To all the people complaing about no DX11 :)

Well, we live in an age where PC's are very powerful so my view is that we should expect great physics and great visuals.

I'm pleased ISI are focusing on the fundamentals of the game first i.e. the physics and tyre model. Hopefully graphics are given due care and attention at some point as I don't find rF2 to be visually satisfying, particularly in trackside cams. The importance of believable graphics in creating a realistic and immersive experience shouldn't be understated.
 
BULIT said:
Some people think that the simulator has to look as project cars. Yes RF2 should have DX11 and the new technologies it anyway. Graphically well encounter little shader. For me, it would be sufficient to improve the shaders. It clearly demonstrates a better DX9 shaders in rf1. Personally, I'm waiting until it finally ISI understand and enable people to improve their game. I am glad that the ISI is focused on driving model that is most important. But honestly RF2 be more friendly for people who do mod. Mainly I mean more editors (for example physics editor for engine etc). So the ISI continue the good work to improve driving model and let people make better graphics (for example allow custom shaders). Most of all I liked the freedom rf1, absolutely perfect ..
Click to expand...

If this message was for me, I think this quite mistaken! I have 2 games, just said that pCars with DX 11 I had gains of up to 60%. I'm showing gains over DX11 to DX9. I'm not comparing pCars with rFactor 2.

This is MY view on DX11, and I can assure you that many people think like me.
 
AraujoCarlosEdu said:
If this message was for me, I think this quite mistaken! I have 2 games, just said that pCars with DX 11 I had gains of up to 60%. I'm showing gains over DX11 to DX9. I'm not comparing pCars with rFactor 2.

This is MY view on DX11, and I can assure you that many people think like me.
Click to expand...

Not me.

But by all means, list these people you are assured think like you.Or are you just trying to generalise?

The FACT still remains... ISI are not going to suddenly turn RF2 into supporting DX11. You can all shout, scream, stamp your feet...but it is still not happening right now. So make the most of what we have, whether you prefer pCars or Rf2.
 
AraujoCarlosEdu said:
If this message was for me, I think this quite mistaken! I have 2 games, just said that pCars with DX 11 I had gains of up to 60%. I'm showing gains over DX11 to DX9. I'm not comparing pCars with rFactor 2.

This is MY view on DX11, and I can assure you that many people think like me.
Click to expand...

Even if pCars showed an FPS boost of 60%, and I've no reason to think that isn't the case, how do you know rF2 would show a similar gain? Wouldn't it depend on what is actually being drawn?

There are people with a lot more knowledge than me in this area, and maybe you know a lot too, but I often find people are comparing titles in DX9 vs DX11 and ignoring the possibility that some things might be disabled in DX9 (since a DX11 card will generally be more powerful, so can handle more) which makes DX11 look better, and/or some features more 'native' to DX11 are being emulated in high detail levels in DX9 which then suffers performance losses.

There are maybe 3 people who actually sound like they know what they're talking about when it comes to graphics engines and DX levels on this forum, and they usually downplay the graphical and performance gains of DX11 vs DX9 compared to everybody else. I'm sure if you fully utilise a DX11 feature and then try to make DX9 look the same you'll run into problems, but if rF2 isn't doing anything that would be helped by DX11 it seems unlikely it'll make it look any better or run any faster.
 
Woodee said:
Not me.

But by all means, list these people you are assured think like you.Or are you just trying to generalise?

The FACT still remains... ISI are not going to suddenly turn RF2 into supporting DX11. You can all shout, scream, stamp your feet...but it is still not happening right now. So make the most of what we have, whether you prefer pCars or Rf2.
Click to expand...

Dear Woodee,

I'm not screaming or going crazy to have DX 11. Just showing my point of view, and MY performance gain when comparing one game to another, only this. The ISI has its priorities with the game. In all the time I talk about performace gain and not on visual gains. Just to finish, most video cards have mid-gen support DX 11, then most would benefit performace with the implementation of DX 11.
 
Lazza said:
Even if pCars showed an FPS boost of 60%, and I've no reason to think that isn't the case, how do you know rF2 would show a similar gain? Wouldn't it depend on what is actually being drawn?

There are people with a lot more knowledge than me in this area, and maybe you know a lot too, but I often find people are comparing titles in DX9 vs DX11 and ignoring the possibility that some things might be disabled in DX9 (since a DX11 card will generally be more powerful, so can handle more) which makes DX11 look better, and/or some features more 'native' to DX11 are being emulated in high detail levels in DX9 which then suffers performance losses.

