NoGripRacing.com

Go Back   NoGripRacing Forums > PC Racing > Project CARS

Reply
Thread Tools
Unread 2 June 17, 00:40   #51
pistoncup
Uploader
 
pistoncup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Default

Maybe be keyboard steering . still looks wrong .

I don't play rf2 and never got into rfactor because I found and played GTR and GTR2 first which is more polished and better looking game .
pistoncup is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 June 17, 00:49   #52
pistoncup
Uploader
 
pistoncup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Default

I invested in Pcars 1 , the actual game play sucked . Some cars were good but most were very average physics wise . Drive the V8 FALCON SUPERCAR , it's pathetic and they had that car for nearly 2 years as bait before they released it.

Last edited by pistoncup; 2 June 17 at 01:02.
pistoncup is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 June 17, 01:01   #53
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pistoncup View Post
Maybe be keyboard steering . still looks wrong .
Any title will look the same when not using a wheel. If you are judging it based on that, then there is no sim that will satisfy your needs. This video posted earlier is a better idea:

http://www.nogripracing.com/forum/sh...4&postcount=31

Quote:
Originally Posted by pistoncup View Post
I don't play rf2 and never got into rfactor because I found and played GTR and GTR2 first which is more polished and better looking game .

I invested in Pcars 1 , the actual game play sucked . Some cars were good but most were very average physics wise . Drive the V8 FALCON SUPERCAR , it's pathetic and they had that car for nearly 2 years as bait before they released it.
I've driven all the cars in PC1, and I do this in real life.. The isiMotor engine (what powered rFactor/GTR/GTR2) was good for it's time. However, there are limitations with that physics engine. If you do real life competition driving, the limitations stand out. I actually had an argument with Ian Bell about it when they were working on their GTR2002 mod (before GTR/GTR2). Without knowing the underlying limitation of the physics engine, it turns out years later that what I felt was wrong was actually a limitation on how the engine worked. Those limitations are gone with most current sims (i.e. AC, iRacing, pCARS).
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 June 17, 01:02   #54
pistoncup
Uploader
 
pistoncup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Australia
Default

no doubt i will buy Pcars 2 to try it out .
It will be what it is, as I have no hopes it's going to be a game I play regularly .
pistoncup is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 June 17, 01:09   #55
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pistoncup View Post
no doubt i will buy Pcars 2 to try it out .
It will be what it is, as I have no hopes it's going to be a game I play regularly .
And I'm not trying to sell it to you. That's up to you to decide if it's something you want. At the end of the day, it's a great time to be a sim racer with so many good options available today.
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 June 17, 04:23   #56
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
BTW, see how twitchy rF2 is with a gamepad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEJ7C1LwvfQ

That's just how sims look when you aren't using a wheel/pedal setup.

Yeah but you can see he has not even adjusted sensitivity that is why it is so touchy
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 June 17, 18:12   #57
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DurgeDriven View Post
Yeah but you can see he has not even adjusted sensitivity that is why it is so touchy
With any device that allows you to go lock to lock in a split second, it's going to make any sim look twitchy regardless of sensitivity settings. It always has... The good side it makes it pretty easy to tell who us using a gamepad when in multiplayer..

The one control I've seen used in the past which was not a wheel but looked smooth was a flight stick (and the guy was good with it) on rF1.
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 June 17, 23:46   #58
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 9 June 17, 01:34   #59
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
.......... it's going to make any sim look twitchy regardless of sensitivity settings. It always has...

Not so twitchy
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 9 June 17, 02:06   #60
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DurgeDriven View Post
Not so twitchy
Still twitchy, but not as much. You can do the same with PC if you spend the time tweaking like the RF2 guy did. Just look at the thousands of console videos of PC1 out there (since most of those players are gamepad users).

Not that I care as I will not be playing any sim with a gamepad.
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 June 17, 06:30   #61
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
Still twitchy, but not as much. You can do the same with PC if you spend the time tweaking like the RF2 guy did. Just look at the thousands of console videos of PC1 out there (since most of those players are gamepad users).

