Automobilista 2 v1.5.5.2 Introduces Less Forgiving Tires, All-In DLC Pass

Metla said:

Note-I don't disagree with the above post, In fact I think game bias is the main contributing factor in these conversations

My only concern with quoting professional race drivers stating driving race cars isn't hard, is that they are professional drivers, who have shown some ability which has then been nurtured over decades so they can reach the highest level available to them in their field.

Of course it shouldn't hard for them, and if it were, they would likely die before very long.

That's not us. We are plebs with plastic wheels.

Click to expand...

You have to remember though that not all race car drivers are professionals, there are the gentlemen drivers who are I guess rich guys that want to race and they are in the mix with the pros but of course not competitive or as skilful but still drive at speed. I guess Michael Fassbender could be the exception to the rule, he seems to be able to crash regularly, even in a straight line.

It's quite an interesting discussion the simcade thing. I would say FH is an arcade racer. It has vague pretensions to real world physics but its designed to work with a gamepad.

I would put GT7 and FM in the simcade category. They are more serious attempts at simulating real world physics but they layer on arcade elements to make the game more user friendly and are again designed primarily for a gamepad. You can use a wheel with them, but does a wheel actually give you any advantage?

A full blown sim attempts, in my view, to simulate reality as much as possible as realistically as possible and allows you full access to changing the entire setup of a car. To this end, I don't think there is any doubt that AMS2 falls within the sim category. Whether it is successful or not is what a lot of these discussions are about. But throwing the "simcade" title at it is just trolling and I really doubt the people saying that can justify it rationally at all. It has controller support and it's very good, but it's designed to be used with a wheel, and it doesn't have the arcade layer on top ( i.e. some sort of made up currency you get for completing a sector of a track etc ).

F1Aussie said:

You have to remember though that not all race car drivers are professionals, there are the gentlemen drivers who are I guess rich guys that want to race and they are in the mix with the pros but of course not competitive or as skilful but still drive at speed. I guess Michael Fassbender could be the exception to the rule, he seems to be able to crash regularly, even in a straight line.

Click to expand...

Yep, I think even in IMSA there is a pro-am element. Sure I saw Daniel Morad mention it in one of his vids. He is partnered with an amateur driver. Now I'm sure that guy is a very good amateur, but he presumably paid a big wad of cash to get that seat.

mcroshaw said:

Yep, I think even in IMSA there is a pro-am element. Sure I saw Daniel Morad mention it in one of his vids. He is partnered with an amateur driver. Now I'm sure that guy is a very good amateur, but he presumably paid a big wad of cash to get that seat.

Click to expand...

I even think if we only would have feedback from F1 drivers as consultants, they would interpret things pretty different. A setup done by M. Schumacher was likely way different from J. Alesi or A. Senna or A. Prost. etc.
Schumacher has driven the team to develop Benetton very peaky. He could handle it and was fast but the car was rather difficult to drive for his teammates and they did there personal setup of the car to get it better balanced from their point of view.

Metla said:

Note-I don't disagree with the above post, In fact I think game bias is the main contributing factor in these conversations

My only concern with quoting professional race drivers stating driving race cars isn't hard, is that they are professional drivers, who have shown some ability which has then been nurtured over decades so they can reach the highest level available to them in their field.

Of course it shouldn't hard for them, and if it were, they would likely die before very long.

That's not us. We are plebs with plastic wheels.

Click to expand...

I will bet you the average sim racer has way more seat time in their game of choice than the average driver in a GT racing series has in their real-life car, and by an order of magnitude at that.

There's no reason why sim racers, who have racked up thousands of hours in their favourite sims, would suck so badly as to be unable to reach virtual lap times that are competitive with real-world lap times (or even faster given the lack of g-forces). Racing drivers are not superhuman gods.

adamb said:

Guys, the negative critics are not necessary haters who have nothing else to do. It's just a very frustrating situation. Sim racing hype is on. We have spent a fortune on equipment because we are passionate about driving.

