Have Your Say: Are Graphics Important?

[Nick Hill]

For me, all other things being equal, hell yes - gimmie da eye candy! In the world of sim racing though, all other things are rarely equal in my experience.

This will echo what many others have already said to the point of being cliche, so I'll keep it brief - PCars vs GTR2. I can tell you one of those has way better graphics, yet is perma-uninstalled on my machine while the other one gets played regularly by me.

I think my attitude is extremely common/mainstream in the sim racing realm. In the world of mass market games, though...I'll tell you this, if I were in charge of a mass market driving/racing game, once I had the big name licenses secured, I would throw however much dev effort it took to make the game (1) look gorgeous and (1a) have good (visual) damage. That equals great boxshots and those equal sales! I'd probably also prioritize sound over worrying much about physics.

The funny thing is, when the above game gets produced, it'll still be marketed and referred to as a "sim" in the mass market. I've long since made the observation that, for mainstream gamers, "sim" in the driving/racing genre means "looks like real life" and "the cars get banged up when you crash them".

 

[Ryan Robbins]

When I used to race on my iMac using a Windows boot camp partition games with older graphics didn't bother me as much. Now with a gaming rig I have trouble playing AMS or other old games. The graphics in Dirt Rally and AC are icing on the cake of an already great game. RRE and iRacing ok graphics, but a little dated. AND, though I love the FF, feels too old to me. RFactor 2 has improved a lot in graphics

 

[John Jorell]

Graphics for me is as important as the real-time car physics while on the track. It doesn't just give a realistic impression of the game itself but it creates immersion on the perspective of the player. Just let the developers make sure that they should be able to balance both visual fidelity and the physics and I'm good with it.

 

[Captain Condescending]

For me, Graphics are important to a point. They're amazing for immersion, of course, but they also allow for gaemplay and realism (dynamic lights and weather effects, time of day, etc). I play in VR, so for me the most important thing is good consistent performance, but I think graphical effects like time of day and weather, as well as sun glare, smoke etc really add to a racing sim's gameplay, and I really wish Assetto Corsa would have more in this regard - hopefully pCARS 2 can nail the physics enough for me to give it a go, because I know that game has the graphical side down.

 

[bsmooth]

I'm looking at a beautiful image of a Ferrari P330 P4 from Assetto Corsa, and I wish I could run it, but my system is probably about 7 years old now. Would I want to have AC, yes by all means I would especially with all the great mods, But something called life gets in the way sometimes, and right now a PC upgrade just isn't in the cards. Christmas is coming and I have to put my family first.
But as an alternative to that we have Automobilista. It does have great physics and very good AI, and yes it does have at least for me pretty darn good graphics, oh yes and it runs great on even my older system.
So are graphics important? Yes to a degree to immerse you in whats going on, heck GPL did that years ago, and everyone was saying it was too hard, well If that game didn't get you involved, minds as well give up and go back to playing Pong. But as simmers, and after years and years of playing them I think we all qualify to get what we want. But our needs vary and right now we can get pretty good eye candy in some sims, and we can also get good enough graphics and great physics.
I think were all pretty darn lucky at this point, especially with the great track and car selection we have, and even better how accurate and good looking they are. I just finished watching Kubo and the Two strings, and am still amazed at what can be done, and how good it looks.

 

[Fabrice Bourguignon]

But our needs vary and right now we can get pretty good eye candy in some sims, and we can also get good enough graphics and great physics.

I have an old & modest config too (I5 2500K, 8Go ram,Ati R9 280) and I can play AMS, Rf2, AC in good conditions. Now, the race for graphics isn't more important like that. Since Moore law is done, 7 years old PC be able to run actuals games. Maybe not Pcars 2 in full. No so long I had to change my config every three years to playing.

 

[Pywackett-Barchetta]

I feel like graphics do matter, but photorealistic graphics don't. If you have a consistent, cohesive art style that's easy on the eyes, I'm happy. Virtua Racing's aged well, the DiRT games still look great, RACE 07 and Shift 2 have some blurred textures but hold up okay, whereas stuff that tried to look cutting-edge just look sloppy and dated not too long after, if they can even run at a decent speed. High framerate and great physics will last you longer than "ooh pretty".

 

[aduo]

Handling is the "sine qua non" condition , then comes the graphics . the more I feel the handling real the more i have fun , this is the reason I dislike all those arcade style games like Forza , horizon or gran turismo they all have fantastic packaging but then you drive and .... bleagh . I still remember a rally game ( a WRC franchise title if I welll remember ) and the car drove like it was on a flat surface , like on a track without bumps and jumps , I played it for few minutes and then never again .

 

[BenCollins]

Great graphics won't make me play a sim with bad physics.
Bad graphics won't stop me play a sim with great physics.

 

[Ghoults]

There are 3 different things that I personally care about graphics.

The first one is the most important one. High fps, low input lag and good graphical feedback that tells you what the car is doing graphically. These aspects make the sim or game drivable. Nothing kills a game quicker for me than input lag. However even in the sim world there are differences between sims in how well they display the graphical feedback coming from the car. I'm not talking about camera shaking. I'm talking about how the view moves with the car when the springs compress and how tires deflect.

If the sim does this well then you can feel the tires compressing and deflecting in corners. Generally lfs was really good at this but ac is also good at this as is iracing. All rf based sims at least for me have issues with this. When sliding it is hard to feel when the tires start gripping for example. Under hard acceleration you can feel whether you are little under or over the peak grip. In rf I can be hard to feel whether I'm slowing down or locking a wheel. It is a small difference but it is always there and in the end it has nothing to do with physics quality. My guess is that rf sims don't use tire deflection for the view movement but of course physically it is there.

Second important thing for me as a graphics modder and modeller is the quality of the graphics. The shinier the better. This one is weird one for me because before I started modding I could not care about graphics at all. I'd be happy with gpl graphics if it had high enough fps. But once you make content you start to care about how it looks. The depth of the graphics parameters in the shaders and the way it looks in the game suddenly becomes this process where you learn new stuff all the time. I'd guess it is like good driving physics. The more you learn the less you know you know. There is always more depth to be found. I don't mean this to say that I like fiddling and finding some hidden functionality but it is more about working with the tools you know trying to get them to do things you first did not see possible.

Third aspect is then the graphics while driving. This is not just the raw quality of the the graphics engine, shadows, car specific metal effects, visually different materials but also some of the physics based graphical phenomenae. Basic things like glowing brake discs, brakelights, dirty windshields and visual tire wear. But also the way the cars move around. Some sims manage to look really realistic while in motion while others don't quite seem to be running the physics that it matches what the car is doing. Especially in replays. Overall when driving I personally don't care about shiny graphics when driving but realistic car motion is important

 

[Deleted member 217114]

For me no and yes. I would love it if a racing game has proper multiview which can run 60+ on high settings with at last CMAA or 2MSAA. On the other side it must not be toooo ugly. I believe AC and AMS has found a great balance. The only company that neglect to adapt this multiview and graphics compromise is Codemasters.

 

[Fabrice Bourguignon]

The only company that neglect to adapt this multiview and graphics compromise is Codemasters

True, F1 2017 by Codemasters Is Not Getting VR Support. Unbelievable

 

[aka2k]

Of course it is important! The heck, man? The best sims ever released always pushed the boundaries of the graphics. This thing of "ehm, graphics doesn't matter, I want handling" is just a lazy excuse to defend your cult.

The best example: Grand Prix 2. It was so high on the bar graphically and physics wise for its time that even to this day it isn't a bad looking game nor a bad one to play.

Flight sims are also another great example. They always move visual, audio and physics tech together. Developers hardly advance only one thing with those games.

 

[BenCollins]

Of course it is important! The heck, man? The best sims ever released always pushed the boundaries of the graphics..

This is true. GPL's graphic card requirements were way ahead of what the average gamer had in 1998. Likewise, Grand Prix 2 and Grand Prix 4.

 

[Nick Gregory]

It's the current year, so why would you want something that has great physics, but looka like GPL?

 

[BenCollins]

It's the current year, so why would you want something that has great physics, but looka like GPL?

I think the majority of posts say that physics can never be wrong, but graphics are a secondary consideration.

For me, Project Cars looks beautiful, but I can't control the cars. Automobilista doesn't look great, but the driving is beautiful.

Project Cars: 3 hours
Automobilista: 45 hours
(Grand Prix Legends: 15 years)

 

[Greg Latty]

Physics > Performance > Graphics
Although I might be one of the few that thinks AMS looks pretty good. Espcially since i can do over 120fps maxed out at 1440p. You dont even notice the lack of pp effects when driving.

 

[billymitchell]

Consistent and smooth FPS performance is the most important graphic element. On PC, we can often solve poor sim engine optimization by upgrading components and throwing more horsepower at the problem, masking what is actually inadequate programming and game engine design.

From a VR perspective, smoothness is again top priority. Nothing breaks immersion like an FPS drop or occasional hang/jitter.

A great example of a driving franchise that has NEVER put smooth gameplay first is Gran Turismo, in which Polyphony was 100% OK with the FPS jumping from 60 to 20 during a single lap... in contrast, Turn 10 always pushed the graphical limits of the Xbox to achieve 60 FPS in most situations.

Forza 7 will be the best optimized graphics engine of this generation, and on PC, it will deliver the best FPS for CPU+GPU dollar. Assuming Win10 and Store don't screw it all up...

 

[SimboWales]

With F1 2017 Code Masters have totally killed the immersion factor for me due to the fact that the individual tracks cannot be modded to look ultra realistic.
I will never ever get the chance to sit behind the wheel of an F1 car let alone whiz up through Eau Rouge at 200mph so the next best is a simulator that looks real to ME.
If you take world War 2 flight sims for example, can you imagine the outcry if a Spitfire or a Messerschmidt 109 had an un modifiable paint skin - the correct squadron markings must be used and the correct type of cross and cockades for the year represented.
Shame on you CM this will probably the last F1 sim I buy from you.

 

[Fat Rich]

For me in order of importance:

No.1 is smooth frame rates.... no stutters, freezes, minimal lag.
Plus I don't want to be constantly adjusting the graphics settings for each car / track combo I drive, one setting should suit all official game content (I'm looking at you rF2)

No. 2 is plenty of texture detail on the road, verges and kerbs, plus enough trackside objects to use as brake points, turn in points, exit points etc. Makes driving second nature if you're not having to estimate all these things because the textures are so poor. Plus these important landmarks should not be turned off on low graphics settings, get rid of the eye candy away from the track instead.

No. 3 is no distracting graphical tricks that grab my attention for no reason....crazy heat hazes (Codies, SMS), leaves flying about in summer (SMS), failing cars chuffing smoke like a steam engine (ISI), crazy lens flares (SMS), moon the size of Jupiter (SMS and ISI).

No. 4 Decent colour palette: top marks to Raceroom for this, others mostly OK although rF2 can sometimes look washed out with pinks instead of reds.

No. 5 I'm a sucker for a decent car interior / cockpit

No. 6 The other stuff is nice if it doesn't hurt frame rate too much.