What do you all think about adding dynamic weather and flag-to-flag racing to RaceRoom?

It's just what I like to drive, not sure about the other cars, but you know, "experts" on the subject will tell you "GT3s have TC for a reason and it should be faster"
To be clear, I'm not saying one way or the other, my point was rather that the common opinion is that LMU has the most realistic tyre simulation and you can get away with some stuff in other sims where LMU will punish you, which I don't find as written in stone. Every simulation is an approximation.

Arguably we have the tech to pretty much cover every aspect of cars driving fast around tracks, but there's also a question of cost vs potential sales and talent required to pull it off. I don't know about racing sims, but in flight sims, the "physics guy" is usually someone who is both a brilliant programmer and and aeronautical engineer, there's a handful of people globally with that sort of skillset.
Racing sims get away with way more, simply because they are racing games first an foremost and the fanbase is not nearly at the same nerdity level as flight and train guys. Quite frankly, I think if everything "car" was simulated in these games, they would be less popular. Imagine if Assetto Corsa had realistic brake wear for street cars. How many people would be doing Touge in '80s JDM shitboxes? Actually let's go further, who would want to, if the game simulated the necessity to change parts and having to pay for them like some add-ons for MSFS do?

We're in this weird situation where sims are popular because they are popular rather than accurate and that comes down to online. And people there want a clean, exciting 30-minute race on fixed setups. I'm fine with Raceroom not having weather, night, or a dynamic driving line as long as it does the stuff I like it for well. And it does.
AMS2 probably has the best dynamic track and weather tech (unless it's iRacing, I don't play that), with stuff like cars going off track kicking up dust that lands on the track and is visible and affects grip. It can also turn into mud when it starts raining. I've only noticed it today, because someone at work told me, it's a thing. It's also the only sim where I've managed to actually blow my engine (PCARS 2 had damage to the radiators on small contact that overheated you engine over time and that blew my mind back in the day). How many people will appreciate that? The most popular racing sim out there is the one that doesn't even properly simulate a gearbox. You can just ignore the clutch pedal, or blipping in and H-pattern car an nothing will happen. I've also watched AC Evo get praised on YT for how "lively" the GT3s are and how that so much better feeling than ACC, then I tried the latest update, drove a bit, car felt very unstable, so I looked at the setup and the springs and dampers were all maxed out. The numbers were also bonkers like 30000N/mm or something.
That actually reminds what I find unique about Raceroom - it's the only sim where baseline setups are not trash. They are still made in this kind of "race-car-be-stiff" kind of way, but for the most part, I find it hard to improve on them. Like I look at the diff preload sitting at 150Nm and I'm like "that's too high", dial it down to 90, then spectacularly loose control on
Eau Rouge and go "oh that's why!"

 

You are completely off on the AMS2 gearbox. You could not be more wrong. In cars that need a clutch, you have to use the clutch unless you match the revs and power shift. You can destroy the gearbox. If your clutch timing is off, you'll miss the gear and damage the gearbox. I primarily race h-pattern cars and I do not race with autoclutch. I know AMS2 well. The gearbox and clutch are as accurate as they get.

It is different from RaceRoom clutch. But it only takes me 5 minutes to switch and get used to it.

 

AMS2 consistently outpaces RaceRoom on the steam charts. Even after the recent updates, RaceRoom numbers are stagnant. AMS2 still does better. Look it up, the numbers are published and constantly updated.

RaceRoom has to make changes, this sim feels its age, they've sat on their hands for too long.

 

You are incorrect with that statement.

As much as I wish this was AMS2, I was talking about AC here.

 

ok, My bad! I agree about AC. There is a gearbox simulation but it is lacking. You can damage the gearbox though. I think it's a legacy of the time when the game was made. In 2012 (IIRC that's when AC came out?) gearbox simulation was only just starting to be a thing. In rF1 and 2 it was complete but then AC at least had a little something

 

I disagree with your "they would be less popular" claim. Just because one game doesn't simulate one particular thing doesn't mean that they all do stuff like that for the sake of "gamifying" your experience. If anything it's the opposite, racing sims are pretty bad if you treat them as videogames and it negatively affects their popularity.

I think a lot of people would love to have a good career mode where parts wear out. It's also not something wild at all, NFS Porsche had it in 2000 and it wasn't even a sim.

It's an interesting question why every sim has some realistic stuff missing from the simulation, but I really doubt that sales are the driving factor for that*. I'd suspect costs of developments are the main reason, and the better you want it simulated the more dev time it requires.

