+1 Hope it won't be a performance hog so that we can't run it with decent FPS. Or, the next build better come with track-specific graphics-detail settings! No point in making everything else look bad because the latest and greatest tracks are over the top in quality.
I hope Toban comes with a sufficient amount of Grid Spots for a decent sized Endurance Grid *cough cough wink wink* (Bathurst is a few short too...coughy coughy winky winky woo!)
Or perhaps think optimisation can only go so far until the user has to upgrade to newer hardware. Getting out of the mindset that any game, no matter the complexity, can work on a tin can computer.
Since rF2 requires SS to look good (until transparency and shadows flickering issues are fixed), it takes a very high-end PC just to get usable frame rates. The same system that can run iRacing or AC at twice the FPS (also with SS).
I think Marc has a point. rF2 looks quite awful with the settings many people in jncluded myself have to use. It does need a high end PC to look nice. Enviado desde mi ONE A2001 mediante Tapatalk
I think this is an endless, unsolvable debate because your 'awful' may well be quite acceptable to someone else. I run rF2, triple monitors with a single GTX 760 and an i5 3570 which is not a high end machine by my definition and at the graphics levels I use it looks just fine to me. You may well look at the same thing I am looking at and have an entirely different description and find it completely unacceptable. And both of us, from our own perspective are correct. For that matter we may disagree as to what constitutes high end PC. But it fills the forums.....
I was hoping we'd see the release very soon, but maybe not! I enjoy the updates though. "Very hard to see inside the car and looks too deep, but bumpy surfaces require it. Need to make it more visible ..."
Since the game is about entertainment maybe they wont release the track until we stop being entertained by their teasers. They are just maximizing the entertainment value this way....
Has nothing to do with personal preferences, If you read my post, you would see I am talking about compared to iRacing and AC with similar settings. I have no problem if the superior physics of rF2 causes slower performance. But it seems to be mostly graphics-related and as each new level of track sophistication gets released, FPS plunges further. Remember when we all thought Silverstone was a "heavy" track? Then AMP came out!! I am just afraid Toban will be even lower FPS to the point that it requires modifying settings to run properly (that don't have to be modified for other tracks). It isn't circular reasoning. It's having such a wide range in the quality of tracks that different settings are needed for newer ones versus older ones. We all have our settings calibratd for a certain compromise and balance. This throws it off. It's really only a problem since we have universal graphics settings that apply to all tracks. Option 1: make graphics settings per track. Option 2: optimize track graphics so there is greater consistency across the official released tracks. Option 3: do nothing to address the issue.