And yet, the best physics engine by far belongs to a half baked 10+ year old game with aged graphics, terrible UI and AI, bugs and in the hands of a bankrupt fraud company.

Despite all the hype, no one ever comes close. Everyone are super excited about hypercars driving in puddles effect yet we don't ask the question often enough: why is it that 10 years were not enough for these studios to match RF2's quality?

We don't hate. I really want one title to succeed and bring us a new level of quality. I don't care which studio it is. I'm tired of RF2 and it should belong to oblivion by now. But it's not happening and we still have to take compromises: RF2 with all the annoying things or a more polished game with simcade physics.

Click to expand...

decent eniough post but the big flaw in your comment was "We don't hate. I really want one title to succeed". Why only one? choice is better and as long as ALL the sims we enjoy are evolving and getting better (RF2 was not perfect out of the box and has recieved MANY pshyics updates over the years).

Bottom line is this : dev resources in manpower and money are limited, NO commercially available personal computer is capable of fully simulating race/road vehicle physics, so corners WILL be cut somewhere to shoe horn things in to the limited computational powers (maybe one day in the future processing power will be good enough to fully simulate things, If humanity is still around that is!). Until we get a phsyics engine capable of simulating EXACTLY what tyre rubber is doing on a molecular and chemical level then it's all just guesstimation numbers pumped into a tyre "model".

roadyroad said:

That's true but developpers should not fear to be out of business by stating this. The issue is that simracers seem not to have integrated that independant simracing titles are several years long projects. This has been integrated by flight simmers for years.

For sure, flight models, although very complex, have a more common feeling than driving models and their FFB, so as a customer, you may be mor3 disappointed by the end result of a racing title than a flight one. There may be a more important part of interpretation in racing sims than in flight sims, which generate broader differences.

Click to expand...

Main difference between flight sims and race sims is performance envelopes of planes are pretty well known and can be simulated with numbers reasonable accurately (weather being the only sticky point for full simulation).

Whereas the chemical molecular process of a tyres interaction with tarmac is nowhere near so well understood, especially around what "numbers" actual equate to the real process. And that interaction between tyre and tarmac is THE critical aspect of how a racing sim feels. Plus you alos have the effect of weather on race vehicles on top of all that. Personally I'm amazed and impressed the current crop of devs get it as good as they do.

mcroshaw said:

How do you define a simcade title out of interest?

Click to expand...

I'd imagine it'll be the usual nonsense, along the lines of "madness engine".

wolftree said:

I will bet you the average sim racer has way more seat time in their game of choice than the average driver in a GT racing series has in their real-life car, and by an order of magnitude at that.

There's no reason why sim racers, who have racked up thousands of hours in their favourite sims, would suck so badly as to be unable to reach virtual lap times that are competitive with real-world lap times (or even faster given the lack of g-forces). Racing drivers are not superhuman gods.

Click to expand...

That's doesn't really relate to the point I was making, I was more stating that a skilled competent person is going to find the task they are skilled and competent in easy. No superhumans required, and the sim-racer aspect could be taken out of the equation.

F1Aussie said:

One recurring theme I am picking up from this thread without going too deep into it is that some people are trashing AMS2 tyres and handling compared to their favourite sims or other sims they play. Shouldn't it be compared to reality and not other sims?

Click to expand...

I've been saying this for years...the old tired arguments that Sim A is shite because it doesn't feel real like Sim B (by someone who has NEVER driven the real cars that are being simulated) is beyond laughable IMO.

then you get those who actually have driven similar cars (lucky enough to race or do track days etc)....but then they don't take into account the setups or the weather conditions not matching 100%. From a scientific point of view that basis for a hypothesis would be laughed at as well.

The ONLY way to assess a sim's accuracy is true 1-1 comparison IDENTICAL conditions and setup. Anything other than that adds unknown variables that would skew the results. And as we all know it is impossible to have a 1-1 comparison that way.

