few more players than the 300 players mentioned here (which on most evenings in Europe are actually about 100, so even less)? I would surmise that at everything under 1,200 players one needn't bother because you would need a certain basic stock to prevent spikes in the system. I might be totally wrong, though, because I have never dealt with that sort of maths in my life.

So, before the game released it was "we/they never promised a good multiplayer structure, what we/they implemented is top notch matchmaking with amazing filters". Game released, it had a good player base for the first few weeks, but dropped fast obviously. Now that the player base is super small, it's "well now it's not worth it to implement a good multiplayer structure because there's not enough players". Really?

 

[maelstrom]

The thing is Sector 3 say they are working on an iRacing system for RR and Studio 397 say the same about rF2.

It's one thing to say you're working on it but quite another to actually produce the goods and make it work properly/efficiently and satisfy people who've used the iRacing system. I wish them luck, but I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[GetSome]

For me it was a 7 out of 10.
It does a lot of things right, but the content is so one dimensional. GT3 only and limited track choices.

 

[Julius Decimus]

7/10.

No Nordschleife, this is outrighteous for a GT3 based game.

 

[Abgefahren]

7/10.

No Nordschleife, this is outrighteous for a GT3 based game.

It's Blancpain GT based, not GT3 based though.
That being said: Bring the Schleife please

 

[maelstrom]

For me it was a 7 out of 10.
It does a lot of things right, but the content is so one dimensional. GT3 only and limited track choices.

But what did you expect from the official Blancpain GT game?

 

[maelstrom]

Once I've completed the full list of games, I'll publish a final results feature, and we can award the winning developer the lofty title of 'RaceDepartment Community Favourite'!

Excuse me if this has already been asked, but how are you going to make the final decision? Total number of votes? Highest percentages?

 

[maelstrom]

With the recent release of v1.1.1, which fixed so many of the things being criticised in this thread, is the rating chart really reflecting the game as it stands now? Can we be change our vote?

 

[PickABetterUsername01]

With the recent release of v1.1.1, which fixed so many of the things being criticised in this thread, is the rating chart really reflecting the game as it stands now? Can we be change our vote?

What's the point? Every time a game releases a patch we gonna change scores now? Scores reflect the state of a game at that point. If Kunos didn't delay the 2019 DLC then scores would have been probably higher.

 

[Turk]

This. It would have been the ideal game to implement iracing style matchmaking and rankings + would have set it apart. Don't get why they didn't make use of that opportunity.

This statement doesn't really make any sense. Copying iRacing wouldn't set them apart, it would mean they are in direct competition with the market leader. Recreating iRacings system isn't as straight forward as just doing it. There needs to be infrastructure to support all those clients and their ranking profiles, it's a big financial investment with no guarantee it would pay off. iRacing have been building their title over years and years, it's ridiculous to expect someone else to come along and instantly be better than iRacing and convince all their users to jump ship. It's not going to happen even if Kunos could deliver a system that's better than iRacing it's not going to instantly convince all those people to abandon all the work they've put into iRacing and start from scratch on ACC. The guys at iRacing didn't just release their ranked online then kick back watching the dollars roll in, it took them years of hard work to get to where they are and just copying their ranking system isn't going to make any other company rich over night.

Kunos took a different direction, one that doesn't require their users to pay a monthly fee. There is a ranking system that works and if you don't like it just sign up to iRacing. It's utterly mind boggling that people are complaining that all the other sims aren't like iRacing, it just makes me wonder why they don't just buy iRacing?? Because it costs to much money, that's why.

