rf2 graphics quality expectations

Hello don't worry i'm calm
i reply
for 1) i agree there is only one and offline but no matter i don't need online to make opinion of a game's physic and graphic, and that's what it's all about.
for 2) can you tell me what is your CG, mother board and CPU, because of course you won't see difference if your hardware is not able to exploit DX11.
for 3) I agree about physics of RF2 and that's why 7 month ago i've paid lifetime license, i was hopping the great physic of RF2 but not with graphics from two years ago, if you take a look at Ferrari virtual academy graphics (2010) you'll see the same graphics as RF2 !! and really i think that's abused !!!!! especially when guys like tim says developing under DX11 bring nothing different from developing under DX9.........seriously...

 

Hello there
To resume my words and to be understood :
i'm not one of this "one sim only" like you said, because if you read carefully i'v paid a lifetime license for RF2.
And i don't say that RF2 is a bag game, but in the thread http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/9476-I-Wish-best-of-both-worlds-!!!!?highlight= when you read that you can't have good physic AND good graphics because they are a small studio, and they decided to develop under DX9 and not DX11 i feel really disabused....and i wanted to prove that if another litle studio can do it why ISI can't.....are they not GOOD enough ??

 

you'r welcome

 

You haven't read that from us. And it's simply not true, either, not in the last few years. PC technology allows for both.

A lack of understanding of the differences between DX9 and DX11 on your part should not play a part in how you feel.

Um, are we done? I wasn't aware we had to stop development so judgement can be passed like this at any particular time. I assumed that when we had announced it would be ongoing development in all areas, including graphics, that we'd be given a chance to improve and develop. My mistake.

 

Glad to see you Tim
i just find strange that in the interview you gave to simracing magazine page 7 when they ask you about DX11 why didn't you reply what you always say on this forum... that DX9 and DX11 makes no difference...what you say is just....DX11 hasn't' made it on the top of our list yet.... if DX11 don't' bring anything why did you say that ????
Strange isn't it ???
BTW i love the physic of RF2 i just want a great game !!!!
I know your answer about "i want a great game" will be : "that's our goal"
PS: thanks for taking time to answer polemic.

Sorry my english is very ugly...i'm french !!

 

Well, because it hadn't made it to the top of our list, and still hasn't. Are you trying to suggest something else?

I also did not say it made no difference, I said it makes little difference in the areas most people think it would. So isn't as beneficial as people think it would be. Are you trying to suggest something else?

Maybe, just maybe, I just answered, and there's nothing to be read into either, or pulled from two difference answers with two different contexts, and two different questions, with two different contexts.

 

Wow Tim you would be a great politician, cause you'r very good using demagoguery.
You just skeep answers when someone ask you have painted it Black ? no i've painted it not White !!!!
Please keep in mind we're not all Geek and 17 years old, some of are used to read between the line of communication, cause some of us works in communication.
Regards Tim.

 

From the faces of the people seriously interested in the project can assure you that the quality of graphics as such is not a question of principle. Graphics rFactor 2 be on the level, when you can confine itself to the wishes and called the situation is quite acceptable to autosimulator. The value of the rF2 without a doubt completely in the other. This is obviously a highly realistic physical model that is inherent with it connected the live circuit, weather effects, qualitative multiplayer and of course incredibly rich game content(in the future), allowing you to exactly recreate a lot of interesting racing series. Why do I need your glamorous picture, if I am unable to recreate with high accuracy the behavior of my favorite Mercedes C11, Mazda 787b or Porsche 962C? Here, for example, the question of optimization I would call topical. It was he certainly deserves explanation. However, I think that this topic here come up repeatedly. And I would mention the main thing, the majority of users are limited to superficial comparisons and completely incorrect conclusions. Actually what to expect from the people do not have the proper qualifications and knowledge. Seth I'm so interesting you do know from a technical point of view, what you say? Have you ever made at least modding, not to mention the development of the simulator? I have to agree with Tim, you have to understand that you are disappointed! For constructive debate requires certain knowledge, but not violent emotions!

