Massive Stock Car Update Released for rFactor 2

rFactor2 2016-01-06 20-40-39-91.jpg

After the initial launch of the 2015 Stock Car content for rFactor 2 failed to impress us here at back in September, today ISI have rolled out the first public update for the once highly-anticipated mod, along with a handful of new tracks to give folks an extra incentive to check things out. Citing much-needed tire behavior updates and AI improvements among the relatively small change log, the revised mod aims to establish rFactor 2 as a legitimate alternative to iRacing’s dominance over American oval racing from the comfort of your own home.

Judging by a Facebook post from the Stock Car Evolution mod team back in September, it appears the rFactor mod group has played an integral role in the development of these cars; though the precise level of their involvement with ISI is something we’re can’t provide concrete info on. It appears to us that ISI are reaching out to talented mod teams in an effort to flesh out the rather patchy list of default content in rFactor 2, as Stock Car Evolution stated in September that they’d like the hardcore Stock Car guys in rFactor 2 to participate in the weekly online events and “provide the feedback we need.”


Along with releasing Version 1.04 of the mod today, ISI have worked with a third-party entity by the name of JM Virtual Tracks to release a new batch of unlicensed NASCAR facilities, ensuring an adequate selection of tracks for those who want to dedicate a serious amount of time to oval racing in rFactor 2. Homestead and Talladega have received minor updates, while Richmond, Kentucky, and California are new additions to the sim.


Reception to the new locations has been mixed. Some are thrilled at the updated roster of oval tracks, as almost all of them are locations that the Dallara DW12 can compete at as well, inadvertently increasing the size of the schedule for the IndyCar fans using rFactor 2 as their sim of choice. However, an anonymous user on 4chan has already began criticizing the shortcomings of the third-party additions. Noting graphical errors at Kentucky and Richmond, as well as the wrong downforce package being used at California, this update may potentially have needed one final revision before going live.


Regardless, I’m sure we’ll get around to evaluating the new build ourselves at some point in the future, but for now, all you need to know is that it’s out, it’s free, and you should try it if you’ve got rFactor 2 installed.



39 thoughts on “Massive Stock Car Update Released for rFactor 2

  1. Pretty sure the low downforce was only trialled during 2015, and that ACS ran with a normal speedway package.
    Might be set to change for 2016, but we aren’t there yet lol


      1. You cant even run rf2 pit-cock\metal sucks, your shitty arse rig struggles with GSCE, thats why you bang on about numbers, cause you wouldn’t have a clue how rf2 plays because it melts ya playskool PC.


    1. A better Joke?

      Where’s ISI’s new year announcement pointing out what we can expect this year?
      Or do they have nothing planned aside from endless “content updates” and some 3rd party track or car here and there. The game still runs bad, and looks lifeless and far worse compared to rF1 with some PP plugin.
      Multiplayer is a waste of money and the content consists mostly of grabbed together mods they could easily license (or not!).
      So much potential, yet they still can’t give it a finishing touch to make it the true succesor of rF1. The steam release is yet another example. Instead of downloading the game with all its content I have to wait another hour for this content manager to do its job. That’s NOT how to sell a game ISI!
      Not to mention rF1 costs only €6 less.


      1. “Where’s ISI’s new year announcement pointing out what we can expect this year?”

        Empty marketing and false promises has never been ISI’s strong suit.


      2. This guy gets it. RF2 has no future. No one cares, it’s devoid of content and it runs shockingly bad for a game that really doesn’t look very pretty.,


      3. Actually, the relative performance isn’t TOO bad if you overlook a few rendering issues. One of the main issues (and it’s much less of a problem now than it was) is that everyone seemed to have to fined unique combinations of settings to get reasonable AI scaling and general image quality or their particular hardware, let alone unresolved shader bugs with obvious visual corruption for >1.5 years (in fact, the same bug has been present and still is present BUT it is now usually outputting sane shading most of the time, so technically it’s a >3 year old shader bug).

        Without a good bit of tweaking, you either ended up with less than ideal framerate around lots of AI OR you had severe rendering fidelity issues.

        These days, I don’t have much trouble getting decent performance from rf2. That said, it is comparatively disadvantaged and they will have to address their somewhat short-sighted choice of ‘sure dx9 is old but we know how it works and what we can do with it AND that it works with our pre-existing IP that makes up 90% of the simulator’.

        If rf2 was as it is now ~ 2 years ago, I think it would have gained significantly more traction.


  2. rF2’s content polish is still a bit of a mess. Old versions of content appear above updates. Old versions won’t deinstall, messy preview images…
    Also there is a noticable difference in quality between tracks. Like Bathurst where you can feel the polygons you re driving on like a crap ripped track in AC, or reiza’s Interlagos which feels very good.


    1. Yes, I would say track mesh resolution is one of my biggest complaints about rf2. Some of the tracks are fine, some of them are unacceptably low resolution.

      As you said, you can physically feel yourself driving over the sharp edges of polygons. If it was only crap modded tracks, but this is content approved by isi.

      If you can see and feel low mesh resolution, then you’re looking at a problem. I still cannot understand how some people are completely incapable of recognizing this issue or simply dismiss it in a haze of pro-isi shill delusion.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Serious? You find Bathurst to be the same as a shit, quick converted track? I run a G25 with no filtering or damping…and there is a day and night difference. What I do feel is corrugations and bumps, but I have no idea what your setup is.

