Irl i kinda like boxer engines, but i fear for thier introduction into automation. The boundry box we have in most bodies won’t be in a good shape to really take advantage of thier unique packaging except for vibrations i expect a boxer 6 to always be out preformed by a v6. I don’t know if the game will even take the lower center of gravity into account.
Can someone ease my concerns? Or will it be even more marginally usefull then irl?
Boxers are still a long time down the road yet (and I mean a Looooooong time) so I’m sure much of this stuff hasn’t even been planned yet
On that aspect it’s probably going to be a similar situation to IRL. Boxer 6 is a lot smoother but offers poorer packaging, which is partly why they aren’t super common, especially when taking into account transverse FWD and AWD applications, where boxers do not fit well at all.
Since they offer a similar layout (2 banks of 3 cylinders each) performance other than that is probably going to be very similar.
The main issue ATM with engine bay space is related to space in front/behind the axle. I am personally not concerned about a lack of space in terms of width on most bodies.
And you have to remember that boxer 4 cylinder engines are going to be the shortest engines in the game, unless we get inline 2s, and even then the boxer has a power advantage.
I believe a dev said that CoG regarding the engine will be taken into account in the final game, but it isn’t at the moment.
The thing im concerned with is not really being able to fit them. Its rather the fact that if you are not utilizing the fact that they are fkat and short you are giving up one of thier greatest strengths (great packaging as long as the body takes advantage of it.
Ironically mounting them transveresly in a small but normally shaped engine bay might be a good use of space. (something quite unusual irl)
The main issue with transverse mounting is the transmission. You can’t really have the differential and output shafts behind the engine like with an inline or V-layout engine, it pretty much has to go under the engine, which isn’t very good for packaging. This is why most boxer engines are longitudinally mounted, even for FWD applications.
The engine length advantage is already fairly useful, as plenty of cars have some limitations on engine size that can’t be dealt with easily using the layouts currently in the game. An example being many rear engined cars, which are stuck using tiny inline-3s or a V6s that is too expensive for the application. There is a reason why Volkswagen went with an H4 for their rear engined stuff.
They would also have the advantage of fitting a lot better in longitudinal applications in cars clearly setup for transverse engines (short engine bay mainly located in front of the front axle)
Edit: I was wondering, have boxer engines (or H-engines since they are the same from outside) have even been mounted transversely in mass produced applications?
The original Mini, SAAB 99/900 and the Ferrari Testarossa had the gearbox under the engine.
Would work very well with a boxer 4/6 engine. (The Testarossa is a 180 deg. "v"12.)
The original mini also had it’s transmission placed diagonally, and to shift to 2nd, you needed to shift to where 4th would be. I highly doubt this would be applicable… But who knows? 
That is only a bad design of the gear linkage.