Not that I care as I will not be playing any sim with a gamepad.
You see early recommendation GPU for Nvidia owners ....GTX1080 and above
>>>>>

pCars2 will end up $200+ AU with DLC + $820-$920 AU for GPU

So much for game optimization
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 June 17, 17:56   #62
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Additional Notes: At this stage in development, recommended specs are very much subject to change.
...........
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 June 17, 19:08   #63
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18 June 17, 20:20   #64
markspeed
 
markspeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Diego, California
Age: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
Racers never want understeer.
Tell that to Jenson Button.
markspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18 June 17, 22:14   #65
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
...........
I only repeat what SMS recommend on Steam I never said it's gospel

Besides, I run pCars with GTX1070 and I need a GTX1080 as it is

That is assuming you want to run in full detail and not compromise
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 June 17, 15:41   #66
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by markspeed View Post
Tell that to Jenson Button.
They don't want snap oversteer either...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DurgeDriven View Post
I only repeat what SMS recommend on Steam I never said it's gospel

Besides, I run pCars with GTX1070 and I need a GTX1080 as it is

That is assuming you want to run in full detail and not compromise
If you want to stick with running graphics from 2002 (rF2), have it it. Although, it's great they finally made it to 2010 with DX11. Sorry, I'd rather run something more modern...
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 June 17, 22:14   #67
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
Sorry, I'd rather run something more modern...
It is pCars physics engine, how is that modern or new


So physics wise pCars2 is really just another pCars build update in the endless line
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 June 17, 00:22   #68
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DurgeDriven View Post
It is pCars physics engine, how is that modern or new


So physics wise pCars2 is really just another pCars build update in the endless line
What modern sim today is using a brand new engine rather than one that started in an earlier rendition?

AC uses an updated brush model from netKar. rF2 is an update to the ancient Pacejka tire model used since Sportscar GT (with all of it's flaws still there). iRacing is an updated model since their Nascar game days... You don't seem to understand the origins on where things come from (or how they evolve).
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 June 17, 02:27   #69
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
What modern sim today is using a brand new engine rather than one that started in an earlier rendition?

AC uses an updated brush model from netKar. rF2 is an update to the ancient Pacejka tire model used since Sportscar GT (with all of it's flaws still there). iRacing is an updated model since their Nascar game days... You don't seem to understand the origins on where things come from (or how they evolve).
I do not care of origins
All I inferred is pCars engine is no more modern then Studio397

I care only what I feel in all sims and in end that is all matters to some of us.
Next up I listen to guys opinions I lap with online, not fake news.

(I said for years here all I want is a sim looks like pCars and drives and feels like rF2)

If anyone in a review says.......... " Wow this drives better then rF2" ( like that will happen or they would have already been saying it ) .... then I will sit up and take notice

But $229.00 AU for pCars2 + Season pass at this time...not likely lol
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 June 17, 02:46   #70
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DurgeDriven View Post
I do not care of origins
All I inferred is pCars engine is no more modern then Studio397
You have no idea what you are talking about..
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 June 17, 03:22   #71
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
You have no idea what you are talking about..
In what way ?

That to me rFactor2 ( Historic especially ) is best feeling sim....

Just like pCars 2 was better feeling then pCars for the guy in your utube

If you say so


Quote:
If you want to stick with running graphics from 2002.....
and I should believe you do ?
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 June 17, 12:08   #72
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Durge,

You seem to have something missing in your life... I'm not sure if you didn't get enough love from mommy and daddy, or if you were picked on as a kid which makes you behave this way. If you haven't looked up the definition of an Internet Troll, here it is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

Your behavior is the current definition and you are demonstrating it beautifully. If that is your intent, you can smile and relax to know you are succeeding.
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 June 17, 17:13   #73
markspeed
 
markspeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Diego, California
Age: 44
Default

I've been reading and posting in these forums since 2008. I wouldn't call myself an A-list member. However, in defense of Durge, I've never read his comments to be Trolling.
His opinion may be quite strong once in a while, but a troll? Not a chance.
markspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 June 17, 20:58   #74
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

ta Mark


Post #1

Quote:
Sure I think rF2 is best but I always thought pCars was best for visual immersion factor and at very least the FFB and physics are bearable at least for me they were.
.........how is that trolling




P.S.

Quote:
You seem to have something missing in your life...
He needs to stop being personal with his baiting

Last edited by DurgeDriven; 20 June 17 at 21:11.
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 June 17, 21:33   #75
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
You must really think you are smart... Everyone can understand your innuendos.
So now you speak for everyone........


Quote:
What the heck are you making up now? Drugs are bad, umkay?

