Today I tried the Vanwall in RF2 on SPA, it is very promising but i find it snaps without any warning. Setup may ease it but I am no expert on setup. Had 4 enjoyable races on AMS2 with the Prsche at SPA. Feel much more planted and predictable.
The issue with the Vanwall is not that it snaps as such, the main issue is it randomly goes around on you and provides no warning and no feeling when it does. This makes set up work extremely hard as you don't know where to begin. AMS2 by comparison is much more informative. It feels planted because you can feel what the car is doing and are able to keep it in the zone of grip, leading to a more planted lap.
Custom FFB in AMS2 allows you to adjust the Slide Factor and the Road Rolling Slip Feel, so these two values can and will influence how the slip and slide feels, and you can set it up to your liking, where as in default or in rF2 I’m pretty sure there’s not a way for the user to adjust this, so your stuck with what someone else thinks is suitable.
Yep AMS2 has a lot of adjustability too in custom profiles. I personally find the default profile gives superb information through the wheel. I must revisit the default plus setting.
AMS 2 physics, even after the 1.5 update felt amazing when I first tried it, but then my opinion changed after driving the hyper/supercars on the Nordschleife. They are literally all over the road, ridiculously twitchy and try to murder you with every bump you go over, and when you catch the slide you're on the other side of the track. They felt great on regular tracks but testing these cars on Nordschleife brings out physics flaws. There's also this wierd physics characteristic where the heavier a car is the more tiwtchy it feels, ie compare the caterham to a GT3 car or one of the hyoercars. The AMS physics feel best suited to open wheelers and lightweight low spring rate cars for some reason, and in rFactor 2 it seems to be the opposite where many of the mods for lighter weight cars feel off but the GT3 cars and road legal cars feel great. Weirdly not all the cars in AMS2 are like this, I'm really hoping it's just a per car physics modeling flaw and not with the overall engine.
I don't think I understand the question. I usually compare tyre models and aero load behavior as well as pitch of the car. These are the main comparisons I aim for.
Thanks Gary, I have had mixed results with AMS2 and RF2. GT3 seems to work well in both but AI in RF2 standing starts are brutal. Kind of like Forza. Isetup the different sims using the Fanatec tuning menu as per Fanatec site. What graphics card are you running? It's amazing looking.
Hey, I have an ASUS ROG 3090 card. RF2 GT3 drove nicely from what I can remember when I drove the 488 before. The Fanatec settings are a decent starting point IMO, but I often find them a little too soft. But it will come down to preference of course. I do have profiles per car in RF2 mainly. I find other sims...the physics and cars are consistent across all models. The only thing I may need to change is the overall FFB gain, but nothing about damping and so on. As seen in the video, RF2 has a serious bug in the FFB.
Can you reference this please? I can tell you from driving real cars, AMS2 is the most realistic in a number of areas. Even more than ACC, which would be my main sim. But in saying that rf2 can be fun when it runs correct. Hopefully LMU is a big step forward.
Yep I will do one during the coming week if I get a chance. 2 days I will be at an onsite event with my team in work, so might not get to it until the week after. But yep, I will keep that one in mind.
Great comparison, it'll be interesting to see what Studio 397 & Motorsports Games come up with on 20th February, hopefully something more engaging, if I'm being kind, than their previous collaboration. Good to see someone debunk the now very tired criticism of AMS2 that it's too forgiving, slidey, etc....the hangover from some overrated 'influencers' is still strong but real sim enthusiasts like yourself celebrate the amazing work Reiza Studios has done over the years with the much-maligned (unfairly in my opinion) Madness Engine. Just a note: the AMS2 implementation of the Le Mans circuit is brilliant & the Bugatti circuit a great bonus, well worth the DLC price. Keep up the good work, I love these comparison videos :)
Yeah the Le Mans implementation is superb in AMS2. Yeah there is that common line that AMS2 is too slippy etc and it's like PC2. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think many influencers try to appease their particular following. For me personally, I never focus on that as RUclips is for me to share sim racing (god and bad bits) as it actually is. And because I'm not relying on RUclips adverts, or other sponsors etc I can be fully honest in what I find. I do often find it's not always the case. Another guy that is very knowledgeable is Nils Naujoks. He's mainly an ACC racer, but has began to dabble in AMS2 reviews. He's very knowledgeable too and calls it as it is.
I took your idea on this one, and well, it's done 😁. It was an awesome idea so thank you for that. And I'd a really interesting time making the video too. Like, really interesting driving em back to back. Keep an eye out over the next 12 hours.
@@edwhalley5 that's an interesting point. I might mess around a bit tomorrow with the view setting. I can see your logic and I think your onto something.
Imagine the monitor as a wooden frame. The monitor should show only what you would see through a same size wooden frame positioned where the monitor is relative to your eyes.the closer the monitor/frame the more you see through it (I.e. it gives you a wider field of view). That's the simple explanation. The monitor view angle calculators work out the fov required to achieve this.
Can't wait for AMS2 1.6
You made some great observations in there. Thanks for doing the video!
Today I tried the Vanwall in RF2 on SPA, it is very promising but i find it snaps without any warning. Setup may ease it but I am no expert on setup. Had 4 enjoyable races on AMS2 with the Prsche at SPA. Feel much more planted and predictable.
The issue with the Vanwall is not that it snaps as such, the main issue is it randomly goes around on you and provides no warning and no feeling when it does. This makes set up work extremely hard as you don't know where to begin. AMS2 by comparison is much more informative. It feels planted because you can feel what the car is doing and are able to keep it in the zone of grip, leading to a more planted lap.
