Getting Enthused for RF2

[Rikki Jenkins]

RF2 is really coming along IMHO... Graphics and Physics are real nice on my machine. FPS is real good even with everything turned to max. New content is being released quite more often and the Lemans track conversion is a must get. I have spent almost 40hrs on it alone. If anyone is on the fence about getting it, they should jump on over and get at least the lower priced option.

Only drag is that there are not enough multiplayer races that are open to all, most of the competition is in closed/PW servers but you can make a session and others do join.

Cheers
RJ

 

[yusupov]

ive probably spent 40 hrs with it the past week. its unique & as others have said, itd be pretty cool if they would actually market it. like, at all.

update incoming too (the rivalry with reiza is clearly very fierce lol), maybe some new content will be released with it, though i've not heard as much.

 

[blanes]

I have to agree, I have only just fired it up again recently and was gobsmacked how good it is looking and more importantly how great it drives. The 660 build and Honda car is fantastic and I just found an old Lola T280 which is enormously good fun to drive at Le Mans and The Ring v1.65 - 2 fantastic tracks of many community built tracks.

I also bought an Asus VG278 3D monitor with 3dvision2 and was astonished how good the 3D is when racing ... always thought it was just a gimmick but boy was I surprised ! I am faster now because the sense of depth perception and clarity when cornering is through the roof !! It really is that good - my eyes accept it extremely well though I hear some people have trouble with 3D and get headaches etc. thankfully I am not one of those and the experience is truly epic for anyone thinking about trying it out ... got the monitor with glasses for AUD$450 which I thought was a steel for a 120hz monitor which even in 2D is very nice with great colour and contrast - much much brigher than my older Asus 27inch which was a very good monitor and now has a set top box attached and is used as a TV in the bedroom LOL

 

[yusupov]

off topic but i think, or hope, that part of its that im still adjusting, but i fi nd i have a huge amount of trouble with sense of speed & depth perception in sims compared to irl. i only have a single 24" screen i recently had to purchase it & while its nice its not 3D...was going to plan on triples, which i think would cure what ails me, but lately have been feeling like waiting out on the idea the OR will be better all-around. 3D sounds like a great stopgap; sucks i also though of it as a gimmick when deciding what to buy.

 

[Rikki Jenkins]

I have been using my Oculus Rift, and it is still a little shaky but the depth perception is awesome. I will try the DK2 once it ships in July to get rid of that screen door effect and the Depth Perception should be better. But even running it on my Samsung 970 3D is a blast.

 

[Frederic Schornstein]

off topic but i think, or hope, that part of its that im still adjusting, but i fi nd i have a huge amount of trouble with sense of speed & depth perception in sims compared to irl. i only have a single 24" screen i recently had to purchase it & while its nice its not 3D...was going to plan on triples, which i think would cure what ails me, but lately have been feeling like waiting out on the idea the OR will be better all-around. 3D sounds like a great stopgap; sucks i also though of it as a gimmick when deciding what to buy.

I recently did a clean install and noticed the default FOV is rubish. I use a 24" pretty close and I think I use around 57° FOV and I have a very good speed & depth perception.
I can recheck my settings later.

 

[Blkout]

I use 45-50 FOV.

 

[Miroslav Davidovic]

http://www.mrpix.co.uk/rF2/fov/

 

[Frederic Schornstein]

http://www.mrpix.co.uk/rF2/fov/

Just rechecked my setting. I use 56 FOV. According to the calculator I should use a lot less, which doesnt suit me. I would just experiment a bit with it. For me with a low FOV I have less immersion and I feel more playing a game.

At the end of the day use what works for you

 

[panande]

It says I should use an fov of 14.7° xD

When Im in my racing position, Im about 115cm or 45 inches away from my screen. With an FOV between 45 and 55 everything feels very natural and not stretched or to fast. Im also only using a 22" screen and my seating is very low.

 

[vee10]

http://www.mrpix.co.uk/rF2/fov/

I tried this a while ago and it gave me a FOV of 14 which in game looks ridiculous. 40-50 on most games suits me just fine.

 

[Miroslav Davidovic]

That's all nice and fine,

I tried this a while ago and it gave me a FOV of 14 which in game looks ridiculous. 40-50 on most games suits me just fine.

It works pretty well if you choose the right values TBH. Monitor size and number of monitors, display ratio and distance. I am using 32°.

The FOV is something a lot of simracers ignore for what ever reasons. But it actually changes the racing/driving experience quite drastically IMO if you set it up right.
However there is enough written out there on this topic so who ever is interessted in it will find enough material.

I can only suggest people if they get some weird FOV numbers there to double check all the values again and then give the right FOV a go for at least one or two days properly.

 

[vee10]

That's all nice and fine,


It works pretty well if you choose the right values TBH. Monitor size and number of monitors, display ratio and distance. I am using 32°.