* - Maybe except iRacing. They have all the money a sim dev can dream of, yet spend them on who knows what. But even then, it's for competition reasons, not "make it simpler so that people don't leave".

 

looks basically identical to me. a couple hundred players diff is nothing.

 

people who pull steam charts as an arguement , fail , as its nothing to do with how many people play ; its about the enjoyement of those people , so continue , compare apples against other apples ..... but remember there are no real apple trees , nothing can be grown from seed ; unless you enjoy eating rock hard small apples

Andi

 

I mean more in the sense that damage and parts wear is something you have to actively consider when driving. An actual detriment like IRL, not a game mechanic. I think a lot of people would get discouraged much earlier. Consider how many newbies crash on the first corner. Imagine, if they'd get a big bill after that and their career is over cause they lack funds? Imagine if the same thing was applicable online?

I'd be one of those, but I think the majority of people racing offline, don't even do championships. Would be interesting, if Raceroom had some stats on that, I might be wrong.

Sales are a factor. It's development costs, but it's costs versus sales. You can have a very basic and not realistic weather simulation in your sim just to tick a box and nobody will criticize you for that, you can half-ass your gearbox simulation too, but imagine having no online (fun fact, PMR has some online problems with cross-play, people rant on the devs and apparently it's a privacy setting on the PS5 which if not on, will corrupt the server and boot everyone).

The original AC got super popular, simply because the car and track list was good and the handling and FFB also, but the idea was to have the player drive cool cars (mostly sports cars) on laser scanned tracks. Got me hooked! They specifically stated that there's no weather or night, because they had the stats and few players ever used that. By contrast, if you make a flight sim without those features, nobody will buy your game (unless you include something better, like nukes, lots of nukes and not brand it as a flight sim).

I'm making anecdotal arguments here, but what even drove me to posting all this is last Wednesday, when we went to that "simcade" place and played AC in full cockpits and all. Some of us had sim experience, some didn't, but we all had fun. At one point, someone said "let's do MX-5s at Zandvoort!" and everyone was all in favor, but the guy who was running the place told us "this is a full manual car, do you want me to set it up as semi-automatic?" Everyone except one guy in the group had a car with full auto and everyone absolutely hated manual. What did the boys say? Nah, full manual all the way! So we raced, had fun, it was a mess at time, even I screwed up a few times, despite driving manuall, but I don't have the stick at home, so it's paddles and clutch. I was surprised that I only missed gears when under pressure and only spun once. After that race, we talked and everyone being agreed, that if this was realistic, everyone would wreck the gearbox at turn 3 max. I don't even think they are aware of break pad wear, because the only guy who went on holiday to Monte Negro in a Subaru Impreza and decided it was a good idea to recreate '70s rally stuff but found out what the cost of replacing the whole brake setup after and hour of abuse instead was, couldn't come.

I'm enjoying the games that are out and every one for different reasons. AMS2 currently appears to be the one that tried to do everything at least decently, but I've got like 57 hours in total on it and I'm an owner since release. I have way more time spent in Raceroom and if you consider stuff that is simulated, I'd say Raceroom does way less and AI isn't its strong point anymore (sorry, did a race at Zolder in 2016 DTM, AI drives bumper cars and it's 3 yellows per lap minimum, it's not the case with more modern GT... I mean DTM cars).

Crap, I've gone on a tangent... Look. My point is, the whole discussion about realism in racing sims doesn't revolve around any set standards. 99% of the time when you see a YTuber review a car or compare it, he's going to say stuff like "game X feels better, car is more lively, while game Y it's more understeery", while never bothering to check the setup menu to see, if it's physics-related or actually the setup. AI quality used to be solely rated on how safe they drive, but now that it's been solved in most sims, people are making opinions focused on speed and aggression. I could go on, but about the only objective factor in the discussion about what makes a sim good is the quality of the the online mode.
For a long time now I have had an idea what a racing sim needs to take the genre to a whole new level, some parts of that were promised and then ditched in AC Evo, so I guess the audience isn't ready to have that conversation yet.

Anyway this is a long enough post as it is. Bottom line: play whatever the hamster you enjoy, because at the end of the day this whole thing is about having fun and who gives a shit about someone being all like "not realism, play other game nao".
To be more blunt about it, the topic is about adding weather, cause big thing, all sims have it bla bla bla... I'm one of the guys that races in the rain once in a blue moon, finds it weird, definitely not fun, cause less fun than it was in Race 07 or GTR2 and frankly, as long as it a feature that is an option to me, it's only fluff.
I'll place Raceroom over other sims, because it's a fun racing game. I'll play AMS2 because it's a fun racing game with unique content. I'll play AC if I want to feel like in an anime and I'll play LMU and ACC just to remind myself that official licensed content is awesome because fidelity, but then I'll realize it gets boring very fast.

