rf2 graphics quality expectations

you can't compare rbr with rf2.
But yes the physics beat since years every outcoming rally sim.
FFB works great. (I have a fanatec csr-e don't know how it works with other wheels)
 
vittorio said:
Really, a 9 year old sim does have better physics than rf2?
Click to expand...

Hype.
Great sim but its physics have nothing to do with rf2.
Ive been playing it since it came out, I stopped when rf2 was released, a different class all together.

Very interesting to try though as it is the best rally sim yet.
 
Kknorpp001 said:
Incredible.
Click to expand...

RBR's ffb was good in it's time.

After I played rf2, no other games out there will satisfy me ffb wise. They are light years away from rf2.. (I finished rbr back the year it came out and I had a cheap wheel, I tried it again after getting rf2 this year, with my g27, and it's just not there...)

I played virtually all racing games since pole position on the atari, arcade and sim...

The ffb in rf2 is so direct, so responsive, it's amazing how good it is. The ffb in everything else feels diluted to various extent.

I don't have some crazy wheel, but a very solid g27.

The one I was expecting the most was iRacing... but it feels so weak... I subbed for 3 months to give it a try during the special, was curious to see if it could get me hooked, and I feared it could... but I stopped playing after 1-2 weeks...

Graphic wise, I don't get the whining either... if it was to be as it is once released, I wouldnt mind... it's looking really nice overall, specially when you play the ISI's stock content or the feels3 tracks.. you can get amazing looking screenshots...

You cannot expect a game like rf2 to be visually the same as dirt 3, as the physics going on in the background aren't the same at all... If you would make rf2 looking the same as the best looking racing games out there, maybe 5-10% or lower of the actual userbase could play it looking at it's best... and even then...

This is exactly why the AI doesnt use the physics player does...

I'm not really a forum poster usually, but rf2 got me that interested that I registered here and post a bit.

The number of comments regarding the graphics or little things boggles me... I wonder how the devs put up with this. They are very committed to their work and they must love what they do to be able to go on reading all kinds of comments on their own forums.

Don't forget that in the end, you payed 40 to 80$ for this product... yet you are complaining as if it was a 1000$+ product.
I subbed with the lifetime package, and will likely get it a second time once I can afford it, because it's that good... and a year or two from now, if it's still going on strong, I wouldn't mind getting a third lifetime, just to support them.

I guess it all comes down to taste... to each his own.

I have AC as well... and graphic wise, the difference with rf2 isn't like night and day... it's a tad better, but the handling is just not there... it feels like a souped up netkar pro... nkpro was good for it's time as well... rf2 is killing both imo.

The track details, bumps, hills, ffb, atmosphere, the game is alive... the sky, track is constantly changing, and the AI is over the top. I found the default aggression level to be too much, so I lowered it down, and the AI is driving a lot more like clean drivers would do... and I like racing the AI so much, and going online is so .... troublesome, that I dont even mind playing offline till the online get sorted out.

To me, the only downside to rf2 is the online part. That would be my only complaint and I really hope it changes... the way it is now... it's like something you would have seen late 90's early 2000...

I can't see rf2 succeed online if it stays like it is... the servers are all empty..
 
Off roading in RBR is brilliant and haven't had anything better (yet), but tarmac is hardly RBR high point. The original author (Euro) even admitted he was dissapointed with the tarmac results.
 
Nice post pleclair, ..balanced

I think it's terrific value for money as well, & I've enjoyed this "beta" ride, it's been fun, & like to think I've influenced in a very small way two parts of the overall package:

Force feedback smoothing for G25/27 owners; & overall contrast/tonal depth to the graphics :D
 
RBR is simply the only actual rally sim ever released, but I don't find it has any good ffb compared to rf2 or rf1 with realfeel.
 
Graphics quality in rF2 is already quite good--with HDR on a high quality track, like one of feels (Poznan or Croft).

