True, and there are quite a few issues with the game crashing for me in 64-bit mode; the latest one involves the Fanatec Shifter SQ. If I want to use the shifter, I have to stick with 32-bit and no SimVibe. I even did a complete rF2 wipe and clean install - no change.
They don't need to do miracles, they just need to explore all isimotor2.5 can do They probably have a lot more people available to work on it than any other sim studio, now if they'll use it it's another history
I would crowd fund them if the deal was sweet enough. I have "invested" for the lifetime sub, and I guess the product is pretty good overall considering the problems that many users have. My experience with the final rF2 builds before the move to Steam was good. AMS has been the darling this last year where I have spent 99.9% of my racing time. Honestly AMS is THE current bench mark in a believably accurate, and just flat out fun sim racer. I think rF2 is worthy of another chance at greatness, it would be a shame if the past efforts were lost.
FFB is related in part to the suspensions geometry ... so as I was saying, it could be just the way this car is. Btw I also have the T300 and I don't find it so amazingly different. It's good, but all within typical rF2 behaviour.
Or it could just be that someone paid attention to the way the car feels and drives instead of just plugging the numbers in. rF2 openwheeler behaviour is a pretty mixed bag, in my experience and opinion some of them are good with default setups (F-ISI, USF2000, historics), some are only enjoyable and driveable after major surgery on their setup (FR3.5, Skip Barber), some are absolutely horrendous no matter what you do (GP2 is possibly the least enjoyable car I've ever driven in a sim) Very few people doubt the technical bona fides of ISImotor 2.5, but it obviously hasn't been enough to keep the game relevant. If S397 can get some consistency (physics, FFB) into the rF2 driving experience and increase the performance and visual appeal (car and track visuals, UI) then rF2 hopefully stands a chance. I'd happily crowd fund them a la Reiza and buy DLC to help fund them towards this goal, as long as I thought they weren't taking the piss like Sector 3.
Of course that could also be it. If my memory serves it also has quite a lot of caster on the default setup, doesn't it? Should help it as well. I'm gonna re-evaluate after the next S397 car is released
Yep, let's wait and see if they can transform one of the existing cars. Then the "magic" will be confirmed for sure. Agree with tpw's assessment above. But I would take any car updated as it would be a great experiment.
totally agree with marc and tpw my thoughts exactly!! I see good old associator on here funny-ing up anyone's honest comment about rf2 lol surprise he's allowed in. He can't enjoy ams surely
Subscribed from August and no messages yet... ISI/Studio 397 should tell their customers: If you buy rF2 we will gave you lifetime license for Associator Posting Companion too
The RF2 USF2000 doesn't drive, to me, like the AM F3. They have similiarities as most cars do since they are based on the same physics engine (not identical physics engine as RF2 has been updated compared to RF1) and on the other hand they drive differently since they are based off of different iterations of a physics engine. The AM F3 drives, well, like an AM car, and the RF2 USF2000 drives like an RF2 car. Nothing more similar/different to them than any other cars in my opinion. Same 'ol - one is RF1 (with Reiza updates) physics, one is RF2 physics. The only cars that drive the same, to me, are cars from the same physics engine. AM cars drive like AM cars. RF2 like RF2, AC like AC, LFS like LFS, NKP like NKP, Pcars like part ISI (RF1/AM/RF2) and part PCars (since it uses the ISI physics engine and it's extremely obvious), IR like IR, RBR like RBR, etc. Within 1 corner I can tell what sim I'm playing purely down to how the car drives and it's been like this for over 10 years. I can even tell from videos and have never been wrong (I've seen many videos where I didn't know which sim it was right away but I could almost instantly tell by how the car drives / physics). This is not an opinion, it's a fact, for me at-least. I can tell. I could even tell within like 3 corners that Project Cars was based on the ISI physics engine and I prior never even knew it was but I could tell instantly within a few corners and me pushing the car (more specifically how the car behaves/reacts during rear slip angle).
Well there's a first time for everything. In this case, it is something good coming out of a comparison discussion b/c it is because of the discussion of F3 vs USF2000 that I tried the F3. Insanely fun car and, while I know nothing about these cars or the USF2000, I can say that the F3 is WORLDS more fun and interesting to drive because of behavior around and over the limit. The risk/reward balance is just perfect. The F3 will bite you when you deserve it while it is simply impossible to push to USF2000 too far. F3 = Brilliant. USF2000 = Very good and possibly accurate ; just not as exciting because the only thing at risk is tenths with almost no possibility of incidents. Has been a while since I drove it though so now I have to right away after driving the F3 (at Londrina, BTW and USF2000 at Toban Medium Reverse)...
Hey Marc . I was just saying: every sim drives different to every other one regardless of car. It's extremely obvious to me and, I bet, many others. I don't understand how people can't see it unless they don't really spend much time with sims or something but I'm guessing everyone here does. It's no different than playing a first-person-shooter in the Battlefield engine, Crysis engine, Call of Duty engine, Doom engine, etc. Sure, they're all shooters but the "mechanics" and physics are all different and if you're a first-person-shooter enthusiast you can tell which game you're playing by the overall mechanics/physics of each. No different to racing games or any game. The USF2000 is no different - it's an RF2 open-wheeler, not an AC one, or AM, LFS, IR, etc. A car is limited and dictated by the physics engine running it, just like real life's physics engine regardless of what car you race in real life (F1, 60s muscle car, etc.) just like how an F1 and 60s muscle car will have similarities to each-other if both are driven under AC, or AM, or IR, or RF2, etc. because the physics engine is the same - it's the same "reality" as long as you're in the same physics engine. It works the other way too and that's why I've never driven a car in 15 years of sim-racing that drives the same (or very similar) to another car from a different physics engine (including between RF1/AM and RF2 although they still have similarities due to much common areas of physics engines).
We'll see soon enough. I am still waiting for an expert to tell us how a real F3 drives compared to a real USF-2000. And which one is more accurately modelled in their respective sims. I expect them to feel different, but would like someone with experience to tell us. I have only driven a few real race cars and unfortunately neither of these was it. But certainly rF2 and AMS share a huge amount of the basic feel and response that you are referring to.
Well both cars are officialy licensed so both ISI and S397 had the real data and maybe help from rea life drivers to make them
Good for them if they are, I suppose. I bought myself rF2 in a sale some time ago and it just didn't stick. I've been checking my steam logs, and I've got: - About 100 hours logged into the AMS family of games (starting with GSCE); - 66 hours on Assetto Corsa, - 54 hours on Codemaster's F1 series - 30 on Codies' Dirt series - 16 on Codies' Grid series - 20 on Project Cars - 3 hours on rFactor 2. I believe these numbers do reflect rather well the enjoyment I got out of each of these games, too. So, yea, rF 2 was a huge dud for me. The whole package, FFB, physics, graphics, interface, felt sooo short of what AMS was doing that, even tho it featured series (indy! nascar!) and tracks (ovals! Macau!) that are not in AMS, I couldn't be bothered to keep it installed.
rF2 can give a very poor first impression but, it does require some investment to get more out of it. Once the graphics upgrade has matured, the new UI is in place and all of the features are fleshed out, it should gain in popularity. It does have amazing AI, handling and FFB with the open-wheelers but, results can vary - depending on hardware. When it all works, it's really, really good. Right now, AMS is a much more well-rounded title with some very unique content and I recommend it to others quite often.
Weeeel, the head of S397 appears to be Marcel Offermans who worked on AMS and rf2 now has frenato ads in monza f60s. I was alarmed by the f prefix but wonder whether its an appreciation of the f-classes in AMS or wether there has been a fallout between renato (of AMS -- head) and Marcel.