MadDriver11 said:

Agree on everything.
The problem seems to be that these posts here at RD are the biggest and ultimate collection of b..thurt elements who, not getting enough attention to their ego on Reiza's forum, keep coming here to dump their toxicity over and over and can't move on for good if what Reiza is doing is not of their satisfaction.
Now the new frontier: with AMS2 picking up users, they even seem to be willing to take credits on them for whatever improvements Reiza made trying to convince everyone that their nonsense and toxicity had a role in convincing Reiza to do or not to do something.
Their egos are so big the walls in this chat room are bending out cause they can't contain them...

Click to expand...

We have been through this before, with the loud minority taking credits for something they had no right to regarding AMS2's development path. 2-3 years ago it happened the same. Influencer's state of mind goes beyond content creators, and it's quite pathetic.

As I read once, "There is a worse level of cowardice than the one of being a conformist: the fashionable non-conformist."

Damage Inc said:

Main difference between flight sims and race sims is performance envelopes of planes are pretty well known and can be simulated with numbers reasonable accurately (weather being the only sticky point for full simulation).

Whereas the chemical molecular process of a tyres interaction with tarmac is nowhere near so well understood, especially around what "numbers" actual equate to the real process. And that interaction between tyre and tarmac is THE critical aspect of how a racing sim feels. Plus you alos have the effect of weather on race vehicles on top of all that. Personally I'm amazed and impressed the current crop of devs get it as good as they do.

Click to expand...

That's right, although X Plane is not about numbers but about calculating aerodynamics considering the physical model of a plane, a method I would compare to BeamNG, method I think really good as it relates to a physical reality.

EDIT : It may be done in other titles (DCS, Falcon4, IL2...) but I don't know, X Plane has been sold.on this specific approach for years, that's why I took its example.

Also something is imo underestimated in racing sims, because tire modelling has been the graal for years, is exactly what flight sims are about : aerodynamics. Something for sure is done on that aspect in racing sims but, as soon as at least 2 wheels get in the air, the physics usually are just fake. BeamNG gets that situation right, I have no idea about how it is done but to achieve that there must be "real" aerodynamics simulation. Wheels in the air is a rare case kn circuit racing so it is not a criitical issue, as with more than 2 wheels in the air your race would probably be over IRL. But it just shows that aerodynamics in racing sims are just numbers, not physically related to the cars design. Unfortunately, aerodynamics are still not fully mastered by real F1 teams, so I don't expect simracing devs to do the job with 100% accuracy, but even 90% would be a great achievement. X Plane does that, BeamNG seems to do it, the old Vehicle Simulator too (as it simulates every type of vehicle from under water to the air), there is something to explore for racing sim devs. This aspect should be the next gen titles graal, complex tire modelling has shown its drawbacks, the main one being letting every other aspect of the sim unpolished or even unfinished (I really hope Reiza and S397 will fully finished AMS2 and LMU). We already know Straight4 will lose itself in the tire model graal, it ihas been the big announcement, nothing new to expect. Maybe Kunos will bring something interesting as the studio stated it has been working on new technologies, which I won't care about if they just add more complexity but no change of concept. I won't be fully interested in next gen titles if their devs haven't learned something from BeamNG, if they keep developping these titles like 30 years ago. ; well, worth than 30 years ago as they've been losing themselves, and their ressources, in only one aspect of simracing, tire modelling, for more than 10 years. At least 30 years ago devs did deliver complete experiences, within the technological limits of their time...

Damage Inc said:

ical molecular process of a tyres interaction with tarmac is nowhere near so well understood, especially around what "numbers" actual equate to the real process. And that interaction between tyre and tarmac is THE critical aspect of how a racing sim feels. Plus you alos have the effect of weather on race vehicles on top of all that. Personally I'm amazed and impressed the current crop of devs get it as good as

Click to expand...

The main difference to me, sim racing is 90% driving feel while flight sims are also about operating aircraft systems, navigation and authentic environment (cockpit, sceneries)- these are all unrelated to actual physics. So if engine performance or flaps extended flight dynamics are 10% off to real life, it's not a big deal. Sim racing the other hand is all about the car behaving realistically to realistic driving inputs.

