rfactor 2 Car models and lighting

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by FONismo, Oct 22, 2012.

  1. FONismo

    FONismo Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    54
    Exactly it's all about scaling back those details for lower systems. If it is done properly there is no reason why it can't work. This is long term plan right with rF2 and so if it means guys have scale back at first then why not? If ISI are looking at rF2 being around for 5 years say. The technology in that time would of pushed on so much that maxing the sim then will be no problem. Prices drop each new generation of GPU's with each new mid spec fairly priced card matching the last gens single fastest card.

    Things evolve so fast these days that really i don't see why you should not really push this sim if it's going to be around for so long.
     
  2. MaXyM

    MaXyM Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,774
    Likes Received:
    29
    There's no reason. Some may say, that there are a lot of people paying for new hardware and wants to get maximum fidelity.
    No one said that every one must play the sim with max settings. The settings are developed just to be used. Some with lower specs rig will set lower details, some with modern powerful cards should get max quality.

    But, what is most important, better quality, better visuals, must not force us to lower gfx settings in game or buying powerful HW. pCARS has a lot better visuals but performs better than rF2 even with more detailed models (more polys), better textures and more sophisticated lighting.
    That's only single example to prove the thesis.

    The hope may be not enough.

    BTW I want to ask you all to not burn down the thread. I hoped it will be place to talk about gfx only. Touching things like ISI schedule, which may be taken as attempt to say them what they have to do may be interpreted in opposite/negative way. I would be glad to join discussion about road map, project planning, development processes etc, but then new thread would be better.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 23, 2012
  3. 10speed

    10speed Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2010
    Messages:
    233
    Likes Received:
    6
    After nearly year of beta ISI should at least give some hints what is planned for the near future ... Because at the moment I can't see any improvements at all. Just a batch of screenshots to clarify:

    Metal does not look like metal but a very glossy material where colors loose their saturation. Number plates and stickers visually get lost. Window textures are also messed up:
    n1.jpg
    n2.jpg

    Shadows on the cars ... just have look:
    n3.jpg

    Lights / lighting at night:
    n6.jpg
    The side is completely tinted in red although there is no other car on track.
    n5.jpg

    No screenshot for the tire smoke, just two words: counter-strike. smoke.

    I'm very aware these issues have been adressed in the forums frequent times. But so far not any of them has been fixed. Based on this progress (or better: no-progress) it appears comprehensible that some users have questions regarding the development process.

    Of course, there are circumstances where rfactor2 looks ok (based on setting the "right" ingame time, weather, camera etc.). But for the most part the graphics are just wrong. And what you don't see in the screenshots is the texture flickering which annoys me even more.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 23, 2012
  4. Knight of Redemption

    Knight of Redemption Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2012
    Messages:
    882
    Likes Received:
    56
    Now Max you know as well as I do that these threads wander around the topic, I think ISI's intransigence when it comes to leaking the odd screen shot, or idea of what graphical tweaks they are working on is all part of the discussion, we know to the enth degree what is wrong, it has been discussed over and over again. It would be nice to be discussing what we have to look forward to rather than turning over the same ground over and over again. But that is what we are doomed to do until one day an update comes along that suddenly sorts out at least some of the graphical issues that are talked about. Until that day some of us are stuck with that nagging doubt that maybe there is no dramatic change on the cards. I am sure the Devs are all beavering away, but really how much time would it take to have a Dev's blog? you know a few screen shots from behind the scenes. Yes I know it won't happen...Never mind only a couple more weeks until the "when is the next update coming" threads start up :p
     
  5. CalgarySimRacer

    CalgarySimRacer Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    1
    Perfect comment.. My feelings exact.. I'd rather they focus on fine tuning the physics engine first like the shell of a house. Then finish the austhetics last.. I feel in the end, and I don't care how long it takes, rF2 is go blow a lot of the negativity right outta the water..
     
