Worried about the future of rF2

[Richard Eriksson]

As the topic suggests...

As a long time ISI supporter and follower, i am now feeling a bit worried for the future.The number of new users coming in to rFactor2 seems to be dwindling.

Also there is a long time between the new official content. And even when there is official content released, it seems to fail to gather an interest (Civics in December) amongst the yet unitiated.

Also, the mod community seems a lot more reluctant than for rF1, with very few members adding content.This is even more worrying as it was the foundation of rF1 and a big selling point for bringing more people to the franchise (race anything you like).

ISI now also faces a stiff competition as the "sim" genre has become "hot" again with more titles in the works, that seem to gather a LOT more interest: AC, pCars etc.

The old veterans like myself are finding ourselves drawn to the likes of GSC, and newcomers are moving towards AC and probably DTM Experience.


I start this topic to see if someone shares my worries, and also to discuss if something can be done to once again bring more interest to rF2?


My personal idea is to go for Steam greenlighting (i actually REALLY like Steam as a platform), to gain exposure and also simplify the purchasing as well as updating.
Connecting it to Workshop makes modding interesting again, like what AC proposes.


I want rF2 to succeed, it is by far the most comprehensive take on simulating the actual race mechanics and based on that it should be the goto title for the serious sim-user, but right now i fear it is not.


Discussions on graphics i will however discard personally, as a) rF2 is pretty enough and b) the prettiest of settings in something like pCars is inaccesible to 95% of users.


So, what is your view of the status of the product?



Points of improvement needed going forward as identified in this thread so far:

* Better GUI (incoming)
* Steam integration and release
* Possible new distribution method that would automate updates and sync, if not steam
* New official content
* More transparent development
* Shorter build intervals
* More efficient code and optimization of codebase
* A possibility to "lock down" the core functionality, to deliver something considered stable and final
* New updater that allows automatic updating of content as well, including adding NEW
content

 

[Gijs van Elderen]

My Opinion: rF2 content amount is fine, but there is no "community" to pull you into the game.

Click here.

 

[Frederic Schornstein]

Its funny that someone finally mentions rF Pro before I chip in. I do hope they are doing fine on the professional services end, ISI deserves to continue even if their impact on the consumer market is diminishing. Think of it, they are getting one-upped by Simbin, SMS, and Reiza who wouldn't even exist without ISI work, kind of ironic.

My Opinion: rF2 content amount is fine, but there is no "community" to pull you into the game.

I am the rare guy who races offline most (I can't race on regular days or times). I go back to AC b/c 1) it feels, runs and looks great. 2) they have their Steam badge challenges for time trials, hot laps, and AI races. This is such a great way to drive users to certain track/car combos. For me, who may have 20-25 minutes to race, I love chasing these goals. I LOVE AC update days so I can see what new challenges I can attack. pCARS has their online leaderboards, so when I jump into a desirable car/track combo (and there are many) I can tab thru the HUD and see my lap times vs. the global leader. What fun chasing those records.

I can't think of anything that gets me back to rF2 except the dread of downloading an ISI track update to go from 1.1 to 1.2. Don't get me wrong, the F2 car is probably my favorite sim car ever, but if I have 20 minutes to kill, I have so many options where I can actually accomplish something. Heck, the damn pCARS alpha has Career mode!!!

My wishlist:
1) Fix UI - Add community features, leaderboards/challenges
2) Optimize performance (fix those rain roostertails that look like they came out of Grand Prix 2)
3) Content delivery method (maybe Steam, maybe something else, even the pCARS system was better before they joined Steam.)

3-4 years ago, things looked bleak for Sim Racers. Now I feels its an embarassment of riches. Plenty of Rf1 racing at r2p, 3 promising WIPs, and some decent mainstream titles (Shift Unleashed, Dirt 3, Beam NG). Imagine being a PC gamer and a hockey fan...

