Rf2 vs ACC

[welshal]

I've been playing the old RF2 since it came out, but recently lost access to it.

I bought AC recently as it was cheap and I like it but it's much more a game than a sim.

I will be mostly playing off line without spending on DLC, but using free mods. I'd like to race online a bit but can't make leagues.
I race every class without preference. The AI behaviour is more important.

Rfactor2 Steam and Assett Corsa Competizione are currently about the same price, though ACC seems to come with a lot more content in the Ultimate pack which matches RF2's price.

ACC seems more glitzy than gutsy, but Rfactor2 used to be very complicated.

Which would you choose if you could only have one?

 

[Overnight76]

I love both..seriously! Both are excelent, with pros and cons each other.

Driving feeling , rF2 is a little bit better.

rF2 will be much better in the future because they are working n it. Try the new content specially the GTE cars...what a bless!

 

[Tatestar1984]

RF2 , best physics and FFB than any other sim.

 

[somake]

[QUOTE = "Herbie Rooprai, message: 3204081, membre: 189956"]
Du point de vue de la réalité virtuelle uniquement, rF2 gagne facilement ... (i7 9700k @ 4,9 Ghz, rtx 2080 ti & Odyssey +)
Pour obtenir une expérience sans bégaiement à 90 ips dans ACC, les graphismes doivent être si bas qu'ils semblent horribles. Juste un désordre flou.

Il est évident que l'ACC est limité par la technologie de la génération actuelle et brillera, espérons-le, en VR lorsque les cartes de la série rtx 3XXX sortiront.

Pour la physique et le FFB, rF2 reste le meilleur.

En ligne / multijoueur - ACC.
[/CITATION]

try this settings look really really great on my odyssey plus with (andew wot and blackarg ) on the forum

ACC VR Settings.zip

drive.google.com

 

[somake]

[QUOTE = "gecco, post: 3214470, membre: 256274"]
C'est un très bon point!
Je veux même prolonger en disant que je possède AC, ACC et RF2, et la différence la plus notable est que je dois utiliser différents profils dans le logiciel Simucube pour que le FFB me sente bien. Mais avec le FFB du Direct Drive, et une fois que j'ai configuré les voitures à mon goût, les trois titres me ressemblent beaucoup. Je peux appliquer le même style de conduite et donner la même réaction de la part des voitures.

Au point de vue du pistolet, je dirais toujours que la profondeur de la simulation dans ACC est presque écrasante (par exemple les freins, ...), et si ce n'est que pour les voitures GT3, probablement la meilleure simulation disponible aujourd'hui.

RF2 à mon humble avis a une excellente interprétation de la flexion des flancs des pneus et en général la simulation de la zone de contact. Curieusement, pour moi, cela n'est vraiment perceptible que lorsque la voiture roule très lentement ou lorsque vous travaillez sur le volant lorsque la voiture est à l'arrêt.
Le principal point faible du RF2 est qu'il possède de nombreuses voitures excellentes, tandis que d'autres se sentent tout simplement faux et incroyables. Étant demandé directement, pour moi, la chute FFB en sous-virage est légèrement trop exagérée sur les voitures avec des pneus à profil bas en RF2, mais là encore, il ne faut que quelques tours pour s'adapter à

AC, au contraire, peut être le plus daté en comparaison, mais fournit une qualité de contenu égale dans tous les domaines. Vous pouvez passer d'une vieille Fiat 500 à une Maserati 250F, à une Murcielago moderne, ou même à une GT3, et chaque voiture, par rapport à toute autre voiture, se sent crédible en termes de puissance, de couple de direction, de roulis du châssis, de tenue de route, ainsi que l'adhérence des pneus. J'ai conduit de nombreuses voitures GT3 dos à dos en AC et ACC, et avec
le FFB a composé correctement, il y a peu de différence. Oui, le FFB se sent toujours un peu différent, et peut-être (probablement) est-il plus sophistiqué en ACC, mais après quelques tours, les différences s'estompent.

Conclusio:
Si vous ne pouvez acheter que l'ACC ou le RF2 maintenant, la solution est simple: obtenez les deux, un à la fois
[/CITATION]



coherent speech

 

[Hikonyan@rFS]

Blancpain GT 2018-2019, GTWC Europe 2020, IGTC, GT4 European Series. ACC has established itself as a GT3 / GT4 Simulator by covering the circuits where these were held, the livery and specifications of the participating teams. However, it does not support mods and has a dilemma that it can only be played on the circuit where the four series were held.

Unlike ACC, rFactor2 supports Mod, so it can be said that it can run on various courses with GT3. However, it can be said that it is far behind the later ACC, such as the BOP not functioning properly and the information on the cockpit dash monitor is poor.

Ultimately, I think it depends on what the player wants.

 

[Jason Mullin]

I'm the only guy around that still thinks ACC creates blurred vision and generally looks terrible during the day.
Night racing is fantastic however, I am not a UE4 fan.

20 years running this sim gig and rFactor 2 is the only simulation installed on my SSD. It will be for the foreseeable future.

 

[dajdosta]

Comparison doesn't make sense as these are completely different titles.
One cannot compare GT3/4's only as this is ACC's only focus.

