VirtualR.net - 100% Independent Sim Racing News
rFactor 2 – Two High Resolution Screenshots Available

rFactor 2 – Two High Resolution Screenshots Available

Eight days ago, a Youtube video with two-brand new rFactor 2 screenshots surfaced. Now, thanks to Ianstorm, creator of the video, VirtualR is now able to present you the high-resolution versions of the screenshots featured in the video.

This marks the very first time we get to see high-resolution preview material of rFactor 2, showing us a Renault on what looks like a hillclimb track as well as two classical Formula Cars at Spa Francorchamps 1967 seen from cockpit view.

VirtualR will have much more rFactor 2 preview material in the future so make sure to keep checking back!

rFactor 2 will introduce various improvements to the modding-friendly simulation including weather, driver animations and a refined graphics engine. ISI has not announced a definite release date yet, the company is still aiming to release their newest title by the end of 2010 though.

  • carbonfibre

    It’s all about the lighting and textures. I swear there’s just as much modelling detail in rF2 as GT5.

  • zudthespud

    that’s looking really neat.

  • F1_fan_1

    God almighty! 😮

  • mike84

    not bad.

    the megane one looks very good.

  • fxs

    ok, this is rfactor 1… where is 2 ?? :sd:

  • pez2k

    Oh wow. It’s like GPL with all of its greatest visual upgrades taken a whole generation forward. I hope that we get more period tracks than just Spa, I find that ISI’s tracks are their strong point, although rF2 looks to be the first time that I’ll be buying one of their titles solely for the original cars.

  • DeDios

    not bad! i prefer first one, but IMHO detail is not full (i mean full AA – AF and all graphic detail).

  • zild1221

    How do we know these are legit? I saw the video on Youtube before this was posted. From these pictures it does not seem any better than rFactor 1. Just a good model.

  • ForzaBarca88

    Those look acceptable, certainly not jawdropping imo. More excited about the physics improvements and the addition of weather. Anyways, appreciate the occasional preview material, sometimes it feels like ISI have stopped working on it with the lack of news.

  • GeraArg

    “VirtualR will have much more rFactor 2 preview material in the future so make sure to keep checking back!” 😎 😎

  • http://simracing.in.ua Pandamasque

    Socond screen – the trees don’t seem to have any shadows (further on the hills). Also the Megane has jaggies. I don’t think it’s in full detail. Other than that I love it.

  • FONismo

    Even though they don’t look to be at full detail as there does seem to be a lack of AA, they look very nice IMO and look very close to iRacings quality when it comes to road textures etc, i for one will be happy with anything close to iRacings graphics and these look very close.

  • Siggs

    HOW SEXY ARE THE TYRES IN THAT SPA SHOT?!?!

    At this resolution we can actually see how awesome they are 😯

  • Maddmatt

    Finally! These actually look very good in terms of detail, clearly ISI has some good artists.
    This is proof that all that criticism about the graphics that was based on that video was a load of s**t. Even I was wrong about the colours, they do look better in these screens. Although maybe a bit oversaturated here, a tiny bit of that of that ‘cartoon’ look?
    It doesn’t look as real as GT5 though. Although even that game seems to be guilty of the cardboard trees and bushes!

    It is still lacking when it comes to shaders though. NFS Shift has some great shader effects, although overdone and it gets some things wrong IMO. It needs some effects to enhance the lighting and sense of speed.
    The lack of shaders makes things a bit flat and dull.

    I guess we can’t expect it to have the detail of GT5, but as long as we can have more cars on the track 😉

    Well it certainly looks like this will make up for the PC not having GT5 or Forza 🙂
    Looking forward to it!

  • http://sommergemuese.klee.in Sommergemüse

    Sorry but it is almost looking like rFactor 1 …

    No Realtime Reflections, Lightning is looking odd…

    I really like the Shift WSGT 2 Screens more (even with to much Bloom/HDR which can be turned off with Mods and then looking 1000 times better than rF2)

    So from what we can see rFactor 2 is looking like a 2005 Game.. Physics no idea we can only talk about Graphics at the moment

  • homerfreak

    I absolutely share sommergemüse’s opinion. Really looks like rF1… =( Well, we’ll get rain, maybe better damage (maybe), but that’s it? (talking only about the graphics, not the physics)
    I really hoped for something between rF1 and Shift…

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    Pandamasque: Socond screen – the trees don’t seem to have any shadows (further on the hills).

    Comments like this I don’t understand. My response to this would be ‘So what ?!’
    This is a racing simulation not a global environment rendering system.
    Do don’t NEED shadows on trees in the distance. In rF1 you sometimes don’t have shadows under cars as the LODs go down when the car gets further into the distance.
    Really don’t understand pointing out things like this which are pretty much irrelevant.

    Anyway… the shots are different from rF1. Much more detail. Compare that Spa track to the original Toban track details and textures. It’s not a world apart but it is an improvement and I suspect will look even better when it’s moving.
    The Megane doesn’t look too hot in the 2nd screenshot though, almost as if its a low poly model. But maybe its just that shot.

  • Shum94

    1 I’m in
    2 It’s a Renault Clio
    3 Look rF 1 and come back state that those screens are similar to rf1

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    Shum94:2 It’s a Renault Clio

    and we all know a Clio has less polys than a Megane :sd:

  • paupau

    I think rFactor2 will look neat once released, with post processing. I really do like the light and the grand prix car looks rather detailed 🙄

  • Raikku

    Must buy. This rF2 I mean.

  • ZombieJim

    That hill-climb track looks like a HELL of a lot of fun.

    I’ll buy this game regardless of what it looks like.

  • gt3rsr

    Honestly I don’t know what you are specualting about all the time here. It’s obvious that rFactor 2 engine is almost prehistoric, totally outdated. In terms of graphics ISI fails completely. It looks like rF 1 which was even outdated back in 2005. For example nature in that 2nd screenshot looks similar to RBR, maybe even worse. Only aspects we can hope for are working weather system and improved physics. I sincerely hope that Simbin (or any other company) will come with something what technically will at least remotely remind a 2010 product 🙄

  • JGoenR

    Great screenshots. However, they show same screenshots 2nd or even 3rd time. That’s a bit disappointing, but at least they are showing something. 😀

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    gt3rsr: Only aspects we can hope for are working weather system and improved physics.

    Isn’t physics supposed to be the be all and end all of a sim and gfx don’t matter ?
    That’s the impression you get from some people. Its all about the physics. Yet when screen-shots are posted which cannot show physics, people get all picky about every little thing.
    Even the supposed best racing sim, iracing, doesnt have day/night transitions and weather so its swings and roundabouts and you’ll never ever be able to please everyone regardless of how good anything is in the sim world.

    How about we all pay a penny for a whinge or a moaning post, then at the end of the year, donate it to a softare house to come up with the best racing sim ever produced and all the donators can have input. Imagine what they could come up with, with all that financial backing !!

  • Shum94

    gt3rsr: Honestly I don’t know what you are specualting about all the time here. It’s obvious that rFactor 2 engine is almost prehistoric, totally outdated. In terms of graphics ISI fails completely. It looks like rF 1 which was even outdated back in 2005.

    rFactor 1 is the first car game with Dx 9 it was very good when it came out regarding Fx
    Texture were low but thats ISI policy
    We’ve seen with hudson’s textures that it looked very nice.

  • Vince Klortho

    I’m with you on that F1racer. Personally, I have always though rfactor1 looks good enough for a racing simulator so any enhancements to the graphics will be welcome. The graphics in ISI’s games have never been cutting edge and I doubt they will be with this game either but that’s OK. This is a sim – they don’t have to be. I am far happier with a graphics engine that gives results like this with performance good enough for me to be able to race with sixty cars at maxed quality and detail settings. That is a far higher priority to me and I seriously doubt that would be possible if it had the latest and greatest video effects in the engine. I couldn’t care less about that nonsense. I want to race with a full grid of more than 50 cars at Le Mans with day-to-night transitions and if a game can’t do that then it is of no interest to me. RF1 can do this (on my machine that is a few years old now) and if RF2 can also then I will be happy.

