Two quotes from the recent news post of build 101 @VirtualR I don't agree that rFactor2 is awful (overall), but I do agree with a lot of what has been said in the above posts, and it pains me to admit it. I'm not a graphics whore, but i believe the visuals can be very important when creating a realistic driving sim - of course you want it to feel realistic, but you also want it to look as realistic as possible too. We've heard that certain elements of the graphics engine and post-processing effects haven't yet been 'turned on'... eight months later can you tell me this is still the case? Because I still make sure the Raindrops are 'on' in the graphics menu, and eight months later I still don't see anything. Colours are one of the main issues for me, and this problem has not changed despite many people voicing their concerns. Yes the sim looks better if you drive in early morning or evening time (9am or 5pm etc), but a real F1 race starts at 1pm - if I set the rFactor 2 time of day to 1pm the brightness and obtrusive colours almost burn my eyes out. This is not realistic. Even ignoring the brightness of the overall image, the greens of the grass and the reds of the curbs are far too overpowering. A sunny day in Barcelona... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joRZwKItlbE&feature=related I do try to be consistent when viewing the changes. With each new build I always do the same test - I choose an open-wheel car (FR3.5 or F-ISI), I set the time of day to 1pm (with clear skies) and I load up Sepang. And so far with each new build i've noticed very little change. I should also mention that the game is completely maxed out. I'm very lucky to have a computer powerful enough that i can pretty much ignore the framerates (i5 2500k 4.6GHz, 680GTX and an SSD hard drive), so everything is set to 'Full' and i even use 2x Sparse Grid SuperSampling to get rid of the remaining jagged white lines and fences. The sim runs very smooth with these settings and it allows me to focus solely on the graphics and image quality... unfortunately with the current state of rFactor2 this may not be such a good thing. If this all sounds very negative i'm sorry - it's not supposed to and i'm not looking for a reaction, just voicing my own concerns and opinion (I know a lot of people will disagree). rFactor 2 is the best sim i've ever driven in terms of handling, physics and FFB. I just wish the visuals had a level of realism to match.
That's all that really matters isn't it? It's funny. pCARS starts out with amazing graphics, but people are "doubtful" they can pull off the physics/FFB. rF2 starts out with amazing physics/FFB and people are "doubtful" they can pull off the graphics. I'm willing to bet rF2's graphics will be better pCARS physics/FFB
I agree with you buddha... i have PCars and simply it is not the same league as rFactor2, i dont know why people compare them, the only software worth. comparing at the moment is iRacing. and as far as driving simulation is concerned I think rFactor2 is leading, i dont know of other software trying to recreate to the same extend, tyre and track 'history'... and that for me says the core objective of the software. that and being open to the comunity. its a racing simulation platform .
I waited when it turn into next 100 posts about 'pcars is not sim', 'gfx in sim is not important' and so on. Guys, try to accept that nowadays good gfx must not be a domain of arcade games only. Pointing to other titles with better graphics but worse in other areas shouldn't turn into acceptance of bad gfx. In that case it doesn't really matter how good physics in rf2 is. Fact is that gfx department is ages behind current standards in computer gaming. Good news is that ISI has started to learn about gfx and we have a chance for good gfx in future. If you don't care about gfx, your choice. but don't try to prove gfx quality is not needed any time someone start to speak about it.
Well said... and I should point out that in my original post I (personally) didn't even mention pCARS. I didn't come to the rFactor 2 forum to talk about a different sim. I've played ISI sims since Sports Car GT - i've paid for all their releases, and F1 Challenge 99-02 is my favourite sim of all time. I'm a massive fan of this company, and I've played the original rFactor so much it's quite embarrassing. Unfortunately this time (with rFactor 2) i just don't feel as though the same progression has being made (so far). I know it's only in Beta stage, but it's been like that for eight months now, and i just can't imagine there being a sudden improvement in the areas people are most concerned about.
