Sure it looks good (CARS) just with players car and nothing else. But try 50-60 multiclass racers with headlights and track lights at Le Mans. With such quality like in that video, we will have serious performance issues.
One thing why console racing games usually look better, is that they have only a few cars on track at the time. It is unacceptable having only 10 cars in racing series like NASCAR or GT/endurance if talking about simulation.
This is the real challenge I believe that ISI is trying to cope with, to be able to build good performance engine with enough eye candy.
CryEngine3 license is available to anyone who wants to try building next generation car sim.
Doesn't matter. There is no single effect which cannot be done with DX9.
Originally Posted by THUNDERbreaks
Of course there always be performance loss in relation to number of cars vissible. But how rendered scene looks depends on lighting techniques which must not affect performance negatively. In short, rf2 engine may looks like CARS, without performance issues.
Originally Posted by Johannes Rojola
You you guys, don't believe in it, check trackmania 2 canyon
Euhh i dont have the latest cpu or motherboard. And i run 50 fps c.a.r.s on full
Now +40 cars at night on a big track, then i'm willing to sacrifice aliasing at 8x>2X & aniso 16x>4x etc etc...
The excuse of yeah its for a big field, great physics dont hold for me. Again i dont have the best pc, no one has to run on full ( i run ultra on c.a.r.s), and finally rF 2 can be though for ou rpc now but it's ok as it is for a long run.
Graphics it's nfs shift without all the crazy bloom or blur over the place. Shadows though arent the best i've seen.
Originally Posted by tyrrel
Physics it's not as bad as nfs shift, and less good than gtr2.
Sound is average
Menu is console friendly, not pc.
That's their main problem, I'm a fan of their aesthetic tuning/racing style, BUT I don't like how their physic works. The handling in shift1 and shift2 weren't good enough. Yes I know, EA ass-heads dictated simcade physics, but now without them they have to improve. Something labelled "less good than Gtr2", (the stock Gtr2 I suppose) doesn't sound good enough either. Actually I use Gtr2 with Napp 1.4 physic mod which is a noticeable step forward from the stock game. So if you tell me they have something less good than stock Gtr2, honestly I think they still have a LONG way to go.
Originally Posted by shum94
And about graphics, 40 cars at night in DX11, go ahead dude and tell me how it is.
Theoretically it can be as good or even better as SimBin titles and rFactor 1, as the physics engine in Shift/Shift 2 is based on ISI engine like from rFactor. Tyre and car parameters can be edited but if C.A.R.S. suffer from the same input lag like we have in the Shift series then that's really bad and only the devs can fix that
Ekhm, I just realized it's one bit OT, when we look at the thread title
Please don't argue if you have no idea about things you are talking about.
Originally Posted by THUNDERbreaks
1) DX11 is not a reason to get less fps than with DX9.
2) effects you can see on CARS, TM2, Shift2, videos, are not DX11 specific. All those things you can get also using DX9c.
So, please stop talking about how DX11 is power consuming, because it is unrelated at all.
about DX11..no doubt it has some perfomance , effect and other nice features over DX9..but basicly when talked about perfomance , all is up how
well code is wrote...small mistake, conflict in the code can affect to perfomance very noticeable...there is many pages examples in the AMD dev
forum if wanna read more about it..
DX11 is just an API which only gives you possibilities to create something new... but that doesn't mean every "DX11" game will have implemented all the new stuff and that's what Maxym is talking about. For example, no one force you to implement tesselation in a DX11 game...it's just a feature of that particular API, nothing more. You may write a DX11 game with only DX9-like features... and probably it will run faster in the end than with the same features but wrote in DX9 API.
Dx11 or not, I just wonna see that thing with 40 cars in a night track at 60 rock solid fps with GREAT physics and GREAT ffb. For now I've seen one single car struggling in a WIP video with a physic labelled "less good than Gtr2" that's my point. High details ok, but that's not everything. So good luck and good work to SMS, but for now I have the feeling rFactor 2 will be a more balanced simulator. Oh and thanks for your sympahty dude.
Originally Posted by MaXyM
not forgetting that RF2 is an ongoing project, so whilst its DX9 now who's to say that ISI wont take time to update the graphics to DX11 or whatever in a couple of years or so.
For me a good balance between graphics and physics is the key, or great physics and graphics good enough to make you forget about them...which is a good thing!