iracing.com

[smuffyatfcp]

Would this be accepted as a request?

Could I request a name change to New Name Here?
If that name is taken could it be New Name Version 2

Obviously new name here would be the name I would choose. Does that seem ok?

Edit: name changed

 

[sandboxgod]

Yeah physics is the most important aspect for a racing sim by far. Laser scanned tracks is a big part of that (physics). All that I ask for is that iRacing keeps their graphics up-to-date which they have been doing. DirectX 11 and all that is nice but that's at the bottom of most dedicated iRacing sim racer's list that they want fixed. I much rather they get these new cars out they promised faster (RUF, McLaren, HSV, etc). We need to get NTM on all cars.

Hell, I can personally think of a lot of things I'd rather have 1st. Besides, they are always upgrading graphics as we have seen with New Smyra & motegi. If you dont own these tracks then you probably cant honestly speak on iRacing's graphics too much to be frank. Thier last major update they stressed the new shaders on these tracks. They look amazing.

But maybe I am being a bit too anal cause there are plenty of other good looking tracks in the sim (Spa & Oulton Park). But Motegi takes it for me

* I went ahead and grinded out the last bit (5 SR points) to hit Class B Oval. I can run Motegi now in the Indy Ovals


edit: I am stoked they updated the hands models. The previous hand models looked too chunky to me. So graphics is indeed a priority but just not the highest

 

[MagpieRacer]

I would describe iRacing graphics as accurate.

 

[left888]

Yeah physics is the most important aspect for a racing sim by far.

edit: I am stoked they updated the hands models. The previous hand models looked too chunky to me. So graphics is indeed a priority but just not the highest

I have done modeling and animation work for many years. I never modeled a complete car but I have good knowledge on how it works. To get better hands that you see now they added more polygons, basically more definition. Of course it is a double edge sword. More polygons = more detail, more detail = more computing power.

A highly detailed car will have 350,000 polygons or more, just guessing the Caddy has approximately 50,000 polygons and that would be on the high side. Textures that have lots of pixels like 4800 x 4800 offer nice looking polygons but iRacing uses far less textures then that, more like 900 pixels on the long side.

Shaders do offer better looking textures by the way lighting hits them. Then you get into Ambient occlusion and Global illumination just to name a few lighting techniques used. Less is more in modeling and animation. Game makers base their work on minimum requirements you see for computing power.

 

[smuffyatfcp]

Well I just got a penalty for nothing. I was behind the guy on the rolling start, and was going 34 mph in a 35mph pit lane and apparently I overtook before the line and was speeding in the pits?
Has this happened to anyone else?

 

[Eric.]

If you passed the start line before a car that is supposed to be ahead of you, that's a black flag stop and go penalty.

 

[Nastradamus87]

Agreed that gameplay is more important to graphics but lets take away our fan boy bias here, iRacing isn't known to have good graphics. But thats not why we enjoy it.

I have to agree with others that iRacing's graphics are better than GT5's or FM4's, overall. Yes, GT5 has better lighting (HDR), but that's about its only advantage. When you are actually on track, creeping along or at speed, iRacing's visuals blows GT5's out of the water. Take a lap on Sazuka or Laguna Seca in each game one after the other and you'll see it's like night and day between the two.

The only racing sims with getter graphics are CARS and rFactor2. Agreed?

 

[VINCE__]

I have to agree with others that iRacing's graphics are better than GT5's or FM4's, overall. Yes, GT5 has better lighting (HDR), but that's about its only advantage. When you are actually on track, creeping along or at speed, iRacing's visuals blows GT5's out of the water. Take a lap on Sazuka or Laguna Seca in each game one after the other and you'll see it's like night and day between the two.

The only racing sims with getter graphics are CARS and rFactor2. Agreed?

I concur.

 

[iRevelationz]

I'm very surprised at this page of the thread. In my opinion, GT5's graphics absolutely demolishes iRacing's, especially when racing at night or going through a time transition (iRacing obviously doesn't have dynamic time yet, so this comparison isn't really fair). Don't get me wrong, iRacing's graphics are pretty solid. The newer tracks in particular like Motegi, New Smyrna, and the rescanned Charlotte look really good. Then of course some of the older tracks like Phoenix, Atlanta, Texas, Las Vegas, etc look mediocre at best and could use a rescan, along with night lighting

Makes me really anxious to see how they'll look with dx11.

 

[Kamuifanboy]

Heading into week 3. I'm leading the Ford GT points in my division by 19 in the Proto and GT Fixed series.