I'm not sure what Feels did with Croft but whatever he did in terms of lighting seems to work for me. I can run it at say 2.30pm with light clouds and it looks nice to me. Same setting with the ISI tracks and it just doesn't seem to work. Like the OP though setting these ISI tracks to early morning/sunset and the tracks come to life. But then it's too dim for my liking. I like sunset etc as part of an endurance race for instance, where it goes from night to daylight and you get the proper transition, rather than racing the whole race with one setting. Either way whatever Feels has done works for me. Same goes with Sebring, it also looks good at the setting i said above. I don't think btw that anyone is saying graphics don't matter, for me they do matter but sounds and FFB are more important to me personally in a sim and it's not like rF2 looks like Mario Kart or anything. My real gripe with rF2 if i was to moan graphically is the muggy/distorted/unclean look the graphics can have. It can be seen more when you upload videos to Youtube. It just doesn't look right and gives the wrong impression to rF2's graphics on Youtube. Not sure if it's lack of high res textures, lighting, i just don't know. But it certainly could do with sprucing up and cleaner visuals. As always i spose patience is the key here and we will just have to wait. I do hope that ISI are taking onboard advice and help from guys like K Szczech who seem to really know what they are talking about and can be a real bonus for rF2 if they are listened to.
The two best tracks so far are from modders, but i believe both were released later on in the beta stages, whereas the ISI tracks are much the same as their initial release. Those tracks now look awful, and really need to be adjusted. I assume they will update them along with the current cars/new content.
ISI beta content so far has been good, although my favourites are also croft and now Sebring which is from private modders, (although I did wonder on the first beta release & 1st build lol ) But in my mind the real pressure for ISI is to deliver a fantastic efficient engine with cutting edge features , physics & ffb, one in which it's as easy as possible for the better modders out there to deliver top quality mods upon. I'd be even happy if ISI don't release anymore content and just concentrate on the core engine/features etc, maybe also reserve the right to advertise any "approved" (by ISI for a quality standard ) mods for rf2. Im sure modders would be happy with this as it would still have their name on them. When it goes gold it will be the built in content that has to draw potential customers only initially I'm sure everyone has to learn together (ISI & modders) how to get the very best out of rf2 New builds have been fairly regular and each (to me) has been a good step in the right direction -if this wasn't the case then I'd be very concerned -thankfully its not, his is an ambitious project but I do hope ISI manage a gold release pre-Xmas I believe at this point it's heading in the right direction to be a totally unbeatable racing simulator.
Well, Ill take it of my chest. Pcars graphics, even with my meagre 9800gt, really give me a fit, because rf2s, are so far back, I cannot see any way of catching them there. I dont now about graphics whores (lol), but being in a cockpit there and coming back to rf2, really pisses me off
I'd think of it this way ISI make a good solid underlying game engine and then simbin or moders have implemented the content. Nothing in Rf2 has really blown me away 1960s cars are fine , but everything else is fairly average. NKP , GTR evo , GSC , and evan some RF1 mods drive better than the base content in RF2 , sure maybe mathematically they might not be as reolistc as a RF2 car but from the perspective of a driver they drive an behave more realistically.
Tim has said many times they are learning about there new graphics engine, so with that said it will only get better as they learn more maybe that's a reason were not up to gold yet.
ISI are also trying to add every possible feature that a racing sim could have Wet tracks with progressive drying line / live track surface / dynamic weather / lighting transitions etc To my knowledge all these features have not been in any racing sim & are not in the ones in beta/about to be released. I do hope all of these features become optimised along with other things though, Build 101 has been decent, hope next build is a good step also ( & include further optimisations )
Anybody here remember what the approximate date was, when ISI announced they were starting RF2?. Was it two years or three, prior to the release of the beta? Somebody was asking me and I couldn't remember.
I have an idea. How 'bout ISI build Toban (hint hint) and incorporate what they have learned so far into that and then they can "retrofit" Mills, etc.
