Home
News
rFactor 2
rFactor 1
Forums
Contact
Company
Technology
Image Space Inc. YouTube rFactor 2 Twitter Image Space Inc. Google Plus rFactor 2 Facebook
ISI - Advertise
Try or Buy rFactor 2
$43.99/84.99 Windows Only PCDL
Download rFactor 2 Demo Now!

NOTICE Notice: This is an old thread and information may be out of date. The last post was 953 days ago. Please consider making a new thread.
Page 9 of 21 FirstFirst ... 567891011121319 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 420

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Post your initial impressions here

  1. #161
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC


    My first time out. Running better than most with ATi cards. 20-30FPS all settings maxed. 20° V-FOV by default(Thank you ISI) but no permanent Horizon Orientation offset adjustment (booooo).

    FFB in the F3 was OK, same with the Megan.. the F2 was like Jesus loaned me his magic steering wheel (ie great) and other than a couple of anomalies and missing features this went well. I knew what to expect and with HDR disabled nobody should be complaining about the looks yet. I also screwed with the PLR and INI's a bit to get it back to spec with my rF1.

  2. #162
    K Szczech's Avatar
     

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Quote Originally Posted by Stefaan View Post
    So the bottom line is that, it's a DX9 engine, it looks dated
    As a DirectX / OpenGL programmer I have to disagree with that statement.

    One most important thing to understand here is that DirectX is only a messenger between game engine and GPU. It's entirely up to programmers to make graphics look good. New games tend to look better not because they use latest technology, but because it so happened that programmers improved their techniques over time.

    But enough of that. This thread is all about impressions, not discussing technical stuff
    SRPL Shader Pack v0.92 is now available for modders: announcements / discussion
    "Be kind whenever possible. It's always possible." - Dalai Lama

  3. #163
    Thomas_L's Avatar
     

    Newer Member
    Dec 2011
    My personal subjective impressions:

    - installation: easy to handle, installed and updated the mods via mod-manager

    - purchase and activation: no problems

    - FFB: feels quite good on track but terrible on curbs and off-track (G25)

    - graphics performance: not satisfied with that issue .... 60 fps, stuttering and minifreezes (GTX570)

    - server connection: no problems, very easy to connect, seems to run stable

    - driving: graphics stuttering, on-board sound is great, other cars on track are not looking very realistic (no physics, more like a train on railway), tracks are awesome, instant replay is poor (but not important to me).

    Conclusion: from my point of view there is a long way to go until rf2 could meet our high expectations ... but this might be a problem of our expectations .... I bought lifetime membership and I am sure this was the right decision.

    Cheers!

  4. #164
    jonneymendoza's Avatar
     

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Ferret View Post
    I've said this a few times before but rfactor is doing a hell of a lot more in the background than Pcars and iracing. The dynamic weather lighting and road alone mean certain graphical effects can't be achieved in the same way, fully dynamic lights (rfactor 2's sun) vs a track made at a specific time of day differs a lot in terms of how it is built and rendered. So many corners can be cut (baked shadows / lighting onto the textures being a big one) fact is rfactor is processing a crap load more information than these other sims.

    I also remember isi saying that hdr was the first of a few post process effects they want to add in. Look at pcars with all the post process effects turned off and it won't be to far from this really, as the game is built up it will look better and just wait till CTDP put something out for it.

    Tl;dr rfactor is doing a lot more and doing it on the fly/dynamically and this is why the game doesn't look quite as good as other titles just yet. /rant
    i disagree also about the amount happening under the hood. games like arma 2 for example have way more stuff going on behind the scenes then this game in a game world that dwarfs a track of spa. Arma 2 also has dynamic weather effects, uncluding rain and all that day and nigth cycle of shadows etc and that game looks much better then rf2 and runs decent too. It is also a game thats nearly 3 years old as well.