 

[sandboxgod]

Why is GT5 or FM4 even being mentioned? They are not racing sims by any stretch of the imagination. They are straight up video games built to entertain. It's not even close to a racing sim. They are good games. Like BF3 is a good game and so forth. I would agree they are good driving simulators tho. You know, hop into a pruis and drive it along a lifeless track with no bumps like their version of Suzuka

Like I mentioned once at our old forza forums here when I explained. Racing sim should at least provide Local Cautions, Full course Caution, Pits, Pace Car, etc. You know, like any race you see on TV. A driving sim is a totally different category. They just simulate driving a car along a road or track. Totally different category. Better off comparing NFS 2 -> FM 4 -> GT5

True sims is stuff like rFactor, iRacing, and GTR 2 / GTR Evo

So my point? GT5 has nothing to do with iRacing. That's like comparing BF3's graphics to iRacing

After I explained this concept at the forza forums here I was surprised so many people agreed with me.

 

[Pingwhen]

That's hardly fair sandbox. Iracing isn't a sim either of that's the way we want to go.

 

[sandboxgod]

What do you mean? iRacing has full course cautions, local cautions, pace cars, pits, the works.

 

[zedfonsie]

Guess who just got the star mazda and got almost all of its tracks? THIS GUY

 

[Pingwhen]

What do you mean? iRacing has full course cautions, local cautions, pace cars, pits, the works.

Valid point. Pace cars arnt in all races. Local cauti

 

[left888]

In my opinion, GT5's graphics absolutely demolishes iRacing's

The PS3 uses a RSX 'Reality Synthesizer is based on Nvidia GeForce 7800 Architecture but with cut down features like lower memory bandwidth and only as many ROPs. as the lower end 7600.

The 7600 is a mid range GPU and remember the PS3 has features that are cut down on their graphics processor. By its very nature PS3's graphics are as good as a low grade PC. If you were to take a game like "F1" on a PC and compare it to the PS3 version you will clearly see were the better graphics are. iRacing has a way to go in the graphics and lighting, that will come. As mentioned it is a Sim and it's only concern is it does that well.

Here is a small write up from a graphics programmer and what he says about faking lighting on consoles.

MSAA on the PS3 with Deferred Lighting / Shading / Light Pre-Pass


What they do is read both samples in the multisampled render target, do the lighting calculations for both of them and then average the result and write it into the multi-sampled (... I assume it has to be multi-sampled because the depth buffer is multisampled) accumulation buffer. That somehow decreases the effectiveness of MSAA because the pixel averages all samples regardless of whether they actually pass the depth-stencil test. The multisampled accumulation buffer may therefore contain different values per sample when it was supposed to contain a unique value representing the average of all sample. Then on the other side they might only store a value in one of the samples and resolve afterwards ... which would mean the pixel shader runs only once.
This is also called "on-the-fly resolves".

It is better to write into each sample a dedicated value by using the sampling mask but then you run in case of 2xMSAA your pixel shader 2x ... DirectX10.1+ has the ability to run the pixel shader per sample. That doesn't mean it fully runs per sample. The MSAA unit seems to replicate the color value accordingly. That's faster but not possible on the PS3. I can't remember if the XBOX 360 has the ability to run the pixel shader per-sample but this is possible.

That's hardly fair sandbox. Iracing isn't a sim either of that's the way we want to go.

What is it then?

 

[Pingwhen]

GT5 and Forza and iRacing are all 3 sims. GT5 has never called itself a racing simulation. they are the "real driving simulator" and thats what it does. each have their differences. but calling one not a sim and the other is, is not justifiable.

 

[Kamuifanboy]

Both games serve different purposes. And they do those purposes well. It'sstupid that they even get compared in such a way. Here's why,

1. They don't advertise the same way
2. They are on different systems
3. They are both fun, so who cares

 

[Mattdemichele]

When I hear the word sim I expect it to be as close to reality as physically possible, in that sense I don't consider gt5 or forza to be sims, just really fun games

 

[sandboxgod]

Valid point. Pace cars arnt in all races. Local cauti

I don't follow. Every series iRacing licenses emulate what you see on TV. iRacing has officially licensed NASCAR, Star Mazda Championship, V8 Supercars, Grand Am Rolex, & Indy cars. What do all these series have in common? A Pace Car.

Guess who just got the star mazda and got almost all of its tracks? THIS GUY

Excellent! The Star is a very fun car and extremely awarding. The Star is my favorite road series

GT5 and Forza and iRacing are all 3 sims. GT5 has never called itself a racing simulation. they are the "real driving simulator" and thats what it does. each have their differences. but calling one not a sim and the other is, is not justifiable.

