Latest Roadmap Update - March 2018!!!

The regularity in track mesh is a necessary for RealRoad and Rain effects to function properly. It uses vertex color/alpha data in real time, and when you try to assign the vertex colors into irregular mesh just for testing purposes in 3ds max, with an image that has a lot of interpolation, you'll see bad inconsistant painted triangles everywhere. And currently it can't be split, the graphical mesh couldn't have Coll/HATtarget off, this way the changes to realroad won't appear at all. Would be great if that could be possible, though.

 

I think it's a pity that the new build will be messed up, but I am very happy that Studio 397 rfactor has adopted and developed it further. Viewed neutrally, in the time of Studio 397 has more happened than in 5 years before ISI. But ISI has at least developed the best SIM of the current time, I have all available SIMs at home and none offers the driving experience of rfactor. So I just do not understand the comparisons to the other SIMs. Yes, AC has more content, PCar's better graphics, and so on. But what good is that if I do not want to play it? Of course, I want all the featured features as fast as possible and much more. But I also understand that it all takes its time, so I'm very grateful to Studio 397 for its commitment. I do not believe that you can inspire a much larger audience for a hardcore simulation like rfactor (the Gamers play all PCARS or AC ....). I Think it is more Importan to stabilize the SIM, catapulting it into the new time (VR, DX11, UI) and strengthen the base in the long term. After this the number of users is something increase and stabilize. If DLCs continue to be released then they will surely be bought as well. Considering how much VR has improved the immersion and how important DX11 was, I am very grateful for that alone. Otherwise, I hope the build will be released soon and deliver all the performance enhancements that were promised.

 

But then, why does the ported Kunos Nordschleife to rF2 with irregular meshes simply work with RealRoad? I couldn't see any artifact till now and its the only track I drive in rF2. I think RealRoad is already capable to handle irregular meshes.

 

I haven't tested that track. On a track I'm working on now I can see a lot of difference, though. The general tarmac in pit area wasn't consistant, not talking about 1x1 square mesh, but just consistancy. And when the road starts to dry out, or if the building blocks the raindrops to form the wetness behind the building, it was all with dark/bright lines and triangles, which became way less visible when i fixed the consistancy.
It's not the "realroad is capable" or not. You can't have great interpolation on an randomly triangulated mesh. Some interpolations might not be a big deal, but when it comes to drying line, it would tend to show up.

 

Ok, I never tried the Kunos Nordschleife in rain conditions. In dry conditions I can't see any artifacts.

EDIT: But since S397 announced to release laser scanned tracks, and I assume they will use irregular meshes then, otherwise by still using regular meshes the quality I think will be reduced to much - RealRoad should hopefully work with irregular meshes in the future.

 

I'm away at the moment, but been pausing the youtube HD vids of the kartsim tracks, the curbs & track sides look pretty good and similar to the laser scanned ones of iracing, really hoping the physical track surface is of a matching quality too, kart tracks in my experience are usually pretty rough, unless these (the 3 in kartsim pack) are top notch reguarly carefully re-sufaced etc but I dont expect this to be the case

Re. non laser scanned Nords .....I personally woulnt even installing / bother trying it "toytown time"

 

AMS Oulton park is based on laser scan, and has regular mesh, IMO feels very natural.

My best wish would be tricking the No-Coll/HAT objects to receive RealRoads visual information. So the invisible mesh underneath can be anything. And there are few more gains to that. But how do you make your vertex change it's parameters after objects (cars) affect it, if it's actually non-collidable, so the cars don't affect it? That's the tricky one.

 

How so?

 

AC uses two meshes, one visual and one for physics. Probably the conversion to rF2 is done with the visual mesh modified for the needs of rF2, that is, squares of 2x2 or less.

 

What do you mean by "squares of 2x2 or less".

I've looked at the mesh the rF2 port uses in 3DSimED: It is a very detailed irregular mesh (as I said 10x10cm and even smaller polygons). Yes, people telling AC uses two meshes. Visual and physics mesh. The physics mesh should be even more detailed. (But I doubt AC really can use this more detailed physics mesh with its physics model - for me rF2 feels far more realistic even without that physics mesh)

EDIT: As I said it is a irregular mesh - not built up on squares - it is built up on irregular triangles.

 

In my experience you don't necessarily have to use regular polys. As Vittorio says you can use irregular mesh for road.

Someone said that first rF2 tracks only had 4 polys width. That's not true.

 

how do iracing do it ? their track surfaces are top notch

 

That was me. If I remember correct "Lime Rock" was the first track using 8 quads along the width. Before all track used 4 quads along the width.

 

If the mesh in rF2 is 10x10 cm probably it is that physical invisible mesh from AC. The visual mesh has less polygons.
Ok, on a meshes of such density it's no problem with interpolating on irregular triangles. But instead it's performance hit big time.

 

I don't know I ever seen a mesh of IRacing tracks - but I assume they use top notch irregular meshes. (I think i've seen a mesh of their tracks when promoting something like iRacing RealRoad and IIRC it was a very detailed irregular mesh - but it was a promo video where they can show anything).

 

It's working without a problem on my machine even in VR - no performance hit.

 

how many ai? which shadow settings?

 

Only a few AI (something like 4 AI), and shadows on medium. But VR is so demanding on every track (GTX780Ti, i7-3820) - thats why I'm so thankful S397 are working on performance improvements.

 

well, here you go. It serves your purpose, but in racing conditions I assume it's a performance hog if it's really using the mesh of that density. But I'll better test that track myself someday, don't want to play a guessing game anymore.

Based on iRacing's dynamic track previews I believe it's also vertex based, and inteprolations there looked more or less linear/consistant.

 

I'm unsure if the converted track really uses the full mesh. The converted track is weird, it has one layer of realroad and some other groove layers which are marked non-collidable. But the main realroad resides on an irregular mesh, I'm just not sure if it's the full precision. It looks not that much higher in density than the current eight quad rF2 standard.