Does this road that bumpy? Compared to the Patrikpat's; Casino (T4), Tabac (12) & The Pool Section (13-14-15-16) are more bumpy on yours.
Hmm interesting, I wonder whats causing it
I stopped adding these to my configs and actively remove them from any downloads, i found they impact FPS, exponentially so if overused, besides which unless you are looking for them, you dont actually see them
I stopped adding these to my configs and actively remove them from any downloads, i found they impact FPS, exponentially so if overused, besides which unless you are looking for them, you dont actually see them
I stopped adding these to my configs and actively remove them from any downloads, i found they impact FPS, exponentially so if overused, besides which unless you are looking for them, you dont actually see them
For me, it's more about the principle.And is it not better, or at least faster to retexturize the existing one? How did WilliamTRiker do with rfactor's Nurburg '67
And is it not better, or at least faster to retexturize the existing one? How did WilliamTRiker do with rfactor's Nurburg '67
BTW is enough for me, although it is true that the environment for assetto corsa looks a bit outdated
Asphalt feels pretty good with gary paterson's autounion v16
My best in first trys
I rebuilt the track, but, its still roughish, but, this goes back a longish time now before i figured out how to use nurbs in rhino to rebuild track meshes (in a faster cleaner way) that fit existing meshes perfectly etc. the other issue is the palm trees, i did replace some of them, but the X-Trees dont match up at the base the tree textures are angled so some trees have two trunks etc. but yes, might be faster to retexture. the idea was to build a topographically correct base first (it is VERY wrong in the GPL convert) then some copy-pasta to bring the trackside objects over to the new base. THEN the retexturing begins. The construction folder already contsins a heap of photo and video content, new textures for the palms, and some 3D palms etc. I will upload the whole lot to my G-Drive once I am at that PC and the community can run with it perhaps.
Yeah I was thinking about that, it can depend a lot on your computer and how you are using AC. I just did a retest, to make sure I'm not talking out my ass... interesting as norms and I were just talking about this. A while back I did a nutty rain fx for Macau- I did streams for every track side building and all the complex overheads, which took me about 4 days to do. It should be a worst case scenario, as I've never seen more streams in another config, yet.
So I loaded that config just now and then made another and removed all the streams. Did one lap in an MX-5 by myself. 161 fps without, 157 fps with all the streams put back in. So yes there was a little drop, but in my application not really an issue. I guess if you are in VR it could be more critical to have max fps at all times, so I agree with what you said, and totally understand your logic. In other tests I've done on other configs I've put together for other less complex tracks, I've seen no difference at all.
Now regarding visibilty, I'm also starting to wonder how much time it takes versus the visual impact. I could definitely feel a little more immersed with all the streams at Macau, but on the other hand it seems like in the latest preview, the density of the rain drops, or perhaps the way they are rendered, has changed, and it seems to make the streams less prevalent. I noticed there's a density setting in CSP now, but reducing it had little effect.
Anyway, as you say, to each is own, so that's the nice thing about AC. Removing the streams should only take a few seconds, and you're good to go.
