Don't judge a book by it's cover...

[jimortality]

Or a racing sim by it's graphics. I have to eat humble pie here and also apologise to @Gijs van Elderen. After my set up session the other night, I thought I would head into the club server for the upcoming Brands hatch Audi server. I did a couple of laps. came straight on here and posted a negative comment in the sign up thread about the poor graphics. This afternoon before I started my nightshift I thought I would have another go with the Civic on the same track using my new found knowledge from my set up session and with notes in hand I had another go. After about 10 minutes of fighting my way round this track, I started to make changes then go out and test then back in for more changes then back out and test. After an hour of testing, I hadn't even noticed the graphics because the feel of this track in my opinion was awesome. I still hadn't conquered the hatch but it just goes to show, that yes in a perfect world we would have photo realistic graphics with perfect physics, ffb, the whole works, even a fit blond giving you a BJ as you're racing but unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world. So, my fellow racers, don't judge a book by it's cover or even a sim by it's graphics

 

[Rui Santos]

rF2 is the best simracing title you can buy, simple as that. Expensive? That's a joke for sure, AC and pCars with its DLC's become much more expensive, and they don't have half of the quality, iRacing is a robbery compared to all others. So if you didn't bought rF2 yet, you don't know what you're losing, i'm having the best races of my life on it, also demo doesn't replicate the true quality of the sim. I bought lifetime and i don't regret it for a second

 

[Jim Liak]

Don't want to start a debate with sims. I love rF2.

But AC has more quality. 100% laserscanned tracks and official cars is not simple to say.
And is the only game that has that. And it is the flaw off rF2. Limited content that is supported mainly from modders = less fidelity.
In AC you know that if you take for a drive the F40 in Nordschleife, the outcome will be 95% of reality. In rF2 what happens?
Also if someone buys now the AC + DLC1 will give 50€ (i gave half of that in discount but doesn't matter).
With more DLC's yes the cost will be almost the same.

Still for a game with outdated graphics and limited official content, i think that the cost is high.
I will buy it though when i have the chance because i love the hardcore feeling that it gives me.

 

[Gijs van Elderen]

But AC has more quality.

Content: Yes

FFB, AI, physics, tire model, engine model, suspension model, chassis flex, multiplayer prediction model, track dynamics, race rules, flag rules, safety car, ... ==> No AC doesn't have this quality

outdated graphics

I don't like blur, bloom in replay's. Unfortunately i can't turn it off with AC:
I like the "natural" look of rF2.

But it's al about what you are looking for. AC is awesome, but it lacks some essential stuff to simulate a complete real race.

 

[Rui Santos]

Content: Yes

FFB, AI, physics, tire model, engine model, suspension model, chassis flex, multiplayer prediction model, track dynamics, race rules, flag rules, safety car, ... ==> No AC doesn't have this quality


I don't like blur, bloom in replay's. Unfortunately i can't turn it off with AC:
I like the "natural" look of rF2.

But it's al about what you are looking for. AC is awesome, but it lacks some essential stuff to simulate a complete real race.

Well, Gijs stole the words from my mouth, that was precisely what i was going to wrote, no way AC can compare with rF2, it's not even close, it has good physics and laser tracks, nothing else. Also rF2 has full 24h time cycle and full weather, with wind and real road, after you try this last you simply can't go back.

Anyway i have AC and i like it too, but very incomplete and dumb at this stage, let's see when 1.2 version comes out

P.S. - Graphics of rF2 are different from demo to the full game and when you buy it you'll realise it's realistic graphics they're trying to achieve, not fake effects...

 

[Ace King]

It doesn't make any sense at all that the rF2 demo wouldn't show their best graphics possible and be equal to their full game. I ran the demo and thought the graphics were not any better than rF1. So, your words are encouraging if the graphics are better than it's demo!

 

[Gijs van Elderen]

Yeah, the Demo is identical to the normal install and with an up to date build. But has only Silverstone and 2 cars.

BTW: The demo content will be updated with next build.

 

[David Cordell]

It doesn't make any sense at all that the rF2 demo wouldn't show their best graphics possible and be equal to their full game. I ran the demo and thought the graphics were not any better than rF1. So, your words are encouraging if the graphics are better than it's demo!