Damage Inc said:

decent eniough post but the big flaw in your comment was "We don't hate. I really want one title to succeed". Why only one? choice is better and as long as ALL the sims we enjoy are evolving and getting better (RF2 was not perfect out of the box and has recieved MANY pshyics updates over the years).

Bottom line is this : dev resources in manpower and money are limited, NO commercially available personal computer is capable of fully simulating race/road vehicle physics, so corners WILL be cut somewhere to shoe horn things in to the limited computational powers (maybe one day in the future processing power will be good enough to fully simulate things, If humanity is still around that is!). Until we get a phsyics engine capable of simulating EXACTLY what tyre rubber is doing on a molecular and chemical level then it's all just guesstimation numbers pumped into a tyre "model".

Click to expand...

No sim has accomplished the level of RF2 engine for 10 years so what I mean is, let there be just one... the more the better obviously but I wouldn't expect that

About the simulation, it doesn't need to be perfect. But we know that if we can floor the throttle or make any drastic inputs mid-corner without unsettling the car, that's simcade. Even if we cannot give a precise categorical definition, we can recognize it.

The objective criteria of realistic simulation would be
1) in case of a particular car, the patterns of driving input are comparable to real life patterns (smoothness, extent etc), and
2) high end lap times are similar or somewhat quicker than real life and
3) deviations of velocity, steered angle, slip angle, engine data (etc) curves compared to real life are kept minimal.

So if you had a set of real life and sim data, the more efficient a machine learning algorithm would be to classify them apart, the farther that title would from simulation. In case of the perfect sim, data would be similar.

adamb said:

The main difference to me, sim racing is 90% driving feel while flight sims are also about operating aircraft systems, navigation and authentic environment (cockpit, sceneries)- these are all unrelated to actual physics. So if engine performance or flaps extended flight dynamics are 10% off to real life, it's not a big deal. Sim racing the other hand is all about the car behaving realistically to realistic driving inputs.

Click to expand...

But the feel is highly subjective! No-one knows what it's like to actually drive 99% of the cars in racing sims. Not only that 99% of the feel (motion) is just not there, the primary way to judge grip loss is the feeling in your body, which no sim can replicate with out a full motion rig, and even then I doubt those rigs truly feel like real life and just fool the brain with similar stimulae.

All the sims to reasonably high degree simulate realistic behaviour with the caveat of edge cases where numbers just don't work, or setups push the engine to break (leading to exploits) and the resulting handling anomolies.

Bottom line is I don't think there's a more difficult simulation coding problem that is harder than tyres.

adamb said:

No sim has accomplished the level of RF2 engine for 10 years so what I mean is, let there be just one... the more the better obviously but I wouldn't expect that

About the simulation, it doesn't need to be perfect. But we know that if we can floor the throttle or make any drastic inputs mid-corner without unsettling the car, that's simcade. Even if we cannot give a precise categorical definition, we can recognize it.

The objective criteria of realistic simulation would be
1) in case of a particular car, the patterns of driving input are comparable to real life patterns (smoothness, extent etc), and
2) high end lap times are similar or somewhat quicker than real life and
3) deviations of velocity, steered angle, slip angle, engine data (etc) curves compared to real life are kept minimal.

So if you had a set of real life and sim data, the more efficient a machine learning algorithm would be to classify them apart, the farther that title would from simulation. In case of the perfect sim, data would be similar.

Click to expand...

I think what would be better is the one Durge has championed several times (IIRC), by that I mean like you have Unity and Unreal....you have an engine (I believe this is what Marcel Offermans is aiming at? Could be wrong!) that people can license to build their sims (F1, Rally, BTCC etc etc etc) on top of, but the underlying physics engine is at it's core the same and is leading edge physics. Unless that is also what you mean...then yes I agree.

Kev455 said:

The braking model in this game is the worst part about it. Most cars have 'magic' brakes that stop with the power of F1 brakes instantly, and the weird last 30-20m of braking the car seems to magically find grip to brake to a stop perfectly even if you massively overshoot the corner.

