What's with people not caring about looks?

Hmm RX 480 equals a GTX 970 in performance, you shouldn't have any problems running rF2 at max settings with it, it should easily manage a steady 60+ FPS @1080p. People have maxed out rF2 on 1080p ever since GTX 700 series came out few years ago and not much has changed since then with gMotor engine. Maybe it's the Soft Particles setting, I would recommend turning it off as it does almost nothing and bogs down performance for some users.

 

Cool, I'll give it a try.

I just assumed it runs so much better on iracing because of the DX11 engine.

 

If you are running rfactor2 windowed or borderless window your frame rates will fall quite significantly compared to fullscreen

 

I did switch to borderless as the game kept crashing when alt-tabbing in and out.

 

Yeah , i know , that's why when people say pCars 1 looks great i often disagree . Even with high (i think i have DSX4 or something on) AA @4k there is to much that annoys the crap outta me . Alot of tracks in rF2 dont have much if any flicker at all but to be honest R3E has to be the best imo at AA but the cars feel dead and numb to me ,lol
I'm pretty hard to please in case you cant tell .lol but being stuck inside mostly, racing Sims have become my safe and happy place and having rF2 feel the way it does (fukin Awesome) i just hope and dream for it to emulate the outside as i see it.
Sorry, but its just what ive become .lol

 

If this is my thread then there's no trolls here , say whatever you want or need .
It's all about saying "your opinion" . You wont hurt or upset me .

 

Running rF2 maxed out with a GTX 770 is pretty much impossible for me, even on a 1440x900 screen. That said, it runs pretty nice and smooth with everything on high, even reflections and gives a nice and sharp image. It could look a tad more vibrant at certain times, but that's being adressed I think. But a 970 should be able to run it just fine on max.

Anyway, it's obvious that PCars is the better and more consistent looking game in general, but that comes at a cost. I can only judge what I see on my screen, and that's definetely not the big difference that some people see on their screens. That's how PCars looks on my machine when I want to have playable framerates and a clean image. Not that overwhelming:

 

The flicker probably looks less due to Youtube compression also .
It is always fences too!
Is there some hope with any new tech (on the horizon) for the future that will help with this because this would be the finishing touch in gaming realism .
Again i have no idea about this stuff .

 

I thought the RX480 would do 1080p because i previously had a GTX 1060 (similar performance) it almost did lower setting 4k .
Is your CPU the limiting factor?

 

Where is that ? i'll see if i can do a similar image.

 

Isn't that because it's not finished yet? There is another video whenever there is fire on cars exaust the cockpit gets a blue flash lol

 

Pcars DOES looks great, you may like the style or not, but it's still a visual benchmark for many...but it does suffer same glitches every game in the planet has, more or less, because technology has limits. And more little details a game has, more glitches you'll get. Yeah, there are new tecniques (mostly theoretical), alternatives to actual filtering methods, but they are too demanding for actual hardware, but there is hope for the future, in the long term... Talking about game industry in general.

 

Chase view! Blasphemy!

What would be nice though is if passionate sim enthusiast developers got together with a bigger dev team that are good at optimized flashy graphics and sounds, and then have them make a race game that have 3 modes: arcade, simcade and pure simulator. It would get everyone into the same game. PCars 2 graphics with rF2 physics... Mmmmmm.

Still, i cant get the same satisfaction from those flashy awesome looking racing games as i can from a title like rF2. As soon as the cars feel and behave unrealistic the enjoyment goes out the window. I think us older guys that have been around simulators (different genres) a long time have gotten so used to that when developers simulate reality the graphics almost always suffered (gotten better and better). Even the armies around the world who use simulators for practice have always had simulators that are crappy looking but with real data punched in to make weapons/vehicles behave as close to reality as possible. In the last case with military i think it was just too heavy for the hardware to run great graphics together with the realism. I remember they were using really beefed up PC's to run grunt simulators and they looked pretty bad graphics wise, and im guessing its because the simulation of real data ate all processing power. It wouldnt be good for business if the minimum requirements for us was the top range hardware lol.
We will see what GTR3 will bring. UE4 engine can be made to look very realistic. Question is how the physics will be. I always say to make 2 modes at least: simcade and simulation. Otherwise they have to settle for one, and the former always sell more copies... You would think they can make proper physics and then dumb it down for those that dont want too much realism and have 2 modes, but maybe it isnt so easy? Or maybe those that develop simcade simply cant do proper physics? I dont know.

Bring on the nano tech computers already so we can have realistic physics AND graphics! Until then i will enjoy the crap outta what we have tho.

 

That's with the Pagani on Nurburgring. Keep in mind that it is a replay image and Steam compresses the screenshots alot. From the cockpit it'll look better, but the same applies for any sim. In PCars I have the biggest problems with cables and thin objects, but that's to be expected as Tuttle allready explained. What I find more annoying are the shimmering trees. It's hard to point a finger at it, but I get a better image quality in AC and rF2.

 

Agree on your first point
But I have never seen my pCars screens looking like the picture you posted.
I have a Nvidia GTX 980 TI feeding three BENQ 27" 144Hz / 1Ms monitors, almost all visuals maxed out. Depending on track and weather and the number of cars on track I get an average FPS of something between 60 and 120.
Storm / night drops the FPS sometimes as low as 50, but even then it is playable.
For some reason rF2 leans a lot heavier on my system and though I lowered some settings it is no exception to see FPS drop below 40 at the start of a race, augmenting when the field spreads. And in these circumstances I get massive stuttering on the edge of even playable.
I do love rF2 physics (which is why it gets a lot of driving time), most tracks look OK too (though I find the view a bit too sharp - which I can probably soften, just don't know how), cars around you look very good too, sounds are nice.
A lot of cars could use some better looks in cockpit view though.
And some of the car previews in the UI (the Mazda Miata springs to mind) are really ugly...

 

Okay , i thought GTX 980 TI and GTX 1070 where on par ? I get (in rF2) a constant 90-110 fps without v-sync and pretty locked v-sync 59.9 @ 4k and no stutter at all with v-sync but the same stutter i get in all racing games/sims with v-sync off .

 

Weel,i run RF2 at moment in a 9 years old PC whit 3 caps blowed hehe,40 FPS max whit all in low or off,honestly i dont care about the graphics so much,for me they are enough in RF2,but whit the DX11 on the way things may stay better hehe,also new hardware coming soon

 

It's quite simple,the main processing power is taken up by the physics,if you want better looks,ask them to simplify the physics,or maybe buy forza

 

lol , i cant even figure out how to take a screen shot in pcars ? i got photo mode to work but F12 and win prtscr don't do anything ?

 

Hey man check out post #78 of this very thread . It came to me ,lol i didnt even have to go looking for it !
First line of his post
"I don't care about the graphics so much"