    Sorry but saying just because it has a more dynamic world is no excuse to gimp on the graphics and for it to run as poor as it does on some peoples high end rigs

  5. #165
    Mr.Ferret's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by jonneymendoza View Post
    i disagree also about the amount happening under the hood. games like arma 2 for example have way more stuff going on behind the scenes then this game in a game world that dwarfs a track of spa. Arma 2 also has dynamic weather effects, uncluding rain and all that day and nigth cycle of shadows etc and that game looks much better then rf2 and runs decent too. It is also a game thats nearly 3 years old as well.

    Sorry but saying just because it has a more dynamic world is no excuse to gimp on the graphics and for it to run as poor as it does on some peoples high end rigs
    Have a look at my second post i touched on arma 2. Ive put in 160 hours into ARMA 2 and it was complete dog when it came out and its a heck of a lot better now after those 3 years. but in terms of fair comparisons (ie ARMA 2 graphics vs BF3 graphics and rF2 graphics vs iRacing graphics) check out my other post on the last page

  6. #166
    Stefaan's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Newer Member
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by K Szczech View Post
    As a DirectX / OpenGL programmer I have to disagree with that statement.
    One most important thing to understand here is that DirectX is only a messenger between game engine and GPU. It's entirely up to programmers to make graphics look good. New games tend to look better not because they use latest technology, but because it so happened that programmers improved their techniques over time.

    But enough of that. This thread is all about impressions, not discussing technical stuff
    All good impressions is very much what is discussed here and can't avoid the technicalities behind it

    I did also state this btw:

    I would even argue that a totally new DX9 engine could have looked better then this overhauled one we see in RF2.
    And in another thread I also brought up the 360 as an example of what is possible. Forza albeit more game then sim looks a bit fake by design but you gotta hand it to them when it comes to making DX9 look good.
    But no matter how good DX9 can look it never seems to quite match DX11 in that more photoreal look, I assume it's due to lighting options, you probably know better then me I'm only a consumer but the tech side of graphics does fascinate me, particularly in the areas of lighting.

    Certainly nothing even approaching photo-reality is going on here, even the cars in the showroom look like drawings rather then photos. And clearly the goal is towards a photo real look, it's not like rfactor is going for a certain graphical art style.

    Bottom line after 6 years I think the audience for this game is inevitably going to have a certain expectation as to what graphical standards RF2 should reach, but the vibe of this tread certainly shows that people expected a lot more on that front then what is being delivered.
    And I don't even consider simracers the most demanding bunch out there either.

  7. #167
    JJStrack's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification 

    Registered
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Cologne, Germany
    My first impression:
    -easy installation and purchase
    -good user interface
    -graphics are ok for no HDR
    -FFB is horrible (DFGT) --> can't say anything about physics since i don't feel the car at all...only voilent rattling

    i stopped playing the beta after about an hour because of the FFB...very frustrated right now

  8. #168
    ZeosPantera's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Beta's are frustrating.. Your being told what your about to play is broken. I knew that going in. Let's just get organized and cooperative and coherent on the matters that.. matter and I am sure ISI will address them in a timely manner.

  9. #169
    idiot_intraining's Avatar
     

    Newer Member
    Jan 2012
    Quote Originally Posted by jonneymendoza View Post
    lots of people using single monitor and still getting framerates lower then 60fps.

    What are u on about? UI menu's? what the hell does the UI menu got to do with framerates?

    i agree about weather, that may impact pcars and ffb? the FFB on pcars is very very good already.

    hello.. i SAID ... use pcars graphics.. with the GUI/menus.. and weather.. well all of it but the graphics.. put it all in pcars..

    also i said im using 3 screens. duh.. im on max 40 or so fps.. on eyefinity in pcars.. but in rf2.. like 23fps online racing..

  10. #170
    coops's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification Where I race Modding Group: NONE 

    Registered
    Feb 2011
    Location
    aussie

    Thumbs up

    hey guys orsm job well done for the beta stage, cant wait for more up dates,a lot better than i thought well worth the wait, cheers coops

  11. #171
    K Szczech's Avatar
     

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Poland
    Quote Originally Posted by Stefaan View Post
    And in another thread I also brought up the 360 as an example of what is possible. Forza albeit more game then sim looks a bit fake by design but you gotta hand it to them when it comes to making DX9 look good.
    Yeah, totally agree.
    Regardles is one likes Gran Tourismo or Forza graphics, it shows that possibilities are there in DX9 class hardware.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stefaan View Post
    But no matter how good DX9 can look it never seems to quite match DX11 in that more photoreal look, I assume it's due to lighting options
    Both are exactly the same in terms of lighting algorithms. Actually, lighting approach changed only once, when we switched from DX8 to DX9 (because shaders and HDR were introduced, wchich finally allowed lighting calculations based on real world). DX11 can give advantage in more advanced lighting algorithms such as bounced light. But only few games do that anyway and racing games aren't among them as far as I know.

    The main reason why DX11 games look better than DX9 ones is that some time has passed since release of DX9 and programmers learned to do better engines since then. This could give false impression that we owe better visuals to new DirectX, which of course many people would like us to believe (for marketing reasons), but the truth is we owe better visuals to passing time, which means growing experience of game programmers and increasing processing power of modern GPU's.

    That's why rF2 is still behind. It's not the technology - it's programmers that have to pick up with today's standards (today's standards, not DX11's standards ). That's understandable actually - it's not like they've been working solely on graphics engine for the last 6 years
    SRPL Shader Pack v0.92 is now available for modders: announcements / discussion
    "Be kind whenever possible. It's always possible." - Dalai Lama

  12. #172
    Nor's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Not Validated 

    Registered
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Berlin/Germany
    OK, I think now I can give my first impressions of the beta.

    First I'l like to post my specs:
    OS: Win 7 64bit ultimate
    CPU: E8400@3,3Ghz, FSB@ 366MHz
    RAM: 4Gb DDR2@ 1100MHz
    GPU: HD6850@ 900MHz Core, and 1050MHz Memory speed, latest available ATI driver without catalyst, I use ATI tray tools.
    Wheel: Fanatec GT3 RS, also latest driverst available.

    After some treaking with settings I run at High settings inkl. HDR, but sun, track and windeffects disabled. Hudge drop if FPS. AA level 3 and AF x16 ingame. That settings allow me to run the 60's at Spa with ~60FPS. Almost smoothe, but sometimes it looks like the game would stutter a bit.

    What I'm wandering ist, that the CPU usage is roughly about 50-60% and also the GPU runs at about 60-70% of full performance. If the usage of hardware could be optimized, I'm sure i could achieve lot more FPS.

    Menues: The look of the menu in rf2 improoved in every point into positive. I only miss some additional FFB settings. Everything else, looks satisfying. Good job.

    Gameplay: got a good feeling. makes lot of fun. The 60's F1 in rain conditions is really big challenge. Nice FFB feeling with my wheel. Had to decrease to 0,25. To comment the physics, I have to drive lot more kilometers. Waht I can say for now, there are some problems with the collision, which must be solved. Cars are jumping after colision sometimes like

    Graphics: I don't expect very best graphics, the improvement to rf1 is visible. There are some issues, like rain seems to come out of sunny weather, have seen on a sever yesterday. Don't remember which one. The changes in the weather condition seem to come little sudden. But Ok, it's nice to see different visibillity condition on different track parts. And also the weather seems to move, good job, ok, but there's something to improve the changes happen more smooth.
    The rpm display of the hud should be car specific, as the 60's can go up to 10000rpm, and display ends at 8000rpm.
    I saw a bug with hdr one time, after activating HDR, and entered a 60's monaco server, everything was over saturated, it was impossible to dirve. But this bug did not occure anymore.


    short conclusion:

    Overall, concidering that this is a beta stadium, i'm happy what I've seen. But there's a lot of improvement to do. Especially the optimization of hardware usage, the collision bugs, weather changing. I look forward to see improvements.

    Hope I could help you.

    best regards Norbert

  13. #173
    Fulcoboy's Avatar
     

    Newer Member
    Jan 2012
    Location
    A, A
    Can somebody tell me if the pitcrew at the moment is still a placeholder for a full animated pitcrew? (I mean the people that work on your car on a pitstop and not the engineer when you exit your pit box)

    It's strange that everyone in the pitlane is animated and your pitcrew looks to be made out of cardboard?

  14. #174
    HuntTheShunt's Avatar

     rFactor 2 Validated PC Specification Where I race 

    Registered
    Oct 2010

    Poor FFB

    Quote Originally Posted by JJStrack View Post
    My first impression:
    -easy installation and purchase
    -good user interface
    -graphics are ok for no HDR
    -FFB is horrible (DFGT) --> can't say anything about physics since i don't feel the car at all...only voilent rattling

    i stopped playing the beta after about an hour because of the FFB...very frustrated right now
    I agree the FFB is poor.


    It is still on the whole a good sim
    Last edited by HuntTheShunt; 01-11-12 at 09:52 AM.

  15. #175
    theother5's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Mainland Europe
    FFB is so subjective but it can be tweaked alot already and seems perhaps that this may even be a topic higher up the list for more focus as the beta matures.....

  16. #176
    I'm surprised and happy to see it feels as good and looks as good as it does right now. I am telling my (non-iRacing) friends to go ahead and get it and working to get our clan's server up for it. It's definitely in our group's future as the race sim for the masses. I think there is some fuzziness right now in the game, not sure if it all works just right yet, but overall, for BETA, Its a THUMBS UP.

  17. #177
    javixeneize's Avatar
     

    Newer Member
    Mar 2011
    not too bad for being a beta (remember, ISI told us that this was just a Beta, so there is a big room to improve)

    Graphics can be improved, some items as telemetry, etc can be added, but, in general, this is quite good for being a beta version

  18. #178
    bleco's Avatar
     

    Registered
    Oct 2010

    Thumbs up Fisrt impressions

    Hi,

    Thank you very much ISI to have released this Beta ...

    Even if it is still a very early release, it feels amazing to me ...

    A lot are complaining about the FFB ... With my fanatec GT3 V2 if feels incredible!! It's the best FFB I have tried so far and it exceeds iRacing one IMO. You can really feel the wheels and traction loss and off track feeling is also very realistic to me. Maybe it is just not yet well adapted to Logitech wheels ...

    I will not talk about graphics as this is the first beta release but they are already very realistic and immersion is fantastic over night. I can't wait to see rain drops on the windshield, early screenshots looked superb! And with everything maxed out and 8xAA + VSync I am getting a very fluid framerate even on 3D vision on my Core I7 920, 6gig ram, GTX570.

    I love the weather options and wheel/pedal settings are very good. I have the best feeling ever with my clubsports pedals now with rF2. I love the way we can easily adjust min and max pedal sensivity and I also love the fact that we can see the car specific wheel rotation ratio in game settings.

    Keep the good work and again thank you very much!



    Bleco
    Last edited by bleco; 01-11-12 at 05:49 PM.

  19. #179
    emilblixt's Avatar

     PC Specification Facebook profile 

    Registered
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    As far as first impressions of the sim, I must say, even though knowing it is a beta, Iīm completely underwhelmed.

    Graphics look like Top Gear Rally on N64. Like painted with water color, and I guess this is a core feature that wont change much during the beta stage.

    FPS -horrible, on low settings (i5 760 @ 3.8, 5870 @ 900, triple screen (1280x1024). )

    FFB; vague and spongy. Feels like iRacing-like rattle has been coded over tracks with no topographic information.


    I hope all of this is improved because as of now it feels ten years old.

  20. #180
    RafBR's Avatar

     PC Specification 

    Registered
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Brasil
    Great, great, great, great! I readed the tutorials (tracks mods) and now I played the game and I am very impressed. Few small issues donīt make me mad!
    Thanks ISI!

Page 9 of 21 FirstFirst ... 567891011121319 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •