From the first moment I read this post, I was thinking: this guy should model the "reasonable priced car" as well ;-)
and when I reach the last page of the post, I find you are already considering it; fine, in that case, I would suggest the Liana, as I think is the one they've been using last season, insn't it?
Brilliant job; I wish the rest of the game and it's mods could get close to this level, as most of them probably won't be able to reach it. ISI, take a look here, give us an update
Thanks a lot
somehow it makes me giggle that one of the most talented modelers in this community will bring us a Suzuki Liana out of all the amazing cars out there but i too think, that the Top Gear Track is only complete with one of the RPCs. I love your work Tuttle!
Unfortunately I've to park the project due the HDR read/write locking in the new build 85.
The track looks completely different now (huge step back for me in terms of eyecandy) and we can't work with profiles (no read/write)...so it's impossible to understand where I'm going with lights/textures/shaders etc.
I usually need HDRs to optimize everything for a proper looking in different light/weather situations (texture saturations/proper baking/shaders values/colors etc)..but now the profile browsing do not work, so it's like painting in the dark.
Happy to see new improvements in the reflection field..but I'm very disappointed for this limitation, considering the time we had to wait for a new build...
HDR isn't such a big problem (at least for me) but big problem is with normal and specular maps. With new build they are working in a different way and track modders now have to set all materials and textures again with no guarantee that with the next build it will work.
Of course I could work with HDR off...but this is not the smartest way to do a good job.
BTW..I've to agree with the rest of your post. 100%.
THis is why modders needs more feedback from ISI. (think to the fact that this limitation is not even mentioned in the build feature list....)
Maybe it's matter of language, but IMO HDR shouldn't be used to tune up texture appearance. HDR is for fitting high range of light intensity into limited output range. Of course it will affects final appearance but it is not a tool to tune it. IMO textures should be prepared for neutral lighting. then lit with good, one HDR profile. If textures are prepared correctly - HDR will beatify it, otherwise - exaggerate flaws.
I hope, ISI has started this way - to not allow track creators to play with HDR. Rather force them to prepare tracks for given, standardized HDR profile.
Nice way to ruin rF2. Hoping they are not working in this way.Rather force them to prepare tracks for given, standarized HDR profile.
Why do you think it will ruin something. You (as track creator) will be forced to create content just for one existing HDR profile. No reason to ruin anything.
Why? Because irl light works same for anybody. Rules doesn't change depending on who is looking at. Leaving HDR to be freely modified by track creators will cause inconsistencies: one track will have darker shadows, another softer one, one will be warm coloured, another cold... IMO there is no place for artistic expression. It should look real and consistent.
Some people are running without HDR (because their PC is not good enough, like mine ).
I may be wrong, but maybe your beautiful track will look terribly wrong with HDR OFF because you designed the textures/look with your special HDR-profile. With HDR OFF, I think it still has to look 'neutral', more rF1-like.
Atmospheric effects is what have influence on scene lighting and I'd like to see that beeing simulated in shaders (as properly and accurately as possible), leaving HDR to just do what it was supposed to be doing.
I also think, having to much freedom to tweak things is not always a good option.
You miss the point, as usual.
I'm talking about a feature that it's still working in rF2...but is temporary disabled.
Since this feature still remains in the rF2 core...I've to work with it, I've to manage it, I've to consider it in my developing process and seems it worked since today uh?
When, and if, this feature were removed from the game - I will starting with a complete different approach (more similar to rF1)...but now you're talking about your own wish list...while I'm talking about a feature that is temporary disabled.
About inconsistencies; you can create aberrations with or without HDR profiles, just making bad textures, bad models, bad shader settings, using bad colors, using full whites, bad alphas, incorrect transitions, messed up normals, smoothing groups etc etc...
If you know how to manage HDR profiles you can get great results, as for everything in other modding fields...
Please, stop trying to hijack my thread to another useless, boring, infinite discussion.
Well I have to say that the open-beta is for the testing of the mod-managing system. The packaging system. It is superb that you guys are already keen to build new proper content, but this isn't what the open beta is for, if I remember correctly...
Thats also why it is completely normal that settings are going to change during the process of development.
Good thing is, you will have around 10 years of fun with this software when it is finally released. So, I don't think it is necessary to rush things while the software is in an imperfect status...
Hmm,...but what am I saying. Just release this beautiful track!!!
Last edited by Tuttle; 05-24-12 at 08:12 AM.
Off course it's not your fault my pc is 4.5 years old, but building a track/mod is not only for the ones with the killer PCs.
It also has to run/look acceptable with lower settings, depending on your definition of acceptable. I had to lower mine with the transition from rF1 to rF2.