Would You Recommend rfactor 2 ?

[2scoops]

Hi Everyone,
I've played Project Cars, too buggy at the moment. Just getting in to RaceRoom, which I really enjoy. But what about rfactor2. I want to race online more, not necessarily leagues but a lot a various classes to get variety in the cars you drive.
Would you recommend rfactor2 as a sim and also the popularity of online racing.

 

[Jockey]

I'm embarrassed that I made my friend buy rFactor 2. Everytime we go online, no one's on. The cars drive atrociously and slip and slide around as if there is a huge hole in the physics engine.

All the typical ISI engine holes from the 1990s still exist like vehicles behaving like there is no weight in the physics engine, like there is no mass being pressed into the ground. Like there is no forward momentum. Or, as my friend put it: "Like you're being pulled by a rope from another car in front of you".

You can even cleary see all that from the way the vehicle behaves. You can go around corners using like 20% the amount of steering lock that a real life driver needs to go around the corner because of what I explained above.

Low speed slip/grip behaviour is still terrible and it's like the tyres turn into cement.

Unless you're understeering, then you're just trying to prevent the car from turning in more rather than steering it yourself since it's often like there's no forward momentum. You're often trying to prevent the car from turning (or turning too much), rather than actually trying to make it turn, because of this massive weight/moment/being-pulled-by-a-string issue that's been around in the ISI engine for 20 years.

If you drive a soft/old car or a road-car then it's like the physics run in slow motion or something. Everything is imprecise and like it's from a different planet. It's like the physics are of a different universe. In Assetto Corsa, you can tell the physics are trying to simulate actual vehicles, and on planet Earth at that.

The ISI engine has tremendous potential, but it needs lots of fixes which surprisingly still exist after 15 or 20 years and complete ruin the driving experience for me personally, my friend, and every single person who's ever come over and driven at my place. The glaring holes in the physics engine need to be seriously fixed. You can clearly see and sense these issues in any game with any ISI physics engine coding in it including R3E and PCars.

You need to report this to ISI too! They aren't aware of these serious issues. :O

http://isiforums.net/f/forumdisplay.php/143-Bug-Reports

 

[Jim Liak]

@Spinelli , Yep, this is exactly what I feel, I was trying to explain that to my friends but now I will just point to your post.
Until the limit, rF2 is excellent. FFB is so perfect, you feel everything, which axel has grip, which doesn't.
But when over the limit something strange happens. Tyres stop feeling elastic but like plastic. I can take the turns with minimum lock, just by exploiting this behavior.
The "above the limit" area, is what I believe that Assetto Corsa is so good at it and keeps me from driving it more.

 

[Associat0r]

I'm embarrassed that I made my friend buy rFactor 2. Everytime we go online, no one's on. The cars drive atrociously and slip and slide around as if there is a huge hole in the physics engine.

All the typical ISI engine holes from the 1990s still exist like vehicles behaving like there is no weight in the physics engine, like there is no mass being pressed into the ground. Like there is no forward momentum. Or, as my friend put it: "Like you're being pulled by a rope from another car in front of you".

You can even cleary see all it from the way the vehicle behaves. You can go around corners using like 20% the amount of steering lock that a real life driver needs to go around the corner because of what I explained above. The car, the physics, want to keep turning more and more - it's ridiculous - and therefore you can keep very small and unrealistic amounts of steering lock on and the car just keeps turning and with like no gravity and momentum trying to keep the car heading straight.

Low speed slip/grip behaviour is still terrible and it's like the tyres turn into cement.

Unless you're understeering, then you're just trying to prevent the car from turning in more rather than steering it yourself since it's often like there's no forward momentum. You're often trying to prevent the car from turning (or turning too much), rather than actually trying to make it turn, because of this massive weight/moment/being-pulled-by-a-string issue that's been around in the ISI engine for 20 years.

If you drive a soft/old car or a road-car then it's like the physics run in slow motion or something. Everything is imprecise and like it's from a different planet. It's like the physics are of a different universe. In Assetto Corsa, you can tell the physics are trying to simulate actual vehicles, and on planet Earth at that.

