I was listening to the interview with Eric Alexander at Opinion Nation,
especially about leagues at iRacing. Eric says, and I'm paraphrasing,
that iRacing fears that if they allow private leagues then guys will go
"hide" in those leagues and undermine what iRacing is about.
Think about that. If simply allowing private leagues would undermine
their licensing concept, what does that say about the viability of that
concept overall? To me it shows it's a weak concept. I would predict
that if they did allow private leagues that their "driving school game"
would die immediately because it has such small appeal now anyway. And
that contributes to why so few veteran SIM racers want to be involved
with it. The concept is a divider not a uniter.
When you listen to almost everyone talk about iRacing they have as many
negative things to say as positive. I believe it's because they, the
racers, have no control at affecting changes that can improve their SIM
Racing. Racers like the technology of their cars and tracks so they put
up with the game concept, in the short run. But if they could change it,
they would.
Eric's comments hit directly on what's wrong with the iRacing concept.
And that's that, if given the opportunity to do private leagues and exit
the "licensing" system, the "licensing" system would die in short order.
And iRacing knows it. So iRacing demonstrates control by saying if you
want to use our SIM technology you must submit to licensing. Overall the
people I race with resoundingly say "hell no."
iRacing's friendship loyalties to Nim Cross is their downfall. They have
thrown so much time and money at it, as well as creating their own
internal culture of emotional reenforcement, they are paralyzed to
effect change in this regard. Even though the SIM racing public has
already spoken with their wallets. The answer is "no."
iRacing could still monetize their product and increase revenue simply
by letting league managers do it their way. Racers would still have to
buy their cars and tracks to race in the league. iRacing cuts it's own
throat by wanting to execute such maniacal control.
And with all that said, if they don't have the cars I want to race, Indy
Cars, then I'd still be doing rFactor anyway.
Opinion by Niles
PS: All the stuff I said here still applies
http://www.mnrlonline.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=5178.
iRacing's stance on private leagues and its value for training
Niles Anders criticised Eric Alexander's interview remarks that private leagues would let drivers hide from iRacing's official structure. Tony Rickard said private leagues planned for later in 2009 would require the right licence class. The debate shifted to whether iRacing is useful training for real drivers, with Racer developer Ruud van Gaal saying simulator braking points at Zandvoort scaled well to real life.
With Ruud van Gaal (Racer)
Automated summary.
I agree with that. And I'd happily pay per race to race in a proper league.
So mine is money iRacing could have. And there are many more people like me
than there are current members of iRacing, imo.
"Niles Anders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:Zi_Ql.41478$%[email hidden]...
Quoted text (45 lines)
>I was listening to the interview with Eric Alexander at Opinion Nation, >especially about leagues at iRacing. Eric says, and I'm paraphrasing, that >iRacing fears that if they allow private leagues then guys will go "hide" >in those leagues and undermine what iRacing is about. > > Think about that. If simply allowing private leagues would undermine their > licensing concept, what does that say about the viability of that concept > overall? To me it shows it's a weak concept. I would predict that if they > did allow private leagues that their "driving school game" would die > immediately because it has such small appeal now anyway. And that > contributes to why so few veteran SIM racers want to be involved with it. > The concept is a divider not a uniter. > > When you listen to almost everyone talk about iRacing they have as many > negative things to say as positive. I believe it's because they, the > racers, have no control at affecting changes that can improve their SIM > Racing. Racers like the technology of their cars and tracks so they put up > with the game concept, in the short run. But if they could change it, they > would. > > Eric's comments hit directly on what's wrong with the iRacing concept. And > that's that, if given the opportunity to do private leagues and exit the > "licensing" system, the "licensing" system would die in short order. And > iRacing knows it. So iRacing demonstrates control by saying if you want to > use our SIM technology you must submit to licensing. Overall the people I > race with resoundingly say "hell no." > > iRacing's friendship loyalties to Nim Cross is their downfall. They have > thrown so much time and money at it, as well as creating their own > internal culture of emotional reenforcement, they are paralyzed to effect > change in this regard. Even though the SIM racing public has already > spoken with their wallets. The answer is "no." > > iRacing could still monetize their product and increase revenue simply by > letting league managers do it their way. Racers would still have to buy > their cars and tracks to race in the league. iRacing cuts it's own throat > by wanting to execute such maniacal control. > > And with all that said, if they don't have the cars I want to race, Indy > Cars, then I'd still be doing rFactor anyway. > > Opinion by Niles > > PS: All the stuff I said here still applies > http://www.mnrlonline.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=5178.Niles Anders wrote:
Sim racing has been a contracting niche since the early copies of
Papyrus' Nascar titles sold in excess of 1 million. In the absence of
any developer led or official sanctioning body grasping the nettle, sim
racing fans have done a pretty good job organising themselves, arguably
better than F1 right now!
However, for potential new sim racers the entry into the decent leagues
is a matter of luck and a simple google search a find plenty of
examples of league forums that have disintegrated into flame wars and/or
fizzled out mid season to a handful of drivers.
For those in the decent leagues their only need is the sim - the rest
they can do, but it is no recipe for expanding sim racing. As long as
the sims keep coming why should they worry?
The reality is the sims aren't keeping coming. The major publishers gave
up on PC sim racing years ago in favour of either console racers or
different genres. The small studios are doing a decent job along with
the home made community mods, yet to attract in major developer is
going to take a significant change in the market.
Many consumers will focus on the now and view iRacing as another boxed
title but with annoying restrictions. Simply feeding the existing niche
community isn't going to justify the development costs. So it needs to
provide the venue for races to pool sim racers for its systems of
getting drivers racing of similar capabilities to experience the quality
of racing first hand and establish numbers to gain momentum for new
racers to come in. We now see the Nascar deal in a timeline where new
fans can join in where there is already an established membership
initially from the existing sim racing community.