There are maybe 3 people who actually sound like they know what they're talking about when it comes to graphics engines and DX levels on this forum, and they usually downplay the graphical and performance gains of DX11 vs DX9 compared to everybody else. I'm sure if you fully utilise a DX11 feature and then try to make DX9 look the same you'll run into problems, but if rF2 isn't doing anything that would be helped by DX11 it seems unlikely it'll make it look any better or run any faster.
Click to expand...

In no time I said that rF2 will have a gain of 60%, only showed the difference DX 9 to DX 11 in pCars. Nor said the DX 11 game will be more beautiful, I'm just talking about performance.

Most mid-end video cards have DX11 support, and I really believe it would bring a performance gain to the game.

Just remember that rF1 was compatible with the DX7, DX8 and DX9, and we we decided which version to play.

If one day the rF2 has compatibility with DX11 will be very well received by all, you can be sure of that.
 
"but if rF2 isn't doing anything that would be helped by DX11 ", well it seems that they neither do anything that would be helped by DX9.
I think there is a general agreement in this forum that GFX is ok but not @ 2013 level. The level of GFX quality in rF2 does simply not justify the bad performance.
On pcars, AC, iracing I get better image quality with constant 60FPS v-synched! and all this with propper tripple screen implementation.

More important: Where's ISI on this? The majority of existing and new threads are about performance... Considering the high level of interest of he community in this topic, a little reply might be adequate.
I have not seen any kind of reply from ISI on this or did I miss something?
 
The benefit that would dx11 bring is a lighter code, in other words DX11 used properly will perform better than DX9. Also improved multi-threading for multi core processors.

The only true "visible" advancement is tessellation, which is absolutely unnecessary at this point in time (for a racing game). It's a performance eater and does not offer such a big advancement, but just like the lighter code, if used properly will look astonishing. But we will have to wait for better/cheaper machines to handle it on regular basis.

Other things like predicated rendering that helps render high quality motion blur eg. is again.. not so necessary. DirectCompute could be used for computing many parallel computations such as tire model on 30 cars eg. But this would require rehauling of the entire engine, which is great at the moment IMO.

The real reason why rFactor2 doesn't look like pCars is ART ART and ART. Not just car/track models, but fine tuning materials, particle effects that are terrible at the moment and those little implementations that we need.

Soft particles, simple subsurface scattering (for trees and leaves), lighting and HDR (what's with all this oversaturation??), even trackside camera motion gives an increase in graphical appeal, but noone ain't go no time for all this yet. I hope they will finish it all at the end =) or at least unlock it so we can make our own.
 
Cracheur said:
I think there is a general agreement in this forum that GFX is ok but not @ 2013 level. The level of GFX quality in rF2 does simply not justify the bad performance.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree with that and this is my main problem with the game. It's a little frustrating when you spend a lot of money building/upgrading a good PC only to get basic graphics and underwhelming performance.

As good as the game drives, the rather basic visuals take me out of the experience a little. I'm no graphics-whore, but in 2013 I expect a good-looking game. Contrary to the opinions of some people here, we can have both quality gameplay and quality visuals on modern PC's.

I hope we start to see some graphical improvements and optimisations soon but, as with everything ISI, we have to wait and hope for the best.
 
DX11 is barely even being taken advantage of, even in current PC games. Infact, even DX9 hasent been used to its absolute limits yet, but the limits of DX11 go much further than DX9 so there isnt much point in going with DX9 until you finally take it to its absolute limits. You guys will see what DX11 is truley capable of in the next few years now that consoles are moving to DX11 and x86.

ISI will be moving to DX11 eventually, not short term but eventually. I am totally guessing that in 3-4 years, when the product has really matured (due to ongoing improvements, which is AWESOME) that they will do a big RF2 DX11 update.
 
For 3-4 years I don't think that rF2 will ripen. Now it any not the constant. Tracks let out, but it isn't enough cars. With each release it is necessary to correct something. Generally graphics. They should have adjusted at once graphic part, instead of to let out on the business middle.
It is interesting to me, at what stage of rF2 as a percentage, from 0-100%?
If to think, and to look at approximate plans of ISI, to consider last time of development of the testing closed a beta, to have today's situation + long-term development a minimum for 5-7 years... now 40-50% of a product. That is, qualitative and constant mods these years shouldn't be expected. Because the graphic and physical component will constantly change.
It is interesting to me, I guessed or not. )
A transition to 11dx + is still at least 2 years + correction for all models and so on.
So, you need to finish what begun.
At all my respect for ISI, I support you! You are pioneers, for a big platform for mods.
 
