I'm a backer of AMS2 and check both the Beta and full release several times a week, I don't like how it feels or how I feel from spending time in it. Could very well be me, as I get a similar lacklustre feeling from both AC and ACC, they just don't excite me in the slightest, I may well enjoy ACC a bit more if I had a better PC, maybe but then, it's the feel more than the looks and RR and rF2 just float my boat far more. Although rF2, over the years has been a bug festooned nightmare, capable of just grinding to a halt but once you are driving the experience is a satisfying one, generally, not always for sure but enough to keep me coming back. ACC has improved vastly and is closest to acquiring some soul but AMS2 falls way short for me. I don't go complaining and banging the virtual table, I'll just keep trying and hope that one day they succeed but one will not be holding ones breath.
I start every day with the iRCC you tube compilation, if you believe cars flying through the air like leaves in a hurricane then our conversation is over! All I hear is people screaming " why the hell have I got a 4x ". I don't like the iRansom physics either or should I say I didn't the last time I tried (about 18 months ago). I own a lot of content but begrudge paying monthly to be disappointed.
Talking about the improved crashes with tires, suspensions, wings flying off in a believable way. It's not implemented in all cars yet.
That's fine but the cars don't even need to touch each other. The contact physics in iRansom are appalling, I don't enjoy the driving experience that much either, this combined with having to pay monthly to access what I already own, just riles me, then on top of that you have to pay 5 times more for each piece of content than any other Sim. Nope iRansom is not for me and never will be, I've given it 3 chances and as the great American legal system demands, 3 strikes and you're out!
I feel iracing is a perfect example of what can be done to an ancient engine if the developer puts time in adding new code and building on it. The amount of new features they have added to that engine in the past 2 yrs is amazing, where as most other devs would simply start all over with a new engine and title. Dx9 to dx11 Added VR, VR optimization, performance options... Nvidia sps Day to night transition Loose surface physics Dynamic track, track rubbering, dynamic weather/sky minus rain Multi layer track heating system Damage model New audio engine AI New UI New shaders and graphic options Added more global servers Etc, etc And it runs well on older systems Personally, I'd prefer Raceroom go this route too for the time being. Update the engine to dx11 or dx12 Give me day to night transition, dynamic track with rubbering and I'd be more than happy....even more than I am already
I don't think I want RaceRoom to change the game engine. I'm happy with how ACC turned out on UE4, although new engines are also worse in some aspects... I don't know any technical terms, but for example, small things like antennas look really odd and pixelated in ACC, while it looks way more solid in AC and R3E. I also really dislike the Madness engine, the FOV looks weird (even after adjusting it with a FOV calculator, the sounds themselves are okay, but really bad put together in both PCars 2 and AMS 2. The same goes for the driving feel, cars are bouncing all over the place, which is not realistic whatsoever and not how it was in AMS 1... So that also has to be engine related. If you can evolve this engine to include stuff like in post #65, the game would be able to last for many more years! (I disagree with the audio engine bit though R3E has the best sounds in the business and any room for improvement there currently is, doesn't need a new engine as far as I'm aware of)
I mean... what is this really? Old men afraid of change, afraid of trying out something new? Adapting to new things? Nah, better keep the old stuff forever. I'm out of this thread. Just hoping that Sector3 knows better.
Let´s call it the IT rule 101, if it is not broken don´t attempt to fix it. These days "optimisation" has changed meaning and is now used for bloatware that consumes all available system resources to run slower than previous versions with no tangible gains - iOS, here´s looking at you. Microsoft seem to have understood this by choosing to evolve Win 10 and not rush release an unfinished product no one wants or need and consumes more resources than the previous version but runs slower. We see that every time there is a major change to RRE; it takes 4 months or more to iron out all the bugs that come with it, and that is with a supposedly stable game. Let´s not even mention RF2. I don´t look forward to RRE changing engine and being barely more than a beta for 2 or more years, like ACC and AS2 have been.
@Vale I get what you write but you cannot shy away from progress forever. There's a time when you have to do the next step. Looking at AMS2 it's not easy but I for one can already see that it's gonna be worth it.
Yes, I am fine with progress so long as it is not 1 step forward and 2 steps back. These small studios always seem to rush stuff to market which is not ready and then we spend years as paying (not paid) beta testers. At least they do listen to feedback though, unlike SMS who just go in their own literally slightly mad direction! Another issue is who to listen to. When DTM 92, Touring Classics, Gt3 and GR5 were updated last year, the majority of people were positive about the new physics and the vocal minority who weren´t were being shut down, told we didn´t know how to drive, we have to use a top of the range wheel, etc etc when in fact the tyre model had some fundamental flaws. Can anyone honestly say they prefer the model 4.0 handling to 4.1? To get to 4.1, which is darn perfect, we had to endure a year of 4.0 and some people giving up the game so they got there in the end but at a cost.