Which leads us back to my original point. Why is a "driving simulator" being compared to a "racing simulator"? However this is the catch. I don't even consider GT5 a driving simulator because the tracks & roads are not accurate due to lack of laser scanning technology. iRacing has raised the bar. Only that new sim by netkar pro devs will challenge it when it comes to accuracy (because every track will be scanned). GT5 & FM4 havent even reached 1st base. Notice I am not even discussing vehicle physics which becomes a matter of opinion. I am just sticking to the basics.

Jury is out on Project CARS. I read some tracks will be scanned. So I want to wait to see how that turns out.

rFactor is moddable like any other sim built on that technology. So it can accept road surface data ( read rFactor pro uses it & Ferrari Virtual Academy had scanned tracks). GT5 & FM4 though are dead in the water in this regard

 

[livemusic]

Please don't transform this into the GT forums...

 

[sandboxgod]

I wish this side of the forums was more like that side. Then we would have a lot more traffic.

 

[livemusic]

And I would have a lot more posts to scroll through.

 

[Mattdemichele]

Bk to iracing!! Who is racing the skip barber in top splits?? Be really good to chat to some of my competitors??

 

[Eric.]

If you want a busier iRacing forum, go to the official iRacing forum. Geez.

 

[Mattdemichele]

I don't think he wanted a busier forum I think he wanted an iracing section of gtp that wasn't talking or arguing about gt5!

 

[GTP_FastM3]

I just tried the Cadillac for the first time last night. Man I like that car. I especially love the noise. One downside was I couldn't hear my Shiftone any more when running the Caddy. I couldn't believe how limited the visibility is out of this thing. I can barely see anything to the left.

I think my goal in iRacing is to get to driving the Corvette and Ford GT. I'm thinking if I liked the Cadillac that I will like these too. I'm class C now, but I'm not sure if I'm ready to try those yet. Before I purchase either one of these I'd like to know how they compare to the Caddy. Are they similar?

Currently I'm spending most of my time in the MX-5 in the inracing new series. Would I be stupid to jump from the MX-5 up to the Corvette? Should I spend a season in the Mustang first, or should I just spend that practice time getting to know the Corvette

 

[Jav]

Currently I'm spending most of my time in the MX-5 in the inracing new series. Would I be stupid to jump from the MX-5 up to the Corvette? Should I spend a season in the Mustang first, or should I just spend that practice time getting to know the Corvette

Not really, if you like and can run the Cadillac consistently you'll love the Corvette! The hardest part about the Vette is the brakes, other than that it's an awesome car to drive!

 

[sandboxgod]

It is bad to skip Class D because you get a free repair if you mess up. This means you can maintain your iRating more nicely. You do not have to quit like we do if you get popped during Lap 1 and lose a bunch of rating. Additionally, now you will be drawn to Prototypes & GT. There you will surely get hit by an HPD sooner or later. I know even I have tacked a vette or two in my time and I usually always have a decent SR rating.

But maybe everything will work out for you.

The license system is a bit too easy. I'm already Class B Oval. After doing a handful of races I was Class C 3.96. So I ran a TT to close out and hit Class B.

Anyway, seriously reconsider skipping Class D. It is a blessing. FREE REPAIR. You get a Free Repair.

 

[GTP_FastM3]

It is bad to skip Class D because you get a free repair if you mess up. This means you can maintain your iRating more nicely. You do not have to quit like we do if you get popped during Lap 1 and lose a bunch of rating. Additionally, now you will be drawn to Prototypes & GT. There you will surely get hit by an HPD sooner or later. I know even I have tacked a vette or two in my time and I usually always have a decent SR rating.

But maybe everything will work out for you.

The license system is a bit too easy. I'm already Class B Oval. After doing a handful of races I was Class C 3.96. So I ran a TT to close out and hit Class B.

Anyway, seriously reconsider skipping Class D. It is a blessing. FREE REPAIR. You get a Free Repair.

Is the Mustang a fun car? I guess if that gets the NTM I could give that a crack for a season or two. I just wish there was a way to sample a car for an hour or two to see if you like it before purchasing. It's such a guessing game trying to figure out what cars you like.

I've spent some time in the SRF and wasn't that fond of it. I found it is just so much effort to keep it straight. I just wasn't enjoying racing it. That's why I'm thinking I may like the tintops better. I seem to jive well with an FR layout car.