F1 25 To Be Revealed March 26, Retains Year In Title

Trebor901 · Mar 25, 2025

Fexcooper said:
Why do you think that Piastri is better than Norris?

Because Norris isn't champion material he proved that at the weekend with yet more stupid mistakes. Bottle job Norris is his nickname.

Large Style · Mar 25, 2025

Halusewanszky said:
Retains year in title of course to be able to sell the Ctrl+C Ctrl+V game every year for 80 €. "Precision" update to one of the many outdated circuits, new liveries, new furnitures to your flat, but the key parts, the 15 years old graphics engine, crap physics will be the same for sure.

It sounds like you're not particularly familiar with the changes in the F1 titles over the past few years...

Albeit at a heavy cost (and practically unusable in VR), ray tracing has improved year-on-year with '21 introducing it in non-gameplay, to '22 adopting it within races, and '23 & '24 offering increasingly more comprehensive RT options including not just effects but a lighting overhaul which undeniably adds advancements in graphics that actually no other (sim)racing title currently offers at all. Even if you discard RT and continue with the lack of evolution in graphics train-of-thought, due to industry "need" of prioritising excessive resolutions and frame rates, that slowing of graphical evolution applies to most games and genres, not just the F1 franchise, so I'd say it's rather unfair to single-out anyone in that regard, especially as most of our racing sims look 10+ years old now.

As for "crap physics" - they've (slowly) evolved per title too. F1'22 was ok as standard but somewhat came alive with good car setups found online, '23 had a major improvement in how connected the cars were and in particular felt great with sim-like FFB, and '24 fixed '23's biggest handling flaw of drift oversteer which in the latter title became awesome snap oversteer instead and allowed us to push more on the limit in slow corners.

F1'24 still has flawed handling - at last weekends Shanghai circuit for example, putting power down exiting turn 9 in the correct gear had a huge risk spinning the car right out so an overly-precautious short shift was required, and the same for dealing with turn 12 where the FFB doesn't communicate over-rotation (if that exists IRL) so staying on the limit consistently is extremely difficult. That said, it's worth remembering though that we're driving the world's fastest and lightest prototypes with no TC and in a sim with (generally) no physical input aside from the wheel, so I'd say the "flaws" here are perhaps more to do with limitations of simracing than the game.

Overall, could the F1 games be better? Undoubtedly yes. Should they be better (in comparison to other sims)? Probably. Are they the same game every year? Absolutely not.

Trebor901 · Mar 25, 2025

Large Style said:
It sounds like you're not particularly familiar with the changes in the F1 titles over the past few years...

Albeit at a heavy cost (and practically unusable in VR), ray tracing has improved year-on-year with '21 introducing it in non-gameplay, to '22 adopting it within races, and '23 & '24 offering increasingly more comprehensive RT options including not just effects but a lighting overhaul which undeniably adds advancements in graphics that actually no other (sim)racing title currently offers at all. Even if you discard RT and continue with the lack of evolution in graphics train-of-thought, due to industry "need" of prioritising excessive resolutions and frame rates, that slowing of graphical evolution applies to most games and genres, not just the F1 franchise, so I'd say it's rather unfair to single-out anyone in that regard, especially as most of our racing sims look 10+ years old now.

As for "crap physics" - they've (slowly) evolved per title too. F1'22 was ok as standard but somewhat came alive with good car setups found online, '23 had a major improvement in how connected the cars were and in particular felt great with sim-like FFB, and '24 fixed '23's biggest handling flaw of drift oversteer which in the latter title became awesome snap oversteer instead and allowed us to push more on the limit in slow corners.

F1'24 still has flawed handling - at last weekends Shanghai circuit for example, putting power down exiting turn 9 in the correct gear had a huge risk spinning the car right out so an overly-precautious short shift was required, and the same for dealing with turn 12 where the FFB doesn't communicate over-rotation (if that exists IRL) so staying on the limit consistently is extremely difficult. That said, it's worth remembering though that we're driving the world's fastest and lightest prototypes with no TC and in a sim with (generally) no physical input aside from the wheel, so I'd say the "flaws" here are perhaps more to do with limitations of simracing than the game.

