I know that engine is struggling but what is the point to force higher settings then you system can handle? Come on you know that PP is on even if you have it off with DX11.
Well literally after medium there isn't any worth gain on PP from cockpit even devs told people to stick to medium while driving, only TV cams will be worth to go higher and make screen shots. The rest need an update no matter if DX11 or 9, game needs better smoke and rubber on track that is not dependent on soft particles (Reiza does better smoke and has rubber on track without needing this)
Fps dont drop much if you put soft particles and PP to high what causes fps drop is shadows and AA. I agree that engine needs to be optimized and I believe new shadow system is going to make performance better.
This will help some users : The 5 worst elements in terms of FPS are : - Shadows in first - AA - PP - Environment reflections - Real mirrors. Remember : the more trees or objects that can be reflected on the car and making shadows, there is a huge loss of FPS. Fans of the Nordschliefe are very affected by this (thousands of trees). I hope to help as many people as possible.
Right, I forgot to mention there is also a big drop in rF2 DX11 FPS if you use older Nvidia cards than GTX 1000/900 series. I tested with both a 600 series and 1000 series card in summer.
Check the screenshot below I just took from in game. Only difference I can see to the official one is that lights are less blue and the DoF (bokeh effect) is not exactly the same, probably because trackside camera is not identical.
Would be interesting to know how GTX Titan Z (Kepler)is performing with rF2, GTX 780Ti seems to run rF2 much better then I expected.
Even though the comparison might seem unfair, that is the reality. If you were to compare only new tracks with up to date shaders and textures, you'll end up with only 5 tracks, and even those that supposedly have been updated to DX11 look glossy and worse than in DX9. Most old content won't get updated because modders have moved on. I have around 180 tracks which look completely fine in DX9 and every time I switch to DX11 the game is unplayable with glossy tracks and awful cockpits and I haven't heard S397 mention that they will maintain backwards compatibility with mods, that simply won't happen. Those mods will die unless they give us an option to keep DX9, which even if they stop supporting it, i'd rather use.
I have, for the most part, overexposure. The road at night is kind of glowing and painful to look at mid day. Dusk is the only time that looks good. Is there a way to set this?
There is an easy solution for the problem that you are describing and that's pretty much just to use those older DX9 tracks without PP effects. I think what people need to understand is that wich such a platform that is focused on long term support and as a very open evironment you will allways end up with outdated mods. Kunos has the same problem and breaks the sounds for older mods on a regular base. If we were living in a perfect world all modders would be updating their content with each core update when new tech and features get implemented. But we aren't living in a perfect world and there allwayscomes a point where moving forward means that some stuff gets left behind. Thats at the same time the curse and the beauty of an open platform.
Unfortunately some cars and tracks are so bad done even with PP off you get super shining parts (and some other issues), the BTCC mod has a ultra light on the back of some cars no matter if you use PP or not. Lucky that mod will get an update, but many modders left the platform. What people need to understand is that it's the mod content that is wrong, not the DX11. Properly made DX9 content has no issues As I said in RD S397 needs a strong 3PA project to have more cars and tracks that wont be licensed, and mods on same quality as original content
If the DX9 tracks are worth updating to DX11, then someone will update them because it is easy. Remember the specs for what we call "DX11" are nothing new, they're merely proper HDR-specs that ISI released a couple years ago. The process is to move them into Dev Mode, extract the textures, remap the color range, replace the textures, and then repackage the track. There's even a Photoshop script for remapping the color range. The fact that only a few third party converted tracks are getting the treatment is a hint that most of those tracks are not worth a couple hours effort. They need more effort than texture work to get them up to modern standards. Edit: reminder of the format https://www.studio-397.com/guidelines-for-artists/
Agreed, though I have to admit that I don't really know why a in-development Sim didn't have their shaders updated to "nowadays standards". I guess visuals wasn't the proirity in ISI, but that's a wild guess. I'm just a newcomer that knows almost nothing about the company True, but the sky wasn't really in the comparison. In this regard, I much prefer the one(s) on rFactor 2. And in regards to the power needed for real-time skies: yes, it's obviously a bit higher than to render a static image, but it's not too much to the point where the overall game looks bad (which shouldn't take a lot of resources) and the skies hog everything. "Live" skies have been done beautifully well in many games, and in none have I experienced such a dramatic loss in performance just because of it. I never really noticed that, but putting so many objects is, in my opinion, is a useless waste of resources. When it's the case of a standing image it's OK to fill the scene with everything and as much as possible; but when it comes to games, specially ones where the user will be passing through very rapidly, it doesn't make sense to fill the scene with a lot of detail, it degrades performance and nobody will stop to look around. I do appreciate the level of compromise on Kunos' tracks, they look awesome and I never really stopped to think of how much stuffed it is (or isn't). Comparing videos from the real tracks and Kunos' never made me think that there are objects missing. In fact, that's what I like about their optimization, they know how to build tracks that look really nice while keeping performance in check. Still not a problem, IMO it's irrelevant while in-game. And again, I never really noticed anything weird about AC's AA. To me the problem is: while rFactor 2 does have what I consider the best physics/tyre model, it lacks in visuals and overall car detail, and that strips some of the immersion away. Again, I'm not blaming anyone, just stating the fact that rFactor 2 is known for the lack of details on, for example, the cars' interiors. (The image bellow shows some of the better parts of the car, the rest is pretty much bland and lacking in detail. But I do like how it's a regular guy in jeans driving it ) While on Assetto: I drive both AC and rF2, but I find myself driving AC more in the last weeks because of the overall presentation: very good visuals, very good physics (though obviously not at rF2 level), very large amount of quality cars and tracks (the vast majority being laser scanned), and very good performance. The only thing it lacks, in my opinion, is dynamic weather and full day-night cycles. For endurance I'm always on rF2. Nothing beats it on night/rainy conditions and long races. I love it True. I do recon that rF2's engine is dated. S397 is doing an amazing job so far, and I hope they can bring good visuals with performance improvements. And if there's anything I can do to help development, I'd love to do it. I'm a 3D modeler, perhaps I could help build some of tracks or cars? That would be awesome!
Last time I tried I'm pretty sure I had PP off and the Cars of the Century mod looked completely awful. Maybe it has to do with what Will is saying....It's a very old mod so I wouldn't be surprised some components are off or wrong. Maybe it's DX11, maybe it's the mod, my point is that right now I can use all my content without any issues at all and with DX11 I won't. All I want is for S397 to not get rid of the DX9 build and force everyone into DX11. I couldn't care less about pretty blue skies and "fancy" graphics and I have no performance issues. I'm in RF2 for the physics. If I cared about graphics I'd be playing AC or PCars. Steam has disabled the "no update" option, so if at some point i'm forced to move to DX11, i'm not gonna be a happy customer.
You can use previous version of rF2 on Steam at any time, starting at the first Steam build v1048 if I'm not mistaken They cant keep both engines, that would mean having to update both for some features slowing down the process even more. They need to move forward and maybe with that old modders will come back
Isn't it supposed to just be disabled in the settings menu of the launcher? Ohh damn, if that's the case I might need to test that again. Thanks for that