fbiehne, you repeat a lot that progress has to be made, but I missed the part where you said what defines progress actually. Concerns have been made, and with good examples, that some of the newer engines do not work that well in VR, namely U4E, also that the older engine in RR produces very good framerates - and better framrates usually than with sam eharwrae but a newer engine, becasu enwer visuals with more bells and whistle tend to be more demanding. And I am hesitent to chnage things too carelessly though with my i7 8700K, 32 GB RAM and 1080 Ti 13 GB I am not using a really slow system at all. I simply miss a argument from you that goes beyond "new engine for the sake of having a new engine and calling that progress". Nothing against a change in looks and getting night and weather, but not at the cost of loosing performance, especially in VR. Loosing 15 frames in 2D at 120 frame,s is one thing, loosing 15 frames in VR from 90 or 45 frames is somehtign very different, and even makes yo sick. And that IS a major concern, all racing sims I know show it to me, on the mentioned rig, in VR. Newer means "more demanding on hardware", means "need to reduce visual fidelity in options". And I repeat: taken for itself, the current engine still holds its ground in the visual department. It simply looks good and well, still. I hate the idea of S3 rushign somehting out just to deliver somethign new, and compromsing an established quality for it: stability, and performance. They once announced they want to let SimBin do their GTR3 engine, and then take that one over. I wonder whether that plan still is valid? For its been a while already, and the whokle project runs at a dubious pace. See the recent thread at RD. Myself, I personally do not really wait for GTR3 at all. Not for its engine. Not for its package design and focus.
Good examples of a new or updated engine which work well is AMS2 with the Madness engine (and I didn’t even like the PCars titles but with Reiza physics it’s another thing) and the continously updated Iracing engine (looks good and has DX11 etc). UE4 for ACC is a desaster (at least on my machine in VR), rfactor 2 works good with content that is updated to the latest DX11 standard. The thing is: I really like the look of Raceroom how it is, that is not my issue. However it could be better, this sim could have more features (day/night, rain, dynamic track, good VR implementation etc) which are probably not that easy or impossible to implement with this old engine. So I wonder why so many want to stick with this engine.
I think people are not in pricniple objecting to night, weather, new engine. They just do not want to risk paying for that with a performance drop that weighs even heavier in VR. The gain is not dispouted - what is disputed is that the gain is heavy enough to jzstify the losses. And weather alone is nothing if it is only visuals, but no convincing physics. That is what sets the rain module in ACC apart: the convincing physics of driving on a wet tarmac, and a dynamically drying (or wetting) driving line. And there lies dangers in, dangers of doing damage to the very good physics of RR. If you do these chnages, you have to go all the way, and get every detail right. Ganz, oder garnicht!
The current graphics engine is fine in normal weather and I enjoyed it For Rain, you need to simulate standing water, dry line, wet line, water splash effect., etc. I think you need a better graphics engine for that. Think gtr2 and race07, you don't want those rain effect. Also, for night time, it is tricky to do it right. Simulating black colour is difficult. Think of driving your real car at night time with no street light. You try to find some light within the darkness. The light effect has to be good in graphics
LMP1, LMP2, GT3, GT4 and even TCR - these are all driven in modern endurance events. And then there are some historic classes. There's more than enough endurance-ready cars in the game.
I've just recently returned to this sim and to be honest I'm amazed how good the new and updated earlier content looks for being DX9. The devs have done a superb job of extracting the best from this graphics engine and of course the physics and variety of content is also brilliant. It's certainly a great foundation to build upon with DX11/12 and Multicore support. And to echo what @David Slute posted - day to night transition, dynamic track rubbering and heat etc would be a welcomed upgrade for sure. That along with DX11 would bring this sim up to the level it deserves. My own opinion on the alternative engine front - I'm still not convinced with the Madness Engine in AMS2 yet and although UE4 might look good on ultra settings, I don't think its best suited to racing sims. ACC may be decent but there's no dynamic rubbering and I very much doubt if the drying lines are dynamic either. Top that off with requiring a next-gen spaceship to run it at ultra with anything more than Full HD resolution and abysmal VR performance - no thanks. It will be very interesting to see if GTR3 is actually on UE4 as was suggested some time ago which may influence Sector 3's direction going forward. Time will tell I guess, until then I'll enjoy what we have now
LMP1 doesn't exist anymore and there is only the Audi really from P1, there are no LMP2's, just a mish, mash of P2's, none I've seen for many a moon, absolutely nothing you will see today. Is there any of the marques running in GT3 this year that are in RR, maybe the Audi and I'm not sure any of the GT4's, other than again the Audi, I'll give you WTCR but who wants to go through the night in a FWD screamer, not me. Nah, anyone who tries to tell me RR is an endurance Sim is smoking more weed than California. Just to make a point, this weeks endurance event, F2.
Nit-picking and straw-man, these aren't arguments. RR is not an endurance sim yet, it lacks some important features. But they keep adding them, and the content is already there. It's not "one endurance car", it's very far from how you're trying to paint this picture...
I have basically stopped playing and purchasing content on raceroom for more than 12 months now, for two main reasons, the first is the graphics, it has been left in the dust by all the other major Sims now so the racing can become very same old same old. I like changing time of day, night racing and weather conditions to keep things interesting, I can't do that in raceroom. The other issue I have is that I now can't race without my shakers as tracks feel lifeless without them, but in raceroom the tracks are lifeless even with them. They are just billiard table smooth, even kerbs dont tend to do a lot. I think my days in raceroom are basically done now. I can't complain, I have around 400 hours on it overall. I will stick with the ever evolving AMS 2, ACC and a slight dabble in RF 2 from time to time. I can't see raceroom evolving to a new graphics engine, there is so much content to convert and make work properly I just dont see them doing it.
Other way around pal, you have no argument at all. By the time RR has just some of the needs of the endurance racer it will be so archaic, you will need to keep hold of an old PC just to run it. Now RR2 may well be endurance based but that's another story. Nope the FIA or whoever it is will not be calling RR to run Le Mans this year or any year but feel free to hold your breath.