 

[Eng.]

In my opinion, it depends on what do you want.

When I play Rf2, ıt feels like a simulation, not game like. You can feel FFBtraction loss and FFB is more alive and gives reactions.

For ACC, it doesn't feel much like simulation, because of less FFB, or unable to feel loss of traction etc. Even AC FFB is better and more alive imo. Maybe it is related to the nature of GT3 cars, I don't know. But you can play more on ACC compared to rf2 because as it feels more complete package and multiplayer has more users.

 

[Cote Dazur]

When I play Rf2, ıt feels like a simulation, not game like. You can feel FFBtraction loss and FFB is more alive and gives reactions.

For me it is the exact opposite, in RF2, the FFB feels like a racing game FFB, not like driving a car. If my wheel was to feel like it feels in RF2, I would stop, call a towing and have my car fixed.
In ACC, the wheel, trough ACC FFB, feels much more natural, not 100% but much closer, so between a wheel feeling natural and the interior cockpit details including animations vastly superior, the photo like UE4 graphics, the tracks, other cars, liveries exact to the last details, all the rules implemented as they really are, there is no comparisons, driving a GT3 or GT4 in ACC feels much more real to me, so better simulated. RF2, more like a game.

 

[Eng.]

For me it is the exact opposite, in RF2, the FFB feels like a racing game FFB, not like driving a car. If my wheel was to feel like it feels in RF2, I would stop, call a towing and have my car fixed.
In ACC, the wheel, trough ACC FFB, feels much more natural, not 100% but much closer, so between a wheel feeling natural and the interior cockpit details including animations vastly superior, the photo like UE4 graphics, the tracks, other cars, liveries exact to the last details, all the rules implemented as they really are, there is no comparisons, driving a GT3 or GT4 in ACC feels much more real to me, so better simulated. RF2, more like a game.

Are you driving a race car on daily use?

As ACC has dynamic damping setting, which makes your wheel harder on speed makes you feel like your car.

But on racing traction loss and weight transfer forces are present which you don't feel on normal cars. On ACC, they are not present or very weak compared to Rfactor. You should rely on tire noise on ACC.

Rfactor simulates those forces on wheel as much as it can. You can say it is excessive but comparing it to a normal car doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Taranta]

I love rf2 and I love ACC, sometimes i prefer one some other time i prefer the other.
ACC is more specific for GT3 and GT4, in rF2 I prefer FFB and the tire model; many things did not end in rF2, many more I would like in ACC ....
The conclusion is that this comparison leads nowhere

 

[Eng.]

Comparing them can give better understanding about their weak and strong points to whom thinks trying.

 

[Kenny Paton]

Comparing them can give better understanding about their weak and strong points to whom thinks trying.

Surely your own experience with both is more important, what's a weakness to one person may not be to another.
A quick glance over the forums here will amply demonstrate that.

 

[slideways]

Am I on my own here or are there others that think these sim vs sim posts are more for fanboys to strut their stuff. Very rarely does it lead to intelligent discussion.

 

[Durge Driven]

I've always been harsh saying that it's the Historic stand out

Yesterday was first time I gave the GT3 a decent go, really only brought them to support the team
Did 30 min races @ Road America (wow), Palm Beach (wow), Sebring (wow), Virginia had to do 2 races (wow) and all with default set Ferrari GT3 felt so alive

So 3 hours went like nothing wanted to pick another track but dinner on said to myself I will do some more of this tomorrow .............went to turn on PC today and it's broken lol

 

[Jan Larsen]

Rfactor simulates those forces on wheel as much as it can. You can say it is excessive but comparing it to a normal car doesn't make sense to me.

Well, it does to me. The forces I feel in my G27 are relatable to my real life car. The feeling of getting understeer not so much, but oversteer yes. A small oversteer moment out of corners is something the car can catch itself (if you let it) in much the same way my G27 reacts to the same situation in game.
But all this also depends on your FFB settings, and the settings in the real car - with or without power steering, how firm is that power steering or is it one of those damn electric power steering things? They all transmit a different feeling from the tires to the wheel which makes it hard to compare.
The only true comparison is a power steering-less racecar and a DD. Those two can be made to match quite well. If the wheel and/or game software is up for it.

 

[cristi84nu]

If only I had ACC graphics and rF2 physics. ACC sure looks pretty but driving physics are dull and not so exciting. While rF2 graphics make me feel like I'm playing a game from 1984 yet the driving physics are way more engaging; never got a dull moment in this game and that is way more important for me than just looking pretty.

 

[MarcG]

I wish I had RF2 graphics in 1984, PONG would've been extra amazeballs!

 

[davehenrie]

I wish I had RF2 graphics in 1984, PONG would've been extra amazeballs!

If you would have waited til 1987, you'd have the amazing 4096 colors from the Amiga 500!

 

[JimLee]

If you would have waited til 1987, you'd have the amazing 4096 colors from the Amiga 500!

Yes, but only an amazing 32 color at a time from the 4096 color palette / 640 max res and the Atari STe .. same issue I had both ... so I guess we have progressed over 30+ yrs