All your good for........ personal attacks


Quote:
If you want to stick with running graphics from 2002 (rF2)
and you calling me a troll ??? roflmao
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 01:43   #76
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by markspeed View Post
I've been reading and posting in these forums since 2008. I wouldn't call myself an A-list member. However, in defense of Durge, I've never read his comments to be Trolling.
His opinion may be quite strong once in a while, but a troll? Not a chance.
Let's look at the definition:

Quote:
In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often for the troll's amusement.
So, he doesn't like Project CARS.. Has no desire to buy the second iteration.. Yet, what is he doing (see definition above)? Making posts to provoke readers into responses by saying unsubstantiated comments as if they are facts (with laughing emoticons), but then posting back "it's just my opinion" to try to defuse a response... If it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck.....
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 01:46   #77
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DurgeDriven View Post
and you calling me a troll ??? roflmao
DX9 was released in 2002. That's fact which is what rF2 was using until the recent patch (in which the engine is still designed around DX9 rather than DX11). That's not trolling. Learn how to discern facts from fiction.
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 01:53   #78
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
DX9 was released in 2002. That's fact which is what rF2 was using until the recent patch (in which the engine is still designed around DX9 rather than DX11). That's not trolling. Learn how to discern facts from fiction.

Quote:
If you want to stick with running graphics from 2002 (rF2), have it it.
We both know you were inferring rF2 graphics looks like a 2002 sim, not DX


Anyways as far as DX it could not be further from the truth.

From the very first public Build (DX9) of rF2 it had better lighting ambiance then any gmotor 2.0 title you can name

But how would you know that
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 02:18   #79
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

P.S.

Further to that ......

Shortly after rF2 from earliest builds ISI introduced HDR profiles.
Example of progress is obvious, as new builds improved they dropped HDR profiles
Later again they dropped No HDR alternative before DX11 was even mooted

So years ago rF2 evolved the "2002 DX9 look" you so dislike so much that you can only drive DX10-11 sims ....apparently


ENB DX9 and RF2 DX9 HDR are nothing alike in lighting or ambiance or anything else
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 02:20   #80
DucFreak
 
DucFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lisboa, Portugal www.gtlw.co.uk
Age: 42
Default

From the few previews I've had a look, so far it's looking good and especially sounding much better than PCars 1 (is Greg Hill still the car/fx audio guy for SMS?).

But my main doubts are regarding optimization, how is that being handled.

SMS have always had very high hardware demands at the time of release, for every single one of their racing games. I sense that's unlikely to change but surely hope that improves for PCars 2.
DucFreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 02:24   #81
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DurgeDriven View Post
We both know you were inferring rF2 graphics looks like a 2002 sim, not DX
Nope. I used to be a programmer. I'm well aware of the technology which is why I used that year specifically. Don't try and "think" you understand what I was referring to and don't try to twist it around to something it was not. The year was picked specifically for the technology the engine was designed around.
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 02:31   #82
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DucFreak View Post
From the few previews I've had a look, so far it's looking good and especially sounding much better than PCars 1 (is Greg Hill still the car/fx audio guy for SMS?).
Nope. Greg was/is a contractor so he moved on once PC1 was completed. However they have many talented sound engineers working (and the improvements they have done with the sound engine provides a much better experience over PC1, not that it was terrible there).


Quote:
Originally Posted by DucFreak View Post
But my main doubts are regarding optimization, how is that being handled.
There were a lot of optimizations done when some of the graphical modules were rewritten (i.e. like the lighting rendering engine was re-written). Also there were improvements found in the physics processing. These improvements have allowed the new enhancements done for PC2 to not be too overly taxing over PC1. It's still a little early to tell with the final performance but it will be similar to PC1 but probably with a little more overhead given all the new features (i.e. you won't need to build a completely new system if you were able to run PC1 at a decent pace).
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 02:40   #83
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Back on topic

I will do as others and buy it in a year or 2 @ Steam Sale


The Collector’s Edition will be $229, is exclusive to EB Games and will include:

Copy of the game so it is Non-Steam as well or what
200 Page Art Book
Exclusive Steelbook
McLaren 720S 1/43 Scale Die-Cast Model with Exclusive SMS-R Stealth Satin Paint
Japanese Cars Pack Digital Download Code
Season Pass Digital Download Code
eSports Live VIP Pass
Sticker Sheet
Collector’s Edition Box
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 02:53   #84
DurgeDriven
Premium Member
 
DurgeDriven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
Nope. I used to be a programmer. I'm well aware of the technology which is why I used that year specifically. Don't try and "think" you understand what I was referring to and don't try to twist it around to something it was not. The year was picked specifically for the technology the engine was designed around.
Well if you look at any gmotor 2.0 sim the the difference in lighting and ambiance to say GTR2 and rF2 early builds is clear as the nose on your face.