 

[mister dog]

This statement doesn't really make any sense. Copying iRacing wouldn't set them apart, it would mean they are in direct competition with the market leader. Recreating iRacings system isn't as straight forward as just doing it. There needs to be infrastructure to support all those clients and their ranking profiles, it's a big financial investment with no guarantee it would pay off. iRacing have been building their title over years and years, it's ridiculous to expect someone else to come along and instantly be better than iRacing and convince all their users to jump ship. It's not going to happen even if Kunos could deliver a system that's better than iRacing it's not going to instantly convince all those people to abandon all the work they've put into iRacing and start from scratch on ACC. The guys at iRacing didn't just release their ranked online then kick back watching the dollars roll in, it took them years of hard work to get to where they are and just copying their ranking system isn't going to make any other company rich over night.

Kunos took a different direction, one that doesn't require their users to pay a monthly fee. There is a ranking system that works and if you don't like it just sign up to iRacing. It's utterly mind boggling that people are complaining that all the other sims aren't like iRacing, it just makes me wonder why they don't just buy iRacing?? Because it costs to much money, that's why.

Excuses really; SRS for AC is free, was developed by a dude in his shed and without any of the exaggerated development/ maintenance costs you mention. it is a very popular aplication as well.

It would set ACC apart as the alternative for iracings subscription based model which puts off a lot of people who don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on content they already own in other games, just to have some rating based online races on demand.

 

[maelstrom]

What's the point? Every time a game releases a patch we gonna change scores now? Scores reflect the state of a game at that point. If Kunos didn't delay the 2019 DLC then scores would have been probably higher.

All of the other games that are in the poll are well-established, mature sims which have been out for a few years (many in some cases) or are an updated version of an existing game. The difference with ACC is that the sim is completely new, is changing regularly and the latest patch changed/added a lot of things in ACC that people who voted specifically said had influenced the score they gave. If this had been a small patch I would completely agree with you but it wasn't - 6 new cars, a new circuit, brand new aerodynamic slipstream simulation, triple screen support, animated pit crews, much larger grids, better optimisation and many other improvements and fixes. The new version has changed ACC quite significantly and it's debatable whether or not the voting is now a true representation of the game.

I don't agree that Kunos delayed the 2019 DLC - they delivered it when it was ready and included a lot of things that people hadn't expected. Almost all of the comments since the release of v1.1.1 have been positive, which wasn't always the case with earlier versions. In many ways this is not the same game that people voted on.

 

[Turk]

Excuses really; SRS for AC is free, was developed by a dude in his shed and without any of the exaggerated development/ maintenance costs you mention. it is a very popular aplication as well.

No offence to SRS, it's a great piece of software but it's no iRacing. It's good for scheduled racing but that's it as far as I remember. The Kunos system is more advanced and does actual ranking. The ranking can be up to how strict the server admin wants to be. I think adding scheduled racing would be a great thing for ACC, but it's a separate thing from ranking. I'd agree that Kunos should be giving us more access to the data, like looking back at race statistics.

It would set ACC apart as the alternative for iracings subscription based model which puts off a lot of people who don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on content they already own in other games, just to have some rating based online races on demand.

SRS is not an alternative for iRacing. But your own statement should highlight why Kunos ins't going to produce a free iRacing. If it costs the market leaders with what is it, decades of experience, hundreds of dollars to provide the service then it's really, really unlikely that another company could offer the same thing for free. I won't hold my breath, if another company manages it fair play to them but my guess is any free service will have serious shortfalls compared to the paid version.

The Kunos system is free, it's up to the community to decide how strict they want it to be, and it's still evolving. Scheduled races I'm with you 100%, but outside of that, the actual ranking system is good if maybe underused.

 

[Jugulador]

A online/e-sport focused videogame can't have a 13 years ago like online mode. Just don't!

5/10, just because the simulation is Kuno's standards and they are giving serious support to it... but must have a gamming inside the simulation... the career mode is too 90's and the online still on 2006's. It's like GTR2-HD, but worsen.

 

[PickABetterUsername01]

A online/e-sport focused videogame can't have a 13 years ago like online mode. Just don't!

5/10, just because the simulation is Kuno's standards and they are giving serious support to it... but must have a gamming inside the simulation... the career mode is too 90's and the online still on 2006's. It's like GTR2-HD, but worsen.

