It is a high end app a lot of people can't afford. 62% poll don't mean anything .......bunch of impatient fanboys. hehehe I paid my money for rF2 to develop the best driving sim not for high-end fads. When rF2 is finished no problem, knock yourself but not at the expense of anything else.
in your opinion.................. The future for me is a more realistic sim at the core level. OR won't make that sim any more or less realistic ..............it will just add to the immersion.
I don't think you've been reading the polls right but ok. Isn't rF2 a constantly developing product? So when it's "finished" would be when rFactor 3 is in focused development or released. Also not sure how increasing immersion wouldn't make using the sim more realistic. It'll certainly make the experience more realistic (and enjoyable) but it won't make the sims physics engine any more realistic ofc.
That is want I meant. rF2 has more immersion simply because it is outstanding physics. OR does not affect the physics, tyres weather chassis nor will it make what ? lmao Live for Speed wtf ? better then rtF2 hahahanh in your dreams. . Either way I do not think it is the future.
OR ( imho ) is not the future because it will become just be another 100 dollar gadget. Using Live for Speed sales as a reason to accelerate OR support is fanboyism, nothing more. OR, Track IR, 3 screens, the best steering wheels, none of this matters to me much if the sim does not FEEL .................capisce ? I not dissing OR and I would like to try it.
I'd like to try mine again but friends have taken over it in my house & will not leave why didn't they order one when I told them!
mmm but I do not think that.......mm he used LFS as a reason for rF2 to support it, because it will increase sales. Which leads me to my question. hehehe OMG !@! are you saying OR guys spend more time driving better OR support sims ( like pCARS and LfFS ) ......... or heavens forbid shooters !@! ............. rather then rF2 seat time !@! please tell me it's not true hehehe p AH I am very happy whatever ISi decides to do, like I said 2 years ago Historics is already there it is Gold for mine. lopl TrackIR , 3 screens , OR I do all see as advantages over single screen racers like me can't afford better but I will still run you all, cheapest wheel fanatec ever made, rattling, I will still have ya.
Imo the rift is just as important to making rf2 feel as ffb is. It just that big a difference (for me at least). Also yup ive been using pcars and lfs since my dk2 got here, havent touched rf2. Why would i want to play a video game when i can feel like im in a racing car
lol oculus is the future and in 4-5 years will every one drive with a vr headset. Yes the immersion is a part of realistic in terms of seat position, fov , headtracking etc. And the poll is useless because why should a guy vote for yes if he don t have a dk 2. But anyway i think nobody can talk about vr if he don t have a dk 2 and tried lfs. I mean how can ppl talk about thing which they never tried ? Or is there anybody who played lfs on dk 2 and don t like it ?
You mean like how in 15 years all simmers have 3 screens, gated shifters, decent wheels and good computer specs. ? I have one of the four. >>>> hehehe My "future" is one day a ISI Historic Racing Series developed and sold separately ( others Series later ) Only validated and approved add ons would be allowed. Engine would be specifically coded to Historic data, nothing else.............I believe suspension travel and chassis movement is rF2's Holy Grail. There would be no ai, aids, no help, no fantasy options or menus. They could ditch that much un-needed coding stuff ......................... we would have a real clutch !@! lol hehe Long way from OR hey. hehehe
are you back in uk now dripper? DD -agreed the rf2 historic is right up there, maybe they should have just concentrated on this (historic tracks for all the historic cars) & let modders add whatever else, historic content in other titles is very weak when compared
I can see HMD's getting cheaper, especially when production increases and competition increases amongst companies. For me here in NZ, the cost of the rift currently is about what a decent single screen would cost (one with higher than 60hz, low lag, etc). For that cost too, I get proper head tracking as well as a big FOV. For someone who enjoys their sims, I can't see many people opting for a triple screen or projector setup over it. Even if you are looking at upgrading your standard screen, the same things apply. Bar reasons of motion sickness or a really slow PC, something like that, it just wouldn't seem like a rational decision to me. You always mention going through Eau Rouge for the first time as a strong feeling with rF2, I can imagine you going on about going through Eau Rouge with the Rift on for the first time...XD
oculus are practically giving them away now, if the consumer version is priced at this low level (they have pretty much said they will also be very cheap) then surely they can't get any cheaper (the stunt about them being free is to ward of any competition) although there is pressure on the user to spend out on a decent CPU & gpu to run everything seamlessly I think soon we'll be laughing at even trying to make a stupid comparison monitor vs VR .......... square wheel vs round wheel ? EDIT hang on a second ....another thread? ....I see a vote, not fair all the rift users gone to LFS
You don`t need to be Albert Einstein to understand that dk2 has too low resolution (1280p/2= 640 one eye) Minimum resolution must be at least 1440p before it is worth to buy.
There's no rift support in menus but in game it feels as smooth as lfs in game (And looks a hell of a lot better ;-) ) i think they will have direct to rift mode working by the weekend as at the moment you need to use extended mode.