Discussion in 'News & Notifications' started by Christopher Elliott, Sep 26, 2017.
Perhaps we can discuss about unreleased GT2 cars ?
English is not my native tounge and I guess yours neither. I don't understand what you are trying to say.
My question was: does anybody (here in RF2 forum) knows if PCars2 has rain animation dependent of type of vehicle or vehicle speed?
I am just curious because they are industry leaders in such stuff, aren't they?
project car are leaders in graphics of their own . where you should ask that question is in your forum
I very much doubt that this becomes real with the wind and the speed
@Lazza la verdad que lo que tu creas es algo irrelevante , la realidad es la que es y en formula 1 la lluvia es inexistente en el casco por diferentes motivos , no que no entre agua en el coche, o no que no exista , o no que no moleste el spary del que va delante , que son cosas diferentes , es inexistente porque la aerodinámica, la velocidad y el viento se llevan las gotas casi al instante, si no fuera así tendría limpias en el casco porque no podrían ver ,y como veras, no lo llevan ni los pilotos de motos, ni los pilotos de f1, ni mono-plazas descubiertos, el problema de los pilotos suele ser el vaho , que donde se suele dar mas el problema es en motos ,
es mas las laminas transparentes que los pilotos se quitan del casco , lo hacen por la suciedad principalmente, aparte de la película del repelente de agua
y por la cuquita del niño jesus que no te contesto mas el tema, que veo que eres duro de oído o de ojos , en tu caso no se que es peor @Lazza
The spanish forum is this way ---> https://forum.studio-397.com/index.php?forums/spanish.149/
Wow, there's a lot of PS Gran Turismo in this screenshot.
I know nothing about the story behind this.
But from my experience racing in a league catering for mostly new and inexperienced racers, the faster and harder a car is to drive, the less interest in it.
So maybe the effort required for a quality mod of this caliber would not have been vindicated...
If we really want RF2 to grow and succeed then maybe we need to sort of put our hardcore genes a little on the backburner and let them cater for the market a little bit, prioritize the things that sell.
You can have the tastiest meal in the world but if you just throw it on a plate with no presentation whatsoever people will lose their appetite.
Now where's my GT3s.
Nuh, just kidding, I can wait another hour or two
from rf2 discard channel good news for modders
Marrs - Oggi alle 13:24
We're still working on and testing the new UI.
If, with "final DX11" you mean DX11 becoming the default, that is a discussion we're having now, no conclusion yet, but possible.
And we will most likely post some new tyres after the GT3 pack in case modders want to use them on similar cars.
In May we announced the “open beta” of our brand new DX11 engine and in the following months we have received a lot of feedback and support from the community that have lead to numerous improvements to the performance and visual fidelity. Our plan is to make DX11 our new default at the end of September. At that point we will also update our current demo version. We will keep the DX9 builds in sync until the end of the calendar year.
It is bit confusing, first there is plan to make DX11 default and 30 days later it is a discussion.
They are very late in their projects but it happens frequently in a project. On the other hand, what they do must be good immediately.
I say this because it took 3 versions of the mclaren 650s before it was at ISI standards.
DX11 is beta now. There have not been changes or fixes to the issues why it is still in beta stage.
No screen painting info unavailable.
UI is untested at large scale.
Performance issues regarding fullscreen mode.
In order to be default, it should be something complete.
DX9 is fully functional and it should be considered default version.
Only VR users do actually need DX11. They will use it anyway if they want to use their VR devices. Why force the majority of not VR users that get basically no advantage?
Hope it is just my wrong interpretation, but this + the delays + the changes in roadmap targets is kind of starting to feel like a c*****f**k in the making.
People plan things all the time and either fail to do them, or don't do them when they hoped. I think it's wrong to see that as some indicator of intent. (not saying an update on those plans wouldn't be welcome, before people put me on 'that side' and throw a whole heap of their gripes in...)
Theres been loads:
It seems that like in iRacing DX11/DX9 has also rFactor 2 DX9 mandatory duplication of everything GPU VRAM in main RAM and virtual memory causing the huge system RAM requirements and the bus load which is causing lot of performance issues and I can hardly imagine what is going to happen when the new shadows system and rain effects is going to be introduced to rFactor 2.
Roadmap in August:
In May we announced the “open beta” of our brand new DX11 engine and in the following months we have received a lot of feedback and support from the community that have lead to numerous improvements to the performance and visual fidelity. Our plan is to make DX11 our new default at the end of September. At that point we will also update our current demo version. We will keep the DX9 builds in sync until the end of the calendar year. We will continue to improve the fidelity of our DX11 engine, improving every aspect of it step by step, and this process will continue in the years to come. As we discussed last month already, we also fully intend to provide an exciting new solution for plugins to render to the screen as part of this ongoing development and we will look at what information we should really be providing “out of the box”.
If this plan to make DX11 new default is going to be changed for my part it is going to be RIP rFactor 2.
Ari, this isn't the first time I hear you talking about this, do you think devs aren't aware (if real) of this?
If this is real (I doesn't know how this work so...) I hope they will sort it out because DX11 switch can be the opportunity to improve the engine not only on the graphic side, on the outside, but even under the hood...
I think the switch to DX11 will be a huge step forward on the long term because they will work and mantain only one version of their engine (no more DX9) and they will have more time and resources to invest on it.
@everyone (I miss Discord tagging) I can understand people being upset to see release date moving forward but give them a breack, "shift" happens...we don't know which problems or bugs they are solving right now (and how much time they need to be solved) or if a major brand still doesn't give them the green light for releasing the car...so why bashing them?
This is only a game, one of the best on is genre but still a game...1-2 month doesn't change a thing in your life!
Let's ignore the other issues @SPASKIS talking about.
Yes they do @DaVeX and I think it is reason why so few posts/replays from devs about performance issues like stutters/freezes etc. in Technical & Support section
Wow ground hog day every day
So repetitive,I hope those few are just copy and pasting their posts and not writing them out again,every day,every week in different threads.
So we should ignore his misinformation then? What goodwill that do for newcomers to read his post and think he's right when he is blatantly wrong?
Probably this is the exact reason why not everyone is happy. They simply refuse to talk about things people want to know. And due to this people start speculating and here we are.
Kind of hard to believe the green light issue when they originally wanted to release the pack in September.
People speculating about how will be the dx11 build perform on mainline because for 2 months now we don't have any info regarding the dx11 performance.
When folks asked on discord how will be the dx11 rain performance. No answer. And so on.
And they topped this with a "roadmap" which was nothing new basically. Yeah, we got a shitty image which was mistery for about 5 min. Instead of a high-quality nice promo pics for the new car.
Yeah, ignore it.
Separate names with a comma.