The rise and possible fall of iRacing

Brief history on the Service:

iRacing started out in 2004 by John Henry and Dave Kaemmer. John is a co-owner of Roush-Fenway Racing for those who aren't aware, and so he was able to provide financial backing that has never really been seen before in sim racing. Combine that with the experience of Dave Kaemmer who has competed in the Skip Barber Championship in real life, and is the mastermind behind such sims as GT Legends, and you can expect top notch results. Finally an able developer has virtually all the time and money they need to create the ultimate sim experience. In a period from 2004-2008 iRacing consisted of lots of R&D and closed testing, some early members became part of the testing early on with most early testers joining in 2007 through connections in the sim world. In mid 2008 iRacing was open to the public but through invites only, then released fully to the public later on in the year.

The stage was set nicely, a huge amount of hype and community buzz had set iRacing above all other racing sims, before it was even released. Laser scanned tracks, cars being measured, weighed, and scanned for perfect accuracy. From a scientific point of view it was very hard for people to argue with what iRacing was doing, they were miles ahead of everyone else. They also have a 10 year plan, and a $20million investment from John Henry which they boasted through advertising and shameless plugs in the sim community. It was a good move by iRacing to let people know how serious they were early on, if they didn't there is no way they would get away with charging what they do for their service.

iRacing has a model that is unique to racing sims, but not unique to the gaming world. To use the service you must be a member, which requires you to purchase one of their monthly or annual membership packages. With the membership you get access to limited content, at first it was only a few cars on the Oval and Road side, with a handful of tracks. If you wanted some of the faster cars or more tracks, those would have to be purchased individually. People were so excited about the sim, they did not care much to argue with the plan, they did not mind that they owned none of the content, and were only purchasing access to them when their membership is in current status. If you stop paying to access their service, you lose all access to the content you have purchased. How do they control this? It is simple, the only way you can use the service is through an internet connection with a compatible browser. There is a large program installed on your PC, however you cannot access it unless you are logged in securely through their website. This helps them to keep control and monitor all things that happen in the sim.

This type of service is very controversial, but with the level of professionalism that iRacing was trying to achieve, this was the only way to go for them. By controlling things through an online browser, they prevent people from running modified versions of the game, which could include hacking the physics, or any other type of manipulation. That does not mean iRacing has been free from hackers though, there have been reports of cheats that have been used, patched, with the users who cheated banned, and no refund given. By controlling the sim in such a way, iRacing was able to display itself as a professional service, where people can compete fairly worldwide against their peers, 24 hours a day, with a full time staff of stewards and developers constantly monitoring and updating the service.

They ran ads showing professional drivers giving testimonies on how realistic the simulator is, which is nothing new, every simulator out has done this. However with iRacing, people are required to give their real first and last name, so users who are part of the service can literally search their favorite drivers name, and through a statistic screen, monitor the progress and lap times. This made iRacing unique because people can actually see professional drivers using the service. This helped give consumers confidence, not only were they confident that the company was on solid ground having John Henry as the financial backbone, but they also are able to purchase content in confidence knowing that professional drivers have sworn by the accuracy. From 2008-current the service has grown in overall members, but so has the sim. What started out as a few thousand people in 2008, has grown into the tens of thousands. Content has also been expanded, it was just a handful of cars and tracks starting out, but now iRacing boasts a car for everyone on both Oval and Road, with 24 hours 7 days a week series of official sessions.

The future of iRacing is still not very clear...how could this be though? With such a strong foundation, and having the largest active community in sim racing, how
could they ever fail?

Downfalls of the greatest sim available:

Even though iRacing has been the dominant name in sim racing since its release in 2008, it still has its downfalls. The sim does not provide a lot of the simple things that other sims have for years. Some of these things include tire build up, dynamic weather, and dynamic track surfaces. You are basically racing in a static environment all of the time, which is obvious to anyone that the real world of motorsports simply cannot be simulated accurately in a static environment.

Other downfalls are development times. In the beginning the members were very forgiving over long development times. Cars and Tracks were basically announced, then several months later eventually released, with some projects lasting over a year. As time has progressed and their team grows you would expect development time to go down, but it has not. Members are still finding themselves waiting almost a year for new content to be released.