 

All this is equally applicable to flight sims that you mentioned, so I can't take it as a jab against racing games.

I don't play flight sims but is it actually a fair comparison? While both these subgenres are called sims, they play differently enough not to compare every feature one-to-one, but instead we need to look at what place they have in the game overall.

Also, again, separate cases of Kunos' sloppy job can't be used as a proof that it happens in the whole genre.

 

I play both flight simulators and race simulators and I can say with out doubt, the standard for calling a game a simulator is very different between the two.

I vote that Raceroom sets itself up to become a true racing simulator. To do so, I propose that Raceroom should start by developing a pre-race check list, sort of like the pre-flight check list we use in flight sims.

Raceroom's pre-race check list could include things like the below.

Garage and Power Unit Systems Check

• Cooling and Fluid Circulation: Connect external pre-heaters and pumps; circulate engine coolant and gearbox oil until operating temperatures reach target thresholds (coolant at 80°C, engine oil at 90°C).
• Hydraulics and Pneumatics: Pressurise hydraulic system via umbilical; verify pressure across active circuits (power steering, differential, DRS actuator, clutch, and brake-by-wire). Confirm pneumatic valve return pressure holds at designated spec.
• High-Voltage Safety (ERS): Run insulation and isolation resistance tests on the 400V/1000V energy store; verify master breaker and cockpit status LEDs (Green = safe, Red = hazardous). Check MGU-K and MGU-H harness integrity.
• Fuel System: Complete definitive race fuel fill using mass flow metering rigs; verify total fuel mass against race strategy target. Sample and log fuel density and temperature.
• Telemetry and Electronics: Establish primary telemetry umbilical link; verify all pressure transducers, strain gauges, infrared tyre carcass/tread sensors, and optical ride-height lasers report nominal values to the central server. Verify race control telemetry transponder and marshaling light system communication.

Mechanical and Chassis Inspection (T-Minus 60 to 40 Minutes)

• Torque Verification: Conduct visual and physical torque checks on critical suspension pick-up points, pushrods/pullrods, upright retainers, and brake caliper mounting bolts. Apply paint-pen tamper marks.
• Brake System: Bleed front calipers and rear brake-by-wire hydraulic slave cylinders; inspect friction material thickness (carbon-carbon discs and pads); calibrate brake balance bias bar travel and migration maps.
• Aerodynamic Setup: Inspect front wing flap angles using digital inclinometer against track-specific setup sheets; check rear wing mainplane and DRS flap gap tolerances with feeler gauges; inspect floor edges and underfloor diffuser strakes for damage or bonding defects.
• Wheel and Tyre Preparation: Fit tyre warmers to designated starting set; program thermal controllers (typically 70°C for slicks); verify cold baseline pressures and core bleed pressures against FIA and supplier directives.

Driver Extraction, Cockpit, and In-Seat Checks

• Cockpit Installation: Seat insert positioned and secured; attach six-point safety harness; install drinks system line and radio comms jack.
• Steering Wheel Integration: Lock steering wheel to quick-release column; verify tactile engagement and physical latch pin retention.
• Static Systems Function Test:
  • Test two-way radio link to race engineer and chief strategist.
  • Verify digital dash page cycling, multi-function rotary switches, differential entry/mid/exit dials, and engine braking thumbwheels.
  • Confirm clutch paddle bite-point calibration mode and bite-point find (BPF) routine.
  • Execute steering sweep (lock-to-lock) and confirm zero binding or play in the column.
  • Test driver drink pump function.
• Pedal and Safety Gear Confirmation: Driver depression test of brake pedal to maximum operational threshold (greater than 100 bar line pressure) to confirm hydraulic stiffness; verify fire extinguisher internal/external pull-cord armed and active.

Pit Lane Departure / Grid Preparation

• Pre-Start Engine Fire-Up: Connect high-torque external starter shaft to rear gearbox bellhousing; prime engine oil and fuel rails; verify fire-up sequence; monitor cylinder head temperatures and exhaust gas temperatures across all six cylinders.
• Bite-Point Learn: Perform static automated clutch bite-point scan with rear axle elevated on stands; confirm clutch drag and torque transfer parameters align with target start maps.
• Race Control Cleared: Verify on-board FIA transponder sync; verify camera housing mounts and FOM ballast plates meet minimum weight distributions.
• Tyre Fitment: Remove tyre warmers at the final designated minute mark; install race-start wheel sets using calibrated high-pressure wheel guns; verify safety retention locking pins engage flush on all four central axle nuts.
• Chassis Drop and Final Release: Clear external umbilical cables; remove cooling fans from sidepod radiators and airbox; lower car from front and rear jacks; confirm pit lane marshaling clearance to release car for reconnaissance laps to the grid.

