Discussion in 'Modding' started by Michaelc, Dec 2, 2018.
If they have the original scan then its much easier is what i mean.
They probably never thought of it. It didn't occur to them to see if they can improve.
Imagine the pain of developers as they watch long loading times and don't know what to do. They probably tried snake oil and magic songs but it didn't help.
Luckily they have invaluable advice in posts like yours.
I hope they read this thread and they will learn they just need to see if they can improve something. Just that. Simple.
Because until know that never occurred to them. After all they are just working on that software for years as a daily job so no way they could come up with some deep revolutionary idea like that.
Sometimes I think you ask a bit too much of the realism and detail aspects. You can't have all the detail you want and expect it to load as quick as you want, especially if you intend to run 100 AI on Nords when it comes out.
Well, they have installed The New FIA Fence too..? FPS drop for sure..!
One of the versions of the ring I've found is supposedly laser scanned. The graphics are great but its also filled with blind apexes that tend to dampen the fun factor for me. The S397 Sebring track is simply superb IMO except for one thing, the bumps are far more severe than in real life when comparing real life MoTec data. I think I know why, but its just a guess. Most of the worst bumps at Sebring come from the settling of the concrete segments, some as much as an inch of difference. Once the gap extends beyond about 1/4" the edges begin chipping off. There are gaps in the 1/2" range vertical but the edges are usually broken back at least an inch horizontally and as far as 3" or so, at least the last time I rode a trike there a few years ago. Even then they were getting ready to do so concrete grinding in prep for the upcoming 12H race.
I have a hunch that while the laser scan may be accurate, the resolution required to add all the broken edge factor into the model is beyond the resolution capability, but again thats just a guess.
Not a jab, but are all the people who complain about load times using mechanical hard drives? That's a serious question because I've never been bothered by rF2 load times. Sebring with 40 AI loads up in a few seconds. Same with the other tracks.
The *only* time it takes longer than a few seconds is the very first time you load the track. That can take about a minute, but after that loading times are pretty fast.
For me the loads are very slow.
I would have to calculate again, but it's long.
SSD new on port sata 6 gbs.
i7 4770k not OC.
16 go DDR3 1333 mhz not OC.
GTX 1080 OC + 5%.
No mechanical hard drive, of course, otherwise I would not have complained.
Loading times, especially the track and car loading times, are not much limited by disk, but rather by CPU. Tracks are typically around 500 MB on average, and that amount of data is quickly read from any disk. The limiting factor is the CPU decrypting track and loading assets into memory.
For me loading Sebring with 40 GT3 AI takes over a minute with an SSD, so I don't see how a few seconds is possible unless you are using a 24 core CPU.
Same here, SSD NVMe and it's slow...
I think a LOT depend on how the software work. For example, switching from 8GB ram + "normal HD" to 16GB ram + SSD , impacted very little loading times in RF2, but now, DCS world that usually took minutes to load, now take seconds for the main screen and less than a minute to enter the 3D world.
Separate names with a comma.