Overall, could the F1 games be better? Undoubtedly yes. Should they be better (in comparison to other sims)? Probably. Are they the same game every year? Absolutely not.

I was personally annoyed when they went back to the f1 23 style physics after release because the original f1 24 physics felt so much nicer and the car actually felt connected to the road.

Ego engine is fine in my opinion especially after seeing WRC on unreal engine. Blurry horrible graphics which are a trait of unreal engine. Personally feel that unreal and unity while giving small developers a chance to build games also makes the big fry companies lazy.

Large Style · Mar 25, 2025

Trebor901 said:
I was personally annoyed when they went back to the f1 23 style physics after release because the original f1 24 physics felt so much nicer and the car actually felt connected to the road.

Interesting. I was a late adopter to '24 due to all the complaints at launch so I couldn't comment on the difference you experienced. I was under the impression that it was very arcadey handling, along with broken steering rotation values and completely flat kerbs. Hopefully they get '25 right from day 1 (yes I'm being extremely optimistic if not delusional there) so I can try out any attempts at an overhaul.

Trebor901 said:
Ego engine is fine in my opinion especially after seeing WRC on unreal engine. Blurry horrible graphics which are a trait of unreal engine. Personally feel that unreal and unity while giving small developers a chance to build games also makes the big fry companies lazy.

Yeah, UE(4) was clrealy never well suited for racing and obviously came into use due to the lure of not having a very aged looking simracing title for a change. I personally don't see any laziness with UE and Unity and seeing it more a case of those engines being detrimental due to being generic and non-proprietary, along with being inherently flawed and limited in terms of performance, features and compatibility.

I think / hope now that after ACC and WRC, devs have learned to not cut corners with their choice and use of certain game engines. If Ego outshines UE4/5 then the message couldn't be louder or clearer.

pz666 · Mar 25, 2025

Booooooooo...

EA needs to change it's approach... It's obviously working for them financially as casuals will buy this and sepnd 30 mins a month on it like they do with other titles made for the casual...

But this series has gone downhill massively after the EA take over... It used to be an ok sim lite option that whilst had some bugs they were minor... They've had great AI for years and really catered to the SP crowd well... But there's just stagnation now, the same title with a new driver line up and fresh UI gets pumped out each year...

Boby Kim · Mar 25, 2025

Argueing about the cover?? Infants...
Concerning the game itself? Let me guess...same ****, different year as it has been going on for years. Just as bad as Farming Simulator which does the same trick. See, they should start using a different game engine, which they won't. And as long as F1 is an arcade console clone for the PC it's going to be crap deluxe

Trebor901 · Mar 26, 2025

Boby Kim said:
Argueing about the cover?? Infants...
Concerning the game itself? Let me guess...same ****, different year as it has been going on for years. Just as bad as Farming Simulator which does the same trick. See, they should start using a different game engine, which they won't. And as long as F1 is an arcade console clone for the PC it's going to be crap deluxe

Why should they use a different engine exactly? Ego performs and looks just fine. Or would you rather it be a blurry over saturated mess like WRC is on the unreal engine?

Farming Sim 25 is on a new version of the Giants engine, again an evolving engine is that really that hard to understand?

SB83 · Mar 26, 2025

Will this be the edition that finally supports multiple controller input? Will this be the one that, at last, allows you to navigate the menus using your MOUSE instead of having to peck away at the keyboard or controller buttons? Stay tuned!

Slapped · Mar 26, 2025

Trebor901 said:
I was personally annoyed when they went back to the f1 23 style physics after release because the original f1 24 physics felt so much nicer and the car actually felt connected to the road.

Disclaimer - I've never tried F1 24 in any of it's versions so I can't personally comment on the driving experience, however:-

You raise an interesting point here as to what good sim racing physics are. It was clear at the release that the F1 24 physics were not close to even a semi realistic interpretation of F1 - the fastest way through some corners was drifting, yet a lot of people, like yourself, enjoyed the handling.