    1 person likes this.
  6. MarcG

    MarcG Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    6,731
    Likes Received:
    2,078

    and for me therein lies the problem, sure they dont have to talk about their secrets (no one is asking for that) but once in a while give us something to discuss and maybe we can help fuel their idea before we actually see it for ourselves, as I've repeated 10000x times before give us a clue what direction the modding platform is going in let us talk about it THEN release it to us wtih any ideas we may of had....instead we'll get it in an update and left to deal with whatever state it is in and point out the flaws. Sure they are their own company and do things their way but I've never known a company to be this quiet especially during a Beta, I find it mega frustrating, again a simple post from a dev every few weeks is'nt hard to do.

    The way I'd like it to be done:
    We bitch & moan in the forums
    ISI release a little bit of info what X will do in a future update
    We discuss X *WITH* ISI input (albeit occasionally) and they get ideas from us...surely thats helpful no!?!
    Update comes out
    we discuss update
    We go back to bitching & moaning but then another small piece of info comes from ISI.....rinse & repeat!


    The way its done now:
    We bitch & moan on the forums
    Update comes out
    we discuss new things in the update
    We go back to bitching & moaning because theres nothing else to talk about

    It just does'nt make sense to me, get feedback from us on certain subjects before it goes into an update, if you'd done that before we would'nt have Tracks linked to Mods from the start because we would've made it clear how rubbish an idea that is! (pure example sake).


    P.S. dont why I bother repeating myself on this cos its never gonna change :p
     
  7. CalgarySimRacer

    CalgarySimRacer Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    1
    Pcars is an aliasing mess. I just purchased me a Asus 27" 2560x1440 monitor, and I'll take the fine smooth edges of rF2 and iRacing any day of the week over the pixelated mess i'm seeing on Pcars at this timepoint with every graphic setting maxed out. In pause mode, Pcars looks amazing. In motion and from behind the wheel, Yuck is all I can say..

    Even GTR2, GSC2012, Race07, rF1, etc, to me look much finer and neater.. I'm not for that madness engine at all.. Even their finished Shift 2 look flickery as hell.. Nope rF2 to me track wise and environmental wise looks FAR more realistic. Much like iRacing. Thing that seperates rF2 from most of the new stuff tho, is the amazing physics engine that continues to be focused on and get more and more refined.

    I do agree in much nicer textured models. We seen it with some amazing mod work in rF1. So I'm confident it will come.

    Another thing I'd like to see is a little more suspension movement with the wheel in the wheel wells of the full bodied cars..
     
  8. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    I think it's the other way around actually. The game needs to sell, therefore graphics improvements have to be made (plus there are always options to turn down settings so people with less powerful comps can play)

    Ok?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 23, 2012
  9. Gearjammer

    Gearjammer Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,823
    Likes Received:
    24
    To address the issue with the decals on the cars, doing customs skins will allow you to create the skins where the decals will stand out. you do this by editing the alpha layer of the skin, making the decal areas more opaque than the rest of the skin alpha channel. For what ever reason, ISI chose to use the alpha layer to determine specular highlights for the skin. I presume this is so that they get the reflections that they want from the skins instead of the colors being washed out due to too much reflection.
     
  10. MaXyM

    MaXyM Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,774
    Likes Received:
    29
    It's something else.
    Controlling ammount of reflection by alpha channel may be considered as best way. At least saves a lot of memory. I can imagine to be able to create skins consist of many textures to control a lot of material parameters making possible to paint cars by normal varnish,chrome-like, metalic without need to prepare different models with different materials (yes, those materials differ not only by ammount of reflectivity)
    But imo it is not needed since we don't need to change meterial properties in most cases. Maybe some stickers may have lower reflectivity than the rest of livery - that;s all, and it is the reason to use alpha to control it. Of course there should be also shader which allows to control transparency by alpha. Might be used for banner on the windscreen for example.