    My biggest questions are what enhancements have been made to the physics engine and AI but I guess we’ll have to keep waiting for those answers. I also hope they have fixed some of the annoying issues with the game like the bug with overlayed semi-transparent textures. That one has been lingering a long long time and needs to be squashed.

  • BenUK

    The trouble being, that rFactor is only as good as the mods people create. Granted, some of the mods the teams do are brilliant (Virtua LM etc) but I would say 80% of it is junk.

  • Scott_J

    Just a bit of info on these shots: Belgium is the first track that was produced for rF2 (finished just about 2 years ago), and it was mainly a test track for various elements we wanted to do. It is, in terms of quality, not up to the level of the track we just finished (which you’ll see some screen shots of sooner or later 😉 ). The second shot is of a track that was about half way into development, but was the first of its type, so again a lot of experimentation involved. So, once all the other tracks are brought up to snuff–I think many people will be pleased.

    Yes, we do plan on more 60’s era tracks to go along with those cars….

  • krisby

    These shots don’t appear to show anything not already available in rf1, so IMO are totally pointless. We have no idea if the shadows from the armco are from a lightsource or drawn as part of the track, ala rF1, the detail on legends f1 car whilst impressive, does not look any more spectacular than what can be achieved in rF1, and the tracks, well, I’ve seen better rF1 tracks.

    I just hope the physics, AI, weather and lighting are better in the final version, though we have no proof of any of that as yet.

  • mikem

    My main concern with the improvement in rF2 especially when it comes to graphics has more to do with the car animation/motion especially when it comes to the replay mode. It’s the achilles heel of all PC sims in that the animation/motion is right now is at least one or at most two generations behind games like GT5.

    It’s not so much an issue with F1 cars because of how they behave and move: high downforce, stiff suspension, high speed, twitchy and almost cartoon-like movement. With GT/stock race cars and especially production cars, there’s more requirement for a more fluid and dynamic motion where the chassis (mass/weight), the suspension, the tires and how these relate, behave and move in accordance with the surface/pavement underneath make for a much more realistic looking replay.

    I do understand that not everyone is preoccupied with replays in a driving sim as I am. To me, it’s a waste to have a game with a terrific driving/tire physics yet failing to translate those components into something visually tangible. If a console developer like Polyphony is able to parallel the improvement in its game’s physics with refinement in the car motion/animation, it begs the question of why can’t it be done by any PC driving sims developers.

  • Raikku

    I don’t think that GT-series has anyhow good car animation…

  • http://www.bsimracing.com BSR-WiX

    Every thing we need is a better modding engine….and i guess thats what we will get. The magic and the looks will be created once we can get our hands on it. I have full fate that rF2 will be worth the purchase when it arrives. he WSGT2 already looked good in rF1 , so for RMT it can only get better. Making assumptions and forecasts by just looking at two random shots seems a bit unrealistic.

  • David Wright

    Scott_J: Yes, we do plan on more 60’s era tracks to go along with those cars….

    Interesting. Since rF1 shipped with only 5 tracks I had assumed that rF2 was unlikely to feature more than one 60s track, given it must also include modern tracks, dirt tracks, and point to point rally stages. Glad I was wrong. Just like I never figured ISI as closet GPL fans. Who would have guessed that ISI would beat Dave Kaemmer to producing GPL2? Or at least a mini-GPL2 – I don’t suppose it will simulate a full F1 season but then again neither would iRacing should they decide to move in this direction.

  • http://sommergemuese.klee.in Sommergemüse

    @Scott_J

    Lol and why give out excuses?

    What about Releasing Full Detail Screenshots with recent Development of this Tracks?

    I am sure driving will be a lot of fun with rF2 but gfx…

  • Scott_J

    David, I’m not sure we will have more than one 60’s track at release (not saying we won’t, but not that we will, either. Depends on if I have time to before we reach Beta and have to lock everything down…

    And personally, I LOVED GPL… 😉

  • Scott_J

    Sommergemüse, no excuses. I’m quite proud of what those shots contain considering when they were made and what they were used for. But, as earlier art, I wouldn’t consider them as the final expression of how rF2 environments will look…

    As for releasing shots of our current stuff… when Gjon feels like it’s time he’ll do, I’m sure 🙂

  • http://simscreens.blogspot.com 6e66o

    Scott_J:Yes, we do plan on more 60’s era tracks to go along with those cars….

    Fantastic! 😀

    Vince Klortho:I also hope they have fixed some of the annoying issues with the game like the bug with overlayed semi-transparent textures.That one has been lingering a long long time and needs to be squashed.

    +1

    Also hope the flickering shadows (espacially with long tracks) get fixed.

    Thanks for your comments Scott!

  • moppenheimer

    Sommergemüse: @Scott_JLol and why give out excuses?
    What about Releasing Full Detail Screenshots with recent Development of this Tracks?I am sure driving will be a lot of fun with rF2 but gfx…

    Please stop trolling.

  • moppenheimer

    Btw, looks very good ISI guys! :sd: Ignore the console fanboys who will whine and whine, and still buy it….

    The majority of us are grateful for your work!

  • GeraArg

    Scott, was improved online code? will be able to use a server with 64 slots without problems?
    😀

    moppenheimer: Btw, looks very good ISI guys! Ignore the console fanboys who will whine and whine, and still buy it….The majority of us are grateful for your work!

    100% agree, console = all show, no go. :happyevil: :tongue:

  • doggod

    Scott_J if their is still time could there be an independent force feedback setting for each mod.eg u set logitech to 100% ,set the game settings to 100% but if u set a particular mod to 80% it overrides the main game settings for that particular mod(car).
    Any chance of a screenshot of where ye are now even with a big wip across it.
    and lastly how close to locking down for beta would you think ye are.

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    krisby: We have no idea if the shadows from the armco are from a lightsource or drawn as part of the track, ala rF1,

    Really ?? I mean are you serious ?? Since when has a shadows light source (2 words) been in the “Top 1000 things important to a sim racing experience” list ?

    Get in the damn car and just drive !

    Jeez, what is with all this irreverent micro-criticism ?

  • AaronC

    Here’s what we know so far from the little information released by Scott, and Gjon.

    1. Real time dynamic shadows.
    2. Real time dynamic reflections.
    3. FFB improvements.
    4. Multi-threading for multi-core processors.
    5. Various physics improvements.
    6. Dirt racing support (I’m guessing because of the off road trucks).

    That right there makes me happy all in itself, so it’s a day 1 purchase for me.

  • Scott_J

    6e66o — flickering shadows on long tracks is no longer an issue. ALL shadows are now dynamic (unless you WANT to paint static shadows, and everything self-shadows.

    Alpha transparency works better now if used correctly…

    doggod — All I can say is that environment art has started it’s second pass, which is getting all the tracks of the same quality, adding more detailed elements, etc., also that we still plan, of this moment, to release in 2010. As always, Gjon will give more detailed details when he feels the time is proper…

  • Scott_J

    AaronC — yes those are accurate at this time, and there’s lots of things we haven’t talked about just yet…

  • Vince Klortho

    Excellent ! 🙂

  • Mr. A

    One of the things I’m looking forward to the most in rF2 is the dirt racing. I’m hoping some the best car and track makers think the same (crosses fingers for some awesome rallycross/folkrace mods). :sd:

  • batito

    In the first photo, the flags are moved by air, looks great!

    I like it 😉

  • Shum94

    I saw the news and completly forgot to read the post lol

    I’m glad to see Virtualr will get more media to show us. I rather to see media here than elsewhere…

    Scott it’s always nice to read you.

    I stated that rF2 would come out in september like rF1 did in a french forum, now i’m confident it will happend.

  • http://sommergemuese.klee.in Sommergemüse

    moppenheimer: Btw, looks very good ISI guys! Ignore the console fanboys who will whine and whine, and still buy it….The majority of us are grateful for your work!

    I’m wondering who is trolling here?

    FYI I dont have any consoles I hate them … so stop insulting peoples..

  • Shum94

    Scott what about damages ? Have you seen the video i put on rF2 group on facebook, with the indy 500 crash ?

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    Thanks for the info Scott_J.

