[Suggestion] Add more options in-game to improve performance

Discussion in 'Wish Lists' started by Jeremy Clyde, Jan 18, 2012.

  1. Jeremy Clyde

    Jeremy Clyde Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    rFactor 1 had options for things such as Draw Distance and various other options available in the PLR file.

    rFactor 2 lacks many of these options, it appears as though a lot of the tweaks that could be used in rFactor 1 to improve performance have been removed in rFactor 2, it would be nice to see some of them added, so we could improve the performance even more on low-end systems.
     
  2. Mitt Wilson

    Mitt Wilson Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2010
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    1
    I agree that RF1 had more options....
    But I DISAGREE with adding more options to RF2- ISI shouldnt have to dilute RF2 to appeal to the masses, ISI designed a Sim that is Beautiful with Graphics and Overall appealing to every Sim racer. Now having them add all these adjustments to Lower it's overall showcase I cant agree with- If anything Upgrade your self, go out and get a cheap 4 Core system and a decent video card.so you can run the Sim how it is supposed to be run...
    FYI a Carton of cigs ids the same cost of a 3/4 Core Motherboards and or a 1GB Video Card...

    Look at this.... http://www.tigerdirect.com/email/WEM2973.asp?SRCCODE=TIGFACEBK&cm_mmc_o=m21CjCd-2HPRRsCjCHFzbkCjCPzyw_BEwVybgw
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 18, 2012
  3. Jeremy Clyde

    Jeremy Clyde Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    The additional options would be there for those who want to use them, noone's forcing you to use them. Adding a draw distance option (something rFactor 1 already had in) would improve performance for those who want it, and wouldn't affect you.

    And I don't smoke or drink, so why would I care about the price of cigarettes?

    Buying a full quad core system in the UK would cost upwards of £300 ($400+). Not something which I can afford.
     
  4. bigtabs

    bigtabs Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    52
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think more options is diluting anything.

    Asking people to buy new hardware just so you don't have to see an extra button on your UI is pretty self-centered and also not based on facts. Draw distance is not something that is going to eat into dev time and reduce the chances of them putting some high end effect in. It's a very quick and easy way to drastically improve performance. Besides that, the issue is not just about supporting low end systems, it's about configurability, which is the core of PC gaming.

    I don't mind reasonable arbitrary settings such as low, medium, high, ultra etc. but for the love of PC gaming let us adjust things with some fine control too, with a bit of information on what specific thing we're enabling/disabling.

    If I see something like 'effects' - low, medium, high, max... I have no idea what is being enabled or otherwise, and there might be something I want to switch on without having everything it that group switched on.

    Yes, hide this stuff in a sub-menu - it's not something everyone wants to see, but give us the options.
     
  5. blakboks

    blakboks Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    30
    Yeah, the max/high/medium/low settings maybe should be track/car-specific. Putnam Park doesn't have NEARLY the amount of 'asset density' that Monaco does. So, even with a modest system, one could probably run a full grid of FR3.5's at PP at Max settings, but be getting 15 fps at Monaco (just a hypothetical example). Plus, since PP is so open and flat, and Monaco is tight and twisty, you might be able to get away with a lower draw distance at Monaco, but would miss that view distance at PP.
     

Share This Page