    There are a few important problems with ISI's shaders:
    - specular texture/layer doesn;t control everal reflectivity but specular reflection only. It's nonsens, because if material is less reflective, it reflects less sun as well as surroundings.
    - it is impossible to set up specular reflection characteristic to be sharp enough to simulate reflected sun. It's is rather 3DMax issue which doesn't allow to export value higher than 100 (as far as I know) when for the sun it should be set to thousands. This is also the reason why sun washes the side of vehicle
    - shaders cannot reproduce high energy of sun light. Maximum value is just white colour which is not correct because sun reflection is more powerfull than just white couated material.

    But... those issues are known at least from begining of beta stage. I could say that even longer. And I dont' know why ISI doesn't fix this. Is it not important enough? Maybe. But for sure it stops modders to do their work and probably will force a few of them who released some mods already, to revise their work after changes in shaders. Also ISI probably will rework all currently released mods. it is waste of time and money. Isn't it good enough reason to fix those things in the first row?

    Finally, doesn't matter how long fixes will take, we have to agree that current state of gfx is not acceptable. Is not good enough and need to be refined to current standard. it might be good start.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 23, 2012
  11. Gearjammer

    Gearjammer Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,823
    Likes Received:
    24
    Part of the problem may be that any given light in a 3D application or game is only capable of casting one specific color instead of the entire color range that the sun does, or even something close. You would likely have to stack quite a number of suns with different color values in order to come close to replicating the output of the sun, but then again, it would be a pita to have to move all those suns a few hundred million miles away and then get the right intensity :)

    I think one option for skins of cars would be if the car had 2 layers. First layer would be the paint and the next would be a clear coat to give the reflection plus some small amount of refraction so that the specular highlights and such would be more realistic and the reflection would be maintained at proper levels for each item. In 3DS Max, the material would be a shellac.

    I am no programmer and I have no clue what would be involved in order to get things right like that and still have dynamic lighting to transition from day to night and back, but would be interesting if it could be done without taxing systems heavily in the process.
     
  12. GTFREAK

    GTFREAK Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2011
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    5
    ISI is basically saying "Here is what your mods will look like (structure wise), now go build your own". It's up to us to create better and more detailed looking models.

    ISI would probably rather spend more time creating and perfecting things like tire models and physics in general. Take "RealRoad" as an example. That's an excellent feature and no other Sim has that. It's revolutionary features like this that make rF2 stand apart from other Sims.

    You've already seen great looking models (from Tuttle) that highlight what rF2 is capable of, but it's up to the community to create them, not ISI.

    Yes, ISI are giving us mods. But again, these mods are only foundations. They lay the groundwork for modding groups to come in and show their talent. I just wish more people realized that.
     
  13. MaXyM

    MaXyM Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,774
    Likes Received:
    29
    Even if what you say may be acceptable there are still major bugs and issues in gfx engine.
    Without fixing them there will be no good enough looking mods. period.

    BTW: If ISI was wanted to release 'foundation' only, they might release only one track and car. But as we know a lot more is expected. I see it inconsistent.
     
  14. MarcG

    MarcG Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    6,731
    Likes Received:
    2,078
    you see thats something thats subjective, I'd like an ISI response to that because I certainly would hope they dont make their own mods just as a "foundation". They will want to sell units from Gold and displaying better models from them will help increase that, I cant imagine they'd give it 75% and say "thats it" for example, surely they strove to be as good as they can in all departments and therefore better than your average modder.
    There really is nothing stopping them from releasing the best models they can and we've already got improvements in the BT20 & F2 over the original first mods released, and while the modding community may well make better looking models thats not even half the battle, they still need to deliver quality physics, sounds and other high quality standards elsewhere.
     
  15. Fabio Pittol

    Fabio Pittol Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    71
    I really don't get those excuses that just because it's a moddable platform, the developers have the right do not bother at quality of what someone else can do. It's sold as a whole game, it has licensed content, and yet it will be enhanced by enthusiast's free work! It just doesn't make sense!!