    Man, just imagine a Virtua_LM Le Mans 24hr (time scaled) race with variable weather.
    Now that there’s rain, I hope that cars can be made to have working wipers/clearing windshield like GTR2.

  • Shum94

    Now i wait a hr screen with the track with wet condition but we could see the dry line appearing.

  • Crazy_John

    F1Racer:
    Isn’t physics supposed to be the be all and end all of a sim and gfx don’t matter ?

    Exactly , thats all i want from Rfactor 2

    •physics,physics,physics,physics,physics,physics,physics…7seven
    •online,online,online,online.
    •graphics.

    well, ok graphics again one more time but hey 2 its enough. 😆

    •very simple UI.
    •custom stuff , this doesn´t need to be said :tongue:

    ………….
    ### These shots don’t appear to show anything not already available in rf1 ###

    Great , if that means that the rest of Rfactor 2 will be just good physics and good online , im happy with that , if that happens… “im loving it” .

    I really hope that physics are in first place , graphics can wait abit since what “we” really want is race , so online needs be good also.

    A simulation need be good\better in the racing part , the graphics goes to 3º 4º place because theres other things…

    One question:
    We will be racing in high poly and have the textures applied in low poly or it will be like in RF 1 ?
    Race in “textures” flat meshs scares me abit, sometimes.
    Race high poly and see low poly is good,tho.

    Or this doesn’t matter much to the handling ?

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    To compliment improved physics, don’t you also need proper force feedback in order to appreciate more what the physics are doing ?
    Maybe realfeel or realfeel’s methods can or will be implemeted in rF2 so we can better feel things like weight transfer / brake locking / loss of grip etc.

  • Shum94

    It has been said already that ffb and physics would be improved.

  • Iainstorm

    zild1221: How do we know these are legit? I saw the video on Youtube before this was posted. From these pictures it does not seem any better than rFactor 1. Just a good model.

    They are lagit and emailed to me directly from Gjon himself. I keep in constant contact with Gjon on MSN and Asked if he would supply me the two screenshots which he was very nice to do.

  • carbonfibre

    I just remembered a small request I had a while back; and that was to leave the cockpit speed shake off by default.

    Unless that repetitive algorithm is seriously overhauled in rF2 (I already saw it in the last video) I think it spoils every real modelled bump that would otherwise not be visually seen or felt, especially now that we’re going to have better bumps, thank you very much. 😉

  • Ark

    I feel pretty underwhelmed. I hope it looks better in the next round/s of screenshots.

  • http://www.bsimracing.com Arnold Carter Wong

    The only thing I am concerning is that: if rF2 supports standard .fx format shaders and shader model 3.0

  • sosman

    rF1 can’t be crap if Mark Webber is using its eh!…so it must be the console jockeys that are having a moan…..Oops sorry….that’s right!…they have moved to that full-on Sim called…Need for speed Shit!

  • AndreasT

    Some issues with AI that imho need urgent fixing in rF2:
    – AI getting back on track properly instead of spinning around and killing everthing in their way
    – proper AI behaviour under full-course yellow (no sudden slowdown because one AI needs to overtake another but doesn’t, no pitting under FCY of both team mates at the same time)
    – better AI behaviour at the start, it feels horrible if you drive with full damage and a cloud of AI around you kicking your a**

    With these fixes and some nice updates on lighting/shadows I could live well. 😉

  • Ivo Simons

    Lol who cares about AI cars and offline play. 😉
    Graphics looks nice. But the contrast is big if you see GT5 under this article. 😉
    But important for me is the physics because now its getting it bit outdated. And improvement if the FF

  • http://www.apatch.org Ahmad

    Sometimes I wish you’d remove the comment system from this site.

  • DeDios

    +1.
    I play a lot offline against AI and..i’d like to see a proper AI in rF2. (like GP3).
    I’d like to see in future a proper shots showing us all new effects/improvements in graphic engine. I’d like to see some graphic like iRacing, imho that game looks really, really real.

    AndreasT: Some issues with AI that imho need urgent fixing in rF2:
    – AI getting back on track properly instead of spinning around and killing everthing in their way
    – proper AI behaviour under full-course yellow (no sudden slowdown because one AI needs to overtake another but doesn’t, no pitting under FCY of both team mates at the same time)
    – better AI behaviour at the start, it feels horrible if you drive with full damage and a cloud of AI around you kicking your a**With these fixes and some nice updates on lighting/shadows I could live well.

  • http://arseforums.com/phpBB/ r8response

    Ahmad: Sometimes I wish you’d remove the comment system from this site.

    That, or have a better moderation system.

  • David Wright

    Ahmad: Sometimes I wish you’d remove the comment system from this site.

    We do seem to get the same old debates over and over. But Scott Js comments are new information so perhaps worth wading through all that “graphics don’t matter for sims” stuff.

  • http://www.autosim.ru Hanjin

    fxs: ОК, это rfactor 1 … где 2??

    +1!

  • Tensor

    Iainstorm:
    They are lagit and emailed to me directly from Gjon himself. I keep in constant contact with Gjon on MSN and Asked if he would supply me the two screenshots which he was very nice to do.

    very nice, indeed. the community is wondering for months (years) now how good or bad the graphics in rF2 will be. so it’s some nice move to give us one more set of useless and outdated screens so we can wonder even more. dunno what Gjon has from an unsatisfied community.
    “the community asks for some screens for month now, gjon!” “ok, give them some old shiat that has nothing to do with the real rF2 power” “yeah! nice move! they don’t deserve real rF2 screens.”
    wtf.

  • doggod

    Scott_J , thanks for the info,last ?s from me would be ,will the tracks available in rfactor be able to be used in rfactor 2 or will it be possible for the modders to do a quick port or will it be necessary to do a complete rebuild and as this is graphically a lot different that rfactor ie shadows do you think that ye will be releasing updated modding tools prior to release of the title if porting can be done

  • DeDios

    Scott_J also that we still plan, of this moment, to release in 2010.As always, Gjon will give more detailed details when he feels the time is proper…

    Take your time for release. Personally i prefer to wait more if needed. When will be released i expect to see a proper sim at same level of others currently available, in terms of graphic, physic and sounds.

  • F1_fan_1

    And every time I look at the comments I’m amazed to see how much unthankfull ‘simracers’ there are………

    I think the screens look fantastic and far better than what rFactor 1 is capable of. Good job ISI!

  • David Wright

    DeDios: Take your time for release.

    😆 – Remember ISI are not a mod team – they need income from rF2 to live on. Do you tell your employer – don’t worry about paying me this year – next year will do.

  • DeDios

    Yes sure, but will the final quality of the work to decide if it’s a sales success IMHO.

  • logos

    Scott_J:
    Yes, we do plan on more 60’s era tracks to go along with those cars….

    Thanks for the great news Scott! Keep up the good work.

  • stabiz

    I dont know, but I suspect the public editions of ISI software are not their main income.

  • DeDios

    stabiz: I dont know, but I suspect the public editions of ISI software are not their main income.

    yes, i’m agree. Probably is rF PRO the main income.

  • kevmscotland

    DeDios:
    yes, i’m agree. Probably is rF PRO the main income.

    Which is worth remembering since its based on rF 1 technology, so its fair to assume the evolution of rF Pro will be based upon the changes made for rF2.

    If anything, that should drive forward the features, the modability and the quality of rF2 as it will evolve into rF2 Pro

  • DeDios

    rF PRO main feature is possibility to use own physics, based on real data. For rFPRO owners IMHO is not so much important graphic, probably rF1 is ok. Physic engine is totally different than “our” rF. And probably will be the same for rF2.

  • DeDios

    I hope ISI will take care at same level the rF and rF PRO users 😉

  • http://sommergemuese.klee.in Sommergemüse

    lol I really can only laugh about the peoples “Yeah I dont need great graphics. If it looks like Shit – no problem. Please use only 64x64px Textures and lightning? who the fuck needs that? – yeah rfactor 2 looks like 2005 games but who cares?”

    Are you guys so blind? You think the Physics Engine needs so much power that better Graphics are not possible or what? Big lol!

    This guys who are so thinking are really ISI Fanboys!!