Another downfall of iRacing is the content it provides, a lot of the cars are somewhat unpopular or outdated when compared to race cars in other sims. Instead of Ferrari, BMW, and other big names in racing, we see Pontiac, Kia, and what seems to be at random one car selected from several different series all over the place. So when you see something like Formula 1 advertised you will be sad to find out you only have two F1 cars available, and they are decades apart from each other. If you are a fan of Grand Am racing, the Daytona Prototype available is a Pontiac, and it is already half a decade old. This is the trend with iRacing, they tend to model only one car from a series, then by the next couple years it is already outdated, and then they tell people they have a virtual version of that series even though it is only that one car that is most likely not used in the series anymore.

Then there are the tracks, other than Nascar, you will be lucky to find more than a few real world tracks available where your favorite series actually races in real life. This, combined with the random car from a random year, can make you feel as if you are competing in some fantasy series, rather than simulating the real life series. Some are hopeful to one day get a complete series, but with iRacing's super slow pace in their development it seems near impossible for them ever to release a complete series will all the cars and tracks from the same year competition. Some tracks were scanned, and left to be forgotten with excuses given from the staff members that they simply do not have the manpower to complete, leaving a sour taste in the mouths of many members. On top of that, some projects end up getting delayed, like the coveted Lotus 49, it has been promised many times by the staff, but delayed every time.

This brings me to my biggest concern with iRacing, its quest for perfection comes at the expense of its members wallets and patience. For iRacing to prepare a release to the public they seem to have very high quality standards and must simulate things accurately through a formula. This sounds great, except they don't always get it right, and when you wait several months for something to be released, you expect it to be good to go when it is released. Several of the iRacing fans will just use the excuse that everything in the sim is a work in progress, and things will always be updated and changed. The problem with that, is it gives iRacing a fail pass, meaning they can release something that is a failure and get a pass from the community because it is a work in progress and will be updated. This is not just limited to iRacing, now that the internet is here to update games, developers across the board are releasing unfinished products and just updating things later on.

The problem with this whole situation, is it creates a circle of long development times, and a pass for mediocre content. Some will say they cannot have it both ways, they cannot offer an advertised realistic experience, yet make dramatic changes to the core of the simulation. Things like the tire model and physics have changed dramatically over time, and to this day the tire model still is not right. When individuals question the tire model they are met with some resistance from iRacing staff members who believe things are not as bad as they seem, but are also told there are yet again going to be more dramatic changes to fix bugs such as more grip with cold tires, but like everything at iRacing, even the tire model gets delayed over and over again.

Then you have cars that were driven by professionals before their release and have sworn testimonies of being accurate to the real life counterpart, that have since been changed dramatically, so now iRacing has to answer the question,are the cars inaccurate now? Or were their professional spokesman just spewing company lines to promote iRacing early on?

One will ask themselves why has iRacing not hired on more experts to help with the physics and tire models, or more professionals to help speed up development time of cars and help with the completion of tracks. Well, as unlimited as their resources may seem, they do not have an endless supply of money. If you think about how much it must cost to run a business like this year round, that $20million will get gobbled up fairly quick over the years, and the membership alone cannot support a super large staff. Even with a small staff they are paying several yearly salaries, sending employees all over the world to scan cars and tracks, not to mention other expenses like the cost of equipment and an office headquarters. They simply cannot afford to stay in business, and also have a super large staff.

There is a lot of controversy over the direction of iRacing, with its lack of features, and its ever changing view on how physics and tires work. One can only ask how long can this company keep all its members? Right now
iRacing has somewhat of a monopoly on sim racing. They are the only sim offering full time year round organized racing in a professional environment. Everything feels official with iRacing, and anyone can join with ease. This gives iRacing an edge over all other sims which depend on mods and communities to bring people together, which as we have seen before can be very messy, but also very rewarding if done right. Personally, I would love to see iRacing just "get things right", but at the moment with how they do things, it would take years before they ever start releasing complete series or getting cars that are up to date instead of outdated ones that are already retired from their current series.

