I have owned rF2 since the first beta release and in general I have felt happy as customer how things have gone forwards recently, physics, sounds, AI, etc. I still have the first build installed on another machine so I decided to compare what improvements the game has seen graphically in 16 months. Below some comparison shots: Spa: View attachment 7933 View attachment 7934 View attachment 7935 View attachment 7936 Monaco View attachment 7937 View attachment 7938 Sepang View attachment 7939 View attachment 7940 Mills View attachment 7941 View attachment 7942 I used the same settings on both machines and the latest versions of the tracks available for build 218. My subjective preference is that the lighting/HDR looks better in build 45 than in 218, and therefore graphics as a whole, especially in the Spa case. The road texture looks slightly more detailed in 218, perhaps due to track updates, but the overall image looks duller. I can't describe what is wrong in technical terms but I think this is an area where ISI needs to work on since a small change of lighting/HDR can produce a huge difference to the end graphics.
thanks for that, shame your older builds on another machine as I'd be interested to know FPS & Performance improvements between the two builds.
@Monaco I miss that self-shadowing on 3D trees in older builds. Billboard self-shadowing was pretty messy but it was still better than nothing in case of these 3D trees. I guess we have to wait until ISI will get back to the topic of trees.
Unfortunately it's not all about shaders or computing technology, you need to have an artistic touch too. Look at this landscape (Grid2). Then compare it to RF2 Monaco.
Don't see much difference besides obvious lighting changes that have nothing to do with graphics engine improvements. I have assumed that they have spent next to no time on fundamental graphics so far (not counting car amd track improvements) because they are awaiting a later stage of the development process.