The problem is that most of the tracks aren't produced with textures that are as realistic as his--in terms of colours, tones, actual surface design/images, etc. So we have a bunch of cartoon-like tracks and trash rF2 graphics capability as a result. pCARS is the opposite. It drives like crap, but every single track is being produced at the highest quality level, so the first impressions are wonderful.

In my opinon, you can only judge the graphics quality of rF2 with a very select few tracks. You can judge rF2 as a sim/game in terms of whether it is supplying tracks that take full advantage of its own graphics engine. Clearly the answer is no, though apparently the new Silverstone will be the first one from ISI to do so. Hope so and hope that they can go back and upgrade the existing ones.

There are AA/texture transparency issues that have plagued rF since rF1 in 2005. Hopefully those will also be fixed along with a performance optimization (especially shadows and mirrors).
 
Marc Collins said:
Graphics quality in rF2 is already quite good--with HDR on a high quality track, like one of feels (Poznan or Croft).

The problem is that most of the tracks aren't produced with textures that are as realistic as his--in terms of colours, tones, actual surface design/images, etc. So we have a bunch of cartoon-like tracks and trash rF2 graphics capability as a result. pCARS is the opposite. It drives like crap, but every single track is being produced at the highest quality level, so the first impressions are wonderful.

In my opinon, you can only judge the graphics quality of rF2 with a very select few tracks. You can judge rF2 as a sim/game in terms of whether it is supplying tracks that take full advantage of its own graphics engine. Clearly the answer is no, though apparently the new Silverstone will be the first one from ISI to do so. Hope so and hope that they can go back and upgrade the existing ones.

There are AA/texture transparency issues that have plagued rF since rF1 in 2005. Hopefully those will also be fixed along with a performance optimization (especially shadows and mirrors).
Click to expand...

I disagree, you cant judge rf2 graphics quality with some of their best tracks because the engine itself is flawless, theres something with the overall tone of colors that dont match with their real life counterparts, not like pCars or GT5, also the metal paint of the cars dont have that fresnel reflection right.
I still dreaming with the sim with GT5 graphics and rf2 physics, oh, and bundle with an F1 1991 season :)
 
Hi

ISI does not have a graphics engine capable of moving textures photorealistic or high-end graphics, the gmotor not able to work properly with the reflections. These work evil jerks and consuming like rearview mirrors. Here or changes rf2 many things or going to be a game for computers within five years, , And that will cost dearly to ISI.
High intensive cost for reflections, as rear-view mirrors. The color palette is very matte. Or this sim change much or expect the same future that ntkart.
 
Guimengo said:
pCARS can look stunning (I have it) but I'd like to see rFactor 2 progress to the level of blending that iRacing has. The car, shadows, and track all fit very well within the environment. I purchased rFactor 2 hours ago and right away was taken aback by the low resolution textures and the lack of shadow cast by the car when driving through a shadowed area.
Click to expand...

Yea even though iRacing does not technically have as good of graphics as say project cars they nail the textures, and lighting on some of the tracks. These are some unedited iRacing shots I took this week.

9301534193_0524e36a00_o.jpg


9279793311_0070cb332b_o.jpg


9279790445_09c5e616cc_o.jpg


9270320228_44f1a3b7f6_o.jpg


9279785123_0c485d9cc5_o.jpg

Full iRacing gallery: http://imgur.com/a/EmQkF

This is a gallery of unedited Project Cars shots I took as well. http://imgur.com/a/WRqDx

It looks really good but a bit more videogamey to me. I think rfactor 2 should try to match the realistic look of iRacing, and I think it comes close from the cockpit at times. I usually change the time in rf2 to around 4:30, which seems to make everything look a bit more realistic to me. I think it's harder when you have time of day changes though. Having one set time in iRacing probably makes it easier for them to get the colors right.
 
rf2 its not even close to the shots before... it aint a problem if the performance would be good but... poor graphic and poor optimisation... still best ffb and phisics imho
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top