100% agreed
2 Likes
@OreoCookie They already had a companion app and the Unity engine already allowed them to do a lot of the calculations so it doesn’t seem like there was that much that needed to be done from the engineering side. See the below quote from DC Rainmaker’s article when Wahoo bought RGT which explained the longer term strategy and steering seems to be in line with all of this:
In any case, without giving specifics, Wahoo says they plan to iterate very quickly, and will be aiming to deliver key new features to RGT that go to the core of areas, not just ones that the RGT racing base have asked for, but also specifics that the Zwift Community/Racing Core have asked for but haven’t yet been delivered on Zwift. Said differently, it sounds like Wahoo is basically trawling the Zwift forums for the features that Zwifters have been asking for, but ones that have been ignored. Expect those to be implemented first.
As for SYSTM, Wahoo says that it’ll continue to get content additions. The company seemed to imply that they see the SYSTM app as relatively mature in terms of delivery, but now want to keep adding more content. Whereas RGT will see both content as well as growth of the app design/features/etc.
3 Likes
Tbh, the fact that RGT is on an engine like Unity is going to allow them to get miles ahead of Zwift should they survive.
4 Likes
Yes, but how popular is that? And as far as I understand, the engine Zwift uses (ID Software’s Doom 2 engine from the looks of things, although people in the texture department seem to be slacking off) is perfectly capable of steering input. Yes, Unity is better, but how a game looks is different from its game play mechanics.
The issue seems to be that Zwift hasn’t made steering into a compelling component of the game play mechanic. Basically, Zwift should make its users want to have steering input, and so far they haven’t. Wahoo’s steering product seems like the poor person’s solution (no offense, this could actually be a selling point) that could allow people to get steering without having to get something like the fictitious Kickr Climb with steering input.
@OreoCookie I would definitely disagree with this statement - RGT’s overall physics are way better and I think that the implementation of steering makes a lot more sense versus Zwift’s solution of turning your handlebars on a stationary bike. Have you tried steering in RGT? If not you should definitely check it out. There is a free version and there are a number of races that you can sign up for.
3 Likes
I don’t think this contradicts anything I have said: I wrote that it doesn’t matter that RGT is better than Zwift, because RGT hasn’t and will likely never grow to be as big as Zwift in terms of user numbers.
I don’t know which steering input method is better, that’d be something that the market would determine over time. Just as a product, though, I think it’d be better if you integrated steering into another product that people will want for sure. Steering would just be a bonus — at first.
Moreover, I can also imagine a future where the user base is divided on this. Just look at gamers: if you are a console gamer, you want a game controller. Most PC gamers make sure their WASD keys are clean and have a mouse. Famously, there are some games that were initially designed for a console and the game mechanics has been awkwardly adapted to a keyboard and mouse.
I have neither tried Zwift nor RGT in any capacity, and currently have no desire to. Not a dig, it is just aimed at a different audience.
I don’t think this is relevant, this discussion is about whether it was a good idea for Wahoo to spend engineering resources on this particular steering solution. Given that Zwift hasn’t made steering desirable and RGT isn’t big enough to make a dent (even assuming its implementation of steering is good and makes RGT a better product), I think Wahoo made a mistake.
1 Like
I liked RGT when it was RGT. But admittedly, I understood why Zwift’s large community provides such an appeal to keep people into it. I thought I needed just an “avatar” to watch while I did TR. There is something very charming about zwift. I just can’t put my finger on it
But I’d love to see RGT get bigger. Maybe I’ll try it again
@OreoCookie Yes and I don’t think that they have to. If they gain 5 to 10% of Zwift’s base that would likely have a big impact on their numbers.
@OreoCookie Got it - well I do know that lots of people including myself use Zwift or RGT when doing TR videos to provide something to look at so there is some overlap in the audience.
@OreoCookie The relevance relates to creating a better and more differentiated product to grow market share. This thread is about the bleak outlook for Wahoo’s future. The trainer market is going to be in a soft sales cycle for a while so why not try to drive sales from the software side?