    Don't be naive, it's business. I like ISI, I develop things for their titles, but at the end of the day we paid (or gonna pay) the same amount of money as we did (will do) for Simbin, Kunos and SMS titles!

    I still believe (actually, hope) that ISI has some hidden tricks that will kick our asses when rF2 comes gold. If they don't only the time will tell, but as we have seen from some mod groups, maybe the focus will be shifted!
     
  16. tjc

    tjc Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,849
    Likes Received:
    335
    I think ISI will surprise us... ;)
     
  17. GTFREAK

    GTFREAK Registered

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2011
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    5
    If you're expecting the models or textures for those models to be updated and "perfected", I'm afraid you're holding your breath for nothing. The models we have now are more than likely going to be what you'll get in "gold".

    Yes, this is subjective because we really don't know what's happening internally. However, given ISI's past, it's highly unlikely that better, more detailed models will be included in the final release.

    They know the community will come in and create masterpieces. Is it lazy? I don't see if that way. Take Assetto Corsa as an example. Take a look at those models and textures. And it's going to be modable? There are only a handful of mod groups that can create models and graphics that look that good. So, if the models you get when the Sim is released are going to be far superior to what an average mod group can create, what's the point?

    That example is a bit extreme, but you get the idea. AC will be modable, but it's going to take some talented Joe's to create equal or better models that Sim racers will want to drive.

    I'd also like to point out that it's not always about the pretty graphics. Pretty graphics are great, but can you run those with 55 cars on the track at the same time? I suppose with 10 levels of LOD's it's possible. I have a pretty beefy system. It's no slacker, I'll tell you that. Even my system can't handle too many pCARS cars on track. Yes, it's still alpha and there's lot's of work to do, but I would say the same for rFactor 2.

    Perhaps ISI will surprise us with super high detail cars and tracks. Who knows. I just wouldn't bet on it.
     
  18. Johannes Rojola

    Johannes Rojola Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,038
    Likes Received:
    38
    I think that is one major thing modders should think of especially if they are making cars that are raced in large numbers. Then there are these "showroom" mods that feature some rare street cars etc, which are mostly driven all alone or just with few other cars. You can have pretty much detail there.

    If mods like HistorX and Touring Masters would have made without looking things performance wise, those two mods would have been very unfunny.
     
  19. Golly

    Golly Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    9
    Historix saved RF1 for me, it is pure graphic glory at high FPS, a work of art.
    TCL had great content mod but not at the same model/graphic quality as Historix, two of the best racing mods I have raced over the years for fun factor as well. Both mods are a credit to the teams who designed them, very good FPS, if only TCL continued on to include the R32 and Jag! ahhhhhhh hhahah

    In my humble opinion, Historix for RF1 is of the quality to step straight into RF2 via conversion quality wise. The day that happens, alot of racers will be sooooooooo happy.
     
    1 person likes this.
  20. MaXyM

    MaXyM Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,774
    Likes Received:
    29
    Maybe point is to extend game/content. Not to improve one.
    Original content should be also the reference. Because a lot of moders don't know about things the reference would help them to not produce stuff which looks unrealistic or is not well optimized etc.

    I would rather say, that such games should be developed to satisfy also near future expectations when set to max. Especially if their TTL is predicted to 5+ years. If it works today with high/medium on decent hardware then it's ok. Tomorrow most of us will buy new rig and turn game to max. At the end it is how it works in gaming world *). But there is one condition: computing load must be reasonable. For example you should get extraordinary visuals. I can agree that I have to lower shadows and reflections quality to get constant 60fps in pCARS (3x fullhd) because I can see the reason why it is so fps hungry. Unfortunately I cannot say the same about rF2.

    *) The same was with rF1 - after release we all had relative low fps especially on race start. Now we all run with 200fps on almost every track
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 25, 2012

Share This Page