Sooner or later, iRacing will lose its monopoly on this type of service, someone else is bound to come along and offer a similar service. If such a service comes along, and offers things that iRacing still has trouble with, like a correct tire model, or dynamic environments, then iRacing's future may be in trouble. They can only exist in such a state as long as there is no competition to steal their customers away. Eventually when another sim does come along that rivals iRacing, they better be ready to deliver on their promises, or face the reality of having to eventually close their doors after everyone but a few dedicated followers leave for the new kid on the block who offers something bigger and better.
 
I suspect it was contextually reasonable.
Most of the posts about this is (now) hidden for me inside the iRacing forum.
And furthermore I have a feeling that even if you get links to such outpourings of Kaemmer and Tucker then you would just demand further links - and further links again.:whistling:
And I could go on and on using my time to feed somebody who are not substantially interested in anything else than denying it - if possible.
Because all the 2 guys outpourings was probably "contextually reasonable".:roflmao:

Its probably also irritating for an iRacing member because such outpourings does also emphazise how many years Kaemmer has been feeding the iRacing community with more or less hot air about how advanced his special TM is.

But anyway. Here are 3 of the links I have saved related to the hot air from Kaemmer and Tucker.;)

 
What what Wayne?
How do you get rF2 mixed into this - my good man?
I admit that before your rF2 reference I had not checked the OP post.
But now I have.:laugh:

And there is absolutely nothing about your lil sim there.:whistling:

The OP does postulate that iRacing will fade away and stagnate as all monopolies - and others will take iRacings place.
Survival of the fittest and stuff.:roflmao:

CatsAreTheWorstDogs: I see absolutely no sign that your mentioned lil sim does even come near to have muscles to take over from Tyrannosaurus Rex :x3:

First post after the OP

"To add to this topic, I believe iRacing ARE loosing their monopoly and it's going to happen this year with the release of rFactor2, Assetto Corsa, Project CARS and the multiplayer portion of RaceRoom."

One look at participation stats https://www.iracingstats.com/pulse/ clearly shows that 7 years after this thread started, iRacing is still far and away the #1 sim. #2 is F1-2019 and it's not even a serious sim. How are the sims listed above doing 7 years later: rFactor2 - 8% of iRacing participation, PCARS2 - 13% of iRacing, RRE - 8%, AC - less than 50%. Not to mention that all 4 of those sims have a lower up front cost and insignificant ongoing costs. Basically, people will pay for quality in the racing sim market.
 
Basically, people will pay for quality in the racing sim market.

iRacing is undoubtedly the best sim for MP and that’s what you’re paying for. If other sims offered the same MP experience, the other improvements they offer (graphics, physics, weather, for example) would significantly tip the balance. iRacing is the best MP package, it’s not the best racing sim. For many, that’s enough.
 
iRacing is undoubtedly the best sim for MP and that’s what you’re paying for. If other sims offered the same MP experience, the other improvements they offer (graphics, physics, weather, for example) would significantly tip the balance. iRacing is the best MP package, it’s not the best racing sim. For many, that’s enough.

Which sim in particular are you referring to?
 
Rfactor has better ffb and physics, ACC does alot of things very well....but neither put a dent in iracings player base.....why?

The majority of sim racers with minimal real life racing experience ex. Rental kart racing. All realize not one sim on the market truely replicate the feeling and physics of real life racing and are merely games....yet so many continue to argue and get worked up about it.

That being said....people complain yet still play and pay for iracing soley due to its quality of mp format which equals competition
No other (sim) competes in that category to date which is honestly mind blowing?

My assumption is they would have to charge more money or a subscription to be able to fund the servers/format/maintenance needed......and we all know how that would go over with most simracers lol

So for now, you have two options.

Pay $60 + dlc for quality single player game and hope some decent leagues pop up and work with your schedule for 1 or 2 races a week

Or
Pay for iracing which has good variety of racing, continual updated, it's massive player base and quality 24/7 online service

We won't factor in the power and cost of a PC needed to run ACC and other modern engines vs iracing...let alone one for VR ;)

Hopefully one day we will have the best of both in one title.
But for now iracing is at the top for mp racing.
 