To gain this momentum iRacing need to control the numbers through
limiting fragmentation. Fancy running Spec Racers around Daytona for 5
laps? The option isn't going to be there. Sim racers used to zillions of
options of cars and tracks and choosing their own rules wil be
disappointed, yet this is exactly what destroyed pick up racing in the
past. To bring order to this chaos iRacing have grasped the nettle and
there will always be groups who will do something different and there
are alternatives - but they will be the niche groups as we have in all
sports.
If iRacing succeeds it will become the de facto sim racing service which
in my view is exactly what sim racing has needed for many years and may
grow sim racing beyond its ill perceived computer gaming image.
That doesn't mean everyone else packs up, the small studios will still
have niche gaps to fill but we as consumers will have a major developer
in the mix, something that wouldn't have happened without iRacing's
vision for change.
Cheers
Tony
Quoted text (7 lines)
> Think about that. If simply allowing private leagues would undermine > their licensing concept, what does that say about the viability of that > concept overall? To me it shows it's a weak concept. I would predict > that if they did allow private leagues that their "driving school game" > would die immediately because it has such small appeal now anyway. And > that contributes to why so few veteran SIM racers want to be involved > with it. The concept is a divider not a uniter.On May 20, 2:07 pm, Niles Anders <[email hidden]> wrote:
Personally I like the iRacing "driving school game" just fine, it
allows for a controlled car/track class system but with a flexible
schedule and participation list which is compatible with real life
time commitments and doesn't require being part of any cliques. Most
every night I can join fun quality pickup races at the times of day
that are convenient to me, while at the same time feeling like my
performance and career data continues to build along with my driving
skills and safety rating.
While I wish the private leagues outside iRacing (and in the future
inside iRacing as well) the best, I personally don't have a real life
schedule like I did 10 years ago that is compatible with the time
investment necessary for the typical league practice/qual/racing
schedule, nor with amount of socializing that usually accompanies
being a good participant in a league or team.
To each his own and I think there are niches for different types of
sim racing, for my busy life the default iRacing system has lots of
appeal, and is actually a feature I like and was willing to pay for
after the free month trial, and I'm hoping the introduction of leagues
into iRacing will complement the default iRacing system instead of
competing with it.
Quoted text (8 lines)
>SNIP > Think about that. If simply allowing private leagues would undermine > their licensing concept, what does that say about the viability of that > concept overall? To me it shows it's a weak concept. I would predict > that if they did allow private leagues that their "driving school game" > would die immediately because it has such small appeal now anyway. And > that contributes to why so few veteran SIM racers want to be involved > with it. The concept is a divider not a uniter. Yep.
To me, all iRacing need to do is offer their sanctioned stuff as well as
let everyone do their own thing.
But is this a flashback to the crackdown on third party stuff for N2003?
Are they threatened by this also? Am I detecting a little paranoia?
"Tony R" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:ir0Rl.167071$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (61 lines)
> Niles Anders wrote: > >> Think about that. If simply allowing private leagues would undermine >> their licensing concept, what does that say about the viability of that >> concept overall? To me it shows it's a weak concept. I would predict that >> if they did allow private leagues that their "driving school game" would >> die immediately because it has such small appeal now anyway. And that >> contributes to why so few veteran SIM racers want to be involved with it. >> The concept is a divider not a uniter. > > Sim racing has been a contracting niche since the early copies of Papyrus' > Nascar titles sold in excess of 1 million. In the absence of any developer > led or official sanctioning body grasping the nettle, sim racing fans have > done a pretty good job organising themselves, arguably better than F1 > right now! > > However, for potential new sim racers the entry into the decent leagues is > a matter of luck and a simple google search a find plenty of examples of > league forums that have disintegrated into flame wars and/or fizzled out > mid season to a handful of drivers. > > For those in the decent leagues their only need is the sim - the rest they > can do, but it is no recipe for expanding sim racing. As long as the sims > keep coming why should they worry? > > The reality is the sims aren't keeping coming. The major publishers gave > up on PC sim racing years ago in favour of either console racers or > different genres. The small studios are doing a decent job along with the > home made community mods, yet to attract in major developer is going to > take a significant change in the market. > > Many consumers will focus on the now and view iRacing as another boxed > title but with annoying restrictions. Simply feeding the existing niche > community isn't going to justify the development costs. So it needs to > provide the venue for races to pool sim racers for its systems of getting > drivers racing of similar capabilities to experience the quality of racing > first hand and establish numbers to gain momentum for new racers to come > in. We now see the Nascar deal in a timeline where new fans can join in > where there is already an established membership initially from the > existing sim racing community. > > To gain this momentum iRacing need to control the numbers through limiting > fragmentation. Fancy running Spec Racers around Daytona for 5 laps? The > option isn't going to be there. Sim racers used to zillions of options of > cars and tracks and choosing their own rules wil be disappointed, yet this > is exactly what destroyed pick up racing in the past. To bring order to > this chaos iRacing have grasped the nettle and there will always be groups > who will do something different and there are alternatives - but they will > be the niche groups as we have in all sports. > > If iRacing succeeds it will become the de facto sim racing service which > in my view is exactly what sim racing has needed for many years and may > grow sim racing beyond its ill perceived computer gaming image. > > That doesn't mean everyone else packs up, the small studios will still > have niche gaps to fill but we as consumers will have a major developer in > the mix, something that wouldn't have happened without iRacing's vision > for change. > > Cheers > Tony[email hidden] (Niles Anders) wrote:
> what does that say about the viability of that
> concept overall? To me it shows it's a weak concept.