Maybe it's because weight transfer or just overall car weight does not seem to be implemented properly, you can prove this just by tapping another car and watch it lift into the 5 feet into air!

I love almost everything about AMS2 but they need to take a serious look at the braking/weight transfer model. It's as if they haven't driven a road car let alone a race car.

I'm not alone in noticing this there are plenty of videos from good yotubers and real life drivers that point this issue of the weird braking out. Reiza must surely have noticed these complaints? I think its this braking/weight issue that makes people have the feeling of 'AMS2 handling is simcade'

Click to expand...

yeah.. not sure who is actually playing this game, but at least in the time trials it's not hard to get on the top ten worldwide.
However, the weekly challenges are extremely competitive, with 25 positions within 0.01 sec.
But, at 105-110% there is some great AI racing and Procars at 80s era tracks is immersive. I still appreciate Reiza acknowledges the physics need work. It's fun for those who have a life and cannot dedicate 40 hours a week to car setup and figuring out track limits.

Andrew_WOT said:

It's not a "pass", as you'll have to pay for new DLCs, just at discount if you have others. The verbiage in the article was misleading.

Click to expand...

I didn't said it's a pass. I said who bought the Season Pass (2020-2022) will have to pay for the new DLCs but cheaper. Reiza are being a bit fair with who already gave them some money. Studio 397 could make the same with rfactor 2 but the way they closed to sell stuff are a bit odd, I only buy their things on sales.

I like how we've come full circle to a post I made a few pages ago about progression etc. Impressive. I think relating to this new level of observation, this patch a few things, as this is why technology not limiting, all the Devs are moving to wider or these days more fully fledged and fleshed out expansive systems, to be by nature less on rails yet still aligning as much as possible to the narrow, specific forces and lines you are forced to run at speed:

1 it must be getting closer to what they want. I've always held that wider tyre models are simply better overall, even when people figured I talked the game down. To that end this patch in order to drive properly and have ffb do well on a Logitech pro in compatibility mode since that mode seems way more fleshed out for this Sim, I'm able to lower gain once more down to 41, 0 lfb, 25fx preference, 50 dampen though not touched that much yet.

On the base 11nm, no dampener, no feedback filter to start with but went better at 8, no trueforce stuff I think, so that's all raw. You can definitely feel the 3d rack and all that, nice and thick, and the tyres have a tactile heft to them even as the rack thuds around. Well done, surely up there with rf2s rack. Ams2 is really maybe the best feeling of them. It's got as a game so much resolution in what you're doing, though stationary. Surely it's not as tight by nature as rf2s but the ingredients are there, and despite rf2 being a wholly different system. To get that more flubby but in essence the same kind of thing is such a good result.

It clearly represents how much further the sim has come I think: you get more output/road feel and car dynamics with much less.

Quick math, that's 35% better off since it used to be 65 for me. Basically I'm pulling roughly 7.5-9Nm when it's maxing out, no red on the graph, and all bars in graph utilised. But the driving-fidelity or how you drive can be improved in all the small things this patch. No wonder it's driving better, it's not just the tyres grip I suppose but they were a major limiting factor. Tldr you get to drive better..

Hitech model 1 at Oulton shows many moments of the new patch shining through.

2 it's easier to drive without cheesing the game to remain fast, and in general is more consistent in the transitions from various forces and turns especially at speed. It feels more and more like a car. I think even as stated the physicality of the model and geometry is emerging better. I certainly get the impression of a much better model all told, you can sense it's shape better, which maybe it's the tyres it sits on now. Also better aero would enhance that you'd think. That would matter even when the car is not under a lot of steering input, to bring out further the impression of the model, a la Beam.ng

3 while some may say old cars or ams2 is more tight and refined now, some might also say it's lumbering still. But it's coming along, the driving model is probably unless its f1 not at detailed for full satisfaction yet.