@OreoCookie This industry seems to move pretty fast but obviously has its twists and turns. Very few of us were riding software controlled stationary trainers 10 years ago (other than maybe a CompuTrainer) and virtually no one was e-racing.
As I noted in my post above referencing DC Rainmaker’s article, this sort of thing was part of Wahoo’s strategy when they bought RGT - so they seem to be executing on that strategy and thus it made sense to commit engineering resources.
I guess if folks like yourself are going to form an opinion of the platform without even trying the product then they are dead in the water and should just close up shop.
3 Likes
If you are doing this is a video animation to pass time, would you actually want to have steering? Honest question. Do you think you’d be in the majority or minority?
You are right that I should be careful talking about products that I have not tried. However, I can still pass judgement by looking at what companies do. I’m very much in favor of the idea of adding steering, too, … just not like this. In fact, why stop at steering and not add braking to the mix, too?
- When Zwift rolled out steering, it did so in partnership with Elite rather than working with all trainer manufacturers on an open or Zwift standard with input from all manufacturers. IMHO that is a mistake if you want steering to become a feature that a large number of Zwift users use and want to use.
- Because steering is not based on an open or industry-wide standard, other platforms like RGT need to either roll their own support or convince hardware makers to add it. Just imagine if each game company had their own standard for hardware controllers and the like. That’s amateur hour.
- From all reviews I have seen, Zwift has not done anything meaningful with steering (e. g. @dcrainmaker’s review of the Kickr STEER starting at 6:48).
- At least some of the smart bikes like the Kickr Bike support braking, and that’d be something desirable to have, too. Rather than always taking the “inside line”, how about having to think about line choice an positioning, too? But to my knowledge this is not supported and Zwift doesn’t seem to be working with its hardware partners here on open standards.
… because I think Wahoo’s purchase of RGT (and other) training platforms was another big mistake. The growth never materialized no matter of whether RGT rests on better technology. Part and parcel of Zwift’s success is its large install base, something RGT lacks.
I am using Wahoo products, I’m a big fan of their head units, and the Kickr Core was in the running for when I needed a new trainer. I’d be bummed if they went out of business. I just wish they would work more on making their core offerings better rather than waste resources and money on things that are less important — especially if those “side projects” threaten the survival of the company.
1 Like
Having had a few rides with steering now, I think they’ve implemented it really well (it’s definitely improved the game for me). I’m using a £15 2-key keyboard by the way, not the Kickr Steer. The only mistake I think they’ve made with this update is removing auto-draft for those not wanting to steer. More thoughts here:
3 Likes
@OreoCookie It is a fair question. The feature is probably best suited for racing and if I was doing intervals on RGT it probably wouldn’t be of much use but for a Z2 ride, group ride with friends or doing a team time trial workout there are aspects that are valuable. Steering allows you to better pick your line whether for cornering or drafting.
@OreoCookie I guess there is the issue of hardware being in somewhat of a mature market and products generally seem to last a while. So trying to get subscription revenue by tying into a software platform seems to be a natural path.
Software isn’t that much of a leap - Peloton sells both software and hardware and brands like Life Fitness have been integrating software into their hardware products. Even Zwift tried to do the same but going from software to hardware before cutting a deal to sell another company’s trainer.
If I am an investor in Wahoo I am probably looking for the company to find a way to monetize itself one day and back in 2018 and 2019 perhaps software and subscription revenue seemed like the way forward to balance out the ebbs and flows in trainer sales. Seems like that is still a valid strategy especially with the current slowdown in trainer sales and innovations like steering and race mode are worth the investment because they could have a positive effect on the hardware side. I guess we will see how it all shakes out.
1 Like
It is only a valid strategy if you can find a way to incentivize consumers to switch platforms….so far, Wahoo (and everyone else) has failed miserably in this regard.
That said, I wonder if Zwift’s Achilles Heel will end up being it’s system architecture. It has long been rumored that they are limited in the revisions they can make because of the original platform the program was based on. But in order to exploit this, other companies need to find a way to innovate the experience to such a degree that it exposes Zwift’s weakness….and steering ain’t that experience that is going to cause a paradigm shift.
