What's with people not caring about looks?

That is beautiful. Haters can say whatever they want but graphics not only matters, it also sell.
Better to have the average Joe trying to learn sim racing being tempted by pretty graphics than not even trying because the sim looks like GTR2 with better lighting.
@Ernie agree, it's very strange, but I guess making it for a single hardware probably helps a lot

That said I see some people with too much hype for DX11 lol all time in dev blogs they say it's "just a port", people are expecting a full rework of everything, they'll be disappointed, even rain was not mentioned if was being reworked or not (I think should be the minimum at release) if I'm not mistaken, if I am somoene correct me please

 

You are correct in your final comment.....I just dream big

 

If the DirectX11-port have no further consequences for the graphics, other than being DX11 then it wouldn´t make much sense.....
So hoping for the unexpected/unconfirmed.

 

I agree... Ill put it another way that with rF2 physics

 

It is a rendered trailer for marketing purposes, so don't expect the game to look like that when you are playing it. It's actually quite easy to spot stuff like billboard spectators, but they are good at highlighting the strong points like the lighting and hiding the ugly stuff. The footage from the cockpit isn't too overwhelming and you can get AC to look quite similar allready.

 

That was already assumed. Comparing apples with apples

 

The gameplay videos aren't that far from the trailer IMO but yes some strange stuff like the poor quality of the buildings is noticeable and the cars look a bit strange when they are far from the player

 

Wow!! I want one. I guess I'm about half way with the Fanatec v2.

Also, I could say the same thing about driving rFactor 2 coming from AC. There are corners and hills on the Nordschleife I didn't even know were there, that I have to prepare for in rF2 now.

Two other cars that show off rF2 physics for me are the F1 Spark and Lola T70. The Lola for incredible entree corner setup steps I need to go through are very close to a real car. There is a wealth of detail to be had in rF2. I am so addicted.

And you say this is even more so with a DD wheel!!

Do you have any idea who you are saying this too??

 

Someone with time and money.

 

Unfortunately I have time because of low oil prices and a tax and gouge government but no money for the past year. Cross my fingers nothing brakes.

 

Sorry to hear that.
At least it sounds like you are enjoying rF2, if only a wee bit!

 

A "wee bit"! That's like saying Hitler was a bad boy!!

Yeah!! A wee bit for sure. And I don't mean it as an AC put down. It's just what I have been using for the past couple of years. In past posts in AC's forum I referred to the icy plowsteer as a no information slide which is exactly what it is. Missing physics!! I know Aris made a comment about leaving physics out so the cars wouldn't roll over and make for funny videos. Well I can roll a car over in rF2 and I don't recall any funny rF2 videos or care.

I did experience a noticeable poor graphics moment and that's at the start of a race. The 60's F1's were pretty grainy so I am grateful for the DX11 update coming.

 

Yeah, that's one thing that has always driven me crazy in AC - low speed grip issues. Most of the other Sim's have that pretty well sorted now - at least much better than they used to be (ice-racing). I like that there are cases in rF2 where you have to counter-steer to avoid rolling the car over high curbs at speed (smaller tin-tops).

 

vegaguy5555 said:
"Do you have any idea who you are saying this too??"

Are you.... Lewis Hamilton?

 

Close!! I design and build sim cockpits. Just working out the math formula for my new VR full motion rig for rF2 in mind. This should amplify everything many times. Inside this thing you will be too scared and busy driving to notice much with graphics.

I'm financing it myself at the moment but thinking of kick starting it.

 

Well you should just run a GTX 970 and set all settings to low and be happy. lol

 

The only reason to deny Project Cars has better visuals than rF2 is the self-deceit. This video is just one more proof of it.
"Oh, they have excessive post-processing and fake effects".
Just turn them off.
The cars' shaders, trees, tarmac, everything is superior. But the most dramatic IMO is the sun-light simulation. You really feel the contrast from the shadowed zones to the lighted zones. It's simply natural and immersive. In rF2 engine we suffer from the lack of contrast and from the overall yellowish pollution, which makes the scene flat and blurry.

Let's wait what DX-11 transition is bringing for us tough.

 

It's the sky colors I enjoy with Pcars. I just wish there was a way to shut the overexposure off.

The rain is nice although I think the physics aren't good enough for rain.

Also Pcars is just too much for a 900's series video card to handle vr. Can't wait to try with the 1080 Ti.

Weight transfer is all Pcars has for physics which I is something AC is missing.

Some of the roads in rF2 I think have the best graphics now. Spa Historic and the autumn Nordschleife are my two favorite surfaces. Most realistic detail I find.

 

And those two tracks are among the oldest content available for rF2, just proves graphics isn't fully about DX levels or having the latest tech. Historic Spa was probably created +- year 2010, I remember seeing early previews of it when rF2 was not even in beta. Nords is based on rF1 version built in mid 2000's with updates from the community.

I agree pCars is superior, but I'd argue it's still mostly about contrast and tone, which doesn't need DX11 or any other tricks. I edited a random rF2 screen I had on my HDD quickly by applying a couple of filters in Photoshop, which took less than two minutes. Only the color tone/contrast was changed, and I'm confident enough to say it did improve the image quite significantly.

 

This is exactly my point for VR as well. I was floored at how good SweetFX was with, I think, doing simular tweaks. Yeah sure more pixels are always better but we have not done everything that can be done with tones and contrast for sure, I think as well.

I know I was disappointed going from the DK2 to the pixel superior CV1. The blurry parts are still blurry but with more pixels so its more noticeable now in some ways.

Overall it is better and I wouldn't go back but its just not what I was expecting for sure.

Some of the older tracks you say?? That is interesting!