So this begs the question, which is preferable for sim racing?

A highly engaging and immersive physics/FFB model that connects you to the car but has only a loose resemblance to the real world, or a very close representation of the real physics/FFB where the driving feels bland, numb, and disconnected?

I tend to sit half way here, shifting slightly depending on game. Take Richard Burns Rally vs Dirt Rally 2.0. RBR may be more realistic but I find it a chore to play. DR 2.0 is maybe not as realistic but it's way more fun and engaging for me.

Trebor901 said:
Ego engine is fine in my opinion especially after seeing WRC on unreal engine. Blurry horrible graphics which are a trait of unreal engine. Personally feel that unreal and unity while giving small developers a chance to build games also makes the big fry companies lazy.

One of the reasons Codemasters stated that the switch to Unreal was necessary was that EGO couldn't handle the longer stages. What they meant, IMO, was that they didn't have anybody left with enough understanding and experience of the fundamental underpinnings of the EGO engine to be able to make the necessary changes.

In-house engines for many game developers are becoming technical debt - staff come and go and eventually you have nobody left with the required in depth knowledge and experience to take that in-house engine to the next level. Sure you can have devs that can use that engine, but you have nobody left who actively develop that engine. Also when it comes to replacing devs there's a large amount of time needed to train those people on the use of the in-house engine.

Hence the allure of off-the-shelf game engines such as Ureal, and to a lesser extent, Unity. You can easily find people with experience in both, and the further development of those engines is handled by the respective vendors. Also there's not much on-boarding needed as the people you're hiring are already experienced in that engine.

So I don't think that the use of Unreal et al is driven by lazyness or financial reasons, although those are definitely factors. It's driven primarily by the experience of the people you can hire. Unreal devs are easy to find. Experienced good low level (think C, C++) coders not so much, and those people have far more lucrative and stable opportunities in other industry sectors.

nitram2k11 · Mar 26, 2025

Hoping for PSVR2 support but not holding my breath :-(

Halusewanszky · Mar 26, 2025

Large Style said:
It sounds like you're not particularly familiar with the changes in the F1 titles over the past few years...

Albeit at a heavy cost (and practically unusable in VR), ray tracing has improved year-on-year with '21 introducing it in non-gameplay, to '22 adopting it within races, and '23 & '24 offering increasingly more comprehensive RT options including not just effects but a lighting overhaul which undeniably adds advancements in graphics that actually no other (sim)racing title currently offers at all. Even if you discard RT and continue with the lack of evolution in graphics train-of-thought, due to industry "need" of prioritising excessive resolutions and frame rates, that slowing of graphical evolution applies to most games and genres, not just the F1 franchise, so I'd say it's rather unfair to single-out anyone in that regard, especially as most of our racing sims look 10+ years old now.

As for "crap physics" - they've (slowly) evolved per title too. F1'22 was ok as standard but somewhat came alive with good car setups found online, '23 had a major improvement in how connected the cars were and in particular felt great with sim-like FFB, and '24 fixed '23's biggest handling flaw of drift oversteer which in the latter title became awesome snap oversteer instead and allowed us to push more on the limit in slow corners.

F1'24 still has flawed handling - at last weekends Shanghai circuit for example, putting power down exiting turn 9 in the correct gear had a huge risk spinning the car right out so an overly-precautious short shift was required, and the same for dealing with turn 12 where the FFB doesn't communicate over-rotation (if that exists IRL) so staying on the limit consistently is extremely difficult. That said, it's worth remembering though that we're driving the world's fastest and lightest prototypes with no TC and in a sim with (generally) no physical input aside from the wheel, so I'd say the "flaws" here are perhaps more to do with limitations of simracing than the game.

Overall, could the F1 games be better? Undoubtedly yes. Should they be better (in comparison to other sims)? Probably. Are they the same game every year? Absolutely not.

