Yes, I do. Which was the basis of the conversation taking place. Did you read the conversation? I'll explain it to you, ok? Someone said it looks only slightly better than rF1. I posted a screenshot of ISI content in rF1. This showed a difference from rF1, to rF2, with ISI content during the same phase of development. This is a qualified comparison of the products and displays, VERY clearly, the advancement between the two. It really couldn't be more simple of a conversation. Why YOU are bringing up other titles, and unable to comprehend why I am making that comparison, is something I am unable to understand. The comparison between rF1 and rF2 originated from that persons comment. Yes, it is a 5 year spread of comparison. So what? It's still a perfectly valid way to display the difference between rFactor 1 on release and rFactor 2 on release and show they are not the same.
This is rF1 too..unedited, by Beemer from F1Classic (ENBseries graphic mod). For me these are the most beautiful screens ever done for rF1. Looks incredible, really.
Absolutely, and think what modders will be doing with rF2 in five years, the five years modders had to get that far with rF1. That's my point.
actually that track was released nearly five years ago (codemasters conversion from TRD3) and it's only the enb plugin that's a recent addition, no idea when the cars were released though. I can see both sides of the discussion here and I too hope we'll see some great things from rF2 in the future.
If you put your own high poly model i new lighting and shadowing in rf2 you will be satisfied Lot of people still forget that rf2 will bring us more complex and dynamic environment. If you look at these all screenshots and movies, rf2 overall looks realy good, and much better than rf1, even modified by modders. Sun glare, deep of field, heat haze, live track, dynamic weather and lot more. Does rf1 have all this stuff? No! Even iRacing and Netkar-pro don't have.
I'm sure there's great things in store. There's things going to happen to hardware and rF2 that we can't even imagine right now. It certainly happened with rF1.
I can confirm that Beemer is working his ass of for those ENB settings. Download it and see the amount of files and the complexity in this stuff... He is doing a great job. I guess modding in general will be way more complex in rf2 because of all the new features but on the other hand I hope it will also mean we have things we don't need to bother about anymore because it will be generated by the new engine. (shadows, racing groove, hopefully all the weather stuff, that mod-packaging system and so on...) Anyway it will be a huge advantage if we could get perfect templates for all the new stuff. rf1 lacked in this part and many things might have seen the light of day earlier... The rfbaja release from kittx for example has sunglare. Ha! Think about it! That was already possible with the initial release of rf1... I would love to update every single track with this feature... (thats one thing a good template/sample can provide from the beginning of rf2...) I talk too much, sorry for that. Just a brainfart from my side... EDIT: I love the rf community for pushing the limits of it's engine. But we need to have more of those peoples that cross borders and create something new. To many things got created by non modding based plattforms such as gta...
Demands and expectations are potentially (and often practically) unlimited, while ISI staff is limited in numbers. Therefore not everything can be developed at the same time - you have to focus on some things. In general - everyone is right about some things here. These screens do look more-less realistic, when we talk about light intensity, shadows, modelling etc. We can also see a lot of improvement since rF1 in these areas. On the other side - when I look at material properties in rF1 and rF2 - I see no difference at all. So yeah - depends on how you look at it. Or maybe to put is as simple as possible - some things have been improved and some didn't change. True, but only partially. Some people need high-res textures to be happy, even if there is sun reflection in the middle of a shadow. Others want lighting to work correctly even if textures have less detail. That's the part that is subjective. The other part is the laws of optics - they're not subjective at all For example - if you take optical density of air and glass then you can calculate amount of reflection at given viewing angle. If someone will say that window is too shiny or not shiny enough, he would be simply wrong (assuming there is no error or other issues with the code). I prefer to separate it into two terms. Level of detail and textures contribute to quality, while lighting, reflections and material properties contribute to realism. Look at this: As you can see, grass is dark-green in general, but it also reflects blue color of the sky, and if that isn't enough - sun can pass right through it, higlighting grass from behind in light green. So you can put excellent high-res grass texture on your track, but can you call it realistic? After looking at the photo above - definitely not. High-res texture is just qreat quality, not realism. Now look at this - top images present original model, bottom images show improved materials: So, no change in quality (same model, same textures), but realism is improved. And finally - I wouldn't spend too much time talking about graphics and comparing to other titles right now. It's not that important how certain screenshot look, but how are things implemented in the engine - if they're a good basis for making improvements, then improvements will be made either by ISI or by community. Untill we get our hands on beta we don't know that. Being concerned about it doesnt change anything either. We just have to wait and see - then will be the time for talking
@K Szczech: You're setting new standards buddy. Keep up the great work! You, kittx, lasercutter, Beemer and many others will hopefully continue with rf2. We need good mod creators and we also need the people that invent new stuff to the sim and push it even further.