It confuses me a bit why high end racing drivers prefer iRacing
The largest and best organized MP = competition....RL drivers live to compete

If you go through the many RL driver interviews that competed in the past few months in virtual racing, a large portion of them said the same thing when asked "how does it compare to RL?".....pause.....pause...uhm it's a lot harder, the cars lack grip and it takes a bit of practice learning the feedback through your hands instead of your butt, tho the graphics, sounds are great and good for learning a new track layout.

Than you'll get the few saying it's spot on! Lol
 
The largest and best organized MP = competition....RL drivers live to compete

If you go through the many RL driver interviews that competed in the past few months in virtual racing, a large portion of them said the same thing when asked "how does it compare to RL?".....pause.....pause...uhm it's a lot harder, the cars lack grip and it takes a bit of practice learning the feedback through your hands instead of your butt, tho the graphics, sounds are great and good for learning a new track layout.

Than you'll get the few saying it's spot on! Lol

This also confuses me about sim racing. For example, I notice Bottas goes off track 11x in iRacing practicing in his rig. Therefore, yes, I can see how it is harder than real racing to a certain extent. However, let's say I can race an F1 car around a track with no assists in sim racing. Would it be easier for me in real life? Probably not either, although I cannot tell.

Ultimately a lot of things are different. I just don't believe that driver skills transition from pad to wheel to real life as many sim racers claim. Perhaps they transition from real life to wheel to pad but again I have seen that proved incorrectly too. I guess if I practice a bit at iRacing I get better a bit at iRacing. This doesn't even translate to being better at other simulation games and can actually make me worse if for example I go from a Mazda with no assists in iRacing back to an F1 car with no assists in an F1 series, not to mention then to a Mazda in Forza and then to a Formula car in Project Cars 2.

Maybe people just see what they are looking for. Hard to tell. It is just infuriating as I don't experience what others do a lot of the time.
 
This also confuses me about sim racing. For example, I notice Bottas goes off track 11x in iRacing practicing in his rig. Therefore, yes, I can see how it is harder than real racing to a certain extent. However, let's say I can race an F1 car around a track with no assists in sim racing. Would it be easier for me in real life? Probably not either, although I cannot tell.

Ultimately a lot of things are different. I just don't believe that driver skills transition from pad to wheel to real life as many sim racers claim. Perhaps they transition from real life to wheel to pad but again I have seen that proved incorrectly too. I guess if I practice a bit at iRacing I get better a bit at iRacing. This doesn't even translate to being better at other simulation games and can actually make me worse if for example I go from a Mazda with no assists in iRacing back to an F1 car with no assists in an F1 series, not to mention then to a Mazda in Forza and then to a Formula car in Project Cars 2.

Maybe people just see what they are looking for. Hard to tell. It is just infuriating as I don't experience what others do a lot of the time.

For what it's worth....I find it comes down to being able to adjust and natural skill.

I too struggle from car to car sim to sim. I am fairly decent in dirt road content and mediocre at best on road.

I've had the opportunity to race several iracers on the kart track who destroy me by a few secs in the virtual world yet I am faster in the real world.

The difference I find is in the virtual world you can alter settings and fine tune things to your liking etc. Etc.
In say a rental kart you can only adjust your seat, physical conditioning, natural ability (the biggest factors)and fear come into play.....no reset to pits
A 250lbs + person can drive a f1 car like a pro in a sim....he's gonna have a hell of a time squeezing into a RL f1 cockpit....and if he does get in he will more than likely be slower due to the extra weight...sim racing doesn't factor weight and there are few exceptions with freaky tall drivers but for the most part the majority are size of horse jockeys lol

I actually learnt how to race through sim racing, racing lines, finding your braking points, how to pass and read your opponents.
Tho comparing say a sim kart to real kart nothing I found translated from the virtual to RL that I've found....maybe some vibrations thought the wheel but I've never found any sim kart handles or feels remotely close to the real thing.
A kart is felt thoughout your body and beats the hell out of you with no suspension and you have to shift your weight in corners for better grip.

So some things can translate to the real world (race craft) but I don't think driving a virtual mx5 will really relate or handle like the real one.

Several interviewed drivers even said the handling of cars and Technics used don't translate between the virtual and RL version.
 
Last edited:
So some things can translate to the real world (race craft) but I don't think driving a virtual mx5 will really relate or handle like the real one.

Several interviewed drivers even said the handling of cars and Technics used don't translate between the virtual and RL version.