The ISI engine has tremendous potential, but it needs lots of fixes which surprisingly still exist after 15 or 20 years and complete ruin the driving experience for me personally, my friend, and every single person who's ever come over and driven at my place. The glaring holes in the physics engine need to be seriously fixed. You can clearly see and sense these issues in any game with any ISI physics engine coding in it including R3E and PCars.


P.S. This stuff is all highly and easily reproducible / repeatable.

You're spreading major disinformation.

Real race teams use regular rFactor and rFactor 2 for real race car development in addition to driver training, because they are the most accurate off the shelve sims when used with real data as input.

 

[Eric Bergeron]

I'm embarrassed that I made my friend buy rFactor 2. Everytime we go online, no one's on. The cars drive atrociously and slip and slide around as if there is a huge hole in the physics engine.

All the typical ISI engine holes from the 1990s still exist like vehicles behaving like there is no weight in the physics engine, like there is no mass being pressed into the ground. Like there is no forward momentum. Or, as my friend put it: "Like you're being pulled by a rope from another car in front of you".

You can even cleary see all it from the way the vehicle behaves. You can go around corners using like 20% the amount of steering lock that a real life driver needs to go around the corner because of what I explained above. The car, the physics, want to keep turning more and more - it's ridiculous - and therefore you can keep very small and unrealistic amounts of steering lock on and the car just keeps turning as if there's no gravity and/or momentum trying to keep the car heading straight.

Low speed slip/grip behaviour is still terrible and it's like the tyres turn into cement.

Unless you're understeering, then you're just trying to prevent the car from turning in more rather than steering it yourself since it's often like there's no forward momentum. You're often trying to prevent the car from turning (or turning too much), rather than actually trying to make it turn, because of this massive weight/momentum/being-pulled-by-a-string issue that's been around in the ISI engine for 20 years.

If you drive a soft/old car or a road-car then it's like the physics run in slow motion or something. Everything is imprecise and like it's from a different planet. It's like the physics are of a different universe. In Assetto Corsa, you can tell the physics are trying to simulate actual vehicles, and on planet Earth at that.

The ISI engine has tremendous potential, but it needs lots of fixes which surprisingly still exist after 15 or 20 years and complete ruin the driving experience for me personally, my friend, and every single person who's ever come over and driven at my place. The glaring holes in the physics engine need to be seriously fixed. You can clearly see and sense these issues in any game with any ISI physics engine coding in it including R3E and PCars.


P.S. This stuff is all highly and easily reproducible / repeatable.

are you speaking only for online or offline too ?

 

[Spinelli]

Associat0r, you are a shill for ISI. You reply every thread on multiple websites with "that is disinformation", "this is major disinformation", etc. It seems like, to you, everything anyone says is major disinformation if it's against ISI's physics and/or for another's physics (Kunos', iRacing's, etc.).

You also only play with a keyboard and have been doing so since we at-least began speaking on Steam probably 6 months to a year ago.

You even declined playing online with me and a friend absolutely every single time we asked you to play even when I said we would allow aids and to not worry about laptimes because we are just there to have fun.

All you ever did on Steam was keep sending me links upon links upon links of threads from all sorts of websites asking me to sign-up to the website so I could post against other people to defend RF2 - Reddit, VirtualR, obscure casual video game sites, BSimRacing, and on and on. It was borderline-crazy behavior; even when I was offline you would leave me messages LITTERED with links of threads and discussions all over the internet asking me to sign up and go "RF2 warrior" in. It's like you're literally trying to assemble an army of rFactor 2 keyboard warriors to invade every website with a ton of RF2 defending, other-sim-bashing, rFactor 2 praising posts. It's an obsession that has taken over your life. You have already been banned from multiple websites and, according to others, you would even sign-up again under different user-names trying to continue your desperate fight.