...........but like I said before how would you know, you won't even use DX9 sims like most of us here

Quote:
If you want to stick with running graphics from 2002
Because rF2 uses 2002 technology does not mean it looks like a 2002 sim
It doesn't
DurgeDriven is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 04:04   #85
DucFreak
 
DucFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lisboa, Portugal www.gtlw.co.uk
Age: 42
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
Nope. Greg was/is a contractor so he moved on once PC1 was completed. However they have many talented sound engineers working (and the improvements they have done with the sound engine provides a much better experience over PC1, not that it was terrible there).
That's the end of a long relation if true.
Greg Hill (Soundwave Concepts) have been with them through the early Simbin and then Blimey!Games era.

Kind of surprised, although the new sounds to my hears are so different (in samples or in design) that it does not resemble any of the previous sounds or general signature that I usually recognize a mile away (and a problem with NFS Shift 1&2 and PCars 1, IMO), which is why I made the question.

I hope the work for that is consistent and keeps going like that for all vehicles.
Whoever and however they're doing it, so far (to me) they're getting the sounds to a good place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
There were a lot of optimizations done when some of the graphical modules were rewritten (i.e. like the lighting rendering engine was re-written). Also there were improvements found in the physics processing. These improvements have allowed the new enhancements done for PC2 to not be too overly taxing over PC1. It's still a little early to tell with the final performance but it will be similar to PC1 but probably with a little more overhead given all the new features (i.e. you won't need to build a completely new system if you were able to run PC1 at a decent pace).
Good to hear that it should not be worse than PC1, but that still means it'll require top dollar PC hardware to get the game going over 60 FPS at 1080P/60Hz high settings, with full grid and in all racing conditions then.

In anycase, it's good to hear they recognize room for improvements/enhancements in that area and have been working on that.
DucFreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 12:39   #86
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DucFreak View Post
That's the end of a long relation if true.
Greg Hill (Soundwave Concepts) have been with them through the early Simbin and then Blimey!Games era.
Greg works on his own for his own company (similar to a few other heavy hitters in other areas that have worked with SMS in the past, specifically on the graphics end). If he's not on a contract with someone else, SMS definitely uses him. Even with PC1, he was on contract with iRacing until near the end of PC1 development. Unfortunately, he wasn't with PC1 for the full duration of the development.

However, I think most will be pleasantly pleased with the updates in sound for PC2. Others will still complain as they are used to the distorted, compressed, Youtube video sounds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DucFreak View Post
Good to hear that it should not be worse than PC1, but that still means it'll require top dollar PC hardware to get the game going over 60 FPS at 1080P/60Hz high settings, with full grid and in all racing conditions then.
I didn't say it wouldn't be "worse"; I said it won't be too overly taxing compared to PC1. I just want to be clear.

Given everything they have done, it would be nearly impossible to keep the exact same performance given the same hardware. However, it won't be so overly taxing compared to PC1 that it requires a new PC. Those who were able to run PC1 decently will be able to do so with PC2. Those who were barely running PC1 will likely have a worse time with PC2.
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 13:58   #87
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 19:41   #88
DucFreak
 
DucFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lisboa, Portugal www.gtlw.co.uk
Age: 42
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
Greg works on his own for his own company (similar to a few other heavy hitters in other areas that have worked with SMS in the past, specifically on the graphics end). If he's not on a contract with someone else, SMS definitely uses him. Even with PC1, he was on contract with iRacing until near the end of PC1 development.
Yes, I know.
It's still same as it was back in the short time period I worked for Blimey!Games then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahjik View Post
I didn't say it wouldn't be "worse"; I said it won't be too overly taxing compared to PC1. I just want to be clear.

Given everything they have done, it would be nearly impossible to keep the exact same performance given the same hardware. However, it won't be so overly taxing compared to PC1 that it requires a new PC. Those who were able to run PC1 decently will be able to do so with PC2. Those who were barely running PC1 will likely have a worse time with PC2.
Understood.