@Traveller. Yes, Monza would be a good guess. A very good guess. Y, agreed. I wouldn't want it all the time, I suspect. In replays might be nice (with a toggle!) re all vehicles : Hopefully both things are catered for - flexibility within a definite standard. No major deal - I just like hotlapping offline with a wide variety of vehicles on track. Keeps you on your toes, keeps interest. @Tim - thanks for clarification. DOF in TV cams is good - I didn't want it in cockpit (at least not without a toggle). BTW hopefully rF2 maintains the adjustable driving cams? And one thing I'd love - if it could remember your driving cam position (as a preset?) without having to go in and manually adjust the file. rF1 'forgets' your adjustments if you hit replay - unless you manually alter the file. So I'd return from a replay and have default cam position and need change it again, everytime. The comparison with rF1 WIP is very instructive. How quickly people forget. I think it's come a hell of a long way. I loved GPL, but this Monaco on rF2 blows it away. We've never had anything like it. One would have thought it was a surefire winner - a sort of GPL2.....or even 3. Brilliant. Thanks very much!
Wow. The point with this though is surely that..... the image is from the engine featured in the (now pretty crude) rF1 WIP shot. So, by comparison to the rF2 WIP shot, we should see some really fabulous stuff from rF2. It also speaks to how incremental improvements are and how significant they can be in aggregate - which is what rF2 is surely providing. Great pics though. Whets my appetite!
Great post K Szczech, thanks for your informed opinion. I quoted the above because although I agree with what you are saying there, I have to add that the 'how our brain/eye combination interprets what the eyes sees' is subjective. So yes despite optics having been proven physics-wise, what we all see could still be very very different depending on our individual eyes and brain. So ultimately it does become subjective. subjective + not subjective = subjective
While we're at it.....my best and worst rf1 pics: haha. This was pretty funky I managed to get pretty good "McLaren chrome" (the best I have seen in rf - even if i do say so myself. Chrome always looks so duff in rF) using those new environment maps and lowering the colour in the texture and blah blah blah - and ENB I am sure. [orig textures from ..... i forget....the lovely ones for FSOne 06?] and
rf2 also doesnt have it. cause u u got no rf2, maybe it will have (maybe not) but it will in future.... far future
I don't understand why people want DX11? Crysis is DX9 and 4 years later still looks better than anthing else.
cause if it now was 2005, we all be absolutely fine with dx9.. but... now its 2011 and 5 years it will be 2016.. technology moving fast... so dx11 now does become a standard (yes it still a lot games with dx9,, and the very very good) but in 5 years?? the new graphic standards are higher and higher.. so dx9 surely will not satisfy users demand even in 2013-2014..
Personally, I don't care what dx version it is, as long as it looks good. If it takes dx 35 to look good or dx 9, I don't care, although a newer dx-version could be a bit more FPS-friendly. Also consider that the initial rF2-version will not be the final version. ISI could implement dx 10 or 11 in the next few years if they feel the need. @Alesi: just look on the internet for dx9 vs dx11 comparisons, and think about which dx11-features we 'need' in a racing game.
This is madness! That level is enough. Add weather and time of day effects and you can consider my pants jizzed. Surely it won't be too long until rF2 gets brought to this level by modders.