Custom FFB in AMS2 allows you to adjust the Slide Factor and the Road Rolling Slip Feel, so these two values can and will influence how the slip and slide feels, and you can set it up to your liking, where as in default or in rF2 I’m pretty sure there’s not a way for the user to adjust this, so your stuck with what someone else thinks is suitable.
Yep AMS2 has a lot of adjustability too in custom profiles. I personally find the default profile gives superb information through the wheel. I must revisit the default plus setting.
@@GSSimRacing Trust me. Default is the best. Default + is absolute shit in comparison.
I have a simucube and default is the best, but the real best is rF2 :)@@ezpz4659
AMS 2 physics, even after the 1.5 update felt amazing when I first tried it, but then my opinion changed after driving the hyper/supercars on the Nordschleife. They are literally all over the road, ridiculously twitchy and try to murder you with every bump you go over, and when you catch the slide you're on the other side of the track. They felt great on regular tracks but testing these cars on Nordschleife brings out physics flaws. There's also this wierd physics characteristic where the heavier a car is the more tiwtchy it feels, ie compare the caterham to a GT3 car or one of the hyoercars. The AMS physics feel best suited to open wheelers and lightweight low spring rate cars for some reason, and in rFactor 2 it seems to be the opposite where many of the mods for lighter weight cars feel off but the GT3 cars and road legal cars feel great. Weirdly not all the cars in AMS2 are like this, I'm really hoping it's just a per car physics modeling flaw and not with the overall engine.
How you can compare RF2 with AMS2 ........
I don't think I understand the question. I usually compare tyre models and aero load behavior as well as pitch of the car. These are the main comparisons I aim for.
Thanks Gary, I have had mixed results with AMS2 and RF2. GT3 seems to work well in both but AI in RF2 standing starts are brutal. Kind of like Forza. Isetup the different sims using the Fanatec tuning menu as per Fanatec site.
What graphics card are you running? It's amazing looking.
Hey, I have an ASUS ROG 3090 card. RF2 GT3 drove nicely from what I can remember when I drove the 488 before. The Fanatec settings are a decent starting point IMO, but I often find them a little too soft. But it will come down to preference of course. I do have profiles per car in RF2 mainly. I find other sims...the physics and cars are consistent across all models. The only thing I may need to change is the overall FFB gain, but nothing about damping and so on. As seen in the video, RF2 has a serious bug in the FFB.
the pro drivers say rFactor is pro and AMS2 arcade, nothing else.
Can you reference this please? I can tell you from driving real cars, AMS2 is the most realistic in a number of areas. Even more than ACC, which would be my main sim. But in saying that rf2 can be fun when it runs correct. Hopefully LMU is a big step forward.
ahahahahaaha, only iRacing and rFactor 2 are for the pros@@GSSimRacing
Sure, I'd always suggest to stick with what game/sim you enjoy the most, regardless of what certsinly pro drivers play.
Great video G.....are you going to visit the gt2 in acc??? Maybe compare them to gt2 in re3....
Yep I will do one during the coming week if I get a chance. 2 days I will be at an onsite event with my team in work, so might not get to it until the week after. But yep, I will keep that one in mind.
Couldn't agree more.
Great comparison, it'll be interesting to see what Studio 397 & Motorsports Games come up with on 20th February, hopefully something more engaging, if I'm being kind, than their previous collaboration. Good to see someone debunk the now very tired criticism of AMS2 that it's too forgiving, slidey, etc....the hangover from some overrated 'influencers' is still strong but real sim enthusiasts like yourself celebrate the amazing work Reiza Studios has done over the years with the much-maligned (unfairly in my opinion) Madness Engine. Just a note: the AMS2 implementation of the Le Mans circuit is brilliant & the Bugatti circuit a great bonus, well worth the DLC price. Keep up the good work, I love these comparison videos :)
Yeah the Le Mans implementation is superb in AMS2. Yeah there is that common line that AMS2 is too slippy etc and it's like PC2. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think many influencers try to appease their particular following. For me personally, I never focus on that as RUclips is for me to share sim racing (god and bad bits) as it actually is. And because I'm not relying on RUclips adverts, or other sponsors etc I can be fully honest in what I find. I do often find it's not always the case. Another guy that is very knowledgeable is Nils Naujoks. He's mainly an ACC racer, but has began to dabble in AMS2 reviews. He's very knowledgeable too and calls it as it is.
AMS2 VS LMU next please .
I took your idea on this one, and well, it's done 😁. It was an awesome idea so thank you for that. And I'd a really interesting time making the video too. Like, really interesting driving em back to back. Keep an eye out over the next 12 hours.
@@GSSimRacingI will most certainly be watching , great stuff . 👍 Subscribed
@@thebigcat499 thank you so much. Here it is ruclips.net/video/Kk4_-qjKVkM/видео.htmlsi=0DUegsybbWffrmkt
Why are you sat in the back seat?
I position the camera to the exact place of the driver's head in the car. It is recorded in 21:9 so could look like a very wide FOV.
It should be your head in the position of the virtual head not the camera @@GSSimRacing
@@edwhalley5 that's an interesting point. I might mess around a bit tomorrow with the view setting. I can see your logic and I think your onto something.
@@edwhalley5 Scratch that, I just ordered triples today.
Imagine the monitor as a wooden frame. The monitor should show only what you would see through a same size wooden frame positioned where the monitor is relative to your eyes.the closer the monitor/frame the more you see through it (I.e. it gives you a wider field of view).
That's the simple explanation. The monitor view angle calculators work out the fov required to achieve this.
Hahá. Esse "sabe" muito.