P.S. I have seen/read most those links you posted. I was an ISI/rFactor "fanboy" for probably an entire decade. ISI engine is good at stuff like maybe how accurately the suspension should get compressed according to front aero, or how fast the suspension should compress according to a bunp or whatever. It's good at that sort of numbers game and that's why engineers/teams may like it but that has nothing to do with the long-standing, 15+ year ISI physics holes/issues myself and MANY others can easily, repeatedly experience. You're using other aspects' praise as a sort of blanket-praise for all apects.

The fact you even posted those links shows me that you don't even understand the issues many, many others and I talk about. Those links are probably just a knee-jerk-reaction-post that you already have saved and copy-and-paste.

@Spinelli , Yep, this is exactly what I feel, I was trying to explain that to my friends but now I will just point to your post.
Until the limit, rF2 is excellent. FFB is so perfect, you feel everything, which axel has grip, which doesn't.
But when over the limit something strange happens. Tyres stop feeling elastic but like plastic. I can take the turns with minimum lock, just by exploiting this behavior.
The "above the limit" area, is what I believe that Assetto Corsa is so good at it and keeps me from driving it more.

Yup, thank you. I hope you do point to it

 

[unknwn]

Real race teams use regular rFactor and rFactor 2 for real race car development in addition to driver training, because they are the most accurate when used with real data as input.

Falacy. What's most accurate now still doesn't mean its real as in RL. Most realistic might not be as "realistic" what we will see for example 10 years later. For example look up tables are still used for tyre flex. Maybe someday in the future it will run in realtime.
Either way modeling how cars act over the limit must one of the hardest things to get right.

We all know that rFactor1 vs rFactor 2 over the limit feels quite different, yet as you say both are used by real drivers as practice tool. Obviously "over the limit" is not the reason why they choose rFactor1/2 for a practice tool.
As I understand Spinelli is talking about over the limit behavior where cars react like weightless karts.

 

[Associat0r]

Falacy. What's most accurate now still doesn't mean its real as in RL. Most realistic might not be as "realistic" what we will see for example 10 years later. For example look up tables are still used for tyre flex. Maybe someday in the future it will run in realtime.

rFactor 2's tire lookup tables are an optimization process, because its FEM tire is of a very high resolution. It works in concert with a lower resolution real-time model.

We all know that rFactor1 vs rFactor 2 over the limit feels quite different, yet as you say both are used for real drivers as practice tool. Obviously "over the limit" is not the reason why they choose rFactor1/2 for a practice tool.

rFactor 2's tire model is fundamantally different from rFactor 1's, and rigid body dynamics has been a solved problem for decades, so this pretty much falsifies all of Spinelli's arguments.
Drivers are constantly near and often over the limit, which rFactors do better than other titles and they use rFactors for that reason too. rFactor 2's tire model provides more detail near and over the limit.

 

[Andy_J]

P.S. This stuff is all highly and easily reproducible / repeatable.

And all highly wrong. You'll be saying Pcars is the best next.

 

[Spinelli]

rFactor 2's tire lookup tables are an optimization process, because its FEM tire is of a very high resolution. It works in concert with a lower resolution real-time model.

So, it's high resolution, that doesn't mean it's more correct/proper. Resolution is just that: resolution. I'm assuming you know this but write it anyways in hopes of others believing what you say because "it all sounds good". Oh, it's an FEM tyre, it must be perfect. Again, more fancy terms and explanations just to make it all "sound good".

rFactor 2's tire model is fundamantally different from rFactor 1's

It may be different, but there are definitely moments where it does quite similar odd stuff from any iteration of the ISI engine going back to the 1990s.

rigid body dynamics has been a solved problem for decades, so this pretty much falsifies all of Spinelli's arguments.

Sorry, that's a ridiculous statement on many levels. Every single physics engine I've ever driven has completely different physics from one-another. To suggest that all sims have identical physics, other than tyres, because "rigid body dynamics have been a solved problem for decades" is farcical. iRacing has had 6 different tyre models yet you can still tell you're playing iRacing because of the rest of the core physics engine. Same with rFactor 2, you can still tell you're driving the ISI physics engine despite apparently completely different tyre models - same with the entire ISI engine from the 1990s to today. Same with Assetto Corsa from the tech demo until now (v1.5x); yes, AC is definitely different and improved from the tech-demo but you can still tell it's Assetto Corsa's physics engine not iRacing or ISI's or another one. Your statement is complete bollocks.