If you are a hotlapping guy, than the other options are great and maybe better than rF2, but for me it is pretty booring and with rF2 a leaderboard would be useless as you have dynamic weather and most important a very dynamic track grip due to realroad. Which for me is a big plus. In other games you can do 400 Laps in the same condition and you will outpace most drivers with less track time.
In rF2 you most likely will find diffrent conditions in every race and it depends, who can adapt the quickest in a limited time like in the real world. For example if you start a 30min qualy session with a big field on a relatively green track, the track improves every lap and you need to adapt everytime and you have only one or two shots in best conditions as the tyres only provide peak performance for a short period of time.
For purely having fun, that might don't do the trick, but for me it is the ultimate challange, which is closest to the real world and requires more skill than practice, which is great as you have no "test limitations" in simracing.

What rF2 would need to be more accessible is a better setup to join multiplayer races. It is pretty much an online racing game. I only use it offline for race preparation and testing, but offline racing wether in rF2 and AC doesn't give me a thrill as AI is still not as intelligent as a human driver.

 

[Blkout]

Its funny that someone finally mentions rF Pro before I chip in. I do hope they are doing fine on the professional services end, ISI deserves to continue even if their impact on the consumer market is diminishing. Think of it, they are getting one-upped by Simbin, SMS, and Reiza who wouldn't even exist without ISI work, kind of ironic.

Ryan, maybe it would be best for ISI to just build physics/sim engines and license them to developers that want to make racing sims with them. This happens all the time with PC games, CryEngine, Unreal Engine, etc...

 

[Kurupt CDN]

I couldn't agree more with the above statement and have been saying this for a while. Look at what reiza was able to do with the aged gmotor engine. Isi can produce the best engine around, but due to the small team and funds, the process is long and official content is lack luster to say the lease leaving us at the mercy of the modding community. If love to see what a bigger dev team could do with this

 

[yusupov]

i havent read this thread, but i think AC will kill rfactor2 & the community you guys have. i saw the OP say to go steam greenlight & i think thats a fantastic idea, PROVIDED there is a solid & accessible demo. by accessible i mean ISI should spend some time making it work nice with gamepads, give a car thats easy to drive & has some kind of 'name', & a well-known track. one problem that might hold it back is the graphics engine. but to me its worth a shot. i just foresee modders moving to AC & simracers already seem to be doing so & why the hell wouldn't they really? sure rf2 is more feature complete but its out of date & has a much more limited appeal than what AC has achieved by doing a couple simple things.

i also don't know how stuck on the shoddy graphics rf2 is. its not as if dx9 can't look very, very good. since i bought AC ive bought GSC & now an iracing membership (idk if ill stay around though but want to try it out). rf2,.,just doesnt seem like enough there when i have AC & now GSC. but my overall point is that rf2 should try to use AC, NCG (i know different genre completely), beamng, all these games to try to lift its sales instead of whats likely happening, which is that gamers as well as simracers are moving away from it. and if AC hadn't been on steam, would i have heard of it by now? i really doubt it. rfactor2 similarly is surely unknown outside of the sim community.

 

[Bez]

to me it looks like rf2 is doing a damn fine job at looking "as good as AC"

...heres a screenshot taken last night. No graphics mods or jiggery pokery, just the vanilla game with everything maxed out.

tell me that doesn't look bootiful!

 

[Bez]

edit: double post

 

[Frederic Schornstein]

That car has a problem, that it is lacking a lot of front downforce compared to the other, that makes it a tyre killer. I would recommend you to test some of the others like the Vette.

How can someone dislike this without giving a point?
It is a fact. I recorded all downforce values from all cars and the BMW has a lot less front downforce on maximum wing levels. It is important to know for people who try it and are questioning themselfs why they are so much slower in the BMW.

 

[John-Eric Saxén]

i also don't know how stuck on the shoddy graphics rf2 is. its not as if dx9 can't look very, very good. since i bought AC ive bought GSC & now an iracing membership (idk if ill stay around though but want to try it out). rf2,.,just doesnt seem like enough there when i have AC & now GSC. but my overall point is that rf2 should try to use AC, NCG (i know different genre completely), beamng, all these games to try to lift its sales instead of whats likely happening, which is that gamers as well as simracers are moving away from it. and if AC hadn't been on steam, would i have heard of it by now? i really doubt it. rfactor2 similarly is surely unknown outside of the sim community.