And yup that was AI generated because what race simmer really gives a flying fukc about all that, so yes , I'm joking of course. And regarding weather & day/night, flight sims need it otherwise they are as boring as shit!

For race sims. I have three primary expectations:
A tyre model that feels realistic, that feels planted to the surface of the road and then having that coupled with excellent force feedback that allows me to accurately feel when I'm pushing the limits of the tyre model . I also seek a game with excellent AI as I only play single player, everything after that is just eye candy and fluff for me.

Raceroom delivers my three primary expectations far better than any other sim I've tried. I feel the game's developers have focused on spending their development budget, exactly where it needs to be spent to produce an excellent race simulator that I've been playing since 2007, when I first purchased Race 07

I keep buying all the other race sims when they come out, but after 50-100 or so hours on them, I always end up returning to SimBin (now KW Studios) for my racing enjoyment.

God I love this game!

 

I like single player too, but that’s mainly because the ranked servers leaves a lot to wish for in my opinion. I want official championships for my favourite content, based on the real life counterparts, but I guess people only cares about GT3s these days.

The single player experience also leaves a lot to wish for to be honest. I mean, something at least somewhat resembling a career mode would be nice, like GTR2 or something along those lines.

 

I pretty much agree with you.

Trying to compete with iRacing for ranked servers is a monumental task. I played iRacing for a few years around 2010 for my ranked server fix. Their subscription model clearly provides the developmental funding to refine their approach, and they have effectively held a monopoly on that market from that period through to today. They are also now expanding into the more casual player base with new player modes!

Looking at the market, it is hard to see how KW Studios could realistically go head-to-head with iRacing's ranked servers. Personally, my time with iRacing came to an end due to three specific factors:

1. Despite the global player numbers, being based in Australia made finding decent race splits in our local time slots very challenging.
2. It is expensive
3. It is too expensive!

I gave iRacing another go two years ago and it was still the same, I particularly disliked their tyre model. Despite the widespread praise it receives, it failed to deliver a convincing connection to the road compared to RaceRoom, and the force feedback felt relatively lifeless. In the meantime, KW Studios has substantially improved RaceRoom's tyre modelling, suspension physics, and force feedback over the past few years to deliver the best driving feel of most sim, all in my opinion of course!

Career Mode
I'm in two minds about that. Yes it would be nice to have for us single players but realistically, how long would a career mode last for, or keep you entertained for? Maybe 50 hours! I've played RaceRoom for around 2500 hours so a career mode would be a bit of short term entertainment for me, likely played once and never used again. BUT it would likely bring in a new player base so might be worth the development time.

Custom Championship Mode:
This is where I'd really like to see further development!
Adaptive AI is a great concept in principle, but in practice, it never really feels like there is a fair chance to qualify on pole or compete for a race win. Being able to adjust the AI strength individually for each circuit when building a custom championship would make the experience much more rewarding and enjoyable.

At the moment, the only workaround is hand-picking a group of tracks that sit within +/- 1 level of the target difficulty. I have put together a reference table of circuit AI Strength ratings that consistently keeps the racing competitive for a top-three finish. Setting up a 9-round championship currently means picking a baseline strength, then balancing the calendar with three tracks at -1, three at matching strength, and three at +1. This system has provided me with plenty of fun, tight, competitive AI championships

So please please please KW Studios, sink some more development time into:

1. Balancing the AI Strength disparity between circuits.
2. Fixing the constant AI crashes on some of the circutis.
3. Implementing a manual difficulty offset (e.g., +/- numerical value) for the Adaptive AI system. This adjustment would allow players to apply a global modifier, such as -1, shifting the dynamically calculated AI strength down by one level to ensure balanced, competitive racing.

Those 3 things will allow you to setup official championships for our favourite content

 

About career mode:

It could, or should, be used for new players to get accustomed to the rules, the handling. If this can be set up like a career mode it would be nice.

Maybe the career mode can used as a test environment to try out rain, night and lighting, etc.

 

I never thought of that, you are 100% correct.

but it still falls back on them fixing the AI cars and disparity of AI strength between circuits first