Drivers are constantly near and often over the limit and they use rFactor for that reason too.

Yes, they play rFactor to practice how to control understeer and oversteer...Keep posting utter non-sense. Racecar drivers don't play sim-games because they need to practice how to drive. Ya, maybe Hakkinen would have beat Schumacher in 2000 if only they had rFactor around for Hakkinnen to practice. A lifetime of real-life practice wasn't enough but some PC sim games would have made the difference since Hakkinen didn't know how to control a slide good enough. Jesus, man, just stop.

rFactor 2's tire model provides more detail near and over the limit.

Again, like the high resolution, you are just saying things which "sound good". More detail is just that: more detail. Grid 2 apparently uses 1,000 Hz physics update rate (or tyre sampling rate or something). I guess you think Grid 2 is an amazing sim too?

And all highly wrong. You'll be saying Pcars is the best next.

No. I mentioned Project Cars. You can experience some of the very same issues in PCars regarding the vehicle's slip-angle relative to it's direction of travel that you can in ISI sims. It does use a different tyre model therefore the entire driving experience is, of course, not identical to ISI sims. ISI's major oversteer-slip-angle-relative-to-the-vehicle's-direction-of-travel issue is much, much less apparent in Netkar Pro, Live For Speed, Assetto Corsa, KartKraft, Driver's Republic (alpha build, never released), etc.

 

[hitm4k3r]

Given the fact, that it is impossible to simulate real life physics on a PC you will certainly find serious physics flaws in any physics model. From my own experience I have the rope feeling much more in AC where I always have the feeling that my car is tied up on a rubber band, instead of being planted on four wheels and I get zero tyre feeling in AC or PC. I don't know wether they fixed the problem in AC of cars having no own weight in a way that they can't roll downhill wich I find much more of an issue than rF2's problems with the old tyremodel where you can't save a spin up on a certain point in extreme conditions when the tire heats up to no end for no apparent reason. Both of those problems show that there will be limitations in any software, but to claim that this is a reason to recommend AC and not rF2 is basicly meassuring with two different standards.

I am hundred percent convinced that you can break any sim in certain siutations. I've seen it in PC (where the physics are terraible), I've seen ridicioulous situations in AC more than enough and I've seen strange situations in any other sim incl. rF2. But it is not a reason to not recommend them. If you want to learn to dance the car on the limit and work with weight transition, rF2 is just about right. Especialy regarding tyre management, an area where most other sims (even rF1) fall pretty short.

 

[unknwn]

rFactor 2's tire lookup tables are an optimization process, because its FEM tire is of a very high resolution. It works in concert with a lower resolution real-time model.

As I said look up tables are used.
Sometime in the future people will say "look we have rFactor x, it has realtime high res tire model, don't use rFactor 2 anymore, it's not as "realistic" ". The same happened with rFactor1.

rFactor 2's tire model is fundamantally different from rFactor 1's, and rigid body dynamics has been a solved problem for decades, so this pretty much falsifies all of Spinelli's arguments.
Drivers are constantly near and often over the limit, which rFactors do better than other titles and they use rFactors for that reason too. rFactor 2's tire model provides more detail near and over the limit.

It doesn't falsify what Spinnelli said. It just shows that rF2 over the limit is much different than rFactor1. It also doesn't prove that rF2 has accurate to RL over the limit.
Whats more important you say that rFactor1 is used by real drivers as a practice tool. rFactor1 is now outdated compared to rFactor2 in terms of "over the limit". Does it mean that real drivers use what's not realistic over the limit (rFactor1)?

Either way real race drivers use sims for learning tracks, braking, turning, accelerating points, smoothness and maybe some techniques e.g. heel-and-toe.
Driving a sim to "learn" what over the limit feels like sitting on the stationary chair based solely on FFB that will feel majorly different on a real car is a waste of time.