I think we have to accept that when John Henry says he's in it for the long haul,
he means it (for now anyway). In that case they can afford to make only small
concessions (like *very* limited leagues) to the demands of the existing user base.
There are any number of things they could do to open this amazing sim code up to a
much wider audience, but at this stage they have no interest, or need, to do it. So
that leads to some decisions which looks strange or weak from the outside (and
inside!)
I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that there is no chance that iRacing will
deviate substantially from their planned course over the next few years, because
they really are serious about the whole 'sport' thing, and have the money (inc.
subscriptions) to fund it.
To me it'll always be geeks (like me) and wannabes sat behind a desk having fun.
But everyone's entitled to their dreams, and if JH is willing to pump $20+ million
into his dream, who am I to argue? All I can do is decide whether the pleasure
iRacing has to offer outweighs the pain of their pricing model and racing
structure.
At the moment I keep finding myself boiling it down to fundamentals... I am
grateful that Kaemmer is still working on something he clearly loves. iRacing is
GPL2 even if it's GPL2 with all sorts of baggage I don't really want. And even
though it hurts my pride to hand over so much money for 'just a game', I also have
to accept the fundamental that I enjoy doing it.
Some days anyway. When I got a phantom x4 penalty and an SR hit for being near a
wreck yesterday I was less impressed. :->
For as long as it exists -- which may or may not be a long time -- iRacing will
continue to be a project we all have pretty strong feelings about. I can't help but
feel that's a good thing. If it was truly awful there'd be nothing to discuss.
Andrew McP
[email hidden] (Byron Forbes) wrote:
> To me, all iRacing need to do is offer their sanctioned stuff as
> well as let everyone do their own thing.
I've been an advocate of a two-tier system for a long time. I see nothing wrong
with the existing iRacing setup for those who enjoy that kind of thing. But
offering a stripped down, but much more flexible version for mass consumption would
make a great advert for the core service and vision.
As yet though, there is no need to generate the kind of revenue a mass-market
oriented product might deliver. I think they're also stretched pretty thin
(talent-wise rather than employee-wise) delivering what they have. High standards
mean you can't just throw programming hours at a project, they have to be the right
kind of hours from the right kind of people. And at this level I suspect that's
quite a small group of very clever people.
Andrew McP
>driving school game
Except that it doesn't serve that purpose, iRacing is an online
pickup racing game, not a school or a training tool.
For racing teams interested in a training or development tool,
they will buy something like rFactor pro (not the consumer
product, but a tool that rFactor customizes for each customer).
> Sim racing has been a contracting niche since the early copies
> of Papyrus' Nascar titles sold in excess of 1 million.
NFS Shift could change this. EA has the money, the people,
including 25 ex GTR employess, the resources and the data to
make a great sim if they choose to do so. What I'm hoping for
is a very realistic sim, with fantasy cars with over the top
physics and assists to draw in the NFS arcade fans. Sales
for NFS games are also down, but we're talking from
Underground 2's and Most Wanted's 9 million copies sold to
Carbon and Prostreets 5.5 million each. Still huge numbers.
To EA, spending 10 to 20 million on a game isn't an issue
when they sell 5 million copies or more.
I'm still sticking with my original prediction that iRacing's
current pricing model will only last about 3 years.
Byron, I have suspected paranoia too. But I think they really want to
own SIM Racing. I know that sounds a little wacky but FIRST is modeled
like the FIA and it appears they want to displace leagues with their
model. I don't think their long term model is good for SIM racing overall.
We've raced together before and I can't remember what league it was
with. But you're Australian, right?
Byron Forbes wrote:
Quoted text (74 lines)
> Yep. > > To me, all iRacing need to do is offer their sanctioned stuff as well > as let everyone do their own thing. > > But is this a flashback to the crackdown on third party stuff for > N2003? Are they threatened by this also? Am I detecting a little paranoia? > > > "Tony R" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ir0Rl.167071$[email hidden]... >> Niles Anders wrote: >> >>> Think about that. If simply allowing private leagues would undermine >>> their licensing concept, what does that say about the viability of >>> that concept overall? To me it shows it's a weak concept. I would >>> predict that if they did allow private leagues that their "driving >>> school game" would die immediately because it has such small appeal >>> now anyway. And that contributes to why so few veteran SIM racers >>> want to be involved with it. The concept is a divider not a uniter. >> >> Sim racing has been a contracting niche since the early copies of >> Papyrus' Nascar titles sold in excess of 1 million. In the absence of >> any developer led or official sanctioning body grasping the nettle, >> sim racing fans have done a pretty good job organising themselves, >> arguably better than F1 right now! >> >> However, for potential new sim racers the entry into the decent >> leagues is a matter of luck and a simple google search a find plenty >> of examples of league forums that have disintegrated into flame wars >> and/or fizzled out mid season to a handful of drivers. >> >> For those in the decent leagues their only need is the sim - the rest >> they can do, but it is no recipe for expanding sim racing. As long as >> the sims keep coming why should they worry? >> >> The reality is the sims aren't keeping coming. The major publishers >> gave up on PC sim racing years ago in favour of either console racers >> or different genres. The small studios are doing a decent job along >> with the home made community mods, yet to attract in major developer >> is going to take a significant change in the market. >> >> Many consumers will focus on the now and view iRacing as another boxed >> title but with annoying restrictions. Simply feeding the existing >> niche community isn't going to justify the development costs. So it >> needs to provide the venue for races to pool sim racers for its >> systems of getting drivers racing of similar capabilities to >> experience the quality of racing first hand and establish numbers to >> gain momentum for new racers to come in. We now see the Nascar deal in >> a timeline where new fans can join in where there is already an >> established membership initially from the existing sim racing community. >> >> To gain this momentum iRacing need to control the numbers through >> limiting fragmentation. Fancy running Spec Racers around Daytona for 5 >> laps? The option isn't going to be there. Sim racers used to zillions >> of options of cars and tracks and choosing their own rules wil be >> disappointed, yet this is exactly what destroyed pick up racing in the >> past. To bring order to this chaos iRacing have grasped the nettle and >> there will always be groups who will do something different and there >> are alternatives - but they will be the niche groups as we have in all >> sports. >> >> If iRacing succeeds it will become the de facto sim racing service >> which in my view is exactly what sim racing has needed for many years >> and may grow sim racing beyond its ill perceived computer gaming image. >> >> That doesn't mean everyone else packs up, the small studios will still >> have niche gaps to fill but we as consumers will have a major >> developer in the mix, something that wouldn't have happened without >> iRacing's vision for change. >> >> Cheers >> Tony >Niles its me your old friend, PENIS BOY from Rfactor. Hows it going
gay?