For me it sounds like you're not particularly familiar with other sims. Try LMU or just compare some external replay footages. The cars in LMU are constantly moving-bouncing, there are lateral, longitudinal movements through bumps or braking zones, skidding out of the corners in low grip conditions. When you hit the brakes before T7 hairpin in Sebring, the bumps are shaking the wheel out of your hands, you should play with the brake pressure constantly through the braking zone to avoid lock-up. The car feels and seems to be alive. In F1 games? Watch a replay. Like the cars running on rails, no pitch, no roll no bumps particularly on the older non-laserscanned circuits. Which are still the majority of the tracks in F1 games. Having the most accurate track models would be the absolute minimum in an officially licensed title. But we still have to wait for this like we've had to wait for about 4 years when finally got the hybrid system in the cars which is still pretty far from how the real system works. This is also worth a comparison to LMU. I'm sure there are improvements but come on... F1 is the most expensive game by far and gives you the less improvement by far year by year.

Large Style · Mar 26, 2025

Halusewanszky said:
For me it sounds like you're not particularly familiar with other sims.

I have AC, ACC, AMS2, Dirt 1&2, WRC, many F1's, Raceroom, rF2, RBR and more, all either with complete DLC or very near to. I'm not buying LMU while they continue to abuse EA.

Halusewanszky said:
The car feels and seems to be alive. In F1 games? Watch a replay. Like the cars running on rails, no pitch, no roll no bumps particularly on the older non-laserscanned circuits.

Most sims lack decent yaw, with the exception to rF2 / LMU, and exactly how much pitch do you think F1 cars have? F1 cars are designed to be on rails as pretty much anything else causes tyre wear and time loss that they can't afford to have. Obviously they'll have some yaw as rotation is expected at some corner exits, and F1'24 does have this to a small extent (if you're very good at the game) but I already mentioned that the car sometimes felt odd in some corners and that it wasn't of the same standard of sims, so you're defending an argument that I didn't make.

Halusewanszky said:
F1 is the most expensive game by far and gives you the less improvement by far year by year.

I never said that F1 titles were good value nor did I mention cost at all, and I find their yearly releases no real different from the typical updates with physics / FFB improvements we get on other sims. Yes we have to pay for them but the primary market for F1 is the casual gamer who uses a controller, not simracers with our cockpits. Do you think that being simracers we are entitled to cheap or free updates, because that's just not how it works. Maybe in an ideal world that could be the case, but I live in the realistic one instead. Besides, if you just wait a small few months from launch (once it's fully patched and actually finished) the games are heavily discounted anyway to a cost near that of any other sims DLC.

Halusewanszky said:
I'm sure there are improvements but come on...

I'm only responding to your previous (incorrect) comment when you were whistling a different tune...

Halusewanszky said:
...but the key parts, the 15 years old graphics engine, crap physics will be the same for sure.

Trebor901 · Mar 26, 2025

Slapped said:
Disclaimer - I've never tried F1 24 in any of it's versions so I can't personally comment on the driving experience, however:-

You raise an interesting point here as to what good sim racing physics are. It was clear at the release that the F1 24 physics were not close to even a semi realistic interpretation of F1 - the fastest way through some corners was drifting, yet a lot of people, like yourself, enjoyed the handling.

So this begs the question, which is preferable for sim racing?

A highly engaging and immersive physics/FFB model that connects you to the car but has only a loose resemblance to the real world, or a very close representation of the real physics/FFB where the driving feels bland, numb, and disconnected?

I tend to sit half way here, shifting slightly depending on game. Take Richard Burns Rally vs Dirt Rally 2.0. RBR may be more realistic but I find it a chore to play. DR 2.0 is maybe not as realistic but it's way more fun and engaging for me.

One of the reasons Codemasters stated that the switch to Unreal was necessary was that EGO couldn't handle the longer stages. What they meant, IMO, was that they didn't have anybody left with enough understanding and experience of the fundamental underpinnings of the EGO engine to be able to make the necessary changes.

