I think you'll find that anything "pre-VR" will lack in car detail, particularly for interiors, as there was less need of interior detail. In that regard, AMS is even more barebones than rF2! Studio 397 is certainly working to change that... see rF2 cars released after Sep 2016. I have no idea how Reiza will prep their content for "Reiza 2017" when it comes to VR, but they've got a mountain to climb regarding car details. Kunos' design decision for AC, however, increases car detail and reduces track detail. rF2 definitely has more detail on the tracks. Kunos realized they overdid that, so went back and added more trackside objects in the first year of production AC, so the difference is not as great now, but you can look at the buildings at Silverstone, for example, to see how much more detail is in an rF2 track. pCARS does not include as much car detail as AC, but also definitely has more detailed tracks than AC. pCARS 2 turns the detail up a notch. As far as I can tell, R3E does more with textures than anybody else. Rollcages have weld textures at the seams, for instance. Sector 3 track artists are devoted to detail, too. Take a look at Spa and compare with AC.
@fsuarez79 Just edit that PP off from player.JSON, use same in-game settings as you are using with DX9 and you get same performance DX9 vs DX11
Ok thanks, I will test it soon, tho even if it works and my old mods are still usable in DX11, I might switch back in the meantime just for the plugins
I think this is also mostly down to mods and not up-to-date content. DX11 changed the tone mapper of HDR to much more contrasty, so the light parts will look lighter and the dark parts darker. This makes for example the tarmac on Sepang look too white, because the texture wasn't built or adjusted for DX11 tone mapper. Texture tweaks would solve this entire problem, that's what I do to modded tracks when I update them for DX11. It's a really simple thing to do as well.
When I come back to rF2 from PC2 I am always amazed at how well rF2 looks in VR apart from the earlier issue. Dust can be breathtaking. rF2 does a much better job with shadows. PC2 has an oily looking shadow with little detail. I'm using PC2 because it is the newest with overall best VR but I think a fully finished rF2 or new rF3 would give PC2 a good run and dare I say even better? Is there a way to adjust brightness in my video card?
To add a few more thoughts to this whole object density discussion and why different devs do stuff as they do. As allready stated AC was developed as a VR game pretty early on of it's life time. 2013 Oculus rift became relevant and basicly right at the same time Kunos published the tech preview of AC. Thatswhy they added more focus on the car interiors and had to lower track detail. rF2 was developed when VR was pretty much non existent so they propably never thought about this aspect and built their engine according to that situation. From todays standpoint it looks wrong, but nobody is able to look into the future. Building an engine takes lots of time and financial ressources so you can't just use a switch and go into a totaly different direction. When you consider how long it took to get AC where it is now in terms of performance and visual style etc. you can easily guess how long it will take S397 to get DX11 work properly with new shaders, good performance and still moving forward. Now there is the point where you could argue what is more important: the track that you are looking at pretty much 100% or the interior that you more or less look at in a periphere way? Don't get me wrong, I like a nice cockpit, but I get more put off by a lifeless looking track than a low res texture infront of my face that I don't put much attention into anyway. In that respect the sky is a very important factor when we are talking immersion because it usualy takes a very big part of the screen. To some extent it is a question of philosphy aswell. I for one like it to blast down historic Spa and see the cows next to me when I drive along those public roads with 300kph, but someone else might just not care. To argue if it is an unimportant wasted asset is pretty much a matter of personal taste at the end.
I think AC also sacrifices some physics response time as well for that buttery smooth VR experience. Even with PC2 out now I still think Historic Spa is the best looking and most immersive tracks! Anyone attempting to build a sim or mod track need to spend a lot of time driving it.
I found cache in steam/steamapps/common/rFactor2. Is that the file? I haven't found shader file though.
...\Steam\steamapps\common\rFactor 2\UserData\Log\Log\CBash and ...\Steam\steamapps\common\rFactor 2\UserData\Log\Shaders Just delete the files inside both folders to get them recreated by the game.
It would practical with some proper documentation and support. Thing is it's seems to be on contrary way that current management intends to do.
What exactly is wrong with the RF2 engine that cannot be resolved with man-hours and they would have to start fresh with RF3?
I agree it's not impossible. Like I said, it's not practical. How many people, on their own, even with relevant documentation have the man hours and dedication to see a mod or track built from scratch through to something that an increasingly demanding community would use and enjoy? Teams are out their like the Next Gen guys with the BTCC mod amongst a few others. I was talking more about the guy on his own with a PC.
They seem to be all disabled as in "Force Feedback":{ "Brake effects on steer axis":0, But some of these so called "canned" effects might be useful. Like AC's "Slips" for example.