6 Likes
Out of interest, what changes do you think Wahoo RGT need to make to cause a paradigm shift?
@Power13 Wahoo has only owned RGT for a year and as I mentioned earlier in the thread I think RGT really only needs to gain an incremental amount of riders from Zwift to materially impact their numbers. I have made the switch and have a few friends that have joined me. Obviously Wahoo isn’t coming from a position of strength with their leverage issues but otherwise we don’t have much insight into how the numbers are trending. I guess that will all start to become more clear over the next year or so.
Schitt, if I knew the answer to that, I’d be an executive at Zwift or Wahoo…
Ultimately, the answer may be “there is nothing they can do”. When you competitive advantgae is “size of user base”, it is really, really difficult to overcome. Again, look at Twitter…there is massive dissatisfaction with that app right now, and still Mastadon and POst.News can’t cause a user base shift.
So when there is only mild dissatisfaction with something like Zwift, but the draw is the user base, it seems to me that it is damn near impossible.
The framework may prove to be their weak underbelly, but I am not familiar enough with SW to be able to be able to say how it could be exploited from an experience viewpoint.
5 Likes
I understand the idea, but does it make Zwift better enough so that people will want to use it?
If you want to add a downhill element to racing, I think you need steering and braking. After all, just taking the inside line while having infinite grip is not, well, interesting. Perhaps you also want a race mode where collisions between riders are to be avoided. But if these are just optional and not appealing enough for people to use them, I don’t know.
I don’t think the hardware is quite as mature as you make it out to be. I can think of a ton of things:
- Making trainers cheaper.
- Developing and shipping good indoor bikes made for structured training and Zwift, and aiming to drive down the price over time. The first generation seems not very good given the price: reliability issues (except for Stages it seems), frames rubbing riders in the wrong places, etc.
- Develop race and analysis modes with e. g. more frequent power measurements. Yes, Wahoo has just released an update to that effect, but this should be standardized and available on all trainers.
- Work with Zwift so that you enable a “downhill mode” which spins/accelerates the flywheel even when the athlete isn’t pedaling. I think Tacx has or had something like this, but I don’t think it is used very much.
- Develop accessories, and continue iterating upon them.
- Nail releases. I still find it surprising how many established trainer manufacturers have stumbled here, even for product releases that are minor revs of existing products.
Software is a giant leap for a hardware company. Even among software companies, you need to distinguish between companies that want to be platforms open to everyone (think Peloton, Strava, Zwift and TrainerRoad) or things that are more niche.
Peloton started with software and offered tightly integrated hardware. They are unique in that sense, because both, the bike and the subscription was expensive. But their goal was to create a community and a large library of engaging workouts. You had group rides and such.
Zwift is primarily a software platform, and is entering the hardware market to lower the barrier to entry. Clearly, their aim is to lower the price of a direct drive trainer, and they can afford that, because they are the only game in town.
Wahoo bought a struggling training platform. I’m not even passing judgement on the quality, I heard that RGT was/is a solid product. Wahoo also added a few other pieces they bought elsewhere and made SYSTM X or whatever they call it. Still, what was Wahoo’s plan with RGT? Make a TrainerRoad competitor? That seems to be the most plausible option. However, as soon as Wahoo bought it, I don’t think other indoor trainer manufacturers were very keen on working with Wahoo.
I imagine TR regularly gets to test pre-release hardware to ensure full compatibility with TrainerRoad. At the very least they have a tight relationship with them so that if e. g. the new Tacx/Garmin trainer doesn’t work as expected with TR, they can bypass tech support and speak to engineers who worked on that product directly. What is the chance that Garmin would give Wahoo access to that degree? Would Garmin or Elite send over pre-release hardware (think also steering hardware) to allow Wahoo’s RGT team to perform compatibility tests? I’m very skeptical. Unless Wahoo wanted to become a software/service company first and phase out parts of its hardware business, I don’t see why there was ever any chance of success.
