What's the graphical difference?


I'm really wondering: What's actually making GSCE look different than AC?

Ya, the HUD is very obvious, but the only thing i can pinpoint is the rather dated texturework in GSCE.
Trackside objects and people are of obviously not the cherry on top, but i don't rate them as high as i barely have a look at them.

Could it be that AC uses a higher contrast that adds more depth?

As usual every game has it's own color tint - some use cooler colors, others warmer colors, but that's nothing that's really a gamebreaker.

So, does it really all boil down to higher res textures / less tiled-until-end-of-days-textures and a little bit higher contrast? Or am i missing something really major here?


I can make a grey box with no shadows and no textures in an DX11 application...

The number behind the DX doesn't stand for "graphics awesomeness"
First I want to say that I'm not a software engineer so the information below might be incorrect but I think I got at least some parts right :p

I don't think it's only the DX version that makes AC look so good compared to SCE.
We all know SCE runs on gmotor2 and it's an ancient graphic engine now days. When the engine was created we didn't have the technology we have today, we simply had to work with what we got.

The engine wasn't optimized for more polygons that a normal computer could handle.
The lighting technology we have today wasn't available back then.
Being a 32bit application it has RAM limitations, we even have to patch it make use of 4gb.

I bet together we can make this list never ending but you get the point, it's just an old engine, built for it's time and IMO it has aged well. Reiza has done some amazing stuff with the engine but if you want more I guess the only option is to build an entirely new graphics engine with today's technology.


I think its pretty much only the shaders... which defines how well the shadows fall and how the light goes on different surfaces. I'm pretty sure gmotor 2 didn't even run hardware shaders, because it didn't require a gpu that had shader clock, and was able to run on directx 7.

GSCE is much more advanced and can't run on anything less than directx9... but still doesn't really have great shadows. You can see it if you drive a tintop, you don't have the shadow of the roof and the window pillars, or even the wheel, moving around the cockpit as in Assetto Corsa, and you only have the environment shadows. Also, even these, which turn on at "high" shadow setting, have great performance impact, at "medium"you get only car shadows...

On other hand, GSCE has multiple light sources unlike Assetto Corsa, and you can have headlights, night racing and circuit lights even... but they calculate at much more basic level.

That might change tho, now, when they have the gmotor2 source code... isn't Raceroom Racing Experience also based on gmotor 2? That game has pretty good shaders, and looks pretty much on par with Assetto Corsa I think. Not that Rfactor 2 is running on Gmotor 3 or something as far as i remember...

Most likely it will depend on whether the developer would prioritize it, being not so large team. In the crowdfunding, they said:
"If we hit 90%:
Bonus car & track (as chosen via voting by backers)
Features / Improvements: Custom offline championship tool; art pass + additional shader development to boost graphics;"
so there might be something down the line...
Last edited:


I agree the graphics engine seems old. Also, AC runs at pretty much the same FPS, with much nicer graphics (at least in my computer).

Well, really, I don't know if much "nicer" graphics, as GSCE are pretty nicely done. But AC does seem better (better reflections, better shadows, better contrast, among other).

One small thing: I don't think that GM2 can handle multiple light sources. What they did with the track and car night lights was to use a texture.


Figured out in the other thread that there are no shadows casted by the car itself in the cockpit view.
(Of course you notice it, but pinpointing it is another thing *g*)
I think that's already a big factor of bling bling.

I remember seeing cockpit shadows for the first time (i think it was a Gran Turismo trailer) and i was like "Wow, really? Awesome! Next Level of video game evolution spotted!".


Every sim has its strengths, GSC's is not its graphics. But nearly all of us go into this game knowing that up front. On the other hand, the less than cutting edge visuals at least mean that everything can be turned up to max and still deliver great frames on modest hardware (like mine).

Given that Reiza didn't have low level access to the engine and still made GSC look amazing compared to rF1, I have every faith in them to produce something spectacular with the source access they now have and their meticulous design.

David Wright

I think its pretty much only the shaders... which defines how well the shadows fall and how the light goes on different surfaces. I'm pretty sure gmotor 2 didn't even run hardware shaders, because it didn't require a gpu that had shader clock, and was able to run on directx 7.
Gmotor2 will not run on DX7. It does support hardware shaders but you can turn this off to support DX7 graphics cards.

GSCE is much more advanced ...
GSCE uses gmotor2, but without the option to support DX7 graphics cards.

That might change tho, now, when they have the gmotor2 source code... isn't Raceroom Racing Experience also based on gmotor 2?

R3E uses S3Ss own graphics engine. It uses a modified version of ISI Motor 2s physics engine.


Frankly, visual fidelity is not something I really care about... It is something I notice the first 2 minutes when I get into the car and then completely forget about it. I don't even run HDR in Assetto Corsa, because its just extra fps for something I don't notice. SCE does have nice atmosphere tho, driving in the morning or the evening does feel like driving in the morning or the evening...

Speaking of features we wold likely not get, my priorities would be more like this:

Ranking site like GPLrank or RSR live timing. I wouldn't mind uploading my times manually, just something to see how good or bad I am at certain combo, and bragging rights I guess :D

Something like working championship or separate events - so I would have reason to try all the tracks and cars... didn't even know there were ovals in here, and they are pretty nice...

Cloudy skies or even fog, for atmosphere.

Deltabar like Iracing - there are such mods for AC and Rfactor2, but I guess Rfactor 1 engine doesn't allow such timing, only by sectors.

Will Mazeo

I don't understand much when people complain about graphics :p
I grew up playing Mario Kart, Top Gear, NFS, GT 1 and 2, etc. From inside the cockpit I'm for sure not looking if the grass is moving or if a tree is 3D or not. For sure new graphics are cool (if you keep it closer to real life) but... in the good old GTR2 I had (and sill have) a lot of fun racing online and didn't care about the rest, the net code was a way bigger issue to me.
Apologizes for the poor vid editing.

I think GSC looks good enough (and racing online is a lot better in it). Just afraid of the developments Reiza said they'll bring on the graphics. Hope it won't affect people with poor PC that much or they'll include more graphic options for people to choose and save some fps without killing what we already have. One of the reasons that made EEC move from GTR2 to GSC was how good and how "light" it is + better online experience since not everyone in the forum has a PC ready to go for other sims, and tbh... better wait and see where rF2 still go and next Reiza sim. The rest of the stuff out there does not worth spending money be it on the "sims" itself or PC parts to move to them.


Some people are happy if the physics and handling merely approximate reality as long as the audiovisuals are immersive. Others are happy if the audiovisuals only approximate reality provided the physics and handling are top notch. The problem is that some people from either camp insist that their point of view is the only valid one, label people with alternative views as anoraks/simcaders (strike out as applicable), and demand that developers cater to their wishes only. The Reiza forum seems thankfully light on these people, let's hope it stays that way.

Call me optimistic but I'd prefer both immersive audiovisuals and perfect physics/handling (without requiring a NASA supecomputer to run them). I applaud moves by any developer in this direction.


Let me put it this way. GSCE's strength might not be its graphics but they certainly aren't it weakness either, not to people who aren't tormented by anything less than what makes their high end car chug.

Me personally I turn all sims down on settings to get over 100 FPS solid. As such AC, while still pretty, has none of the post processing effects and so I can't see that much difference. When I'm going 150 MPH through a corner I can't even perceive it. I'm here to drive.

Whats more I find the sharper contrast of the colours, the brightness, the brilliance of them in GSCE, very enjoyable. Its like my driver is wearing contrast enhancing shades while he drives.

I prefer it honestly.


Andy, well, there's no DoF in GSCE, so your edited shots don't count, mate ;)

In your first shot: Wall on the left doesn't cast shadows
In your 2nd shot: Same gras texture tiled until infinity

Don't get me wrong, i don't say GSCE's graphics are ugly or lacking a lot, but little more polish on the textures, in car shadows and DoF on camera angles (please for the love of god don't put DoF in the driver's vision) would already be more than enough to boost GSCE's graphical fidelity by a lot.
Some say shaders would do the track, but i don't really know a lot about that :)
Top Bottom