In-house engines for many game developers are becoming technical debt - staff come and go and eventually you have nobody left with the required in depth knowledge and experience to take that in-house engine to the next level. Sure you can have devs that can use that engine, but you have nobody left who actively develop that engine. Also when it comes to replacing devs there's a large amount of time needed to train those people on the use of the in-house engine.

Hence the allure of off-the-shelf game engines such as Ureal, and to a lesser extent, Unity. You can easily find people with experience in both, and the further development of those engines is handled by the respective vendors. Also there's not much on-boarding needed as the people you're hiring are already experienced in that engine.

So I don't think that the use of Unreal et al is driven by lazyness or financial reasons, although those are definitely factors. It's driven primarily by the experience of the people you can hire. Unreal devs are easy to find. Experienced good low level (think C, C++) coders not so much, and those people have far more lucrative and stable opportunities in other industry sectors.

I like sims but I won't sniff at any type of racing game as long as it's fun to play because surely that's the whole point of gaming right? To have fun not be sat there working harder than you would at your real life job

Halusewanszky · Mar 26, 2025

Large Style said:
I have AC, ACC, AMS2, Dirt 1&2, WRC, many F1's, Raceroom, rF2, RBR and more, all either with complete DLC or very near to. I'm not buying LMU while they continue to abuse EA.

Most sims lack decent yaw, with the exception to rF2 / LMU, and exactly how much pitch do you think F1 cars have? F1 cars are designed to be on rails as pretty much anything else causes tyre wear and time loss that they can't afford to have. Obviously they'll have some yaw as rotation is expected at some corner exits, and F1'24 does have this to a small extent (if you're very good at the game) but I already mentioned that the car sometimes felt odd in some corners and that it wasn't of the same standard of sims, so you're defending an argument that I didn't make.

I never said that F1 titles were good value nor did I mention cost at all, and I find their yearly releases no real different from the typical updates with physics / FFB improvements we get on other sims. Yes we have to pay for them but the primary market for F1 is the casual gamer who uses a controller, not simracers with our cockpits. Do you think that being simracers we are entitled to cheap or free updates, because that's just not how it works. Maybe in an ideal world that could be the case, but I live in the realistic one instead. Besides, if you just wait a small few months from launch (once it's fully patched and actually finished) the games are heavily discounted anyway to a cost near that of any other sims DLC.

I'm only responding to your previous (incorrect) comment when you were whistling a different tune...

You've got the point. F1 game haven't been made for sim racers, but for casual players with controllers. But why a simracer should accept it? It's a shame. It's tragic. It isn't about the price, but I believe yes we sim racers are entitled to get a decent F1 game by the official license holder. As we have a great wec game, a decent title focusing on gt racing (acc) or AMS2. Reiza made a better F1 simulation at first try than codemasters for the 15th iteration. If you've tried AMS2 you are probably aware of how great it is. The tyre model with flat spots, the wet weather line etc those we still don't have and probably will never have in F1 games. And you haven't mentioned your opinion about the outdated tracks like 2011 Monza, 2016 Hungaroring, 2013-14 Interlagos, or the invisible bumps at some circuits. Ea f1 is an arcade game and insulting to call it a racing sim title.

Pazop · Mar 27, 2025

WALEAD1999 said:
i hope ams2 get the licence cause its will be massive W

Reiza will never get it because they don't have enough money, even though they have a thousand times more talent and passion. The masses prefer this kind of mediocre game, and as long as they see 'F1' written on the box, they buy it, mock those who truly love sim racing, and end up stuck with this poor simcade.

F1 25 To Be Revealed March 26, Retains Year In Title

F1 25 Launch Price To Be Lower?​

Comments

Article information

Share this article

Sabre

KT Racing

Milestone

The Last Garage

BeamNG

iRacing

Straight4 Studios

Bugbear Entertainment

Motorsport Games / Studio 397

Kunos Simulazioni

Reiza Studios

Other (add in the comments below)

F1 25 Launch Price To Be Lower?