Even if we ignore that, I don’t see much air left for RGT in the competitive space: you have Peloton for “casual athletes” (no ding, I think you get what I mean), TrainerRoad for serious athletes and Zwift for racing that covers the gamified aspect. That is in addition to training services. I don’t see a good way for RGT to differentiate itself, unless it wanted to become successful in a niche (think a hybrid between TrainerRoad and TrainingPeaks, aimed at people who are even more serious than TrainerRoadies and might have a coach). I reckon that market is tiny and not worth pursuing for a company like Wahoo.
4 Likes
From the outside, I think its actual weakness is that it seems Zwift has not really changed much. Yes, new “content” was released, but Zwift missed a few big opportunities:
- Make actual Zwift races a thing by working with trainer manufacturers to make things like Wahoo’s race mode a reality, strike that, a requirement to participate. They could have released something like a UCI sticker-equivalent that stated that “this trainer works with Zwift racing”. Requirements could include the aforementioned race mode with more frequent power measurements, a guaranteed power accuracy of, say, 1 %, and calibration requirements. They could have added other things like steering as a mandatory feature to have in order to be able to participate in races.
- Work on industry standards for things like braking, steering as well as additional features. Steering v2 could include force feedback to give athletes indication on when they are about to lose traction. This isn’t rocket science, just look at the sim scene and get some inspiration (and engineers) from them.
- Mountain biking where steering becomes an even more important part of the game mechanic.
- Allow people to ride with or against former greats of the sport. (Think soccer, NFL and NBA games.) That would be a great opportunity to hire some of these people as brand ambassadors. For others you just change up the names a little. Perhaps Eddy Merckx becomes Ollie Marks? Some sports games employ that strategy, I think.
- Yes, upgrade the graphics, too.
Well, i am a zwift long timer in beta…in the early days, you could hardly find anybody to ride with.
Riders Numbers have increased now and what keeps me on zwift, now:
Meetup rides with friends and the possibility to ride workouts while riding together in meetups…my friend rides z2 and i do vo2max but still in the same ride
Races
workouts
there is always someone riding, so i am not allone during boring long rides…
in the beginning, i was attracted by getting the tron bike, riding around with people from all over the world…
so for me, there is absolutely no need to change to wahoo or something else, as it cover all aspects of my bike and even run training.
Speaking of running, this is just the beginning what can be done…
Wahoo race mode is not really a big thing…you can race without this mode, it still ends up being in your legs…i do not care, if my trainer lags 2-3 seconds, as i know that in advance and do the sprint accordingly…
When in workouts, or races i usually miss the vos2 to check for graphics, i never understood why graphics are so overrated? …installing chats and music would be cool, as music usually hellps getting me to the end of the workout…
Newly introduced clubmembers always prefer zwift, even if they start with another platform for one reason: most of the clubmates use zwift, most of the clubmates therefore support help.
I am sure, steering is a low interest thing…after zwift saw, how many of the sterzos were sold, we invest time and money in something only a few would use, when other things have priority?
So do not expect alot new steering stuff in zwift, as there is not so much interest in it, even in climbing hardware, not so many are using it, compared to the total amount of users.
2 Likes
and it would need alot of money to push RGT, which is not available…
a very big issue i see is the main market for trainers and software is europe, therefore there are seasons people hardly buy new hardware…so, wahoo has to survive until next autum…during this “summer wait” they should have new products or features in the pipeline…hard to do with no cash…i think, this is the reason why the throw “NEW” stuff on the market like steering and race mode…final tries to generate cashflow…
i am a hardcore zwift user, during summer a only ride outside to adjust on my tt setup…the rest is done indoors, it just has too many upsides in the place where i live…
i completely agree with you on the hardware side elite and tacx.
We also need to discuss the law suit, wahoo – zwift…regarding trainers…
3 Likes
Good point, I forgot about that. That’s not exactly the mark of a good partner …
Out of curiosity, what is your opinion of adding additional input methods like steering and braking? Is that something you’d like to have or willing to spend money on to try?
Would you e. g. want a more realistic implementation of drafting and downhill riding where you would have to steer and brake correctly?