 

[jimortality]

I'm more interested in the fact that associated plays on a keyboard! In reply to the op's question I take that as a no from Spinnelli

 

[Spinelli]

If you want to learn to dance the car on the limit and work with weight transition, rF2 is just about right.

Learn by dancing on the limit and working the weight transition so that you can go around corners using 1/5th the amount of steering lock needed in real-life because of massive physics holes and because cars turn, in the ISI physics engine, from massive physics holes regarding weight and/or gravity and/or momentum rather than actually having to turn the tyres/wheels? Maybe that's learning how to dance the car on another planet, but not Earth.

Aspects of the physics have such large holes in them that ultra-darty, super-sensitive handling places more of a premium on driver inputs and weight transition in the ISI engine than even real-life (and, many times, the driver inputs needed to correct those behaviors if over the limit are just plain wrong and unnatural). So, because of over-exaggerations combined with just wrong vehicle dynamics, one could make the argument (as I have in the past) that a new, un-experienced driver will be even more ready for real-life because he has trained and only has experience driving under the severely flawed, hyper-sensitive ISI engine.

 

[Associat0r]

So, because of over-exaggerations combined with just wrong vehicle dynamics, one could make the argument (as I have in the past) that a new, un-experienced driver will be even more ready for real-life because he has trained and only has experience driving under the severely flawed, hyper-sensitive ISI engine.

So severely flawed that the highest respected vehicle dynamics seminar by Claude Rouelle for professional race car engineers and designers, also uses ISI's rFactor physics.

You better show us your proper measurement.

 

[Spinelli]

Again, Associat0r, you just keep posting more and more just because it "sounds good". He uses rFactor, what's your point? That doesn't mean it behaves perfectly, or even near-perfect for that matter. Me and others have already explained to you this. These posts, again, show that you clearly don't understand the issues myself and many others have found in the ISI engine over the past 15 or so years and have vocally risen. You just keep posting about how others play/use rFactor. That's cool, I have no doubt they do as, again, the ISI engine does some things (particular some things engineers will like) very, very well.

 

[hitm4k3r]

Learn by dancing on the limit and working the weight transition so that you can go around corners using 1/5th the amount of steering lock needed in real-life because of massive physics holes and because cars turn, in the ISI physics engine, from massive physics holes regarding weight and/or gravity and/or momentum rather than actually having to turn the tyres/wheels? Maybe that's learning how to dance the car on another planet, but not Earth.

Aspects of the physics have such large holes in them that ultra-darty, super-sensitive handling places more of a premium on driver inputs and weight transition in the ISI engine than even real-life (and, many times, the driver inputs needed to correct those behaviors if over the limit are just plain wrong and unnatural). So, because of over-exaggerations combined with just wrong vehicle dynamics, one could make the argument (as I have in the past) that a new, un-experienced driver will be even more ready for real-life because he has trained and only has experience driving under the severely flawed, hyper-sensitive ISI engine.

I am a bit surprised that you find the lack of gravity of a car in a driving game less severe than your stated hyper sensitive extremely flawed hpysics example that might exist in certain situatiuons and not affecting the vehicle in every given situation. Because that's a fact: gravity affects your car every single second you drive.

Once more: I am not trying to say that rF2 is perfect, but you still comepletey talked past the core of my post, this being the fact that you ignore flaws in every other game, but regarding rF2 it just fits your needs to critize something.

 

[Spinelli]

I'm more interested in the fact that associated plays on a keyboard!

Yes, he's just a shill obsessed (literally) with defending ISI all over the internet (not exaggerating). He declined me every single time to actually play with me online. He's just a keyboard warrior copying-and-pasting what he hears, unfortunately.

I am a bit surprised that you find the lack of gravity of a car in a driving game less severe than your stated hyper sensitive extremely flawed hpysics example that might exist in certain situatiuons and not affecting the vehicle in every given situation.

I don't know what you mean. You must be misunderstanding me, the hyper sensitivity seems to be because, or at-least partly because, of the lack of gravity and/or weight and/or momentum - they are connected and are both major problems with ISI physics.

Once more: I am not trying to say that rF2 is perfect, but you still comepletey talked past the core of my post, this being the fact that you ignore flaws in every other game, but regarding rF2 it just fits your needs to critize something.

