Gsce bonanza

Don't make it a strawman. Pointless.

 

From the LFS forum. At-least 15 years from F1 2002 (before rFactor 1) to rFactor 2 and things have hardly changed. This is about the core physics (not a specific car/mod). This guy really nails it down in my opinion:


"The physics is misleading. Drive one or two hours of both and you'll likely agree that LFS has better physics. However, drive two weeks of both, and the tables even out. Drive two months of both, and they both have irritating breaks from reality. They clearly are both based on multibody time integrated dynamic simulations. rFactor is NOT table based at its core, although it seems to have more layers of something going on above this core...for better or worse. LFS has a cleaner rawer feel, like GPL, and seems truer to its own model, and breaks down only when the core model itself breaks down, which only happens in subtle ways. rFactor, like with FF, seems to have more hackery atop of its model, but often for the better. Any simulation model is just that, a model, a simplification, and they all break down somehow somewhere. LFS gently just seems to follow its math where ever it leads, always natural within its own reality. rFactor on the other hand seems to explicitly make an effort to feel right, as in more calibrated to reality in feel, within its sweet spot...which is normal driving within low mistake slip angles. Within this window I have to say rfactor actually feels better. However, when rfactor breaks down it is jarring and unnatural, unlike LFS. Worst case is pre-spin slip angles and angular momentum, where rFactor gets downright whacky.

To summarize physics, if you want a full performance envelope that feels self consistent and natural within its own approximation at all times, LFS wins. If you want more RL realistic feel within nominal conditions, and can deal with odd behavior and strange transitions in extreme conditions (like pre-spin),..."
source --> www.lfs.net/forum/post/253018#post253018


That is exactly what I sense/see/feel as-well - that ISI physics absolutely fall apart and get all wacked, "digital", and unnatural once you start pushing the limits. Until then, they are, for the most part, great (possibly the best in the industry) but then again racing is all about pushing the car, experiencing those limits, fighting those limits, controlling and playing with those limits, and it's at those crucial areas where some of the best physics in all of simracing (ISI physics) absolutely fall apart and become some of the worst, weird, "digital", unnatural physics in all of simracing. This is what makes driving the ISI engine so great at times but so frustrating and annoying once you push the car and drive out of the physics engine's sweet spot.

 

I've experienced this with many titles over the years and it may explain how some people insist that title "X" has correct physics and title "Y" is totally wrong. One has to spend enough time with a title to become really familiar with it's subtleties under various conditions and situations. We are far more "adaptable" to the various physics at work in racing-sims that we give ourselves credit for.

 

http://www.racedepartment.com/threads/reiza-studios-exclusive-interview-part-2.116120/

" RD: Right ok, so while we are still looking at ‘Reiza 2017’, do you anticipate modding support and if so, can you offer any information to the community around how this will be implemented, say for example via the excellent Steam Workshop?

RS: Sadly our upcoming titles are not being designed as modding platforms – for one thing we have agreed with ISI not to go in that direction as that would be conflicting with their own products; "

That's not good.. ..but understandable because Reiza2017 could've been a true competitor for rF2.

 

The way I interpret it is that it will be moddable but there won't be official tools or support for it. The last thing isi (who sold the engine source code to reiza) would want is to compete against other game as a modding platform which uses their own engine. So when you buy rfactor engine one of the stipulations is that you can't make a modding platform sim with it. Doesn't mean people can't make mods for it though.

 

This!!!
They stated it so many times...

 

Somehow i dont consider not making it as modding platform as a bad decision. Except tracks I haven't found mod I like enought to play it anyway. And Tracks will be coming so will some mods.
But all the benefits we will get by reiza obtaining this engine licence are worth it...i have no idea what 2017 game could be, but AMS has big chances to become the best sim out there (combination of physics, ffb, sounds, features, ....).

It is a shame they probably won't obtain some attractive licences like gt2/3, lmps... To attract more wider audience..

Well it looks like 2016 will be even better for simracers than already great 2015

 

I could probably race all the current cars and trscks available in SCE for the next 6 or 7 years. Having 16 gazillion cars and tracks is overrated. Getting the core physics engine updated, I think that's what's most important.

 

There is no reason to make mods to this new simulator, makes more sense make mods to Rfactor 2 or Assetto Corsa.

Automobilista and the others titles of Reiza is not to run with the mods, but with the cars and the tracks that they made for us. Its just like compare Rfactor 1 and the GTR 2.

 

exactly .. GTR2 vs rF1 ... so plenty high quality mods for AMS .. nothing changes just the official support wont be there .. no restrictions, no obstacles .. personaly I only care about tracks ..

 

They even said that you only need to change a little in the mods to make it compatible with AMS. D: