• Guest, RaceDepartment is now on Discord!  Join Here

AUTOMOBILISTA Motorsports Simulator is coming to Steam on Q1 2016

Status
Not open for further replies.

Martin Larsen

500RPM
Dec 6, 2012
635
163
26
So I remember this video from 1year ago

So will those things, flatspots, dirt pickup etc be in this game?...
 

natedogg1867

500RPM
Apr 5, 2015
692
377
So will those things, flatspots, dirt pickup etc be in this game?...
I believe that is still the plan for Automobilista ;)

Not sure how in depth Reiza planned to implement it all since they havent previewed anything since then, but they have mentioned that these features should be pretty satisfying.
 

Kevin Knorpp

500RPM
Sep 9, 2010
548
162
Is it possible to do anything to reduce aliasing with the new graphics? rF2 (for example) would be dead for many people without the texture sharpening = 0 setting and it's sad to think of how many customers have been lost because that setting defaults to 5 at least in the most recent build.

Anyway, my point is that people crticize games for aliasing as if there is something that could be done by the dev so we don't have to apply so much processing power to fix it.

Is that true? Will Reiza be able to do something to "fix" this with the graphics changes they are going to make? Or are they fundamentally limited with what they can do because the ISI engine they licensed?
 

xnorb

1000RPM
Premium
Mar 31, 2015
1,678
549
41
I don't understand your question?
Launch the configuration tool and apply as much Anti Aliasing as you wish?
 

James Cook

Marcas fan
Oct 18, 2013
1,140
403
39
Yeah but I think it's well known that the in-game AA in ISI-based sims isn't the best. You need to use GPU driver software and other tweaks to get these games looking better.
 

xnorb

1000RPM
Premium
Mar 31, 2015
1,678
549
41
Ah okay.
I usually disable AA for performance reasons anyways :)
Love me those 200+ FPS *ggg*
 
Jul 24, 2015
373
267
31
I don't mean anything, it's just a curious question.

Why would you want 200+ FPS if the screen can't handle it and you can keep it at 60 or 120 FPS (the screen maximum) saving processing power?
 

xnorb

1000RPM
Premium
Mar 31, 2015
1,678
549
41
I limit it by software to 90 anyways, but i prefer having 60 FPS guaranteed than dropping to 25 FPS at race start or in a big pile-up when you need all FPS you can get.
 

natedogg1867

500RPM
Apr 5, 2015
692
377
I don't mean anything, it's just a curious question.

Why would you want 200+ FPS if the screen can't handle it and you can keep it at 60 or 120 FPS (the screen maximum) saving processing power?
I'm not entirely sure of the absolute proper technical reason... but for racing games, there is a legitimate reason to run your games at frame rates far exceeding your monitors refresh rate.

It all has to do with input lag and frame time.

Say you have a game where your hardware can only output 60 fps. Your monitor is also 60Hz, so this should work fine. Basically, this means the game is rendering the scenes 60 times a second, and sending it to your monitor which will update visually at the same rate. Now think about 120 fps. The game is able to render twice as many frames per second than the above 60 fps. This means that there is an extra frame being rendered for every one in the first example. This means there is more information that the game is rendering that can theoretically be displayed on your monitor. The result should be less input lag between your inputs and what you see on screen, even if you are limited to a 60 Hz display.

I think it would simply be stated as, you are getting more precise info being displayed on screen, than you would if the game was maxing out at 60 fps.

Im probably a bit off on the explanation, but hopefully you can see the concept behind it. That with 120 fps, the game is creating twice as much information as 60 fps.

I would recommend reading through this post and go through the articles in it for a better description of frame time / frame latency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: James Cook

ouvert

1000RPM
Apr 16, 2014
1,682
638
Fps is not only about what you see, its about what you feel...just like you can feel difference between 60 and 90 fps in shooter game.. But still better to have stable 90 than dropping 120
 
Jul 24, 2015
373
267
31
I'm not entirely sure of the absolute proper technical reason... but for racing games, there is a legitimate reason to run your games at frame rates far exceeding your monitors refresh rate.

It all has to do with input lag and frame time.

Say you have a game where your hardware can only output 60 fps. Your monitor is also 60Hz, so this should work fine. Basically, this means the game is rendering the scenes 60 times a second, and sending it to your monitor which will update visually at the same rate. Now think about 120 fps. The game is able to render twice as many frames per second than the above 60 fps. This means that there is an extra frame being rendered for every one in the first example. This means there is more information that the game is rendering that can theoretically be displayed on your monitor. The result should be less input lag between your inputs and what you see on screen, even if you are limited to a 60 Hz display.

I think it would simply be stated as, you are getting more precise info being displayed on screen, than you would if the game was maxing out at 60 fps.

Im probably a bit off on the explanation, but hopefully you can see the concept behind it. That with 120 fps, the game is creating twice as much information as 60 fps.

I would recommend reading through this post and go through the articles in it for a better description of frame time / frame latency.
Oh, nice reply! Just so we don't stay off topic for too long, let me see if I got it:

The FPS does not matter much. What is important is how fast a frame is processed and sent to the screen. So if I got a lot (200+) FPS, it must have, on average, very low latency, which will make 60 FPS look smooth on my screen.

But what happens when I limit FPS to 60 on my .PLR file? Will it have the same low latency, given that the graphic settings are the same as the 200+ FPS ones? Or do I have to process all the 200+ FPS to get low latency?
 

natedogg1867

500RPM
Apr 5, 2015
692
377
The FPS does not matter much. What is important is how fast a frame is processed and sent to the screen. So if I got a lot (200+) FPS, it must have, on average, very low latency, which will make 60 FPS look smooth on my screen.
I believe this is the correct interpretation. :) Again, Im not the best at explaining this sort of thing, but the point is that... with a really high frame rate (like 200 fps), the gpu is rendering more frames than it does at 60 fps, and therefore more precise information can be sent to your monitor to be displayed. Even if your monitor is 60Hz.

But what happens when I limit FPS to 60 on my .PLR file? Will it have the same low latency, given that the graphic settings are the same as the 200+ FPS ones? Or do I have to process all the 200+ FPS to get low latency?
Im not entirely sure the correct answer to this. The only thing I know for sure is, that you dont want to use V-sync. Not only does that inherently add input lag, there isnt a whole lot of reason to use it for racing games. If you have a high framerate, the picture on screen should be pretty smooth anyway. When I used a 60Hz monitor, I never used V-sync or put a frame rate cap on. Never had any screen tearing or stutters... And this always gave me the least amount of added input lag.

None of these settings will really make you faster, since it is primarily personal preference... but it would be worth experimenting with just to see what you prefer. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Follow RaceDepartment