A lot of what is being said makes a lot of sense to me. I really wonder if the whole graphics wild goose chase is even worth it? Just my humble opinion but as far as reference points, road surface textures, etc. rF1 was and is not just totally fine, but actually rather pleasing and easy on the eyes. Just my prefernce, but as long as FPS is smooth and I have reference points I'm good. I really wonder if the effort to compete on graphics is simply a distraction and also sets expectations and frustrates people who want rf2 to be gorgeous, etc. Well yes immersion is definitely helped by great graphics but wow what a price to pay. I'm telling you physics and feel for me trump graphics any day. When I'm floating a '65 911R on a perfect line on the last turn of Toban special long, I am immersed...100%. ESPECIALLY with smooth frame rates to boot. It just sems like the opportunity cost must be very high regardless of whether you have separate resources because there is just so much noise about graphics that it has to be distracting and it is also you into a marketing competition with the likes of pCars who's customers are clearly seeking something different than sim. Having said all that there is some very low-hanging fruit for example whether you like it or not ghost functionality just seems very straightforward to implement so is almost a freebie and adds much at least for those like me who love very much to do time attack with ghosts, especially my own ghost which is best competition IMO. Now weather, lighting, dry line and dynamic track functionality is very cool b/c it makes content fresh and unpredictable, etc. and levels playing field maybe to some extent. But these seems more complex to implement but are also cool. So I see it this way... - Core physics improvement is a must above all else and nothing else will mean anything with superior physics. - Ghost and other very high return items (better user interface and mod mgt, etc.) why not throw them in. - Dynamic stuff great but more difficult and not as important so do this if you can still deliver a quality product before it is too late to be relevant or is eclipsed by other organizations which are superior at delivery regardless of reason (resources, etc). - Content, hmmmm.... Content can always be added and molders are better often (except ISI has some great fantasy tracks, especially Toban!) Anyway, just thinking out loud b/c as others have said is ISI would concentrate (obviously not easy to do or know which to concentrate on) man could they differentiate themselves like no other (kinda like they did with rF1; there is simply nothing like rF1 ; hopefully rf2 will also be like that but without biting off more than ISI can chew)...
One more thing. Sorry. I wonder if the main advantage that rFactor will have over Asseto Corsa will be tire model and dynamics and AC will win basic physics and graphics. Of course GT3 will be cool too, but not sure if planning any earth-shattering physics. Rf2 is clearly targeting a leap forward in physics and AC already has great physics if from NKP and even better if improving core engine. I lied. One last thing, when you look at Historix stuff in rf1 isn't that just sublime....almost artistic? Like GSC also? I mean these mods are out of this world IMO. I know it sounds and probably is ignorant and naive, but can you really get better than GSC, etc. and NKP except for really wicked tire model? Of course,this sounds stupid now because it is literally where rubber hits the road so I'll shut up now.... Promise ;-)
The thing with tire model is you can have a good tire model in 2 different ways 1) a tire that drives reolistic all around but might not behave as that tire would in real life intemrs of the exact point at which it loses grip / how it heats up and cools down 2) a tire model that heats up cools down and loses grip at near the exact measured values of a real tire but does not drive like a real tire when getting into micro slides and getting those behaviours that makes driving so addictive. RF2 is very much the latter to me and is more in that direction. If i wanted to train and have an idea at what point a car will lose grip to train for a specific race with a specific car and i know i am going to get real track time after using the sim then i would drive RF2. If I wanted to have fun and enjoy the dynamics of a car as it moves around and I want to Feel what it is like to drive a car balancing it and getting into tiny slides and have enjoyable close racing I would play NKP. Both ways of doing tire models are realistic in different ways but to me RF2 encourages a very bland and robotic style of driving ( something that's probably advantages for F1 or real world drivers where a sim is more about learning a track and getting into a set time grove) with the tire model falling apart totally when you get to the edge of the grip of the tires. In NKP the tires ware to fast and cars like the SK2 are simply to slidy although very controlable in the slide , however the Ossela in NKP is probably the most solid and believable sim car of any game.
HistorX is not really a mod, it is conversion from commercial game GT Legends. Sure there are original content as well, but IMO they are not up to the GT Legends level.