The e-sport part of ACC is absolutely useless, as there's basically no competition within the game itself. We can keep repeating the truth over and over again about how pathetic the multiplayer system is, but as you can see, there are people that will defend Kunos no matter what. Just look at the post above yours. "The Kunos system is more advanced and does actual ranking ", that has to be a joke right? Dude think it's up to the community to use the horrible filters and whatever was implemented with these lobbies to grow a big community around the game, seriously, it's ridiculous. This is why nothing will change, Kunos will listen to these posts and think it's fine.

All of the other games that are in the poll are well-established, mature sims which have been out for a few years (many in some cases) or are an updated version of an existing game. The difference with ACC is that the sim is completely new, is changing regularly and the latest patch changed/added a lot of things in ACC that people who voted specifically said had influenced the score they gave. If this had been a small patch I would completely agree with you but it wasn't - 6 new cars, a new circuit, brand new aerodynamic slipstream simulation, triple screen support, animated pit crews, much larger grids, better optimisation and many other improvements and fixes. The new version has changed ACC quite significantly and it's debatable whether or not the voting is now a true representation of the game.

I don't agree that Kunos delayed the 2019 DLC - they delivered it when it was ready and included a lot of things that people hadn't expected. Almost all of the comments since the release of v1.1.1 have been positive, which wasn't always the case with earlier versions. In many ways this is not the same game that people voted on.

Once again, no. If the game launched without so many problems and the DLC released within schedule, the game would have scored higher, the problem is the game, not the poll. Just be glad this poll didn't start when ACC launched, it would be even worse.

And to be honest, it would increase my 5/10 to maybe a 6/10. If the career was improved to be an actual career mode and multiplayer got some major overhaul, then it could increase to 7~8/10. You see, this could keep on going forever, no point in allowing us to change our votes. The score is also inflated by 9 and 10 that make no sense, are people going to give an 11 or 12 with current and later improvements? Lol.

 

[Eckhart von Glan]

… The score is also inflated by 9 and 10 that make no sense, ...

well, it certainly made sense to the people whose opinion it was to give such a vote (me not among them) and I guess one should respect their vote.

 

[Jugulador]

The e-sport part of ACC is absolutely useless, as there's basically no competition within the game itself. We can keep repeating the truth over and over again about how pathetic the multiplayer system is, but as you can see, there are people that will defend Kunos no matter what. Just look at the post above yours. "The Kunos system is more advanced and does actual ranking ", that has to be a joke right? Dude think it's up to the community to use the horrible filters and whatever was implemented with these lobbies to grow a big community around the game, seriously, it's ridiculous. This is why nothing will change, Kunos will listen to these posts and think it's fine.

I think that some people do not play other simulators to compare with. Ranking is a thing that is a reality to sims for more than a decade... in 2019 I really want more. GTS is the minimum acceptable to games from now on.

 

[maelstrom]

Once again, no. If the game launched without so many problems and the DLC released within schedule, the game would have scored higher, the problem is the game, not the poll.

I still think you're wrong. If ACC had been the last game to be rated rather than the first, a significant number of features would then have changed for the better and many of those who rated it would probably have voted higher (based on the reasons they gave for voting as they did).

Just be glad this poll didn't start when ACC launched, it would be even worse.

But that would have applied equally to any of the other titles. They now have the advantage of years of development to get them to their current state.

Let's be honest - the poll is really just a bit of fun because most people won't have all of the sims to be able to compare them directly anyway. The winner will be the one with the most dedicated/vociferous fan base and not necessarily the best sim.

 

[CrimsonEminence]

The winner will be the one with the most dedicated/vociferous fan base and not necessarily the best sim.

Automobilista sais: Hold my beer...almost everyone loves it, almost everyone plays other sims more...but ratings are high af. The Fanbase is very small, compared to others. So yeah...this point doesn't work quite good.