WORRL.
What ever happened to that?
"Niles Anders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:0WfRl.70289$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (84 lines)
> Byron, I have suspected paranoia too. But I think they really want to own > SIM Racing. I know that sounds a little wacky but FIRST is modeled like > the FIA and it appears they want to displace leagues with their model. I > don't think their long term model is good for SIM racing overall. > > We've raced together before and I can't remember what league it was with. > But you're Australian, right? > > Byron Forbes wrote: >> Yep. >> >> To me, all iRacing need to do is offer their sanctioned stuff as well >> as let everyone do their own thing. >> >> But is this a flashback to the crackdown on third party stuff for >> N2003? Are they threatened by this also? Am I detecting a little >> paranoia? >> >> >> "Tony R" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:ir0Rl.167071$[email hidden]... >>> Niles Anders wrote: >>> >>>> Think about that. If simply allowing private leagues would undermine >>>> their licensing concept, what does that say about the viability of that >>>> concept overall? To me it shows it's a weak concept. I would predict >>>> that if they did allow private leagues that their "driving school game" >>>> would die immediately because it has such small appeal now anyway. And >>>> that contributes to why so few veteran SIM racers want to be involved >>>> with it. The concept is a divider not a uniter. >>> >>> Sim racing has been a contracting niche since the early copies of >>> Papyrus' Nascar titles sold in excess of 1 million. In the absence of >>> any developer led or official sanctioning body grasping the nettle, sim >>> racing fans have done a pretty good job organising themselves, arguably >>> better than F1 right now! >>> >>> However, for potential new sim racers the entry into the decent leagues >>> is a matter of luck and a simple google search a find plenty of examples >>> of league forums that have disintegrated into flame wars and/or fizzled >>> out mid season to a handful of drivers. >>> >>> For those in the decent leagues their only need is the sim - the rest >>> they can do, but it is no recipe for expanding sim racing. As long as >>> the sims keep coming why should they worry? >>> >>> The reality is the sims aren't keeping coming. The major publishers gave >>> up on PC sim racing years ago in favour of either console racers or >>> different genres. The small studios are doing a decent job along with >>> the home made community mods, yet to attract in major developer is >>> going to take a significant change in the market. >>> >>> Many consumers will focus on the now and view iRacing as another boxed >>> title but with annoying restrictions. Simply feeding the existing niche >>> community isn't going to justify the development costs. So it needs to >>> provide the venue for races to pool sim racers for its systems of >>> getting drivers racing of similar capabilities to experience the quality >>> of racing first hand and establish numbers to gain momentum for new >>> racers to come in. We now see the Nascar deal in a timeline where new >>> fans can join in where there is already an established membership >>> initially from the existing sim racing community. >>> >>> To gain this momentum iRacing need to control the numbers through >>> limiting fragmentation. Fancy running Spec Racers around Daytona for 5 >>> laps? The option isn't going to be there. Sim racers used to zillions of >>> options of cars and tracks and choosing their own rules wil be >>> disappointed, yet this is exactly what destroyed pick up racing in the >>> past. To bring order to this chaos iRacing have grasped the nettle and >>> there will always be groups who will do something different and there >>> are alternatives - but they will be the niche groups as we have in all >>> sports. >>> >>> If iRacing succeeds it will become the de facto sim racing service which >>> in my view is exactly what sim racing has needed for many years and may >>> grow sim racing beyond its ill perceived computer gaming image. >>> >>> That doesn't mean everyone else packs up, the small studios will still >>> have niche gaps to fill but we as consumers will have a major developer >>> in the mix, something that wouldn't have happened without iRacing's >>> vision for change. >>> >>> Cheers >>> Tony >>"David Fisher's Left Testicle" <dfg.myass@aol> wrote in message
news:H20Rl.165061$i%[email hidden]...
>I agree with that.
Replying to your own sock puppet, eh? You didn't fool me.
I would have to agree with what you've said about private leagues. Taking
advantage of a three-month special for $25, I hopped back onto iRacing,
since during the summer months I have more time to waste than during other
times.
But iRacing is pretty much the same, except for the new tracks and vehicles.
What turned my off of iRacing when I first joined was still exists: I am led
along, allowed to do only certain things as if I were a baby just learning
to walk.
The license idea I like. Why iRacing cannot combine the license idea with
private leagues I don't understand, unless it be some legal issue. How much
better would iRacing be if the user could join a private league with people
who have similar licenses!
Maybe someday iRacing will adopt such a feature. Let's hope so.