I don't ignore flaws in every other game, in-fact, I used to pretty-much be a fanboy of ISI physics and defended it to it's death for many years. And, yes, I'm very critical with physics because I view it as a direct replacement of my (short-lived) real-life racing "career" rather than just some videogame to kill a few hours with. On top of that, no physics engine is perfect, but no physics engine should still have glaring holes in it from the 1990s; that is just beyond ridiculous.

 

[Jockey]

I'm more interested in the fact that associated plays on a keyboard! In reply to the op's question I take that as a no from Spinnelli

You don't need a 1000000$ directwheel to know stuff.
Whenever he says something people always attacking him.
No matter what he says where he says.

Fun fact he pointed out a bunch of issues with assetto corsa:
https://np.reddit.com/r/pcars/comme...or_those_quick_to_trash_pcars_physics/cr8xlgo

Before this gem assetto corsa was the best sim in the world. He get **** from others for over a YEAR now.
He pointed out the ai issues with ac. Now it's a fact. (Altought it's much better than a year ago. But still.)
He said there is a problem with tyre temperature. He said this in 2015 july! And we got a new "New tyre heating modelling with separated surface and core temperatures" with 1.3 ac patch in 2015 okt.
He said ac has poor network code. Yeah people keep complaining about it. Even after a lot of ac patch. Even racedepartment complained because of multiplayer.
He said there is a problem with the tyre physics. And yet we already have the 7th tyre model in ac.

He said many thing in one single post and earned hate from the entire simracing community even thought others pointed out these same issues...

I don't understand this keyboard issue too. Open youtube and type rfactor keyboard. Many many many videos. People keep playing this game with keyboard and they are fine with it.
It's the same when people realized you can play a bunch of racing games with gamepads. And yet we have steamguides and other guides how to setup games for gamepads.
And I strongly believe assetto corsa has the very best gamepad support.

This guy keep pointing out stuff about rfactor 2 and yet people attack him.
People say there is no modding for rf2. Associat0r shows up link 6 or more different website with mods you can download. Errr this guy is an idiot. downvote.

People say there is no online racing in rfactor 2.
Associat0r shows up link a bunch of league and stuff. Err this is not true downvote.

May current favourite. One guy shows up in rf2 steamcommunity:
"is there any drifting?"

Associat0r shows up with actual VIDEO with drifting for rf2!
Here is the comment: http://steamcommunity.com/app/365960/discussions/0/412447524179559747/#c412447613560302690

And immediately another famous simracing member show up:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/365960/discussions/0/412447524179559747/#c412447613562035456
"it's a shame you can't use them in rFACTOR 2, YOU DOLT." He say this to his rf2 video too!
And an insult right after this!

And just for the record: There is even a steam group for rfactor 2 drifting...
But this this doesn't matter because ANYTHING ASSOCIAT0R says it's a complete bs and the simracing community accept this as an ethernal truth without any evidence.

 

[Spinelli]

OK, and how do you know Associat0r actually discovered these problems or just copies-and-pastes things from others?
I can also go on and find bugs and issues with any game and then copy-and-paste them all over forums in order to attack those games. That's his job, he literally goes around forum after forum, website after website, fighting and defending rFactor 2 and attacking other sims all in the name of RF2. That is no indication, at all, of knowledge.

 

[Spinelli]

I don't know what the following means but I'll just do what Associat0r does and post things from everywhere in order to make my point-of-view seem more correct:

In real life, weight distribution is a complex area to setup, but in rFactor 2 it is not that involved. A fixed polar moment of inertia is used by rFactor 2 so when the weight shifts it directly applies grip without the consequences of inertia as it is in real life.

But according to Associat0r, all sims have identical physics besides tyre models since "rigid body dynamics have been a solved problem for decades".

The complexities and methods of programming real-life physics into a software simulation are astounding. The fact Associat0r has such an uber-simplistic view of what an entire physics engine (not just tyres) involves shows how uneducated and completely ignorant Associat0r is on this very subject: physics.