What's with people not caring about looks?

Hope it's still Q1 ( dx11 & VR )

Can't wait !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

"I think the graphics look just fine" != "its a Sim and it doesnt matter what it looks like" (quote from your first post)

I'm only responding to your post and what you said in it. If you want to be literal in what you're saying, I'll either answer accordingly or not answer. The graphics are ok, they aren't 90s graphics despite some people referring to them like that (those people should try loading up some 90s games for a refresher; hint: it's never as good as you remember), but of course they could be better. I agree.

However, starting a post 'quoting' people saying what you did, and arguing against it, is stretching things a bit. No one's getting antsy, it just sounds like it because they're responding to what you said, and you probably don't realise how what you posted actually sounds.

 

I know a lot of people that still play on old computer, and the first thing they do to play is downgrade the graphic settings, they can still enjoy RF2 simulation, but obviously, to them graphic enhancement is a non issue. Honestly, while I have a decent PC, I still need to decide if I want it to look fine, or if I want FPS.. I choose FPS on candy everyday. But in no way, I would oppose better graphic just because I can't afford them.

 

Nah, i know what i said and what I've read being said.
Anyway I've moved on as i think this topic is never going to end even when the graphics become photo realistic.
I'll still probably find something wrong to say.

 

I think my PC can have both.
But 60fps is perfectly fine with me as even though im getting 120 fps in 4k there is still always stutter so i use v-sync and dont notice lag.

 

You probably already use frames ahead = 1 in nvidia control panel? If not you can do that to minimize input lag as much as possible. Even if you experience little input lag without setting it you should get even less with it set to 1. I run rF2 with adaptive vsync and minimum frames ahead = 1, and the input lag is minimal.

 

Yeah i have tried 1-3 frames ahead but stick with one.
No matter what i do it always look smoother with v-sync. Like butter as opposed to stutter, lol.

 

Just imagine rF2 looking like this though..

 

the sun reflection is bloody overdone tho

 

I think, nobody is denying that PCars or PCars 2 look pretty good. The difference to Studio 397 is that SMS developed the Madness engine with quite a big budget sponsored by EA, where Studio 397 is porting an inhouse engine from ISI that needs to work backwards compatible. I won't say that it is impossible to create a great looking game for a small studio, but I doubt that it will ever look like PCars. Next to the fact that I would like to see the latency in that video, because that's one of the big issues with PCars for me. To get a nice and sharp looking image you have to inject quite high amounts of AA wich leads to more latency, not to mention all the PP effects that you can switch on and off though. At the end PCars doesn't look that much better on my PC than rF2, especialy not from the cockpit and especialy not if you are looking for a smooth experience with low latency.

 

lol. I can/will and do fantasies anywhere. just ask my Wife.

 

And im not talking how good" it" looks, i have pcars 1 and never play it (8hrs in Steam) but just "fantasising" mashing it into rFactor 2 the only Sim i play.
Lag would possibly be an issue to alot of people (not me fortunately), i will buy it (and who knows might be okay) i just chase realism as im not physically able to ever race on track but have to live in a virtual world alot these days and racing is all i ever want/wanted to do.

 

Apply a red-yellowish post-process filter and update the skybox clouds, and rF2 will look roughly similar. There is no way tarmac looks that amber colored in real life unless it's made of granite. I much prefer games going for a realistic look.

 

RF2 actually looks really good with all the settings on high.

The big issue is that the engine seems to be poorly optimised compared to other sims.
Hopefully the DX11 update will address this, and allow alot of people to increase their settings.
My PC is not great, an FX6300 with an RX480 8 gig GPU.
But it runs iracing on full graphics at over 100 fps.
With RF2 on full I'm about 35fps.

Sort this out and the visuals will be better without any additional updates

 

Im not so sure, i just was out for a drive at 5pm on a hot sunny day in Queensland Australia and the sun / shadows and reflections were pretty similar.

 

Are you playing @ 1080p or 4k?

 

If anything the PC2 video has the sun itself not doing enough, but trying to somewhat emulate what happens when the sun is in your face without just making it a windshield effect I guess isn't that easy. But that 'mild' sun makes the reflection seem wrong, because it feels like the sun is behind cloud that should reduce the reflection.

Anyway, while sometimes the PC2 feels a bit artificial overall, if you pause the vid and try to imagine standing there... dunno, doesn't seem too far wrong (@stonec I think expecting all tarmac to look the same is unrealistic; and time of day is huge there, afternoon will give everything an amber shade - in fact that sort of shading is exactly what people love about certain times in rF2, so if PC2 didn't do it you could actually call it out as a fault). And rF2 at times has a good realistic balance to it, the DX11 shots are promising with better shadows and general dark areas, so hopefully we get a bit closer.

 

Plenty of "massive" flickering there too.

 

1080p single monitor

 

Cheeky Tuttle. Was about to say the same, but didn't want to be called a troll again. Haha.