Alan
Alan Bernardo wrote:
I believe it's a long term effort to take control of SIM Racing period.
And in that case some might not be considered good enough to SIM race.
How much
> better would iRacing be if the user could join a private league with people
> who have similar licenses!
Or if existing private leagues could simply use the service for their
membership.
Niles
Quoted text (7 lines)
> But iRacing is pretty much the same, except for the new tracks and vehicles. > What turned my off of iRacing when I first joined was still exists: I am led > along, allowed to do only certain things as if I were a baby just learning > to walk. > > The license idea I like. Why iRacing cannot combine the license idea with > private leagues I don't understand, unless it be some legal issue.On May 22, 1:49 pm, Niles Anders <[email hidden]> wrote:
well said my friend.
love
penis boy
Quoted text (21 lines)
> Alan Bernardo wrote: > > But iRacing is pretty much the same, except for the new tracks and vehicles. > > What turned my off of iRacing when I first joined was still exists: I am led > > along, allowed to do only certain things as if I were a baby just learning > > to walk. > > > The license idea I like. Why iRacing cannot combine the license idea with > > private leagues I don't understand, unless it be some legal issue. > > I believe it's a long term effort to take control of SIM Racing period. > And in that case some might not be considered good enough to SIM race. > > How much > > > better would iRacing be if the user could join a private league with people > > who have similar licenses! > > Or if existing private leagues could simply use the service for their > membership. > > NilesAlan Bernardo wrote:
> The license idea I like. Why iRacing cannot combine the license idea with
> private leagues I don't understand, unless it be some legal issue. How much
> better would iRacing be if the user could join a private league with people
> who have similar licenses!
They have announced that when private leagues are introduced (August)
that drivers will require the appropriate license for the class.
The core systems are the iRacing championships which iRacing are busy
getting established with balancing numbers of members racing all around
the world and tweaking race frequencies and series. Hence private
leagues will be somewhat limited to be able to manage these numbers
rather than a free for all where everyone scatters off into tiny groups
and online racing is just for those in the know.
That is as I understand it anyway.
Cheers
Tony
"The Flam Flim Man" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:B8tRl.71220$[email hidden]...
> "David Fisher's Left Testicle" <dfg.myass@aol> wrote in message
> news:H20Rl.165061$i%[email hidden]...
>>I agree with that.
>
> Replying to your own sock puppet, eh? You didn't fool me.Fuck off, you cunt!
On May 21, 9:57 am, "jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote:
I don't agree at all. The bulk of real-world racers are not in high-
budget teams but race in different amateur or entry-level spec series.
iRacing and rFactor Pro have completely different target markets, and
iRacing serves its purpose very well as a training tool.
Quoted text (8 lines)
> >driving school game > > Except that it doesn't serve that purpose, iRacing is an online > pickup racing game, not a school or a training tool. > > For racing teams interested in a training or development tool, > they will buy something like rFactor pro (not the consumer > product, but a tool that rFactor customizes for each customer).Quoted text (12 lines)
>>>driving school game >> Except that it doesn't serve that purpose, iRacing is an online >> pickup racing game, not a school or a training tool. >> For racing teams interested in a training or development tool, >> they will buy something like rFactor pro (not the consumer >> product, but a tool that rFactor customizes for each customer). >I don't agree at all. The bulk of real-world racers are not in high- >budget teams but race in different amateur or entry-level spec series. >iRacing and rFactor Pro have completely different target markets, and >iRacing serves its purpose very well as a training tool.On May 23, 8:08 am, "jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> My post stated racing teams interested in a training tool, this doesn't
> include the bulk of real-world racers.
I made the assumption that you were trying to justify the point with
the second paragraph.
The number of hobbyist and semi-pro racers using the sim for training
is enough to prove your point false, which you could easily see by
browsing the forums a bit. Of the real world series featured in the
sim, the Jetta TDI cup for example will make sim training in iRacing
mandatory prior to actually racing on the tracks.
The majority of users are there to have fun, but the fact is that
there are plenty of those who use it for training, including top-level
professional drivers.
Tony R wrote:
> They have announced that when private leagues are introduced (August)
> that drivers will require the appropriate license for the class.
Can someone post this annoucement (or a link)? Very curious to see what
they have in mind for leagues. Thanks.
"Ken MacKay" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:GFRRl.27825$Db2.4237@edtnps83...
> Tony R wrote:
>> They have announced that when private leagues are introduced (August)
>> that drivers will require the appropriate license for the class.
>
> Can someone post this annoucement (or a link)? Very curious to see what
> they have in mind for leagues. Thanks.
Ken - I believe it is all just in a forum thread within iRacing.
It doesn't sound to be a fully controllable league like you may have seen
with NR2003 however but I haven't read all the details, jsut glanced over
it.
> The majority of users are there to have fun, but the fact is that
> there are plenty of those who use it for training, including top-level
> professional drivers.
I just don't believe this. What do top level racers need iRacing for?
There are a hundred times as many racers that don't use iRacing or even
think they need iRacing. More iRacing zealousness. iRacing and it's
driving school game is irrelevant.
I know a lot of SIM Racers that are iRacers and I know of some real
racers that are SIM racers that have tried iRacing. I also know real
racers that are rFactor racing too. The common thread is they are
"competition junkies" playing a racing game and the driving school game
in iRacing is unnecessary for them to satisfy their competition itch.
iRacers tell me so. The people racing rFactor don't even think about
training. There is a very similar training system built into to rFactor
that everyone by-passes with the by-pass code ISI_BABYFACTORY. Why,
because it's irrelevant.
On May 24, 12:06 am, Niles Anders <[email hidden]> wrote:
> I just don't believe this. What do top level racers need iRacing for?