        But oh wait, this view of mine will blast me as a pro ISI shill…darn it…


      2. No, it’s not as bad as some mod quality can be, that certainly doesn’t mean it’s acceptable… Pay attention when you’re driving to the angular nature of the physically modeled bumps in the track. You’re confused by realfeel and actual output from surface contact probably… I particularly notice it in rises.


      3. I know exactly what the track is like, having done tons of laps there. There is no realfeel, and once again, having just sat down and lapped the track looking for these rough polygons, I find none. As before, there are corrugations in places over the mountain and in some braking areas. That’s the only thing I can approximate to what you are describing.


  3. Here’s something that ISI fanboys can’t come to terms with:

    Rf2 is a part time consumer project for ISI that allows them to collecting funding and end-user performance data for tyre model development.

    In complete contrast, ISI’s full-time effort is put towards rfpro, which is not sold on quality of tyre model at all. It is sold on the ability to stream large amounts of track surface data, apparently in the form of point clouds. The Pacejka model included in their pro package is not a selling point of the software (and obviously an empirical model).

    You guys don’t think it’s interesting that ISI’s professional simulation value is derived from the exact opposite of what you think makes rf2 ‘accurate’?

    Explain to me why the physical model in rf2 is not being sold to professional clients…


    1. Because rFPro isn’t actually developed directly by ISI. They licence the engine (heavily modifed rF1 engine), they do some work/support for the team behind it, but it isn’t directly an ISI product.
      This is like talking about GSC or their new title while only referencing ISI, who licenced the engine to them.

      Professional clients (I.E. the F1 teams, NASCAR, OEMs) would require something proven and “solid” to be doing development work on. Once rF1 had “proven” itself, we saw rFPro spring up based on it’s tech. It would be a fair assumption that once we start seeing the winding down of rF2, you might see rFPro migrate over, or certain elements of it being integrated as needed.


      1. i m glad there is Ac Pcars etc… for the kids keeps rf2 servers kleen with normal racers….I have all the sims simcades etc ou there. grapphics aren’t that good in Rf2 but alle the rest is great! All the negative comments here come from kids who don”t own rf2…


      2. rFactor 2?, I thought that shit game was dead, just like the boring ass developers who make this game, come to think of it, I did a google street search of ISI studio, and guess what, they dont have a studio as such, their studio is based in a cafe, go on do a google street search of the full ISI address, no wonder these clowns never show us any in house videos or pictures of their studio, not even in side sim racing showed us any thing because at the time there was no studio to do the interview 5 years ago, because ISI is based in a cafe shop.


      3. Ahahaha, fuck man…yeah because all coders have to be located at a track, right?
        Crazy when the consumer thinks the physical place dictates how a solely virtual product is produced and recieved.

        If you said McLaren was based in a cafe, yeah you pause for thought…


  4. “Along with releasing Version 1.04 of the mod today, ISI have worked with a third-party entity by the name of JM Virtual Tracks to release a new batch of unlicensed NASCAR facilities, ensuring an adequate selection of tracks for those who want to dedicate a serious amount of time to oval racing in rFactor 2.”

    As written, the above paragraph implies that ISI actually released the SCE mod as official content.

    From the article, I gather ISI outsourced the new tracks to JMVT, and are releasing them as official content (likely with a credit or similar to JMVT), but aren’t doing the same with the SCE mod. As I understand it, although ISI helped (or worked with) SCE create the mod, the result is still a mod, and not official content.

    Unless ISI is actually releasing the mod as official content (as Kunos did with the Cobra and Muira), you may want to edit the quoted sentence for clarity.


    1. The Stockcar is official ISI content, not adapted mods, the quotes from SCE are just regarding feedback and thoughts.
      We had teasers a long time ago of the early 3D models.

      The tracks are the same as any other of the 3PA tracks released. IIRC in this last bunch of ovals, there were 3 different people behind them. Mike Schreiner, JKA and JM Virtual Tracks


  5. Oval AI still crap. Tweaking cars and tracks just isn’t enough and they need to do some serious core update on oval AI, if they really want to do this package well.


    1. Agree, there will have to be an oval AI package at some point, for fixing a couple of road course behaviours you can see.
      Still, out of the current crop, do any do oval AI? AFAIK, iracing doesn’t have AI.


      1. “Still, out of the current crop, do any do oval AI? AFAIK, iracing doesn’t have AI.”

        AFAIK no. I believe pCars dropped oval AI alltogether and will release ovals only for multiplayer. If ISI just would get the AI somewhere like it is in nr2k3, I would be a happy camper. Dallara and Stock Cars would be a fun package on ovals for solo play after getting AI shit correct and something no other modern sim can offer.


  6. i do not understand the issue with oval AI? Are people not loading and forcing oval setups? I made the mistake of not doing this and while i setup my car for the oval AI were not running a speedway setup but the default road course setup. Once I forced the speedway I was running on, the AI cars competed in a far better manner. Clean passing, drafting, no weird braking issues. No slamming into me when i screwed up and went high. Ability to navigate the one crash seemed pretty good as well.


  7. “RF2 graphics suck” i run the game at full resolution on my PC with 16gb of ram and GTX 760 1gb card and the graphics look way better than RF1 or AC.


Ratio of vowels to consonants will be monitored. Post at your own discretion.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s