I think you all need to put things into perspective. These are screenshots. Dissecting one screenshot is not representative of how a game will look and feel when you're actually participating in it. Christ, if you dissected this screenshot from GPL you probably would never have even bothered to play the game! Yes graphics are important but you can't nitpick screenshots.
As a track modeller I'm very impressed, naturally being WIP and static images there are going to be some issues but overall for a midday shot naturally giving everything a little flatness like in real life not based on a TV camera or dodgy Digital Camera shot I'm not sure what some people expected. If you want to race more than 6 cars at once there has to be some sacrifices and I would rather be able to race 30 friends than 5 - 10 in the other oversaturated, blurry and laggy games. Anyway after today I have alot less posts to read thanks to the ignore button.
Hi, thanks for these sceens, I'm not impressed (I checked the Highres on the website), but we can see the Haze effects deforming textures, real reflexion on the car (look the sailing boat on the side) and detailed 3D car, so it's interesting, and I think, we will be impressed more with the beta. So I reserve my opinions for the beta and moving things, because I'm a little bit disappointed in these last screen shots, some technical interesting things, but not an high quality screen shot, it's a WIP, so I have to wait a bit the beta to confirm.
That's one of those questions I can't answer. Thanks for being positive, Dmitry. Please know that I am absolutely fine with comments about the software, but not OK with accusations that it's people not trying hard enough. I personally do think it looks realistic for the time of day, the same as it does at other times. But that's why you are able to make your own adjustments, because clearly you would prefer it to look different. Yeah it really does. Although I think it's hard to see it until you start looking, the sun really does do some interesting things. For example I was driving yesterday and the black/grey road infront of me looked white due to the sun. It has been really interesting though hearing how some people prefer the sim (even though it's the same quality) at different times. Some people are maybe going to have to play around with HDR profiles, etc, to get the look they want. Or maybe just race at 7pm. Try watching the Grand Prix movie and looking at the asphalt of the real track, rather than the asphalt in another software title completely different to the one you're comparing with.
Here's an rFactor1 screenshot from the same stage of development rF2 is currently in (before modders). Is it really that difficult to see some difference?
Indeed. I haven't sent anything outside the existing simracing community. Can't tell you what the third is. I'd like to see DOF for TV cams, but not for the cockpit. DOF is an approximation of where the devs think I should be looking, not necessarily where I actually am. You can run some different car/track combos offline, but I haven't seen them run online, that's something I'll have to look at and see. You are OK to voice your opinion, even if it is WIP, even if other members remind you it's WIP, etc. In the early stages I was replying saying "WIP! WIP!" Only thing I have had to 'correct' lately is that some think that the graphics have changed when all that's happened is the sun moved.
The thing is Tim that is a screenshot from the release of rf1. Since then so much has been done by modders and such to make it look better. This is rF1 too. Low res asphalt is still low res. Bring on the rFactor2!
So we're OK to compare something from well after the release of rFactor 1 with something before the release of rFactor 2 as a fair comparison? I'm pretty sure that 5+ years after the release of rF2 you'll be able to do some interesting comparisons, too. As we've said before, modders don't have minimum system requirements (although IMHO, they should sometimes). I also don't think that looks anything like as good as rFactor 2... So thanks for backing up my statement.
You can, but it's still not an adequate comparison for the reasons stated already. In a few years you can adequately compare some stuff from rF2 with stuff from rF1 if you want to. I compared beta rF1 with beta rF2.
What looks better to you is subjective because what looks better to you might not look better to 10,000 others. Some might think the shader packs for rF1 make the game look better, but I tend to prefer a highly tuned spec/cube on a car in a lot of scenarios over shader packs that sometimes look out of place on cars at certain tracks.
Then you have to create tracks with using of correct env reflections on all objects. Then you will have no problem with visual compatibility and rF1 will look simply better.
Seems this is a replay issue. I'm told there's a couple of things still to be connected and sent through. So there's some replay functions which might not make the open beta.
The cubemaps in rF1 could have certainly used some improvement over the years. Out of interest, how many people drive with the TV cockpit? You'll probably enjoy the rF2 reflections a lot... You sometimes only see a little bit when driving from the regular cockpit view.
env reflections is not only what you directly can notice (for example some objects reflected in car livery). Even tarmac, grass, concrete reflects environment including sky and sun. All objects around us do. Of course reflections will be blurred more or less and their insensitivity will change due to material properties and/or looking angle. If developer got this, then will be able to create real looking 3d engine/scene. If he (dev) thinks that it is enough to put plain diffuse shader onto concrete or rubber material... you will get cartoon-like, unreal image.
something strange... nobody compares beta game1 with beta game2!!! its unbelievable!! u compare beta game1 - year hm..2003-2004 with beta game2 year2011??? its always game2 (beta game2) with its first part... u should compare rf2 with gp1 or gp2 (1993 year) and the progress will be so huge...yeap...
No, the correct comparison for the progress would be to compare GP1 to GP2. There was progress between those titles, no? How you warped what I said to be a comparison between GP1 or 2 and rFactor 2, I have absolutely NO idea. I'm comparing OUR PRODUCT to OUR PRODUCT.
yes so why u compare beta rf1 (2003-2004) with beta rf2 2011... maybe it rf1 with beta rf2, no? 5 years.. and u try to compare this...