What do F1 drivers need simulators for? The fact is, most of them use
one for training. NASCAR Sprint Cup is essentially a spec series, and
the drivers don't necessarily need customized software. The same goes
for IRL, which is probably coming to iRacing soon.
> There are a hundred times as many racers that don't use iRacing or even
> think they need iRacing. More iRacing zealousness. iRacing and it's
> driving school game is irrelevant.
No, your point about "hundred times as many racers" is what is
irrelevant. The fact that there are plenty of real life drivers that
don't use iRacing doesn't change the fact that there are plenty who
do.
> The people racing rFactor don't even think about
> training.
And it shows on the public servers.
iRacing should tweak their system so that more experienced drivers
could advance quicker (although you can get from rookie to C class in
a matter of a few days anyway), but the system is very efficient in
keeping most of the craziness in the rookie series.
Niles Anders wrote:
> I know a lot of SIM Racers that are iRacers and I know of some real
> racers that are SIM racers that have tried iRacing. I also know real
> racers that are rFactor racing too. The common thread is they are
> "competition junkies" playing a racing game and the driving school game
> in iRacing is unnecessary for them to satisfy their competition itch.
> iRacers tell me so.
I think the training benefits are marginal. In terms of track
familiarisation racing sims have been used for many years and iRacing is
the most accurate. Whether when it comes to getting to the track,
millimetre perfect simulation really matters or the fact of knowing it
is a hairpin and not a 4th gear turn is what is really important - the
track could be 2 seconds slower due to the temperature and wind levels
from one day to the next preventing you replicating your iRacing lap the
night before. The most accurate sim would seem a good start though.
The driving school you refer to is the license progression (there is no
driving school per se) which is welcomed by many as providing some much
needed structure to the free for all sim racing that has become a world
apart from real racing. It also provides a much more accessible route
for new entries into online sim racing.
Most long term sim racers I know have found it a breeze moving up the
ranks but it is quite different from downloading an rFactor mod and
jumping online with it that night.
Experience in real racing or sim racing counts for nothing in iRacing
which in my view provides a degree of equality just as a local hero in
12 car rallies at his motor club has to earn a license to race on track
in real life.
One of the great things about computer games is the ability to live out
fantasies of driving exotic cars and iRacing is something of an
exception. Contrary to the view that iRacing aim to dominate computer
based racing the fact they provide such a structured approach means
there will always be a place for other sims providing a driver to leap
into an Aston Martin and run with friends or against computer AI tweaked
to your own performance - and nothing wrong with that.
In this respect iRacing feels like starting over - almost like a South
American racer leaving his mates and moving to the UK to compete in
British F3 and turning up at cold, damp race track and learning a new
culture. Initially tough but if the drive is there success and
progression will follow.
As iRacing grows so will the formats and options but the structure is
very important to align sim racing with real racing and develop it as a
sport. That same structure will seem irrelevant to groups who have
developed their own structure albeit for a group of 20-30 and iRacing is
not a sim that can simply be picked up and used as we have seen with
previous boxed titles, so it won't appeal to everyone and there are
alternatives that can provide what these groups seek - which is good for
ongoing competition.
Cheers
Tony
Ken MacKay wrote:
> Can someone post this annoucement (or a link)? Very curious to see what
> they have in mind for leagues. Thanks.
No announcement as such, the proposals were being developed for
implementation next season although this now looks like it will be the
following season (November?). So we will have to wait and see, something
we sim racers are really good at :)
"Niles Anders" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:vzZRl.52261$[email hidden]...
I'm no great fan of the iRacing system, but you are sounding more and more
biblically apposed with each post. Put your obvious obsession to one side,
why don't you?
Quoted text (19 lines)
> > >> The majority of users are there to have fun, but the fact is that >> there are plenty of those who use it for training, including top-level >> professional drivers. > > I just don't believe this. What do top level racers need iRacing for? > There are a hundred times as many racers that don't use iRacing or even > think they need iRacing. More iRacing zealousness. iRacing and it's > driving school game is irrelevant. > > I know a lot of SIM Racers that are iRacers and I know of some real racers > that are SIM racers that have tried iRacing. I also know real racers that > are rFactor racing too. The common thread is they are "competition > junkies" playing a racing game and the driving school game in iRacing is > unnecessary for them to satisfy their competition itch. iRacers tell me > so. The people racing rFactor don't even think about training. There is a > very similar training system built into to rFactor that everyone by-passes > with the by-pass code ISI_BABYFACTORY. Why, because it's irrelevant.gonna have to do more to OWN sim racing fo sure. too many others doing
things that appeal more and are much less controlling.
On May 21, 1:10 pm, Niles Anders <[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted text (8 lines)
> Byron, I have suspected paranoia too. But I think they really want to > own SIM Racing. I know that sounds a little wacky but FIRST is modeled > like the FIA and it appears they want to displace leagues with their > model. I don't think their long term model is good for SIM racing overall. > > We've raced together before and I can't remember what league it was > with. But you're Australian, right? >> license progression
The downside to this is the time and money a player would be spending
in order to eventually race with the cars and/or tracks that player prefers.
I've always had the impression that this was part of the marketing plan
to increase revenue by forcing players to pay and play for several months
with cars they don't like, before getting to the cars they do want, but
on the other hand it's a scheme that will keep me and many other players
away from the game.
I'm still sticking with my 3 year estimate for how long it will be before
iRacing switches to a more conventional type of racing game structure.
> real world racers
As mentioned, most drivers tend to run at the same tracks, so learning
tracks isn't a big factor. For new tracks, fun runs or track days could
be used to learn tracks if there wasn't sufficient practice time. Games
can be used to learn the basic layout of a new track, but a driver isn't
going to learn his braking and turn in points until some quality
real world time with a particular car and track combination.