Is HDR enabled by default now in the current demo? When I first tried the demo a year ago, HDR was not enabled and it looked like total crap but I am not easily discouraged so I searched and found that HDR needed to be enabled and made a few other graphics tweaks and it looked fantastic. I bought the full version and have been very happy.

I wonder how many people were turned off by the non HDR enabled graphics and quickly uninstall never to return?

 

[Mat Holloway]

But AC has more quality. 100% laserscanned tracks and official cars is not simple to say.
And is the only game that has that. And it is the flaw off rF2. Limited content that is supported mainly from modders = less fidelity.

Jim, I have simple questions for you!
Q: What resolution is the laser scanning performed at... And what resolution is that applied in game?
A: Laser scanning is data acquisition. Imagine we have 1cm resolution. A track has a budget of say 50,000 to 100,000 polygons. 1 Meter squared is 10,000 cm squared. I think you may need a super computer to run these laser scanned tracks.

Unless they reduce the quality. If they reduce the quality from 1cm to 1m. How is that different from using regular surveying at 1 meter resolution?

Regular surveying is not wrong compared to laser scanning. It's slower and less detailed yes. But if you capture at one meter and use at one meter, what is the difference?

When you have lot's of something and want to reduce it, in computing terms that can be known as normalising. They could try to do it by hand, but there is no way they'd be able to release tracks as quick as they have. So when you normalise, you lose almost all the features but are left with a detailed skeleton. That's what the 3D guys will then massage by hand, referencing photos and other data to include key elements of the track.

This is no different to how ISI do it or iR or RRE. The only difference is how much you pay for the data. One tracks laser scanned data can be the same cost as licensing another whole track. Traditional surveying methods are a fraction of that.


Now given all that above. Is it not clear to everyone involved in sim racing by now, that we play a game of averages?

Yes the fidelity of these home simulators is incredible and likely better than what F1 teams had even a few short years ago. But we are still at 1m, not 1cm, not 1mm.
As accurate as it can be made, is still ballpark, not reality.

Q: So when a modder makes a car. Does he just guess?
A: No. To be able to get to the level of creating a car in a game. You are way past the point of guessing. As a modder, you may not have access to 1cm resolution, but as we've seen, you do not need it.

These engineers, or modding teams are not just hacks, they are often the people you will see in a few years working for themselves (ASR/URD) or other developers (COM8/Feels3)
We'll see badly converted works from untalented converters, but it's been a very long time since I've seen a 'bad mod' released.

Don't take mods all so seriously. They are 'fun' and designed to provoke memories that we all had growing up watching this great sport we love.

 

[David Wright]

First, I'd be very surprised if laser scanning is more expensive than surveying to a 1m grid. I'm not saying laser scanning isn't more expensive than tradtional methods, just that I can't believe a manually surveyed track is surveyed to a 1m grid.

The advantage of laser scanning is the nodes on your 1m grid are postioned to a 1cm accuracy giving you a much more accurate track than if they are positioned, say with a 1m accuracy.

In other words, iRacing and F1 teams are not stupid. If laser scanning offered no advantage over traditional methods, they wouldn't pay the additional costs.

 

[Rui Santos]

Limited content that is supported mainly from modders = less fidelity.

Just a question, you're absolutely ignorant when it come to simracing right? You never played rFactor right? It's impossible to make a statement like that and know the reality, sorry but it's the true...

 

[Jim Liak]

Ok I knew that this was going to be a "my sim is better than yours" debate, in which I have no intention to participate. Already some invalid statements here.
I send an email asking for an discount for major purchase by many people. If grunted I will open a new thread.

 

[Galin Dimov]

After spending few hours with the demo last night, I went ahead and purchased the full product. For a first time I took my time with with demo and frankly, loved every moment of it!

 

[Gijs van Elderen]

I knew that this was going to be a "my sim is better than yours" debate,

, No problem with judging a book... But...

Thread tittle is "Don't judge a book by it's cover".

Cars, tracks, graphics... The cover...