AraujoCarlosEdu said:
In no time I said that rF2 will have a gain of 60%, only showed the difference DX 9 to DX 11 in pCars. Nor said the DX 11 game will be more beautiful, I'm just talking about performance.
Click to expand...

As in the first part of your sentence, turning into dx11 must not give performance gain. Even in case of pcars, it highly depends on configuration. A lot of people reports more fps in DX9. It's all about optimization which can be performed in dx11 as well as dx9.
Untill ISI cannot is not able to reach gfx quality and performance compared to dx9 version of pcars, there is no reason to switch to dx11. I would rather see rf2 with well optimized DX9 engine. It might look like pcars and perform better than current ver of rf2 which would be sufficient enough for us.

Also note, that supporting both DX9 and DX11 is not "cheap". Even SMS has issues with this and already stated that some features may not be further implemented into DX9 inpair with DX11 ones.
 
MaXyM said:
As in the first part of your sentence, turning into dx11 must not give performance gain. Even in case of pcars, it highly depends on configuration. A lot of people reports more fps in DX9. It's all about optimization which can be performed in dx11 as well as dx9.
Untill ISI cannot is not able to reach gfx quality and performance compared to dx9 version of pcars, there is no reason to switch to dx11. I would rather see rf2 with well optimized DX9 engine. It might look like pcars and perform better than current ver of rf2 which would be sufficient enough for us.

Also note, that supporting both DX9 and DX11 is not "cheap". Even SMS has issues with this and already stated that some features may not be further implemented into DX9 inpair with DX11 ones.
Click to expand...

Dear sirs, I am not comparing rF2 with pCars...just DX9 with DX11. But in a survey about which version of DX are using DX9 has just over 13%, with DX11 and 86, xx%. So, it seems the people preferring DX11, agree?

I would love to see the game optimized for DX9, but surely the game optimized for DX11 would bring many performance gains.

I'm talking about improving the game, and not to compare the game with A or B. I have rf1 since 2005 and test the rf2 almost one year.
 
Hi

The usefulness of having DX11 frankly is not yet at present necessary.
Moreover for such a small diffrérence.
This is the commercial for me and nothing more.
DX11 = buy new PC, new graphics card.
If little diffrérence, it's not worth it.
rFactor2 turns property and my PC is 3 years old now I just inversti on the Sapphire HD7950 Vapor X 3G and it is day and night.

That's just an opinion.
 
AraujoCarlosEdu said:
Dear sirs, I am not comparing rF2 with pCars...just DX9 with DX11. But in a survey about which version of DX are using DX9 has just over 13%, with DX11 and 86, xx%. So, it seems the people preferring DX11, agree?

I would love to see the game optimized for DX9, but surely the game optimized for DX11 would bring many performance gains.

I'm talking about improving the game, and not to compare the game with A or B. I have rf1 since 2005 and test the rf2 almost one year.
Click to expand...

OK. I understand your point. However your opinion sounded like, turning into DX11 must give performance (which is of course not true). I know that technically DX11 provide more possibilities and room for optimization. But to make use of those optimizations, programmers must write some routines using specific DX11 techniques.

On other hand ISI is developing own engine for more than 10 years and as we can see they are far from results we get from other DX9 engines. It means, low performance is not related to chosen DX but to code itself. Simply ISI is not skilled enough in gfx area to write well optimized engine. Doesn't matter DX9 or DX11.

My suggestion is to wait what they can provide with DX9. Probably in some short time they will be forced to turn into dx11 just because DX version coverage survey. But again: don't expect any improvements just because of changing DX version.
 
At the end of the day ISI still has to bring RF2 to the largest market for it to be successful.
I'm almost certain they look at....
How they can best market RF2 to the largest audience.
Do the few additional (mostly visual) benefits of DX11 over DX9 warrant leaving out possibly a large percentage of users.
Does DX11 offer anything from the car handling/reaction standpoint over DX9.
I'm guessing the answer is no.
You almost need to put yourself in ISI's shoes for a second, then determine if you were marketing the software, what you'd do for maximum impact in a shrinking PC market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top