Unfortunately, I think that's where SMS are, again, shooting themselves in the foot.
Simracing requires a LOT of framerate for a trully smooth experience (with a wheel+pedals especially, many aim for +120FPS vsync OFF, or +60FPS vsync ON, at all times and conditions).
The bigger number of players (online and offline) tend to also gather around game titles that have the best performance/looks ratio (or balance, if the term is prefered).
Over a decade ago, LFS was a major example of this. RF1 and then GTR2 gradually became as well.
Kunos understood this common issue, and AC has been the huge success we see also because of this. While not especially light on resources, it looks and runs very good with the kind of PC that usually struggles with PCars1.
In a gaming scenario where there aren't that many titles to compete with in that particular arena, this is a very important quality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DurgeDriven View Post
Well if you look at any gmotor 2.0 sim the the difference in lighting and ambiance to say GTR2 and rF2 early builds is clear as the nose on your face.

Because rF2 uses 2002 technology does not mean it looks like a 2002 sim
It doesn't
I agree that DX9 can still look very good, and only a graphics snob would sniff at a good example of it.

For instances, the original DIRT of a decade ago (2007, the EGO 1.5 engine from Codemasters) is a great example, as are F1 2010 and the original GRID with same game engine.

But ISI Gmotor2 was not a bright example (the legendary cartoony looks) and Gmotor2.5 (what RF2 uses) was even less relevant for the respective time period.
The HDR in RF2 didn't look particularly good and, without it, the looks were very questionable.

I'm of complete opposite opinion, in that, all in DX9 and at same given settings, GTR2, GTL, Race07 and GSC/AMS look as good as, and many times better than, RF2.
The fog and lightning color palettes, even textures and 3d models, are something that you can change to get a different (better) look from the game. Complementing that with a good Reshade (or ENB, or GemFX) and even those older games can still look pretty decent.
What RF2 has in advantage is the time of release - the more modern hardware/tech allows the use of higher polygon 3d models and higher res textures for stock content, as well as the inside-car shadows (absent in the other ISI Gmotor based games), which we all know makes for a very different, more immersive look.
.

Last edited by DucFreak; 21 June 17 at 20:45.
DucFreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 June 17, 21:29   #89
Mahjik
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DucFreak View Post

Unfortunately, I think that's where SMS are, again, shooting themselves in the foot.
Simracing requires a LOT of framerate for a trully smooth experience (with a wheel+pedals especially, many aim for +120FPS vsync OFF, or +60FPS vsync ON, at all times and conditions).
The bigger number of players (online and offline) tend to also gather around game titles that have the best performance/looks ratio (or balance, if the term is prefered).
Over a decade ago, LFS was a major example of this. RF1 and then GTR2 gradually became as well.
Kunos understood this common issue, and AC has been the huge success we see also because of this. While not especially light on resources, it looks and runs very good with the kind of PC that usually struggles with PCars1.
In a gaming scenario where there aren't that many titles to compete with in that particular arena, this is a very important quality.
Can't say they I agree with all of that.. Traditionally, it's always been games which push technology. It was the Unreal engine in the past, then the CryEngine, etc that pushed technology vendors and people to want better and faster equipment. They weren't designing to the status quo, they were setting a new status quo and they were very successful in doing so...

IMO, it's more of a risk to only deliver the status quo. However, I think we all agree that SMS is not going to take the crown for having the most licensed cars and that's where a lot of focus is today. I'm referring to the masses, not the niche. There are small groups who only want to race vintage F1 cars... there are small groups who only want to race GT3/GTE cars... I don't believe SMS will ever challenge the big guys at their own game. However, going after design features where are new to the genre will give them their lane in the sim market.

Yes, some of those features are taxing, but with what I've experienced so far it's worth it. The seasons are a game changer. Being able to set the date from spring to fall and have the entire track reflect fall colors is beyond cool.

The hardcore racers will still be able to do the usual, i.e. dial down the details. I no longer consider myself hardcore in sim racing as I no longer compete. I just don't have the time. However, I dial down some of the eye candy features myself to ensure smooth play and others will have the options to do so.



Not related to PC2, but more PC1. How many people used to download the extra skyrings for tracks to change the background? I did. I used one specific one for Laguna Seca which I used a specific cloud formation to point at as I came up the hill to get lined up for the corkscrew.

When PC1 hit with dynamic clouds, I could no longer do that as the clouds were not in the same position lap after lap (which is obviously more realistic). These things to add to an already taxing system, but they increase the immersion for the driver and I believe it's all worth it in the end.
Mahjik is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:09.
Home - Top

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

www.nogripracing.com 2003 - 2017
Page generated in 0.06631 seconds with 10 queries