Did you know that car speed has an influence on air intake (air ram effect) and it slightly increases your power output. Someone thought it was a bug. Click here

 

[Mat Holloway]

First, I'd be very surprised if laser scanning is more expensive than surveying to a 1m grid. I'm not saying laser scanning isn't more expensive than tradtional methods, just that I can't believe a manually surveyed track is surveyed to a 1m grid.

The advantage of laser scanning is the nodes on your 1m grid are postioned to a 1cm accuracy giving you a much more accurate track than if they are positioned, say with a 1m accuracy.

In other words, iRacing and F1 teams are not stupid. If laser scanning offered no advantage over traditional methods, they wouldn't pay the additional costs.

That is not information I have. I do know $100,000 is a figure ballparked for a certain euro track.
Yes I certainly understand what you are saying, and do not get me wrong, laser scanning is the way to go. It's simply a cost/benefit equation.

The only reason I mention it is, I've heard a million and one people bang on about laser scanning without having the first clue how it even works.

Tuttle talks about it here Would-you-pay-for-the-laser-scanned-Nordschleife a bit:

Considering the trouble iRacing is in, I wouldn't be too sure of that statement.
If they fold, that's two companies they've lost hold of. If only they had some more money!

 

[David O'Reilly]

With all that essential and mission critical laser scanning, what happens when they do this?

Mt Panorama Road Roller

Mt Panorama Road Maker

Do they have to re-do the laser scanning to make it authentic again?
If a non laser scan result falls somewhere between the two surfaces (old and new) or if it misses some micro bumps does it matter that much?

I know its just a personal preference but for me, to name but a few. Tyres with an amazing temp/friction wear model that YOU can manage. A tyre model that allows you to check in Motec the temps at 7 points in the tyre: Core (X1), Mid Depth Rubber (X3), surface (X3) to assist you with both set up and driving technique. Engine and Brake temps that need correct settings and management, Authentic set up parameters, physics model that goes deep enough that modders have to set correct drag, downforce, lift parameters as well as cooling and thats simply for the brake ducts.
Then there is Chassis, Wing, Diffuser settings that all need drag, downforce and slipstream and dirty air effects set.

I am currently watching a stream of 24 hrs of Le Mans (where FSR World Championship driver Kuba Brzezinski leads). Real weather, driver swaps. The guys have some engine damage due to an over rev after a double down shift. I mean where can you get all of that.
After 20 hrs of racing there are still 23 cars on track. Each team needed a guy awake overnight on Team Speak in case of a problem.
http://148.251.50.26/LiveTiming/Stream.aspx

If the car hasnt got all the stuff that RF2 has, what's the authenticity / credilbility in driving on a track that has laser scanning?
I mean what adds nore to the immersion? Needing to manage a car to bring it home and with the uncertainty of real time real world weather or knowing the track surface was precise at a point in history?

 

[Gijs van Elderen]

I am currently watching a stream of 24 hrs of Le Mans

Me too!

I'm cheering for @Marcel Offermans

 

[Jake Fangio]

First, I'd be very surprised if laser scanning is more expensive than surveying to a 1m grid. I'm not saying laser scanning isn't more expensive than tradtional methods, just that I can't believe a manually surveyed track is surveyed to a 1m grid.

The advantage of laser scanning is the nodes on your 1m grid are postioned to a 1cm accuracy giving you a much more accurate track than if they are positioned, say with a 1m accuracy.

In other words, iRacing and F1 teams are not stupid. If laser scanning offered no advantage over traditional methods, they wouldn't pay the additional costs.

With Iracing the consumer pay's the additional costs.

 

[Jake Fangio]

Good post David.I think laser scanned tracks are overrated IMO.When rfactor2 gives you so much information with the car,are we really worried about whether the track has to many or to little undulations. I mean when I'm racing flat out,I ain't thinking about how accurate the bloody track is.

 

[Ace King]

The scale of accuracy would no doubt benefit and better prepare the professional driver before his real-life race at a particular track but this really doesn't matter at all for the casual sim racer!

 

[JeffL]

just that I can't believe a manually surveyed track is surveyed to a 1m grid.

Not to be smartass but if that were true there have would been a lot of bridges not lining up in the middle. Laser is faster but not anymore accurate