4 v12 is definitely seemingly maybe v10 and gen2 modern f1 the most detailed; also the indy 2033 as a model yet to fit right into the final product its already is/was probably the best of the batch and may be in sim racing, its just a really fine model and not as whimsical on the road; I dont do a lot of oval racing and do not use as much the earlier carts but they did improve prior to this patch a lot; my top 2 might be the 23 indy and the v12. You can even fish tail at this point in the v12 and put it on the edge a lot like a razor; where before you needed ffb to even keep anything in bounds along with really stiff suspension. So it must be closer than before to the result they want it certainly feels like it.

5 with a 41 gain on that wheel in compat mode, 0lfb, 25f, 50 dampen, seems a good spot if one wants to lower for various gt3s etc or non open wheelers with the per car setting/ffb gain buttons in-car. So surely this patch is more refined and more controllable or in a good spot. I doubt anything mentioned in the patch would need outside 40-43 inclusive via percentage adjustment.

6 in terms of forgiving maybe it is as a model. I decided to rip lately the f1s around Oulton and brand hatch where you nail some fast turns and can take the up hill turn at brands a lot better, but the Lmdh's I take to watkins glen for more bends and they seem to go really well in race scenarios where you push it, so thats actually all really satisfying.

Richard Wilks said:

And why there must be a fear of crashing?

Did you know that many modern slicks are basically bias ply tires with a radial thread on them? You know why? Because unlike road tires, race car tires need to be able to comunicate to the driver what they are doing, and be confortable slipping and sliding, without just throwing you around. Unlike road tires, which the criteria for them has nothing to do with that, but more durability, noise, etc. Yes, the OPPOSITE of what most simracing armchair and youtuber critics say.

Should there be a durability penalty? Yes. Should it be nigh on impossible to drift slicks? Totally wrong. Slicks are even outlawed, yes OUTLAWED in many drift competitions, because they are too good and people would use a set, throwing it away later, increasing the costs by quite a margin.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree with most of these points... Aside from there is a need to be in fear of crashing... If I am doing the wrong thing I should fear a crash, not easily get passed it like I have the skills of a racing god like SVG... It's a very important tool for learning how to control a car and what to do to the set up to help me control the car... If there wasn't a need for fearing a crash then we shouldn't see any crashes or lazy spins when drivers are alone on track in real life either... Nor would racing gods like Craig Lowndes use the same tools to find the limits as I do as he regularly spun in practice to find the limits...

iRacing isn't the ideal where you fear death at the slightest slide, AMS1 and rF2 are far closer to the ideal than anything else for my tastes currently (AMS2 1.4-1.48 was close at it's peak slip too), it's not impossible to drift on modern slicks if you have the skills... If you don't have the skills you should fear a crash or a spin... Especially on stiffly sprung cars like the defaults in AMS2 carry... Just like I do on most good Pacejka or rF2 tyres...

I remember your lengthy thread on the forums where you complained about how bad the 98T was... I quite liked it back then... It was a fun car to hustle around the track and there was a penalty for not taking care of it... Now it's all about laptime and I have to go well passed the limit to learn from what is happening for my tastes... Where as back then I was happy with it's close to AMS1/rF2 feel so I could hotlap it endlessly...

It's that kind of dissonance that has me convinced that there's still something on a level beyond what the devs have in their control that has an effect on the output of grip from the SETA tyre model in the Madness engine... It's also why some people say the C9 is a challenge post 1.5 whilst others say it's a slot car racer... I never found a car undriveable in AMS2 after they fixed the diffs for 1.4... But many said that was the case... And it's not just the 2 extremes of floaty or grippy... For some like myself it goes up at the end of the curve after the FFB and other cues tell us it's gone...

Hence and I'm sure some may have noticed in my many rants since 1.5 I have refrained from calling other sim racers "arcade drivers" or "gamer racers" who enjoy AMS2 now (Not that there's anything wrong with being that if any readers of this post are, our opinions will just clash far more)... They're just most likely getting a different experience on their PC and if the end of the slip curve is low enough on their end they'll have a harder time controlling the slides as a result...