I think this ought to be the aim for any sim racing company. For example, if an experienced F1 driver with no sim rig experience is struggling to do one lap in a sim rig, then in my view it is hard to say they have done a very good simulation job.

Perhaps that is being too perfectionistic but it is at least a decent standard. The idea of iRacing is far better than the product so the product doesn't need to be held accountable to real race standards.
 
I think this ought to be the aim for any sim racing company. For example, if an experienced F1 driver with no sim rig experience is struggling to do one lap in a sim rig, then in my view it is hard to say they have done a very good simulation job.

Perhaps that is being too perfectionistic but it is at least a decent standard. The idea of iRacing is far better than the product so the product doesn't need to be held accountable to real race standards.

I think the biggest issue is in RL you drive by your butt and forces felt by your body....in sim racing for the average user your wheel is your only connection to the car and it's feeding you fake information that for the most part you wouldn't feel in RL.

I wouldn't say they have done bad job at all..it's simply a game and not real.
Just like virtual sex and sex dolls....it's fun and simulates it but it sure as hell isint as good as the real thing! ;)

Sim racing has come along way in the past 15yrs, but they still have a ways to go.....for now I treat them as fun games and a cheap alternative for my racing competition fix.
When I want the best experience I jump in my Jeep and go offroading or head to the kart track :)
 
Last edited:
ACC. AMS2 also shows a lot of promise.

The funny thing is, ACC & AMS2 have just as broken physics; they’re just more forgiving and therefore people assume it’s more “realistic”.
Case in point, in ACC I drove the Bentley at Spa. Going through Eau Rouge after the compression phase and going up the hill before radillion where I decided to yank the steering 90° to the left... the car continued dead straight for 5 metres before reacting to my input. If it reacts like that what else is fundamentally wrong with their physics?

AMS2 I drove the V8 Supercar at Kyalami, I hit the curb at Wesbank, the car rolled over. It was almost a carbon copy of what happened to Scott McLaughlin at Bathurst in iRacing (the very same incident that Ogonoski referenced in his, iRacing is so unrealistic video).

You keep fibbing yourself in believing that they have better physics than iRacing. They are all broken.

Have you ever watched a broadcast between iRacing and ACC? I would argue graphically iRacing looks way more realistic. This is also including the physics of how the cars look in reacting to the road surface & curbs.
Also, using ACC in VR is practically like trying to drive with Vaseline smeared on your visor. The weather part is the only part that is better than iRacing... until iRacing implements their weather model.
 
I think the biggest issue is in RL you drive by your butt and forces felt by your body....in sim racing for the average user your wheel is your only connection to the car and it's feeding you fake information that for the most part you wouldn't feel in RL.

I wouldn't say they have done bad job at all..it's simply a game and not real.
Just like virtual sex and sex dolls....it's fun and simulates it but it sure as hell isint as good as the real thing! ;)

Sim racing has come along way in the past 15yrs, but they still have a ways to go.....for now I treat them as fun games and a cheap alternative for my racing competition fix.
When I want the best experience I jump in my Jeep and go offroading or head to the kart track :)

Yes, but perhaps there can be a balance somewhere. Like, for example, if the steering effect is wrong then remove it or lower it or if the grip is too little increase it and just have sim racing without the forces. On the other hand, I do see cars in real life struggling with handling similar to how a wheel rumbles, but as you say it may be the car rumbling more-so than the wheel.
 
Several interviewed drivers even said the handling of cars and Technics used don't translate between the virtual and RL version.
Its two completely different things.
In RL the cars are 100% dependent of the forces of natural laws.
In the virtual world the game developers try to simulate some rather few and more or less faked/simplified versions of the forces the devs think is acting on cars in RL.
Its two completely different worlds.