The FOV is something a lot of simracers ignore for what ever reasons. But it actually changes the racing/driving experience quite drastically IMO if you set it up right.
However there is enough written out there on this topic so who ever is interessted in it will find enough material.

I can only suggest people if they get some weird FOV numbers there to double check all the values again and then give the right FOV a go for at least one or two days properly.

You are totally right about the FOV being important, but unless i am going daft in my old age no matter how may times i try that calculator to check it, it still comes up with numbers that don't work for instance 21" screen sitting 1 meter back = 14.9 degrees FOV which looks like this in GSC the same as it looks in RF2 (have not got that installed on this PC).

Unplayable

45 FOV

Playable

 

[Blkout]

FOV calculators have never given me a number that I like. I prefer to see the top 1/3 of the steering wheel in all my racing simulators just like what Paul posted above. This usually comes out to about 45-50 degree FOV for most sims except iRacing which uses a vertical FOV I believe instead of horizontal so its actually about 70 degrees to get the same view as most others.

LIke Paul stated above, when the FOV is set too close, I can't get a good sense of where the front of my car is and I tend to overshoot corners terribly. It is a strange phenomenon because in some games I can play from the bumper cam with none of the car showing and I can play that quite well too however it does something strange to my eyes when the FOV is set too close in the cockpit view and I can't see enough of the front of the car. I also really prefer to see the guages of the car, I just need that in order to feel that higher sense of immersion.

 

[Miroslav Davidovic]

1 m distance to the monitor is a lot if you ask me.
Just imagine the end of a tunnel, the closer you get the more you see out. That's basically what happens here.
If you reduce the distance to the monitor you'll get a higher FOV number.
The closer you get the bigger the difference. For example if I would move just 10 cm closer to the monitor I would use a FOV of 40° instead of 32° now.

 

[panande]

Im even 115cm away from the screen... And I like it.

And to get a 40° FOV which is nearly the lowest I could go, I would need to be 40cm away from my screen, which would be absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Frederic Schornstein]

Im even 115cm away from the screen... And I like it.

And to get a 40° FOV which is nearly the lowest I could go, I would need to be 40cm away from my screen, which would be absolutely ridiculous.

I got values below the default in rF2 and that looked rather stupid for me. With these thinga it ia more a matter of taste rather than calculations. It gives me a FOV below 20°, which would just be dangerous to race with as I could hardly see the other cars beside me etc.

 

[panande]

Yep. And thats why we dont trust math kids ^^ I set my rF2 back to 55° and thats perfect for me. Someone else sure has other preferences, but the FOV is rather about immersion than the perfect line of sight, I think. If its realistic and you feel good about it, dont change that

 

[Ernie]

I agree that FOV makes a lot of a difference and if you're a High-FOV-user it needs some time to get used to a real (or low) FOV. Trying it out for only 10min doesn't work.

Otherwise IMHO these FOV calculators will give only useful/playable results for Triple-screen-users. If you have only 1 monitor (like myself) it is almost unplayable, because of the small window of sight. (...unless you're using a very big monitor/TV and a low distance to the screen)

For my 1-monitor-setup i use a fictive multiplier of 1,75 as a compromise. So my real FOV of 26° in rFactor2 becomes a 45,5°, which is playable. Yes, i know it's not the real FOV, but a good solution for single screen user.

 

[Spinelli]

Yes NVIDIA 3D Vision isn't a gimmick it really Is amazing, not only in terms of immersion but in terms of depth perception, spacial awareness, closing-in speeds, etc.

The reason why many of you guys are getting such low FOVs (like 14 degrees) is because you must either have tiny monitors or you must be sitting extremely far away. A very high FOV relative to what your proper FOV should be is just making everything on the screen tiny compared to how large that object should look to you in real-life.

On a single screen, over a period of a few months, I slowly brought my FOV, little by little, down to about 30 degrees. The perfect FOV for my setup (eyes are 30 inches away from a 24 inch 16:9 monitor) is 17.5 degrees, however I don't quite go that low, I compensate and use 25.

For the peripheral vision...well that's where triple screen monitors come into play. Also, remember that the larger your monitor and the closer you are to it then the higher your 1:1 true-to-life in-game FOV will be.

With a high FOV corners look ridiculously straight, elevation changes look ridiculously un-steep, and things will look like they are super far from you and coming to you at 700 mph. Basically everything is distorted from how it should look to a human. Once you bring the FOV to a 1:1 representation of real-life, or close to it, then you'll see just how sharp some corners are, you won't wonder why you understeered into the wall going through a corner that didn't look sharp, you'll be able to use tiny trackside objects as reference points that you could hardly spot while using a high FOV (one time in real-life F2000 I used a dandelion flower for a braking marker, good luck being able to spot a dandelion with a distorted, squished, and unrealistic high FOV).

Should really check out these discussions
http://www.racedepartment.com/threads/setting-up-your-rfactor-fov-tutorial.16847/
http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/93-Setting-up-your-rFactor-FOV-Tutorial
http://www.nogripracing.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1160743