GSC is based on rFactor1... just saying. If you say rF2 is out of date, then GSC is out of date by 8 years. The core engine is the same as in rFactor1, with some tweaks. Also it's worth remembering that steam takes around 30% of game sales, so only 70% will go the developers. That's one reason a game with a small audience like rF2 might not want to use steam.

 

[yusupov]

i realize GSC is out of date & actually pegged the graphics as circa 2003 so it seems i wasnt far off. but they have a truckload of base content, are in development, moddable, & only cost $30. i'm not saying its better or worse than rf2, which ive not played (other than the demo, & frankly i dont think its much of a step up from GSC, though its also one of the ugliest tracks around so hard to say for sure), just that i dont see how it as competitive right now w/ assetto corsa, or GSC when it comes to value.

that is a good point about steam; i had no idea. still think it may be worth the risk though.

re the rf2 pic, sure it looks good but you can find dozens of user taken screenshots of AC that look photorealistic; its not hard to make a game look better than it really does with a good eye. re the video, looked like ACs least flattering ToD (morning & evening look great), exposure/brightness seemed too high, & AC doesnt even have its proper lighting yet. the clouds do look a lot cooler at 1000x or w/e in rf2, no doubt, & more diversity, but no one plays at that time scale.

and as i did say, rf2, only having to improve on rfactor, is without question WAY more feature complete than AC is or will be for a long time, which is a big point in its favor. but long term i dont see it being competitve & thats not good for any of us.

 

[Frederic Schornstein]

i realize GSC is out of date & actually pegged the graphics as circa 2003 so it seems i wasnt far off. but they have a truckload of base content, are in development, moddable, & only cost $30. i'm not saying its better or worse than rf2, which ive not played (other than the demo, & frankly i dont think its much of a step up from GSC, though its also one of the ugliest tracks around so hard to say for sure), just that i dont see how it as competitive right now w/ assetto corsa, or GSC when it comes to value.

that is a good point about steam; i had no idea. still think it may be worth the risk though.

re the rf2 pic, sure it looks good but you can find dozens of user taken screenshots of AC that look photorealistic; its not hard to make a game look better than it really does with a good eye. re the video, looked like ACs least flattering ToD (morning & evening look great), exposure/brightness seemed too high, & AC doesnt even have its proper lighting yet. the clouds do look a lot cooler at 1000x or w/e in rf2, no doubt, & more diversity, but no one plays at that time scale.

and as i did say, rf2, only having to improve on rfactor, is without question WAY more feature complete than AC is or will be for a long time, which is a big point in its favor. but long term i dont see it being competitve & thats not good for any of us.

I don't think graphics are really that important, but what would be important is, that you get similar FPS performance on every track. My FPS vary between 150FPS on one track and down to 35 on another and I have a strong graphics card.

Next week AC MP will come out and then we will see what is going on, but for me at the moment there is nothing that comes close in regards of physics and especially on FFB. I haven't triec AC with my new wheel, but with the G25. It was grip, grip, grip, off you go. For most people it is ok, because they stay under the limit of the car, but I will get the maximum out of the car, which is much easier in rF2 than in AC. I know some won't agree with that.

 

[John-Eric Saxén]

Yep, the main issue with rFactor2 graphics engine is not the graphics itself, but the performance; you need almost a supercomputer to run max settings with 3 screens. AC runs about 30% better FPS for me on empty track with comparable graphic settings. This is partly due to Dx9. Dx11/12 would not make the game look better by default, but it would probably bring performance increases.

Anyway, it's unlikely ISI would rewrite their entire graphics engine at this stage of development cycle, especially as they have about one dev working on graphics side. They probably rely on people updating their PC's, so the problem will sort of solve itself in the next few years.