The first one extremely complicated and with a multitude of gradual/overlapping forces interacting with each other - in a continuum of forces.
And the other one is an extremely simplified one where game developers does play with rather few forces they more or less have to calculate as discrete forces before they merge/mix them together in a parody of simplified "interacting".:roflmao:

A not enough honering of the complexity of RL is an analogy showing the difference between a game of chess between 2 experienced chessplayers and two kids playing with a coin flip.
Hope you get what is the (not good enough) analogy of RL and what is the simplification.:sneaky:

CatsAreTheWorstDogs: The assessment of which racing sim(plification) feels most "realistic" can be cooked down to ones intuitive feeling of:
This isnt completely different of what I feel on a RL track day. Hehe at least not completely different.
Or this isnt completely different of how I imagine the guy in exactly this racing car feels when I see him on my telly.:whistling:
 
Have you ever watched a broadcast between iRacing and ACC? I would argue graphically iRacing looks way more realistic. This is also including the physics of how the cars look in reacting to the road surface & curbs.
You can have F1 team simulator physics without any visual effects or vice versa. Physics and visuals are separated from each other in games.

When you play online it varies how things are implemented. When you are spectating online most of the games are closer what you see when you play it online. iRacing delays spectating to get rid of network prediction code. That is why spectating/broadcasting iRacing is like watching AI. What you see playing alone or through netcode doesn't tell what happens in game physics.

These are reaching same level when back in the days (15 years ago or so) someone claimed rfactor1 doesn't have suspension movement physics because he couldn't see it in online. Or some years later when AC "didn't have" tyre flex because it wasn't visual. I guess for some people hollywood movie animations has the best physics underneath. :rolleyes:
 
The funny thing is, ACC & AMS2 have just as broken physics; they’re just more forgiving and therefore people assume it’s more “realistic”.
Case in point, in ACC I drove the Bentley at Spa. Going through Eau Rouge after the compression phase and going up the hill before radillion where I decided to yank the steering 90° to the left... the car continued dead straight for 5 metres before reacting to my input.

Strange. I've just tried it with the Bentley at Spa and that doesn't happen for me at all. The car reacted immediately to the steering input, the tail started to slide to the right and I subsequently ended up in the barrier on the left - pretty much exactly what I'd expect. I'd be very worried if your description is what had actually happened. Is your wheel set up correctly?

You keep fibbing yourself in believing that they have better physics than iRacing. They are all broken.

It's not just me. Real world drivers think the same. An example here from Nicki Thiim comparing iRacing with Assetto Corsa Competizione (he was originally very critical of ACC) - go to 23:30 (and again at 26:50):

 
Last edited:
You can have F1 team simulator physics without any visual effects or vice versa. Physics and visuals are separated from each other in games.

When you play online it varies how things are implemented. When you are spectating online most of the games are closer what you see when you play it online. iRacing delays spectating to get rid of network prediction code. That is why spectating/broadcasting iRacing is like watching AI. What you see playing alone or through netcode doesn't tell what happens in game physics.

These are reaching same level when back in the days (15 years ago or so) someone claimed rfactor1 doesn't have suspension movement physics because he couldn't see it in online. Or some years later when AC "didn't have" tyre flex because it wasn't visual. I guess for some people hollywood movie animations has the best physics underneath. :rolleyes:
You obviously missed the point completely.
 
Strange. I've just tried it with the Bentley at Spa and that doesn't happen for me at all. The car reacted immediately to the steering input, the tail started to slide to the right and I subsequently ended up in the barrier on the left - pretty much exactly what I'd expect. I'd be very worried if your description is what had actually happened. Is your wheel set up correctly?



It's not just me. Real world drivers think the same. An example here from Nicki Thiim comparing iRacing with Assetto Corsa Competizione (he was originally very critical of ACC) - go to 23:30 (and again at 26:50):


I’ve already seen the linked video. I use a simucube OSW & have used time to setup the FFB after reading a fair amount on a number of forums regarding ACC wheel settings for the Simucube.

Strange you said the car started sliding right.

What I experienced was on my first flying lap. I took the first left kink at Eau Rouge normally, turned right for the right hander as I normally would do and then as I crossed the apex and started the climb up to radillion I yanked the steering 90° left. The car continued straight for 5 - 10 metres before finally reacting to my input and then putting me in the wall on the left. That lag between yanking the wheel and the reaction is completely not due to my wheel not being setup correctly.
 

Latest News

Shifting method

  • I use whatever the car has in real life*

  • I always use paddleshift

  • I always use sequential

  • I always use H-shifter

  • Something else, please explain


Results are only viewable after voting.
Back
Top