    FYI Shift is using the same physic files like rFactor + new Tyre Physics and NOT looking like Crap. (And Shift is calculating the same things – with higher Tickrate than rFactor) And with some Modding work you get rFactor feeling easily. But yeah that you have to Mod rFactor as well (like Shift too) that it makes fun driving is no one telling. That the standard Shift feels Crap (no secret) means nothing. rFactor with standard Content is Crap too!!

    Think about immersion – you have much better with great graphics … I expect for Simulations nice graphics too – they are more REALISTIC

    Edit: Look the ArmA Series (beginning with Operation Flashpoint – NOT Dragon Rising) from Bohemia. It is almost the same like ISI. They dont have so much money, creating “Pro” Versions of ArmA (VBS – Virtual Battle Space) which they are selling to military units. This Game is a Military Simulation like rFactor is a Driving Simulation. And look the GRaphics from the new ArmA 2 Operation Arrowhead – they are STUNNING

  • AndreasT

    LOL, still assuming the article in F1 Racing was no fake with respect to graphics, I really wonder how Redbull dares to use what “looks like shit” for their simulator. But of course I’d appreciate all graphical improvements in rF2 as a bonus. 😉

  • Firestarter

    If graphics was not important, we still would use 12 polygon cars and flatshaded tracks.

  • jdb

    This screenshots look bad, depressing. Not any improvement in the graphic department 😮

  • the_last_name_left

    Personally I don’t want to be bombarded with hype – and media. I’m anxious to get rF2 of course, but that’s what I want, not to read tiny snippets about it all the time and see marketing shots ad infinitum…..as we get for all the other things. Waiting ’til the code is nearing completion before releasing marketing screenshots and technical details is the honest approach. I appreciate ISI doing it as they have.

    It’s ready when it’s ready. I’m happy about that. I hate hype. Let’s wait and see?

    I don’t have any doubt rf2 will be the best driving platform out there, all things considered.

    Disclaimer – lol – I am an unabashed ISI “fanboy”. Because they do things properly. Seems they even have someone here answering peoples’ questions, which I certainly appreciate. Thanks, ISI. 😉

    So long as rF2 is an improvement on rf1 I will be pleased. I have no doubt it will. Result! No? lol

  • FONismo

    Firestarter: If graphics was not important, we still would use 12 polygon cars and flatshaded tracks.

    That’s the point though isn’t it? It’s not like they look like Amiga 500 or Commodore 64 graphics are they ( showing my age a bit now ). They look more than acceptable IMO and if you had read all the posts, you would see some posts from Scott J, not sure who he is personally but seems to know quite a bit, saying that these are very early shots and nothing like the final quality, saying that the textures for a start look better than RF1, and as said in my earliert post, anything close to iRacings graphics then i’m a happy man!

    GT5 is ok, but it needs all that HDR to look that good, take away all that BS and underneath the RF guys can produce quality just as good. And personally from what i have seen from GT5, i prefer iRacings more realistic looking graphics to both SHIFT and GT5

  • paupau

    F1Racer:..just imagine a Virtua_LM Le Mans 24hr (time scaled) race with variable weather.
    Now that there’s rain, I hope that cars can be made to have working wipers/clearing windshield like GTR2.

    Yes, time scale, that’s a pretty neat feature. One of my favourite actually, it deserves much consideration. AaronC mentioned “Dirt racing support”, would this also mean dirt accumulates in/over time on a car if long driven? That would be spectacular in a 24h event.

  • http://joekingdesign.deviantart.com/ polarx

    BSR-WiX.: that is the biggest problem the other peoples whose just playing with games and mods they can say so easily that “this is a shit” or ” it’s not better than the rF1″ but if the rF2 is keep some new development for example the wheather and other stuffs, the modder teams (than you) can use this and develop if the isi is do these opportunities on a shit ways. So which i said the biggest problem is that the other peoples can’t imagine that if the isi is do it on a shit way the but the modders can do those stuffs on a really good way.

    By the way everybody i cry for a good gfx and if everybody is thinking to that the all of nice games a piece of shit (mostly). I see that if the rF2 will be released and someone is do a HQ texture pack (if it’s not enough for a sim for that someone) they just download that HQ texture pack and use and whoala nice and good and everything. It was same than the rF1 was released.

    (sorry if my english is bad, i just try to tell my idea)
    Greats from hungary.

  • DeDios

    FONismo:
    And personally from what i have seen from GT5, i prefer iRacings more realistic looking graphics to both SHIFT and GT5

    +1

  • F1_fan_1

    I’m not saying graphics aren’t important to me – I’m just very statisfied with these screenshots. I like them.

  • luka40

    Sommergemüse: Think about immersion – you have much better with great graphics … I expect for Simulations nice graphics too – they are more REALISTIC

    Well said

  • http://www.bsimracing.com BSR-WiX

    Now that we are talking realistic graphix… try iRacing for 3 months, and then hop back into rFactor, GTR, Shift , whatever… they will all look like they come out of a Cartoon, in comparison to the Crisp high res details you have become used to.
    What i mean is , its all a matter of what you are used to and what your opinion is regarding the matter. There is no good and bad.
    In my top 3 , iRacing comes first , followed by the magic that is Gran Turismo when gfx are concerned. On the ISI based side , GTR2 looked way better then GTR-EVO and rFactor. Yet , most of us have done them all , and had heaps of fun with it . so what are we crying about?

    In the end this debate is not about what the developer did , but what we would want them to do.. and lets face it , Comments wise , it would not matter what they do , we would always find a way to bitch about something.

    PS: When i say WE , i use the word IN GENERAL.

  • http://simscreens.blogspot.com 6e66o

    If you think rfactor looks “cartoonish”, go ahead and change it.
    You have full controll over 3d, textures and shader.

    That´s what rfactor is about imo.

    Iracing´s graphic engine isnt that much better then ISI´s.
    Of course the content cant be compared :ooo:
    They put a lot of effort in creating their cars and tracks, thats why they charge that much.

    I´m not expecting the same quality content from ISI.
    What im really interested in, is the technology,
    and what i, you, the modders and the community can do with it.

    So, if you compare rfactor (2) to other sims,
    dont confuse technology and content.

    If you dont like how rfactor looks, change it!

    Customize.Control.Connect.

    PS
    im not necesarrily referring to your specific post Wix
    (RMT knows how to make mods 😉 )

  • Firestarter

    iRacing have way to “bland” textures, ofcourse it`s a way to get away from the cartoonish feel, but it feels way overdone. The textures are sharp and fine though.

    Gran Turismo 5 have the best environment mapping and shading on the cars. The tracks looks sterile though because of few textures used on the track.

  • Mr. A

    Btw, Scott. You wrote that rF2 now has full dynamic shading. Is there any chance that SSAO might be implemented as well?

  • mikem

    FONismo: ……GT5 is ok, but it needs all that HDR to look that good, take away all that BS and underneath the RF guys can produce quality just as good. And personally from what i have seen from GT5, i prefer iRacings more realistic looking graphics to both SHIFT and GT5

    While I’m sure HDR is used in GT5, from what I’ve seen in the last Indy Time Trial demo and the recent demo build, it’s more tactful and unobtrusive than how it was used in GT5 Prologue. There’s a huge difference in the gfx style between SHIFT, Forza and GT5 in that the the first two games have a higher contrast with more texture giving them a more stylish look akin to what you’ll find in most console games. GT5 on the other has a much simpler and cleaner look to its gfx although a slight tweak on your screen- on my Sharp Aquos HDTV, I lower the contrast and saturation and adjust the colour/hue- will make it look much closer to PC sims that its console counterparts.