 

1. Netcode was one of the main problems for netkar...and since I'm an online simracer (like most of us are...) this aspect is VERY important.
2. HD6870 Eyefinity setup (4032*1080), AMD FX-6300BE, 12GBram.
3. I don't now if qualitywise you can tell the difference between DX9 and DX11 in a racing simulator, my doubts are about the fact (and this is a fact!) that last generation Radeons runs faster with DX11!!!
So I know that if a buy a 7950 now I will double my fps in AC but probably I would gain very little in rF2!

 

What people don't seem to be getting is that using DX11 does not just lead to an fps increase without a lot of work. DX11 exists largely to make some rendering processes more efficient, and so the gains are only found when the developers make use of those loopholes. The reason it's not a priority for ISI is that making use of DX11 to its full extent would take time and resources away from other, more important things (like the sim itself).

 

Hello again Seth!
You are like a dog who let go of his bone about DX 11 aren't yer. Tim already explained to you here about DX 11 not being as beneficial as people might think.
http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.p...y-expectations?p=147436&viewfull=1#post147436

You've said rFactor 2 is not a bad game and you also said that Kunos have made a great game. I really hope they have but as yet I dont know that they have... and neither do you.
They have produced a very pretty one car hot lap experience for people to try out. That's all it is at the moment though.
You have no idea how AC will perform with multiple cars on the track and you have no idea if the AI will be good or not.
The features I pointed out in my other post that will be missing from AC upon release will need a lot of optimisation . How do you know AC will still run good and still look as good when these things are implemented.
Only those at Kunos know this at present.

As for your persistent claims that rFactors graphics are bad go and get Poznan if you aint already got it, then come back and tell people rFactor 2's graphics are still bad.

 

What I am constantly thinking when driving rF2 or one of the titles that are taken as reference of how graphics in a race simulation should look like, is this: "What is making those titles look so much more realistic than rF2?"

When I take the Assetto Corsa Tech Preview for example and have closer look at the car and track detail, the trees, the overall texturing, the audience, ... there is not much that it is making better than rF2 but nevertheless the overall feel when looking at the screen is that it has a more realistic appearance. The only thing that AC really does better is particle effects (wich I really miss in the rF2 engine...), 3d grass, slightly better trees and a more realisitc colouring/hdr/don'tknowreallywhatitis. Oh and the animated people on the trackside in rF2 are really very ugly!

I think all we need to get this visual quality in rF2 is in that engine. It just needs some improvements to get it.

But I think the initial question of this thread was: What is the graphic quality that we can expect from rF2? Everyone knows you will improve it, but how far? Will it have the quality of iRacing, or assetto corsa, over even pCars?

Or: Will somthing like this ever be possbile?

 

It seems to me already now things are not so bad !









Add to this an excellent physics and I am sure for a special sorrow no reason!

 

I loved Far Cry 3 and now playing Crysis 3


I WANT THOSE GRAPHICS

 

rF2 looks really good...sometimes. It need adjustments to light, colours etc. I've seen Tosch achieve amazing result with hdr profiles and, whatever he did, got the car really shiny and good looking. And wet track already looks good, just take a drive around Poznan in the sunset with wet track. But we need effects like raindrops on windscreen so wipers actually is useful.. and not that huge raindrops that is now. And we need spray and aquaplaning too. But I'm optimistic

 

Definitely rFactor 2 is not for you!
This is not a silly game, it is a virtual Motorsport!

 

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhttttttttttt

 

ttttttt ttttthhhhhhhhhhhhhggggggggggggggiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir

 

Seth and rest of you freaks that resemble him.
Reading this crap is like watching an episode of Honey Boo Boo, jaw dropping, "whatta hell did I just see", imminent loss of brain cells, growing disbelief of ones own sanity, just out of the mere idiocy of it all.
Seriously... stop smoking crack, it makes you retarded.

How the hell do you cope with these Tim, cause I as an impartial reader am having hard time without going into serious insulting spree?

 

WTF is Honey Boo Boo?