Regarding the physics, I think rF2 will stay as the number 1 option for the hardcore sim racer for quite a while, it's that much better than anything else at moment.

 

[RaceNut]

Next week AC MP will come out and then we will see what is going on, but for me at the moment there is nothing that comes close in regards of physics and especially on FFB. I haven't triec AC with my new wheel, but with the G25. It was grip, grip, grip, off you go. For most people it is ok, because they stay under the limit of the car, but I will get the maximum out of the car, which is much easier in rF2 than in AC. I know some won't agree with that.

It's exactly the opposite for me, I have way more "off's" in rF2 than AC as I struggle to find the "edge" of grip. That is the kind of thing that has more to do with the type of wheel being used than anything else IMO. I love both titles although, for different reasons.

 

[Blkout]

Yep, the main issue with rFactor2 graphics engine is not the graphics itself, but the performance; you need almost a supercomputer to run max settings with 3 screens. AC runs about 30% better FPS for me on empty track with comparable graphic settings. This is partly due to Dx9. Dx11/12 would not make the game look better by default, but it would probably bring performance increases.

Anyway, it's unlikely ISI would rewrite their entire graphics engine at this stage of development cycle, especially as they have about one dev working on graphics side. They probably rely on people updating their PC's, so the problem will sort of solve itself in the next few years.

Regarding the physics, I think rF2 will stay as the number 1 option for the hardcore sim racer for quite a while, it's that much better than anything else at moment.

It would certainly go a long ways if they would fix multiple GPU scaling. As it stands, I get half my framerates from using two GPU's as opposed to one. That's just wrong.

 

[Medussa]

No worried about the future of this rfactor2. There´ll allways exists people that love car simulators and ISI´s game is simply awesome.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

rFactor 2's power and beauty lies under the hood and I am sure over time all those cool things will come to the surface.

 

[Gijs van Elderen]

i havent read this thread, but i think AC will kill rfactor2 & the community you guys have.

i also don't know how stuck on the shoddy graphics rf2 is. its not as if dx9 can't look very, very good.

To answer your first thought: AC has his multiplayer for a while now.
And ... Nope!!! Our rF2 community is growing more then ever.

About the rF2 graphics: Click here for more community Pics/video from this event. Thanks @Xavier de Carvalho for organizing!
Video from: @Davy Vandevenne

rFactor 2's power and beauty lies under the hood and I am sure over time all those cool things will come to the surface.

There will be even more power!!! 64bit.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

There will be even more power!!! 64bit.

Not!!!! http://www.racedepartment.com/forum/threads/rfactor-2-64-bit-environment-in-next-build.88511/

 

[yusupov]

funnily enough, i am a part of that growing community and i am very pleasantly surprised with the graphics. i expected them to look more like GSC, but, despite it being clear the gfx engine isnt as technically as advanced as AC or as slick as iracing, its got a unique look that i find very pretty at times...almost painterly.

very pleased w/ rf2, think its hitting its stride & finding a niche for itself. i had the griptv lemans broadcast on last night & into the morning & it really showed what rf2 can do that nothing else can come close to. day into night, then as the sun started to rise a downpour started & lasted into the early morning. all dynamic, realworld, realtime, just beautiful stuff.

 

[William Néron]

As for me, the price tag is the main reason I will not dive-in. For me the game is fine, I like driving it and all.

But paying 80$ when I'm not even sure I can race on a regular basis (that is at least once a week on a reasonable hour) is just plain waste for me. And paying 50$ then 12$ each years, well that's not worth the buy pass 2½ years. If the game would be 50$ for life, then fine, I would not mind.

For those who say the price has justification in the content that will eventually come about, well not for me. The time I pass on it will make it worth it, not the content, not the features.
And for now, I have yet to find places to race on a regular basis with a race time that won't make me get-up at 6AM or going to sleep pass Midnight; meaning I would not even be profitable in terms of fun/price ratio.

So I think that if the game had a more reasonable price tag, lot more people would be more than happy to make the jump into rF2.

That was my 2 cents