    Here’s a good video comparison between the two games (iRacing and GT5) using the latest Indy TT demo from GT5 as a base for comparison: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcDkovMmgeo

    While the differences are there- the lighting in GT5 seems more dynamic although higher in contrast compared to iRacing, for most part you can see a lot of similarity in term of texture. In comparison Forza 3 and SHIFT are quite different:

    FM3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiAMcuesyd4&hd=1

    SHIFT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBixgHD_zk4

  • stabiz

    Sommergemüse: looong rant

    Its the internet, the place where people disagree about stuff. Dont get so worked up just because some refuse to go harakiri because of a few wip shots. 😉

  • moppenheimer

    Sommergemüse: lol I really can only laugh about the peoples “Yeah I dont need great graphics. If it looks like Shit – no problem. Please use only 64×64px Textures and lightning? who the fuck needs that? – yeah rfactor 2 looks like 2005 games but who cares?”Are you guys so blind? You think the Physics Engine needs so much power that better Graphics are not possible or what? Big lol!
    This guys who are so thinking are really ISI Fanboys!!FYI Shift is using the same physic files like rFactor + new Tyre Physics and NOT looking like Crap. (And Shift is calculating the same things – with higher Tickrate than rFactor) And with some Modding work you get rFactor feeling easily. But yeah that you have to Mod rFactor as well (like Shift too) that it makes fun driving is no one telling. That the standard Shift feels Crap (no secret) means nothing. rFactor with standard Content is Crap too!!Think about immersion – you have much better with great graphics … I expect for Simulations nice graphics too – they are more REALISTICEdit: Look the ArmA Series (beginning with Operation Flashpoint – NOT Dragon Rising) from Bohemia. It is almost the same like ISI. They dont have so much money, creating “Pro” Versions of ArmA (VBS – Virtual Battle Space) which they are selling to military units. This Game is a Military Simulation like rFactor is a Driving Simulation. And look the GRaphics from the new ArmA 2 Operation Arrowhead – they are STUNNING

    God forbid someone have a contrary opinion to your highness 🙄

    Youve been saying the same thing on every game thread not to your standard for months, we get it. Graphics are important to you.

    But they are not as important to everyone.(shocking i know)

    Would all of us like a stunning graphics engine? Of course. Is it necessary (or realistic to expect one) for rf2? IMO, and in a lot of people’s opinions, No.

    Two things can happen, you can keep banging on about this, giving yourself and us a headache to no avail, or you can just skip these threads, not buy the game, and go play a “better” game.

    So quit the exaggerations and quit the whining.

  • dknine

    judging by the screens, it looks good enough for me.
    sure it doesnt have the bling bling gfx, but it’s good enough for me.

    rf2 will be a must buy sim for me, aslong they dont go subscription based.

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    moppenheimer:
    God forbid someone have a contrary opinion to your highness
    Youve been saying the same thing on every game thread not to your standard for months, we get it. Graphics are important to you.But they are not as important to everyone.(shocking i know)Would all of us like a stunning graphics engine? Of course. Is it necessary (or realistic to expect one) for rf2? IMO, and in a lot of people’s opinions, No.Two things can happen, you can keep banging on about this, giving yourself and us a headache to no avail, or you can just skip these threads, not buy the game, and go play a “better” game.So quit the exaggerations and quit the whining.

    [Stands up to applause]

    I’m sure you speak for many of us there m8. Nicely put. 😉

    No self respecting person who calls himself a sim racer would miss out on having rF2 in their collection. Even thoss obsessed with picking pissy niggly ‘faults’ out of each and every little thing.

  • Raikku

    Those who prefer bling-bling graphics over everything else are same types who have some plasticky bimbo as a girlfriend/wife. Who cares if it is stupid, at least it looks good.

  • Firestarter

    So better graphics is now bling-bling and plastic implants? The argumentation on the internet never stops to amaze me….

  • DeDios

    Graphic for a sim is not the most important side but…well, we are in 2010. Personally i expect to see a sim who looks like a 2010 sim, using all new features and improvements.

  • http://www.sonicrealmsracing.co.uk Gerdoner

    I’m trying to play devil’s advocate here.
    I’d say physics are more important then graphics, but graphics can be important, too.
    I’m not talking about fake motion blur or overdone HDR effects.
    But let’s assume in rF2 we could see the graining of tyres when in a single seater. This would be a visual feedback and we could adjust our driving style or pit.
    This would increase realism.
    So for me it’s not about “physics, physics, physics”, but about realism. Surely a good tyre model would be more important to physics then say nice smoke effects, but visual and audio feedback is important too.

  • Shum94

    But where the fuk it has been said that we cant have both.

    Remember rFactor site ? We could see the ISI member talking about what they done each one.

    ISI Joe did the graphic engine (surely not alone but he’s the guy in the graphic department)
    ISI T Bone is the physic guy (Ian Bell in aninterview said he’s a genius).
    ISI Jeremy is the guy who write code, so he’s the exe & UI, Netcode guy.

    These screenshots were not good in 320×240 but in hr they’re ok, not great but ok.
    Scott said it’s the least we can expect from rF2.

    Graphics are as important as physics. Any game (F1 2010 & GT5) become ugly because the physic they got restituate unreal. NFS Shift is laughable.

    If you dont like it then stay with Iracing, with no time scale feature, lower shadows quality and bad physics & sounds.

    Or buy a console…

  • Zonarz

    Something that most of you “gfx doesn’t matter” ppl seem to forget is that you’re going to stuck with this – already- ancient gfx engine for the next 5 years of your life or god knows how many more until the next rF comes out.

    Meanwhile all the other modern sims will have this kind of gfx ….or even better:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtxpH_CXlkc

    and no i don’t have the illusion to expect from a small group of ppl like the ISI team to create something similar to GT5 in terms of gfx quality.All i wanted from them was a modern looking sim that will attract a bigger audience in the Sim racing world.

    Lets hope these two pictures isn’t a representative sample of the final product.

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    jeez guys, you’re gonna get what you’re gonna get so either live with it or don’t buy it !

  • Zenitchik

    6e66o:Iracing´s graphic engine isnt that much better then ISI´s.

    I agree, “much better” doesn’t really cut it, iracing is on a whole different level!

    And it doesn’t look like ISI will improve on that with rf2. At least it’s open for customization.

  • Iainstorm

    I think you are all missing the main point of this game. It is a base for Car mods and Addon Tracks. As such they can not make it too complicated otherwise it will be very difficult for the creaters of the great mods that made rFactor. Remember this game is designed for mods as such it can not be perfect with the eye candy. And as we have seen with rFactor some of the mods that come out take the game to a higher level in graphics anyway.

  • http://simscreens.blogspot.com 6e66o

    Zenitchik:
    I agree, “much better” doesn’t really cut it, iracing is on a whole different level!

    You might want to read my comment again..

    6e66o:
    dont confuse technology and content.

  • Shum94

    6e66o

    Let go lol

    PS: Enjoy racing with different time of the day lighting Zenitschmuck

  • Zenitchik

    6e66o:
    You might want to read my comment again..

    That’s what I’m saying, apart from having the best content, their graphics and physics engine is on a whole different level. :happyevil:

    Shum, playing the game and looking at the screenshot doesn’t give the same experience and most compare the so called technology by comparing 2 screenshots. And since you’ve mentioned it, take a look at this http://www.iracing.com/multimedia/videos/ nightracing is coming. But I don’t think that it will be as good as GTL, it had the best day to night transition.

  • quik4ever

    “Youve been saying the same thing on every game thread not to your standard for months, we get it. Graphics are important to you.
    But they are not as important to everyone.(shocking i know)”

    like a comm’ said (well said) before, if graphism were not important, we would still got 12 poly per car and flat track,

    “Would all of us like a stunning graphics engine? Of course. Is it necessary (or realistic to expect one) for rf2? IMO, and in a lot of people’s opinions, No.
    Two things can happen, you can keep banging on about this, giving yourself and us a headache to no avail, or you can just skip these threads, not buy the game, and go play a “better” game.
    So quit the exaggerations and quit the whining.”

    hmmm… or maybe… maybe, i like this game very much, maybe i want the best graphism possible on my 2000$ comp, maybe i want more than ps3/x360 poor graphism and maybe graphism are important cause 3d vision is going to be the standard, so professional engine driving sim with tetris graphism… in 3d high resolution… no thanks, keep it for yourself, i dont want “blingbling” 3d engine or kind of “dx10 graphism” maybe, like said before, i just want an evolution, like the one from operation flashpoint to arma2, without forgiving the “simulation aspect” maybe i want better games than the better, maybe i want to buy this game, but, you say : “let the dev go and dont say anything”… well dont say anything in your little hole, make whatever you want, but if you’re not able to “cry a little to get better things” prepare yourself to be “chineesed” 😉 and let other people “bark” to get better graphism and better simulations… companies that brings computers parts, electronics companies etc gives us the best everyday i dont see why games companies do it in a different way… we have to wait many years for a simulation, i would rather wait 1 more year, pay it 100$ and buy the top than having a poor version at 50$…

  • Ark

    DeDios: +1

    I agree.

