Next Update.....?

Didn't you get the memo maxy? ISI has left man. Gjon ran off to mexico, Jeremy now works for iracing and Tim is now working for SMS but only keeps this site going because he loves reading your posts.

 

LOL!!!

 

well that's a good question, but i think I would have still got pCARS for all the tracks and cars it has now, even though its still in the Alpha stage
there is a really good thread from the guys working on the tyre model and physics, its very interesting and gives me hope that pCARS will turn out to be a full sim.....at least its being made as PC sim first, and then dumb down and ported to consols, for the masses
but I would have had both anyway, as I've been a fan of rFactor since the first ones came out

I have to say that I love them both, and really can not understand all this stupid bickering abouts who sim is the best? and they aren't even finshed yet lol?
My way of thinking is that Its going to be a great 2012-2013 to racing sims too, we will be spoilt for choice, which has got to be a good thing for once lol

come on ISI, I'm really looking forward to the next update, then we can close this thread and get on with more testing

 

+1 LOL nice point!

 

LOL!!!

 

I found it not funny at all. You are ok with with unrealistic picture. It is rather sad.

 

Tuttle, would be nice if you would read twice or as many times as it takes until you understand what people write before getting impolite.

 

Mate you are so rude it's unbelievable. That 2nd to last shot looks bloody real. That lighting looks more realistic than i have seen from pCARS

 

Great post mate and well constructed. I agree all this bickering is silly, i don't dig pCARS whatsoever and have made my feelings clear and moved on. It's a shame i let a post wind me up tbh, i apologise now for my part. But yes my point was.... take away the tracks and cars and are the physics really that great, i really don't think so mate. I can't trust them mate going by their history that's all.

But we all have different tastes at the end of the day and if you guys enjoy it then that's cool. I think it was the way the original guy posted that wound me up.

Thanks for answering

 

It doesn't look realistic. Check out tail of the chopter. is plain black all around. In real life it will reflect more light at top and bottom of the tube (because of angles you watching on it).
You do think it is realistic thanks to increased contrast and brighter appearance comparing to rF1. It is the same like watching on picture showing dawn or dusk. In overall it may look impressive for the first shot but in details it suxx (but you must have to know what and why is looking bad to notice that)

 

Right but these are things that can be fixed Maxy. You know that yourself, your bright enough and know your stuff. Let them do their stuff with the engine then complain and pick when they say....right it's finished. Even without proper shaders etc you can not deny that looks bloody impressive

 

Reflections are turned OFF. It's clear as you can see no one poly are reflecting something. There are no cubemaps at all into those shaders just because we all know reflections are buggy and we're all waiting for some fix.

My point of view is that the GFX needs some tweak and fix for sure but is FAR AWAY to be called a crap...

And no offense mate, but if you said me I've no knowledge..this is the proof you're talking in front of a mirror or you want just provoking other people to messed up the thread....

Bye.

 

I give up man. Don't know why your wasting your time with the title if everything is just crap and revolves around graphics

 

Curious you have to answer twice on my single post . Are you two persons?

I never called it a crap. There is no need to mystification.
I also noted that I'm not talking about env reflection. but you intentionally skip this part quoting me. But you said that pictures are looking correct which is not true. You may call it however you want. But it was you asking me "why". So you got answer.

 

Possibly the fact you edited your original post. And i replied to your edit. Check my first reply, your post is the original.

 

Sorry it's true. You called it "IT SUCKS".

And sorry again; you're not talking about env reflections..so what the Chopper tube have to reflect?

We have specular and env ref...so if you are not talking about env ref...you're talking about speculars, but speculars depends on light angle and a black surface doesn't have a great reaction on sunlight as a color painted surface.



As you can see the white surface have a lot of light backscatter diffusion, the black painted parts just the spec reflection (shiny lines and spots) and if you want that shiny result you need env ref turned on and in my pics are turned OFF.

BTW...rFactor it's not a offline render program or a photorealistic CGI environment (and pCARS it isnt as well)...it's a RACE SIMULATOR (as AC and nKP). The GFX needs to be nice to maximize the driving immersion but I'm not asking for the real thing just because it's IMPOSSIBLE.

I need 10/15 hours to render one single frame on MAXWELL...so if you want a 0.00000000001 fps game to be happy it's good for me.

That's all.

EDIT: maybe you're talking about surfaces light diffusion and it's true that, actually, rF2 needs more dynamic range on daylight because now diffusion works fine but not enough... No dramatic things...

 

Think this tread has lost focus

 

I did not understand very well what you mean, my English is quite limited if not that is completely invalid, and my friend Google usually translated as he pleases. But hey, better than nothing.

The first thing I would like to clarify that neither have played CARS, and I have no intention of doing at the moment. In its day I played 5 minutes at SHIFT and that was it for the next 10 years. However much they try to sell this game as the final simulator, I have no doubt that this is the SHIFT3 under another name. I see easier than RF2 has better graphics than CARS, that this is better simulator RF1. But at the moment is a WIP product and at least deserve the benefit of the doubt.

In answer to your question I say the same as Maxim. "What about rF2, if it hadn't RealTrack which is only one thing unique in racing simulation market?" Each company runs its own way in the development, some have focused on graphics and other in physics. But why none is better or worse than the other. This we will value in a year or two when both products are finished.

PD: WOOOWWW!!!! Great pictures Tuttle. Great work you are doing. The truth is that the static game looks really good.
For me the problem is bad you see the game in motion.

It's hard to explain and more in English, but for me it is the sum of all the little mistakes there and which came to light when we're playing.

The AA, the lighting, HDR, Shaders, flickering, but above what most bothers me is the vibration of the textures in fences, grandstands ... especially textures with transparencies. As I say is somewhat difficult to explain but I guess you will understand what I am referring.

 

I've to play the game with all settings maxed out to obtain a "solid" view of the track, so it's true ISI have to work more on AA for non SSAA settings...ISI knows about this.