Willow Springs layout could be learned from NFS ProStreet, in spite of
the arcade like 5+g's in the turns, the track layout is reasonably
close.
>iRacing versus other racing games
Bottom line is iRacing is just another racing game, perhaps with better
physics (will have to see what rFactor 2 and NFS Shift come up with),
but a lot more expensive, and more restrictive environment, and a long
time spent with undesirable cars to end up in cars that most players
would prefer.
yankees baby wrote:
> Niles its me your old friend, PENIS BOY from Rfactor. Hows it going
> gay?
Oh no, Niles, you woke up the 12 year olds...
On May 25, 7:12 am, "jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> For new tracks, fun runs or track days could
> be used to learn tracks if there wasn't sufficient practice time.
But that's the whole point, convenient practicing on simulators so
that you wouldn't need to spend money and time on track days.
> Games
> can be used to learn the basic layout of a new track, but a driver isn't
> going to learn his braking and turn in points until some quality
> real world time with a particular car and track combination.
That is not true. Of course it doesn't completely substitute for real-
world practice time, but it does teach you braking and turn-in points,
among other things. The quality of vehicle and track modeling makes a
difference.
> Bottom line is iRacing is just another racing game, perhaps with better
> physics
Yes, it's just another racing game, but it has much more distinctive
features than just better physics and a more restrictive structure.
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
I'll agree with that.
Quoted text (22 lines)
> On May 25, 7:12 am, "jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> For new tracks, fun runs or track days could >> be used to learn tracks if there wasn't sufficient practice time. > > But that's the whole point, convenient practicing on simulators so > that you wouldn't need to spend money and time on track days. > >> Games >> can be used to learn the basic layout of a new track, but a driver isn't >> going to learn his braking and turn in points until some quality >> real world time with a particular car and track combination. > > That is not true. Of course it doesn't completely substitute for real- > world practice time, but it does teach you braking and turn-in points, > among other things. The quality of vehicle and track modeling makes a > difference. > >> Bottom line is iRacing is just another racing game, perhaps with better >> physics > > Yes, it's just another racing game, but it has much more distinctive > features than just better physics and a more restrictive structure.> That is not true. Of course it doesn't completely substitute for real-
> world practice time, but it does teach you braking and turn-in points,
> among other things. The quality of vehicle and track modeling makes a
> difference.
I've read comments from real racers using the same car and track
combination in iRacing as in real life and they state that the braking
points aren't even close. Turn in points are probably close though,
but turn in points even with NFS would be about the same.
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
But this is a bit of a wank though. How could you ever come close to
simming the kind of variations in co-efficients of friction that the real
world throws up (dust, dirt, oil, changing surface over time, etc, etc). And
does iRacing sim wet tracks and wind yet? What is the point of mm perfect
tracks given these issues?
Again, I find the notion of paying substantial extra amounts of money
for a mm perfect track a bit of a joke even from a training tool perspective
let alone a pure simmimg perspective.
Quoted text (17 lines)
> On May 25, 7:12 am, "jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> For new tracks, fun runs or track days could >> be used to learn tracks if there wasn't sufficient practice time. > > But that's the whole point, convenient practicing on simulators so > that you wouldn't need to spend money and time on track days. > >> Games >> can be used to learn the basic layout of a new track, but a driver isn't >> going to learn his braking and turn in points until some quality >> real world time with a particular car and track combination. > > That is not true. Of course it doesn't completely substitute for real- > world practice time, but it does teach you braking and turn-in points, > among other things. The quality of vehicle and track modeling makes a > difference. >On May 26, 1:04 pm, "Byron Forbes" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> But this is a bit of a wank though. How could you ever come close to
> simming the kind of variations in co-efficients of friction that the real
> world throws up (dust, dirt, oil, changing surface over time, etc, etc). And
> does iRacing sim wet tracks and wind yet? What is the point of mm perfect
> tracks given these issues?
Accurate tracks increase realism even if other aspects aren't on the
same level. Changing conditions don't change the track geometry.
Teaching the effects of variable weather and surface would be another
aspect of training.
> Again, I find the notion of paying substantial extra amounts of money
> for a mm perfect track a bit of a joke even from a training tool perspective
> let alone a pure simmimg perspective.
From a pure simming perspective I wouldn't want to go back to non-
laser scan tracks. There might be other ways to achieve the same level
of track surfaces, but I haven't come across any tracks of similar
quality yet. I have no idea what's the optimal cost-effective laser
scan fidelity, but I could imagine going much above a centimeter would
start to make a difference in the surface quality, and going above a
few centimeters would certainly start to have an effect on track
geometry. At least the "millimeter" accuracy pretty much ensures that
no one is going to top them on that...
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
So you're saying you'd have no time for a sim track that exists no where
in real life? It sounds like you're so obsessed with what is literally
pseudo reality that you fail to appreciate the potential of the "sim racing"
world. There are some great tracks in the sim community that have no real
life counterpart whatsoever. Bull Run for example - an official Papyrus
track.
Anyway, my attitude with all new technologies is to wait for it to
become commonplace and then get it when they no longer want an arm and a leg
for it. My guess is that in the not too distant future, every race track on
earth will be digitally mapped and any sim company will be able to purchase
it from them. iRacing must be wondering how long it will be before they
start seeing suspiciously similar tracks to theirs appearing about the
place.
