Question to Studio 397 : graphic improvement of RF2

D

dadaboomda

Registered
QUESTION TO STUDIO 397

Hello !

When will an update of Rfactor 2 improve the graphics?

Can we expect a first improvement from the next update?

And concerning direct X 11 do you have any news regarding the deadlines for implementation?

Thanks you very much.
 
best assume graphics will look the same ( but will run slightly better under dx11 )
rfactor 2 graphics at their best are actually very nice when at their best
( the good tracks that is , sadly there are a lot of mod ones that are plain poor )

I have a good feeling some of the visual effects will be worked on too which is another bonus,
in VR I'm confident things will look amazing ( on the better content, I'm going to discard the rubbish )
 
Our target is still the end of Q1 of 2017, and we will indeed keep you up to date in our monthly roadmap updates. Remember, this is not a hard deadline or solid promise we're giving, but out best effort estimate based on current progress. Our goal for the DX11 implementation is to keep it backward compatible with existing content as much as possible, as I am sure you will all want to keep driving your favourite cars and tracks, but we are looking at both performance and graphical improvements.
 
DX11 or DX9 makes no difference to pop up. Everything in a scene has a draw in and out distance. Cars have multiple level of lods for performance, they get more detailed the closer you get. Everything has it's values so when the whoever is finished and happy with the performance the mod is released, car or track. For me I enjoy no pop up so a simple edit in the vehicle cam.ini and all is good. But it's not that simple anymore in rfactor2. The cam.ini is still there but encrypted mods and repack (no more online) has ruined it. Why can't the just be a simple slider option anywhere. Increase LOD multiplyer? Even in the plr.
 
This is another kind of story. There is also a brand new ui coming. As soon as this appears the world is open to tons of ideas then. A web based technology means that you can easily add or enhance the system. I doubt that S397 will do the same mistakes like those which have been done in the past with rFactor2.
A brand new ui which gets improved and will kept up to date instead of reinventing the wheel again and again is what i think will occur. DX11 does not mean better graphics quality. It just adds abilities and support for new features.
 
slimsymeat said:
Why can't the just be a simple slider option anywhere. Increase LOD multiplyer? Even in the plr.
Click to expand...

LODs are tweaked per each individual track/car object. If the game would just allow to remove all LODs, I assume you would get something like 50% of normal FPS, because ISI tweaks each track object LOD very carefully. Would have even more complaints about rF2 poor performance then.
 
If it will be some web technology based extensible UI, I really hope it will be implemented so that everything can be done in VR headset instead of how it is implemented in AC, where you have to take headset off and on. Dirt Rally is a good example of smooth VR UI, although rF2 is more complicated game, so expecting same simplicity, not sure how realistic it is.
 
The Iron Wolf said:
If it will be some web technology based extensible UI, I really hope it will be implemented so that everything can be done in VR headset instead of how it is implemented in AC, where you have to take headset off and on. Dirt Rally is a good example of smooth VR UI, although rF2 is more complicated game, so expecting same simplicity, not sure how realistic it is.
Click to expand...
I quite like the UI being outside of the headset until you get to drive, it seems to add to the immersion of donning a helmet to race. Easy either way though, the UI isn't the key aspect to me of VR.
 
TonyRickard said:
I quite like the UI being outside of the headset until you get to drive, it seems to add to the immersion of donning a helmet to race. Easy either way though, the UI isn't the key aspect to me of VR.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that this aspect won't be the main thing about VR experience. I won't be happy if I have to switch back and forth, but I'll survive. This is one of those cases where someone will be happy, and someone not. I do not have dedicated racing setup, and monitor is far away from the seat and it is difficult to see what's there. So, to setup session, pick car, I'll have to stand up from the seat, make adjustments, go back etc. If s397 goes separate UI way, they'll probably need separate launcher, and in worst case, it could be hacked into VR using some driver, so won't end of the world :)
 
stonec said:
LODs are tweaked per each individual track/car object. If the game would just allow to remove all LODs, I assume you would get something like 50% of normal FPS, because ISI tweaks each track object LOD very carefully. Would have even more complaints about rF2 poor performance then.
Click to expand...
I know that and this has nothing to do with removing LODs. What about 3rd party conversions who just port a track in, or are happy on their test systems that they have a good all round balance? It's not about asking all the community to change things or even add things. rFactor the cam.ini was a real quick easy fix for me, no more pop up. Play the Endurance Racers and get on a long straight with you at the back, you will not see the full field you've started with, they will pop in and out. Then they're other trackside objects. I think something like this would be easliy added in the plr under graphic options. LODMultiplier=(1.000000) is the standard entry in the cam.ini. Change this to 1.500000 or higher and everything is terrific.
 
slimsymeat said:
I know that and this has nothing to do with removing LODs. What about 3rd party conversions who just port a track in, or are happy on their test systems that they have a good all round balance? It's not about asking all the community to change things or even add things. rFactor the cam.ini was a real quick easy fix for me, no more pop up. Play the Endurance Racers and get on a long straight with you at the back, you will not see the full field you've started with, they will pop in and out. Then they're other trackside objects. I think something like this would be easliy added in the plr under graphic options. LODMultiplier=(1.000000) is the standard entry in the cam.ini. Change this to 1.500000 or higher and everything is terrific.
Click to expand...

With luck we'll have a slider in the UI, not a line in an obscure (to normal users) configuration file. The most extreme end of the range could be no pop-ups whatsoever for those with the latest, greatest hardware.
 
go VR & you'll be so amazed that actual fine graphic quality will not be really a concern anymore

solid bug free decent performance fps becomes number 1 in vr
 
Object LOD OUT has to be set properly by the track artist, as well as SHADOWS OUT distances. After that it’s about the engine doing the proper Culling and Clipping. You should not really have control on these numbers, as a gamer, whatever the track has been properly optimized or not. Track lodding it is not as car lodding. Not even close. LODs for cars stays for different models for the same parts, but using a scalable amount of tris and details. You can then switch between these different models, through scalable settings, other than the lodding the game is doing to optimize per distance. So, Car LODs are models using different LOD IN and LOD OUT to swap between them. Track LODs are just OUT distances, dropping stuff from the frustum to help a stable framerate along the path at the minimum visual cost.

Multiplying track objects Out Distances, by a factor, to fix few popups you don’t want, isn’t really a smart move. May totally throw the optimization in the water, as those numbers are not linear, but set per object and totally based on the point of view of the driver. Short OUTs will be moved a tad further. Long OUTs will be floored to nonsense numbers. Means you may exceed all max numbers for no valid reason, forcing the car frustum to render everthing along the path, even if it’s FAR away and basically buried by other stuff. As we don’t have polygon occlusion culling, but just object culling, that means the object will stay there until it will leave the frustum.

That is really not an efficient way to solve an early OUT, which may happen, but it should just need a fix, more than an overall controller flooring all values to a crazy number. That is like raising the Master level on a mixer, instead just the single instrument level you’d want to be higher in the mix...pretty much wrong…:)
You may accept a bit of stutter and up/down framerates when using TV cams (often using some crazy multipliers), but I’m sure you would hate to get stutter along the path, just to fix an object you see popping up too late on the scene.

This would also means introducing another variable in content debug and we already have a TONNES. :)

We will try raising a tad our OUTs (believe me they are already pretty high), but modders out there should start taking more care of their tracks and working out with those numbers in a more efficient way. I do agree, optimization is boring....(j/k) :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top