  • FooAtari

    I’m not sure ill bother with RF2, but sSurely people are missing a couple of crucial points here when it comes to graphics.

    Sim racing is a niche market so they need to make the game playable to the largest user base possible. That means making the game playable on a very broad range of hardware. If the minimum specs are too high they will limit sales.

    Also, ISI need to ensure that rFactor 2 can handle large grids of cars (30+) at decent frame rates. Sure GT5 looks great, but races only have what? 12 cars?

    They need to do all of this along with having a realistic physics engine and good multi-player code in the background both of which eat into resources. And again, they need to make sure the game remains playable on medium spec PC’s to maximise sales. No sales means no ISI.

    They have to make some compromises, and of physics, multi-player and graphics, graphics should be the first place where sacrifices are made. As without decent physics and multi=player code a sim isn’t worth driving.

  • Higans

    FooAtari: Also, ISI need to ensure that rFactor 2 can handle large grids of cars (30+) at decent frame rates. Sure GT5 looks great, but races only have what? 12 cars?

    +1

    Thats what a active serious simracer wants

  • Sungod

    Just for the record,GT5 has 16 cars running @60 fps/1080p

  • DeDios

    IMHO actual PCs (in terms of RAM memory, CPU and videocars) have enough power to run a sim with great graphic, physics, sounds and..yes full grid (i mean up to 40 cars). Obviusly, this is possible only if you have a recent PC; but..again, IMHO, if you love pc sims, you need to upgrade constantly all parts. Developers needs to go ahead with progress and tecnology. If rF2 will need an upgrade, i’m happy to do it. Consoles are for guys who don’t want to do pc upgrates; max 500euros, start and play.

  • David Wright

    People have short memories. rFactor and GTL were very demanding hardware-wise when they came out in 2005. They were also in the same league graphically as “mainstream” racing titles out at the same such as Race Driver 2. rF2 will probably be around for another five years – graphically it can’t afford to be behind the times at launch IMO. I’d use F1-2010 as my graphics benchmark which presumably can handle grids of 24.

  • Niksounds

    several videos of gt2, tu2..interwiews..screens.. trailers .. and 3 or 5 comments..

    TWO screens of RF2, unknow details settings… and over 100 comments..

    THAT says ALL, i’m happy for rf2 :happy:

  • doggod

    Sungod:
    Just for the record,GT5 has 16 cars running @60 fps/1080p

    Sungod ,i dont think that either xbox 360 or the ps3 is capable of rendering anything at 1080p ,thats why they have upscalers in them,all games are rendered at less than 720 and then upscaled to what ever your monitor is.
    so basically gt5 is capable of rendering 16 cars at 1200x 720 then upscaling
    forza even less cars at roughly the same rez then upscaling

  • David Wright

    Niksounds: several videos of gt2, tu2..interwiews..screens.. trailers .. and 3 or 5 comments..TWO screens of RF2, unknow details settings… and over 100 comments..THAT says ALL, i’m happy for rf2

    If comments translated into sales it might say it all but they don’t 🙂

    GT5 and TDU2 will sell in the millions. rFactor2 won’t.

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    FooAtari: I’m not sure ill bother with RF2,

    Yeah you will. Who are you kidding ?

    Sim racing is a niche market so they need to make the game playable to the largest user base possible. That means making the game playable on a very broad range of hardware. If the minimum specs are too high they will limit sales.Also, ISI need to ensure that rFactor 2 can handle large grids of cars (30+) at decent frame rates.

    Hmm I think you have 2 seperate debates mixed up here.
    Sim racing is a niche market as you say, but rFactor caters pretty much solely for that market. I don’t think you are going to get too many casual arcade gamers playing rF or rF2. rFactor caters for the sim racing community. That’s what its for.
    Then, making rF2 playable on a broad range of hardware has nothing whatsoever to do with catering for that niche market. I’m not sure why you combined those two.

    Up to a point I think rF2 should cater for a broad range of hardware but only in the sense of compatibility. Make sure it works well on both NVidia and ATI cards for a start. I don’t think they should worry too much about catering for 5yr old PCs with 5 yr old hardware. In that case its up to the use to catch up or turn the details down.
    Every game has details settings that you can turn down to the game runs for you. rF2 will be no different, so in effect, it will be catering for those with low end PCs. If your computer can’t keep pace then you’ll have to sacrifice the detail, plain and simple. rF1 can already handle 30+ car grids with decent frame rates (200fps+ in my case). But you need to play your part by having the PC hardware to enable that.

    Sungod: Just for the record,GT5 has 16 cars running @60 fps/1080p

    Just for the record, rFactor has 36+ cars running at over 200fps @1920×1200.
    Or is that just me ? :happyevil:

  • Sungod

    doggod:
    Sungod ,i dont think that either xbox 360 or the ps3 is capable of rendering anything at 1080p ,thats why they have upscalers in them,all games are rendered at less than 720 and then upscaled to what ever your monitor is.
    so basically gt5 is capable of rendering 16 cars at 1200x 720 then upscaling
    forza even less cars at roughly the same rez then upscaling

    Yes you’re right,it’s not native 1080p (1280×1080 – 2D)

    F1Racer:

    Just for the record, rFactor 2 has 36 cars running at over 200fps @1920×1200.
    Or is that just me ?

    No matter how many cars/fps/res will run, rF2 already looks OLD 😉

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    Thats beside the point that was being made. Also a shame that you have requoted me using a sentence that has already since been edited. It should state ‘rFactor’ and not ‘rFactor 2’. But the editing system here is a damned nightmare so my comment awaits moderation to allow that change.

    As for rF2 looking old, thats a matter of opinion not a fact. As stated those are early shots which you dont seem to be taking into consideration. People are now spoiled with the likes of Shift / F1-2010 for gfx and now they want that for everything.
    rF2 isn’t old. It’s different.

  • paupau

    I can see that some of you rush into judging rF2 will look badly, well, may I remind you Scott_J here just unveiled some details for us.

    “as earlier art, I wouldn’t consider them as the final expression of how rF2 environments will look”

    “Just a bit of info on these shots: Belgium is the first track that was produced for rF2 (finished just about 2 years ago), and it was mainly a test track for various elements we wanted to do. It is, in terms of quality, not up to the level of the track we just finished (which you’ll see some screen shots of sooner or later 😉 ). The second shot is of a track that was about half way into development, but was the first of its type, so again a lot of experimentation involved. So, once all the other tracks are brought up to snuff–I think many people will be pleased”.

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    I’m reposting my last post which is trapped somewhere in cyberspace…

    FooAtari: I’m not sure ill bother with RF2,

    Yeah you will. Who are you kidding ?

    Sim racing is a niche market so they need to make the game playable to the largest user base possible. That means making the game playable on a very broad range of hardware. If the minimum specs are too high they will limit sales.Also, ISI need to ensure that rFactor 2 can handle large grids of cars (30+) at decent frame rates.

    Hmm I think you have 2 seperate debates mixed up here.
    Sim racing is a niche market as you say, but rFactor caters pretty much solely for that market. I don’t think you are going to get too many casual arcade gamers playing rF or rF2. rFactor caters for the sim racing community. That’s what its for.
    Then, making rF2 playable on a broad range of hardware has nothing whatsoever to do with catering for that niche market. I’m not sure why you combined those two.

    Up to a point I think rF2 should cater for a broad range of hardware but only in the sense of compatibility. Make sure it works well on both NVidia and ATI cards for a start. I don’t think they should worry too much about catering for 5yr old PCs with 5 yr old hardware. In that case its up to the use to catch up or turn the details down.
    Every game has details settings that you can turn down to the game runs for you. rF2 will be no different, so in effect, it will be catering for those with low end PCs. If your computer can’t keep pace then you’ll have to sacrifice the detail, plain and simple. rF1 can already handle 30+ car grids with decent frame rates (200fps+ in my case). But you need to play your part by having the PC hardware to enable that.

