I don't think you need RBR.
edit: apparently I am wrong
And about the lighting TVE do you have a DX10 or DX11 card?
edit: apparently I am wrong
And about the lighting TVE do you have a DX10 or DX11 card?
Kunos' answer about the default setting was just them saying that they assumed nVidia / AMD would know what the setting should be (in their drivers) so AC just leaves it at default instead of over-riding it.
Unforunately the drivers usually have it at 3 pre-rendered frames.
Tor, this is simply to keep the graphics cards working pumping out frames before they are displayed (in case the CPU is busy and can't send them all smoothly basically) What that does is generally make your frame rate less sporadic. IE instead of jumping around from 80 to 40 and everything in between, it would be more stable like 60 to 80. However when frames are rendered but not displayed yet, there's a graphics lag that occurs and doesn't matter in most games but in sims it's very noticeable.
The number is how many frames the graphics card is allowed to render in advance, and 3 frames pre-rendered is too much for a sim. I hope this helps!
edit: also the setting in the DX11 AC file is at 0 by default which means "leave it to the drivers to decide". If you change the number, it forces that number of pre-rendered frames and over rides the drivers.
So you can either change it in the drivers and leave the DX11 file alone, or you can change it in the DX11 file to force it there. Either way works.
Unforunately the drivers usually have it at 3 pre-rendered frames.
Tor, this is simply to keep the graphics cards working pumping out frames before they are displayed (in case the CPU is busy and can't send them all smoothly basically) What that does is generally make your frame rate less sporadic. IE instead of jumping around from 80 to 40 and everything in between, it would be more stable like 60 to 80. However when frames are rendered but not displayed yet, there's a graphics lag that occurs and doesn't matter in most games but in sims it's very noticeable.
The number is how many frames the graphics card is allowed to render in advance, and 3 frames pre-rendered is too much for a sim. I hope this helps!
edit: also the setting in the DX11 AC file is at 0 by default which means "leave it to the drivers to decide". If you change the number, it forces that number of pre-rendered frames and over rides the drivers.
So you can either change it in the drivers and leave the DX11 file alone, or you can change it in the DX11 file to force it there. Either way works.
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
Really?
I never thought I'd see the day that the world's first laser scanned Nord in a high quality sim would generate so much silly reactions.
Even if you don't like the track for whatever reason you can come up with, there's a very very large segment of the sim-racing community that loves it, and will have a blast sliding the F40 and everything else through it late next summer. That experience has never been brought in decent (and this case excellent) fidelity to sim-racers, and I personally think that's very well worth all the hype. Doing something monumental that nobody has done before: almost by definition worth hype.
Scanning a regular race track happens all the time and is not unusual. I fully expected it to be either a new difficult to achieve vehicle license, or this track. I'm glad it's this track. Would've settled for Porsche (yaya I know they suck but I still enjoy them)
Sure seems that these Italians know what they're doing
Shake my head at the whole "big announcement is something we must pay for in the future" line. I guess that's just the way the entitlement thinking society works, yikes. Want it now, want it free, want something else...
Give your heads a shake and think for a sec... Kunos:
Very nice physics early on, still mostly WIP and already arguably better than any offering on the table
Nice looking presentation to go with it
Laser scanning, which iRacing really was trying to lay on as claim to fame
No monthly sub
Reasonably priced DLCs for continued excellent effort, not charged PER ITEM on top of the Sub
Very active in the community and listen to feedback
"nothing to look foward to"... haha. Good one.
What is this trick? The video is just a guy doing a lap....
Found some new love for the McLaren tonight (yes, I'm behind the curve. Give me a break my wife just birthed our 4th thus I was subdued last night )
I was so focused on trying to be at least competitive in the 458, that it took quite a mind-shift to just get the McLaren around the track at a decent pace. And then I realized: "Shit. This car pretty much does what you ask". That's when the fun began. I started driving it like it listened to what I had to ask of it, and all was well. THEN, I asked a little more and reacted almost pre-emptively with some opposite lock and all of a sudden we understood each other much better.
LFS sort of pioneered the fact that different cars have a different feel and a different methodology needed based on vehicle characteristics (imo), but AC has taken this a step forward somehow and I'm not versed on exactly how they do things so I can't comment on WHY that seems to be.
But I challenge any man on this forum to fire up that F40, have exactly one beer (to make sure your BS meter isn't so high that greatness doesn't elude you), put some LOUD headphones on, and give it 30 mins around your favourite track. The thing sounds exactly like it should, the boost is awfully close to acting like real turbos from the late 80s, and it handles like shit but is so recoverable that you don't care because you'll break your jaw smiling as your counter-steer through trivial matters with ease long before you have the gumption to resist it's allure. That is unless you're Blueflame and choose to spew shit about it to light the boards on fire as usual.
To any dolt that criticizes the F40: keep these simple facts in (a match for a simple) mind:
1) Car weighs little but has big tires and SOME downforce (mostly rear) and almost 500hp
2) Tiny little 80s V8 - Tiny torque on it's own
4) Two turbos from the 80s to assist with previous
5) Discs the same size as my Mazda
And then don't post stuff like "The F40 has turbo lag! It has poor brakes! It understeers! WTF!" If you post shit like this, you didn't get the sim or the car expecting those things which puts you into the category of dumb-dumb. That car has been very challenging to model and AC has been the first to put their balls on the line, and it's pretty damn convincing as far as I can tell. If by some miracle I get to drive one one day, I'll report back, but for now I am duly impressed.
F40 Verdict: It's a piece of crap by today's standards; and I love it!
)I was so focused on trying to be at least competitive in the 458, that it took quite a mind-shift to just get the McLaren around the track at a decent pace. And then I realized: "Shit. This car pretty much does what you ask". That's when the fun began. I started driving it like it listened to what I had to ask of it, and all was well. THEN, I asked a little more and reacted almost pre-emptively with some opposite lock and all of a sudden we understood each other much better.
LFS sort of pioneered the fact that different cars have a different feel and a different methodology needed based on vehicle characteristics (imo), but AC has taken this a step forward somehow and I'm not versed on exactly how they do things so I can't comment on WHY that seems to be.
But I challenge any man on this forum to fire up that F40, have exactly one beer (to make sure your BS meter isn't so high that greatness doesn't elude you), put some LOUD headphones on, and give it 30 mins around your favourite track. The thing sounds exactly like it should, the boost is awfully close to acting like real turbos from the late 80s, and it handles like shit but is so recoverable that you don't care because you'll break your jaw smiling as your counter-steer through trivial matters with ease long before you have the gumption to resist it's allure. That is unless you're Blueflame and choose to spew shit about it to light the boards on fire as usual.
To any dolt that criticizes the F40: keep these simple facts in (a match for a simple) mind:
1) Car weighs little but has big tires and SOME downforce (mostly rear) and almost 500hp
2) Tiny little 80s V8 - Tiny torque on it's own
4) Two turbos from the 80s to assist with previous
5) Discs the same size as my Mazda
And then don't post stuff like "The F40 has turbo lag! It has poor brakes! It understeers! WTF!" If you post shit like this, you didn't get the sim or the car expecting those things which puts you into the category of dumb-dumb. That car has been very challenging to model and AC has been the first to put their balls on the line, and it's pretty damn convincing as far as I can tell. If by some miracle I get to drive one one day, I'll report back, but for now I am duly impressed.
F40 Verdict: It's a piece of crap by today's standards; and I love it!
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
One of the Devs responded to a post I made about the deficiencies of the model on the McLaren (it does things that seem impossible?).
The model is there, and they are planning on improving it.
The F40 is MUCH more like I was hoping for, I don't really see big problems with it and it responds like everything I've ever read or watched about the car. (and the boost gauge actually does what I'd expect in this car for the most part)
Tristan what happened to your screen?
Shotglass - regarding the oversteer, I thought the same thing for a few laps but I don't feel the same way anymore and I realized that letting the wheel spin on it's own was a really REALLY bad idea. You have to actively counter-steer and then it's very very natural in my opinion. Zero issue catching slides any more (I only drive at 900 degrees). In fact there's been times where I've thought maybe it was more forgiving than I'd expect, but I just smooth the lock out and drive away smiling. The sim is also VERY VERY sensitive to throttle steer - another dotted "I" if you ask me.
Personally I really enjoy the feeling of weight transfer in this sim, it's the only one besides LFS that feels like the car is actually a heavy piece of machinery that I'm wrestling around a track. And I love feeling the front end load up under braking.
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
"KUNOS Simulazioni will make an important announcement on December 24th, 2013. Stay tuned."
Let the speculation begin!
Let the speculation begin!
"That may be true, but if you were shown pictures of your route to school.... you would not be able to put them in order." :rolleyes:
I didn't learn that today. Two weeks ago primarily. The blizzard was a bit of an issue.
Actually, it's quite nice these days, at least it's only inconsistently cold. +24C swing in 24 hours last week.
Oh no. Now he's going to look at that and use it as "evidence" because it's not pixel for pixel accurate, not to mention you didn't write the names!
No kidding.
Which beast are you planning to tame first?
I can't wait to fire up that F40.
Last edited by Ball Bearing Turbo, .
What do you mean "
"... more like ""Going to be a fun weekend!
I've learned a lot today!
- "Difficult" = "Impossible"
- Algebra is for morons (and it's also wrong anyway)
- It's both impossible and difficult to memorize race tracks
I feel enlightened.
- "Difficult" = "Impossible"
- Algebra is for morons (and it's also wrong anyway)
- It's both impossible and difficult to memorize race tracks
I feel enlightened.
I think, if you can believe it, he IS serious.
But remember - his comments come from the context of HIS brain, and thus you can see the dilemma here: according to him, everyone's brain is similar to his and never forget he knows YOU better than you do.
Indeed, I second this - I have no idea why it's not an appealing track to race on, that makes no sense. If the track is too long for remembering (
) then treat it like a point to point race - which people have been asking for on this forum forever.No reason at all not to include it - the more diversity the better!
EDIT: Also the first time in forum history that I've disagreed with Tristan and Shot in one thread I think
Well, like you already alluded to, I think it's a matter of bang for the buck.
Probably the same reason I see a lot more Corvette's around too.
They have a lot more brand diversity now - back in the day it was only the 911's that the average Joe really thought of when "Porsche" was mentioned. MAYBE a 928, which I used to see a reasonable amount of.
Now, like you said, there's the SUV, that disgusting 4 door thing, and the Boxter is a decent roadster for not a ton of cash compared to their higher tier of offerings - 3 market segments right there that didn't they didn't used to participate in.
I mean hell, when I see people driving around in ridiculous 80K trucks, it's no surprise to see lots of Cayenne's around too.
From what I've read over the years, I don't believe quality has suffered, but I'm no expert nor do I work for Porsche.
Probably the same reason I see a lot more Corvette's around too.
They have a lot more brand diversity now - back in the day it was only the 911's that the average Joe really thought of when "Porsche" was mentioned. MAYBE a 928, which I used to see a reasonable amount of.
Now, like you said, there's the SUV, that disgusting 4 door thing, and the Boxter is a decent roadster for not a ton of cash compared to their higher tier of offerings - 3 market segments right there that didn't they didn't used to participate in.
I mean hell, when I see people driving around in ridiculous 80K trucks, it's no surprise to see lots of Cayenne's around too.
From what I've read over the years, I don't believe quality has suffered, but I'm no expert nor do I work for Porsche.
I suspect he probably doesn't have enough posts actually. He generally represents the voice of reason which is now limited on this forum.
Exactly.
Except I do still enjoy hot-lapping the road cars.
Are you for real? Or are you just sitting behind your monitor conjuring up the most undiluted, distilled & concentrated literary feces you're capable of; and cackling like a hyper-moron every time you hit "Submit Reply"?
Nope. No it doesn't.
Yeah, Moose... I strongly suspect this it the case driving the car for 1 hour today after work. First, I tried your 458 set, matched my laps with the first few and then realized if I pushed it hard enough I might get close to your time with the 458 at Imola - which I plan to try in the next week. However, that's the closest I've been to the neighborhood of your times in any sim, and I think it's because (humour me) AC rewards driving the cars like real cars for the first time in a sim (!).
So when I took that McLaren out tonight for a short bit, (despite being distracted a lot by the turbos and analyzing what was and was not happening with them) I could see exactly what you're saying - another level of depth. It's not as simple, from a sim-racer standpoint, as it is in other sims - jump in and learn the car in a few mins... there's far more nuance here and that's a good thing.
Looking forward learning more about this sim for sure - bright future ahead. Finally.
We've all been waiting for that, and IMO this is exactly what it is.
When I first tried it the first thing that went through my head was "hm, this feels a lot like LFS in many respects - just more "solid".
The more I drive it (I've only had about 5 or 6 hours on track due to life) the more I realize how much depth there is, more than I even thought initially.
:doh:
How many times did I read past that post, laugh, and not see the attachment. My bad, and thanks.
How many times did I read past that post, laugh, and not see the attachment. My bad, and thanks.
Moose: Can I have that set up to try? 
Last night I broke into the 55s after 45 mins more of practice. My best ideal laptime is 1:55.22 so far, so I'm creeping up on 54s which is pretty good for me: not sure I'll get much better to be honest but it sure is fun
I know the challenge was the default setup, but which tires are you guys using?
I know the challenge was the default setup, but which tires are you guys using?
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG