I agree with that. I also prefer physics, but i also trust Ian. Anyway, i guess the ISI team need someone with enough skills to get all out of the engine, even if its not that much. And it seems anyone really believe that a dx11 engine wont give you any benifits over a Dx9 engine. Well i know really much games using both options and seriously . Every game runs not just better looking, but even smoother and faster with enabled Dx11. I do mod games to it limits like i did with Crysis 2 , gta4 and other games and well yes, the possibility that a Dx9 engine will deliver something like photorealistic graphics is true but it will hit the perfomance such in a bad way that it will get unplayable. you`ve played BF3 before? You`ll never achieve that graphics with that performance in a dx9 engine, really not. I dont know where you read such stuff. Does ISI say that. Thats a joke . Like i said, maybe on a screenshot, sure, but really NOT while playing with 20 others online. The engine will reach it limits. If you for example Mod Gta4 to its absolute limits wich looks incredible awesome your GFX card ( no matter wich!!) will burn like hell. A same imagequality with a dx11 game, my gfx card stays on 80% usage. Anyway, this discussion will never ends, every single member here seems to got his own feeling about what means good quality so i will left this discussion. I will just wish ISI`s rf2 to be the best sim out there "sometime".
I've been developing shaders for rFactor for quite a while now, because material properties available to modders were pretty poor. I've added a few things - nothing special, but it made a lot of difference. Seems like it will be the same story with rFactor 2. It's not the engine as a whole. It's the shaders and tools that are behind.
GTA4 is a poor comparison as it was converted by chimps. That's why Rockstar Toronto aren't being allowed near GTA5 pc.
I don't claim we need one filter that suits everybody. <dream mode on> We need several means of filtering. Faving, digging, hiding tracks. We need a mod database that allows to fav mods, to set bookmarks, to see which mods are actively developed, which are watched and boomarked by many people. We need trending lists and a powerful search engine with rich critera. And all of this in an easy to use platform, that encourages participation. The ultimate filter are people, not generated statistics or ranks. <dream mode off>
A system like Tesnexus would work quite well. You have to wait an hour after downloading (so you can try the mod) before you can give it an endorsement. Then there are several ways to filter results, either by category or top 100 etc.
That'd pretty much be perfect, especially if I could deselect conversions. TES/Skyrim/Fallout 3 nexus is a great system.
Imho worrying about searching a track database with all these filters seems kind of pointless. There's a seriously limited number of people in this comunity capable of making the high-quality scratchbuilt tracks in max you guys want anyhow. Given the amount of time it takes to build one, I'd say there's a very good chance you will see or hear about it WELL BEFORE it's released. Why would you even need a database if you only want to see the few high quality scratchbuilds that MIGHT get released in a year.
No, there's not much chance. I certainly heard nothing about most of the genuinely good tracks for rFactor before or after they came out. They were buried under a tonne of mediocre or plain poor productions and that's exactly why I'd love filtering. The 'there are very few' really only supports my argument.
Ahh I see. For me it was different. Generally found out about the better tracks in forums not rFactor central. Also saw some wip threads for most of the great ones. I agree the rating system at rfc is terrible. Also finding tracks there really became a p.i.t.a. after BTB came out. Sure the tool made trackbuilding quite easy but there was a mass of scratchbuilt tracks with lower quailty than the average conversion lol.