    Sungod: Just for the record,GT5 has 16 cars running @60 fps/1080p

    Just for the record, rFactor has 36+ cars running at over 200fps @1920×1200.
    Or is that just me ? :happyevil:

  • stabiz

    Nope, its not just you. 😉

  • doggod

    Sungod just to clarify
    1080 = 1920×1080 = no console can render games at this just upscale to.
    720 = 1280×720 = consoles can render some games at this. but a lot of them are reduced to 30 fps if they are graphic intensive (for a console)

  • Rooster

    Oh for crying out loud the graphics are Ok. Jeez, why do we need a verbal trash talk battle going on about “ITS OLD” or “GT5 LOOKS BETTER”, lift your game people. 🙄

  • Firestarter

    I`m fine with Commodore 64 graphics.

  • the_last_name_left

    DX9? no 10 or 11? In the future, as an update?

    PErsonally, I’d like scalable graphics…..so we can have dx11 lushness and HDR/Bloom if I want to run with a single car, say……but adjustable so I can take it off for a large field, online etc. Better that it looks gorgeous than not, obviously, but you can only use a processor cycle once. How to spend it is a payoff between competing claims. I’d like as much choice at user level as can be managed. I would like a major step forward in rf2 graphics.

  • FooAtari

    F1Racer: I’m reposting my last post which is trapped somewhere in cyberspace…
    Yeah you will.Who are you kidding ?

    Why did you say that? You just make yourself look a bit stupid assuming you know what I will and won’t do.

    Since I started using iRacing I have since removed all other sims from my PC. I don’t intend to get rFactor 2 for several reasons

    1. Mods are mostly amateur efforts based on a best guess on what the cars handle like as the majority of mod teams do not have access to real-life data. Now I know this is not the case for all mods, but it is for most.

    2. Due to the amount of mods for the rFactor the community is very fragmented and it can sometimes be difficult to find regular races for your preferred mod

    3. The standard of racing on public servers is terrible

    4. There is to much self importance and self righteousness among many of the mod teams

    5. I invest a significant sum of money into iRacing and it provides the best racing I have experienced in any sim. I’d rather spend the limited amount of time I have for sim racing on the sim I’m paying for and that gives me the most enjoyment.

    These are my personal opinions and choices, I’m sure you have your own and that’s great. Neither of our opinions are right or wrong, it’s just preferences, simple as that :). But please don’t assume that because you are going to do something, everyone else is too. I really cannot stand people with that kind of attitude.

  • http://sommergemuese.klee.in Sommergemüse

    Lol if you peoples have no arguments all you can do is getting personally and offending me?

    You are really hilarious guys!!

    You lucky guys I can overlook this because I know you are ISI Fanboys and defend whatever they do.

    PS: I’m not a Console Freak (I even dont have one of this crap boxes), I like GTR 2, Evo, rFactor too BUT the Graphics are really Outdated.

    And about Physics with rFactor 2: We cant talk about them since no one outside of ISI played it (rF2) so far.

    moppenheimer:
    God forbid someone have a contrary opinion to your highness
    Youve been saying the same thing on every game thread not to your standard for months, we get it. Graphics are important to you.But they are not as important to everyone.(shocking i know)Would all of us like a stunning graphics engine? Of course. Is it necessary (or realistic to expect one) for rf2? IMO, and in a lot of people’s opinions, No.Two things can happen, you can keep banging on about this, giving yourself and us a headache to no avail, or you can just skip these threads, not buy the game, and go play a “better” game.So quit the exaggerations and quit the whining.

    F1Racer:
    [Stands up to applause]I’m sure you speak for many of us there m8.Nicely put.
    No self respecting person who calls himself a sim racer would miss out on having rF2 in their collection.Even thoss obsessed with picking pissy niggly ‘faults’ out of each and every little thing.

    Raikku: Those who prefer bling-bling graphics over everything else are same types who have some plasticky bimbo as a girlfriend/wife. Who cares if it is stupid, at least it looks good.

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    FooAtari:
    Why did you say that? You just make yourself look a bit stupid assuming you know what I will and won’t do.Since I started using iRacing I have since removed all other sims from my PC.I don’t intend to get rFactor 2 for several reasons1. Mods are mostly amateur efforts based on a best guess on what the cars handle like as the majority of mod teams do not have access to real-life data. Now I know this is not the case for all mods, but it is for most.2. Due to the amount of mods for the rFactor the community is very fragmented and it can sometimes be difficult to find regular races for your preferred mod3. The standard of racing on public servers is terrible4. There is to much self importance and self righteousness among many of the mod teams5. I invest a significant sum of money into iRacing and it provides the best racing I have experienced in any sim. I’d rather spend the limited amount of time I have for sim racing on the sim I’m paying for and that gives me the most enjoyment.These are my personal opinions and choices, I’m sure you have your own and that’s great. Neither of our opinions are right or wrong, it’s just preferences, simple as that :).But please don’t assume that because you are going to do something, everyone else is too. I really cannot stand people with that kind of attitude.

    Well firstly this is not an assumption based on ‘because I am going to do something, everyone else is too’. It is impossible to assume something like that. But you too have assumed that is what I meant.

    While it might not be in your case if you have ascended to the high heavens of nirvan that is iRacing and believe no other sims can match it and therefore iRacing is the only sim to deserve to be on your computer.
    But there are a lot of people who blindly say they won’t buy this or that when clearly they are only fluffing their chest feathers.
    So no, I don’t feel I’ve made myself look stupid. But if iRacing does it for you and you think because of that, you won’t of shouldn’t touch any other sim, then that’s up to you.
    As to your points:-

    1: While this is correct, it doesn’t have to take away from the fun of playing them providing there is some believability there. Try getting access to real F1 data and see how hard that is. You have to be prepared to sacrifice that and I don’t know why this is such a problem. Just because you can enjoy iRacing for what it gives you, doesn’t mean you have to blow off all the other sims for what they give.

    2: Yep true. But the occasional great mod does surface and provides for some great racing. Finding races online with these mods, because there are so many, is difficult and it’s not helped that there are so many locked servers.

    3: Agreed. Pick up races are a total nightmare. People advancing sessions 20s after you join, people who think the race has to be decided in turn 1, lap 1, the typical pile up into turn 1 and of course not forgetting people who think they are sim racers going for gaps that are not there in order to pass like a moped in a traffic jam. 85% of ‘sim racers’ in pickup races have no idea how to drive like a real world driver.

    4: Maybe, maybe not. But doesn’t really affect most of us.

    5: Up to you. Not up to anyone to judge you.

    I have iRacing too but it’s not like I think Im in heaven and all other sims are the devils work.

    @ Sommergemüse : You only get back from people what you dish out.

  • http://sommergemuese.klee.in Sommergemüse

    lol when did I offend YOU??

    Oh wait I told the truth the graphics are outdated – and this is offending peoples?

    Read the Quotes I collected … there are no Arguments to find inside only getting personally pissed of reason lack of intelligence or whatever that is… and always from the same ones

  • AaronC

    You guys are awesome, and thank you for this joyful read. I guess half of you completely missed, and/or ignored what Scott said. Spa is a 2 year old track, the Hillclimb is old and is the first of its’ kind, and the fact that neither of the 2 screenshots hardly show rFactor 2’s full potential. He also went onto say that both of these tracks are being completely retooled to utilize everything that this new engine has to offer. I don’t think some of you don’t realize that a lot of little things that they’ve added that all add up in the long to make it a much more immersive experience. Such as….