Quoted text (27 lines)
> On May 26, 1:04 pm, "Byron Forbes" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> But this is a bit of a wank though. How could you ever come close to >> simming the kind of variations in co-efficients of friction that the real >> world throws up (dust, dirt, oil, changing surface over time, etc, etc). >> And >> does iRacing sim wet tracks and wind yet? What is the point of mm perfect >> tracks given these issues? > > Accurate tracks increase realism even if other aspects aren't on the > same level. Changing conditions don't change the track geometry. > Teaching the effects of variable weather and surface would be another > aspect of training. > >> Again, I find the notion of paying substantial extra amounts of money >> for a mm perfect track a bit of a joke even from a training tool >> perspective >> let alone a pure simmimg perspective. > > From a pure simming perspective I wouldn't want to go back to non- > laser scan tracks. There might be other ways to achieve the same level > of track surfaces, but I haven't come across any tracks of similar > quality yet. I have no idea what's the optimal cost-effective laser > scan fidelity, but I could imagine going much above a centimeter would > start to make a difference in the surface quality, and going above a > few centimeters would certainly start to have an effect on track > geometry. At least the "millimeter" accuracy pretty much ensures that > no one is going to top them on that...
"jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:sUOSl.2438$[email hidden]...
Links please.
Quoted text (10 lines)
>> That is not true. Of course it doesn't completely substitute for real- >> world practice time, but it does teach you braking and turn-in points, >> among other things. The quality of vehicle and track modeling makes a >> difference. > > I've read comments from real racers using the same car and track > combination in iRacing as in real life and they state that the braking > points aren't even close. Turn in points are probably close though, > but turn in points even with NFS would be about the same. >>> I've read comments from real racers using the same car and track
>> combination in iRacing as in real life and they state that the braking
>> points aren't even close. Turn in points are probably close though,
>> but turn in points even with NFS would be about the same.
> Links please.
RSC is down so I don't have links.
"jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:KWiTl.93270$[email hidden]...
Are these 'real racers' people of note?
Quoted text (9 lines)
>>> I've read comments from real racers using the same car and track >>> combination in iRacing as in real life and they state that the braking >>> points aren't even close. Turn in points are probably close though, >>> but turn in points even with NFS would be about the same. > >> Links please. > > RSC is down so I don't have links. >Quoted text (10 lines)
>>>> I've read comments from real racers using the same car and track >>>> combination in iRacing as in real life and they state that the braking >>>> points aren't even close. Turn in points are probably close though, >>>> but turn in points even with NFS would be about the same. >>> Links please. >> >> RSC is down so I don't have links. > Are these 'real racers' people of note?[email hidden] wrote:
Indeed; I've driven on Zandvoort both in a simulator and in real life,
and it does help greatly to at least know what braking points you have
in the simulator. It scales quite well to real life.
Quoted text (10 lines)
> On May 25, 7:12 am, "jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> Games >> can be used to learn the basic layout of a new track, but a driver isn't >> going to learn his braking and turn in points until some quality >> real world time with a particular car and track combination. > > That is not true. Of course it doesn't completely substitute for real- > world practice time, but it does teach you braking and turn-in points, > among other things. The quality of vehicle and track modeling makes a > difference.> Indeed; I've driven on Zandvoort both in a simulator and in real life, and it does help greatly to at least know what
> braking points you have in the simulator. It scales quite well to real life.
So in your opintion how close are the braking points? Perhaps it's
related to the track and conditions, but I've read a few times that
the braking points in iRacing are significantly different than the
braking points in real life, an apparent limitation of sim-oriented
factors in a racing game. The turn-in points will be about the same,
even in an arcade game, although the fastest way through the tricky
(non-intuitive) and tight corner sequence at a track like Willow
Springs may not be the fastest way for a sim-oriented game. I don't
know if Willow Springs is included in iRacing.
On May 28, 9:53 pm, "jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote:
Read while ago there is sim which did have these accurate braking
points and physics much better matched, looking for link. if tracks
are so acurate shouldn't brakes & driving be if software is good?
Quoted text (15 lines)
> >>>> I've read comments from real racers using the same car and track > >>>> combination in iRacing as in real life and they state that the braking > >>>> points aren't even close. Turn in points are probably close though, > >>>> but turn in points even with NFS would be about the same. > >>> Links please. > > >> RSC is down so I don't have links. > > Are these 'real racers' people of note? > > Nope, just real racers. I cant remember if the Skip Barber school > instructors were one of the ones that stated that braking points in iRacing > weren't the same as the braking points in real life. > > It's an issue related to simulation versus real life, but I don't know what > the specifics are other than comments made by a few racers.
"jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:2eXTl.60940$[email hidden]...
There could be a number of reasons for the discrepancy, like their panties
filling up sooner in real life.
Quoted text (20 lines)
>>>>> I've read comments from real racers using the same car and track >>>>> combination in iRacing as in real life and they state that the braking >>>>> points aren't even close. Turn in points are probably close though, >>>>> but turn in points even with NFS would be about the same. > >>>> Links please. >>> >>> RSC is down so I don't have links. > >> Are these 'real racers' people of note? > > Nope, just real racers. I cant remember if the Skip Barber school > instructors were one of the ones that stated that braking points in > iRacing > weren't the same as the braking points in real life. > > It's an issue related to simulation versus real life, but I don't know > what > the specifics are other than comments made by a few racers. >
"jeffareid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:2eXTl.60940$[email hidden]...
Well, for any of this discussion to have any validity at all we need the
people making these comments to verify that what they are driving is EXACTLY
the same as what's being simmed.
Tyres (new or worn), brakes, weight, etc.
If there is any truth to this though then it sure does make a mockery of
the mm perfect tracks. No point having mm perfect tracks if everything else
isn't mm perfect - chain's as strong as the weakest link!