    1. Fully Customizable Weather
    2. Realtime Reflections
    3. Realtime Shadows
    4. Brand new scratch built tire model
    5. FFB overhaul
    6. Dirt racing support, which brings in a much broader variety of mods that can be created
    7. Multi-Threadding support for much better performance

    That’s only a few of the new features added. I also remember reading in ASS interview with Gjon when he was talking about the new clutch. If you have auto clutch turned off, and try to shift, the transmission will just grind until you depress the clutch or throttle blip. So with that being said, maybe some of you should reserve judegement on this title since we know little to nothing about it. They haven’t even confirmed what settings these screenshots have been taken under. So just chill out, wait it out, and see if it’s worth a purchase or not. I know for me it is, but some others out there seem to think that if it doesn’t look like GT5, it won’t be a true sim…

    @F1Racer. I agree with everything you’ve said thus far…Some guys just jump the gun way too fast, and start critiquing something they literally know nothing about..

  • Shum94

    If you’re so happy with Iracing, by paying what they ask and being happy i wouldnt bother to even look any news about rF2…

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    Sommergemüse: lol when did I offend YOU??Oh wait I told the truth the graphics are outdated – and this is offending peoples?Read the Quotes I collected … there are no Arguments to find inside only getting personally pissed of reason lack of intelligence or whatever that is… and always from the same ones

    No you haven’t offended me but that’s not what I was referring to. Lets just leave it here ok ?

  • Redhawk

    Yes, the graphics are outdated. And there is no reason why we can’t have both great physics AND great graphics, I’ve always hated developers/fans hiding behind the ‘physics is most important’ crap – yes physics IS the most important aspect of a driving simulation but that is not an excuse to make no effort in the graphics department.

    HOWEVER – in reference to rF2:

    a) Scott_J has just said that this is the least we can expect, therefore
    b) compare the stock rF graphics to what modders have come up and apply the same improvements (at least) to those screenshots up there, therefore
    c) as long as rF2 is as, or more, moddable than rF1, we have nothing to worry about

  • Howie47

    OK ISI people, I know you got to be reading this. So please please please. Make this game open in an expanable window across multiple monitors. So I don’t have to buy expensive extra hardware or use donkey home made apps to try and make it span. Do it, just like Dirt 2. I can live with that. OK back to what ever.

  • jonneymendoza

    game looks better than rfactor 1 but still looks like a ps2 game

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    that’s a bit harsh. Either way, it’s not going to play like one.

  • DeDios

    Redhawk: Yes, the graphics are outdated. And there is no reason why we can’t have both great physics AND great graphics, I’ve always hated developers/fans hiding behind the ‘physics is most important’ crap – yes physics IS the most important aspect of a driving simulation but that is not an excuse to make no effort in the graphics department.

    +1 😉

  • paupau

    mikem: My main concern with the improvement in rF2 especially when it comes to graphics has more to do with the car animation/motion especially when it comes to the replay mode.It’s the achilles heel of all PC sims in that the animation/motion is right now is at least one or at most two generations behind games like GT5.
    It’s not so much an issue with F1 cars because of how they behave and move: high downforce, stiff suspension, high speed, twitchy and almost cartoon-like movement.With GT/stock race cars and especially production cars, there’s more requirement for a more fluid and dynamic motion where the chassis (mass/weight), the suspension, the tires and how these relate, behave and move in accordance with the surface/pavement underneath make for a much more realistic looking replay.I do understand that not everyone is preoccupied with replays in a driving sim as I am.To me, it’s a waste to have a game with a terrific driving/tire physics yet failing to translate those components into something visually tangible.If a console developer like Polyphony is able to parallel the improvement in its game’s physics with refinement in the car motion/animation, it begs the question of why can’t it be done by any PC driving sims developers.

    Yet, many don’t notice mods such as Bathurst Legends 1972 and 1969, the Supra mod has some pretty neat suspension work as well, Slimjim’s F1Classic. See, I could name a few that can, I also understand what your trying to define and I fully agree. Add to that deformable tires and some other tweaks 🙄

    I can’t agree on GT5’s exterior dynamics though, from what I’ve seen on videos looked rather sterile to me.

  • http://sommergemuese.klee.in Sommergemüse

    Redhawk: Yes, the graphics are outdated. And there is no reason why we can’t have both great physics AND great graphics, I’ve always hated developers/fans hiding behind the ‘physics is most important’ crap – yes physics IS the most important aspect of a driving simulation but that is not an excuse to make no effort in the graphics department.

    Could be my words 😉

  • scca1981

    These shots are obviously not the best in the world but if you look past their loq quality you can clearly see some good things coming. Look forward to some more better quality preview material. I have faith in ISI.

    IMO iracing is the best looking sim out. If ISI can get their cockpit shadows like that i’d be happy.

  • krisby

    F1Racer:
    Really ?? I mean are you serious ??Since when has a shadows light source (2 words) been in the “Top 1000 things important to a sim racing experience” list ?Get in the damn car and just drive !Jeez, what is with all this irreverent micro-criticism ?

    I agree, I’m quite happy with rF1, however, if the shadows are being passed off as being dynamic when there is no evidence then it shouldn’t be shown, I was merely pointing out it looks no different than rF1.
    So far those shots are showing nothing new.

  • http://racingrenders.com F1Racer

    krisby:
    I agree, I’m quite happy with rF1, however, if the shadows are being passed off as being dynamic when there is no evidence then it shouldn’t be shown, I was merely pointing out it looks no different than rF1.
    So far those shots are showing nothing new.

    Lets wait for moving images then shall we ? Because while you can examine lighting from a still shot, you can’t examine dynamic lighting from one.
    Also I reckon is ISI claim the lighting is dynamic, it will be. I don’t think they’d lie about it.

  • captain_underpants

    The thing I want most from a sim is REALISM. That means I want the most accurate input and feedback that can be achieved while sitting at a desk staring at a monitor. Graphics are an absolutely vital part of feedback, as ineed are phisics, ffb, sound etc. Fancy effects aren’t important, REALISM is. There will always be compromises; we just choose the point where those compromises are acceptable and hand over our money. If rF2 generally improves on the original, isn’t that enough?

    That said, I do find it curious that, if what Scott said is true, they’d release screenshots that don’t show the best of what they’ve got NOW. And how hard would it would it be to throw a quick video of a hotlap or something up on Youtube? They’re not really building the anticipation. I don’t expect a media blitz like we had for Shift, but is one decent video too much to ask?

  • Shum94

    Montoya when ? when ? Virtualr will get more previews ?

  • the_last_name_left

    is one decent video too much to ask?
    ———

    Patience? 😉

    Not releasing oodles of preview stuff works to build anticipation too – clearly. It’s JuneJuly2010….might be a long way to go yet.

  • GeraArg

    Scott would be possible to add a little more contrast and brightness?

    http://i45.tinypic.com/33a5va0.jpg

    http://i45.tinypic.com/2ufx05e.jpg
    😀

  • krisby

    F1Racer:
    Lets wait for moving images then shall we ?Because while you can examine lighting from a still shot, you can’t examine dynamic lighting from one.
    Also I reckon is ISI claim the lighting is dynamic, it will be.I don’t think they’d lie about it.

    You can to a point, look at the renault image, the shadows are being cast (quite short for a low sun I might add) over the armco barrier, yet the armco is lit up, as are the flowers, even the ones lower than the barrier. There is an orange hue from the sun, yet the car does not reflect an orange light, and the reflection in the headlamp is white, not orange.
    As I say, these are looking very rF1 at this stage, there is no point releasing/leaking whatever, images that do not backup the abilities of the new engine when what we are seeing is nothing that rF1 can’t already do.

  • frigopie

    Those screens look bad for a 2010 game… but I am totally agree with 6e66o, it is the technology what matters, not the content… we need more control over the render in rF to use shaders for post-processing… take a look at this screenshot:

    http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/6831/gt5rfactor.jpg

    It is obviously a bad paste I have made in 1 min, but you can see the Zonda of rfactor pasted does not look bad (it has been taken directly from an unedited screenshot)… that is because it uses some new shaders, it would be great if we could make some shaders for tracks…

  • 131

    honestly…i think rf2 is one of those games which will have long shelf life…..and all the other things which are going to be added …..will make things only better.its expected that ISI will deliver good physics, graphics(…. an upgrade would be welcome as its 2010 already).considering what all i have read so far……things like weather,driver animations…etc….etc….make it an out of the box favorite.

Follow VirtualR: