Screenshots does not show well a thing developed for moving environments
You should play a game with and without hdr for understanding well the difference. However is absolutely not just contrast, but a different way of calculate lights and reflections in the screen
Oblivion is a good example. One interesting not is that HRD also disables AA and AF, which at first i though was odd but with HDR the light sources and shadows are in constant flux based on the point of view of the camera and the worlds movment. In effect it blends in such a dynamic sceen that you don't even see that there are jaggies because they are always moving and changing shape.
And however the fact that hdr disable aa and af is only on nvidia and only for now. I think that for the time that s3 will be out we will be able to run aa 8x af 16x and at least hdr shader 3.0 without many problems.
We don't need that at all. Think about it for a second, in an FPS game you are realtivlely still. In LFS, you are constantly moving. So, why would we need HDR?
The whole point of HDR is to simulate the differences in lighting conditions when you're moving around.
Static screenshots are totally pointless when demonstrating HDR...the effect is only revealed when you move from a brightly lit area to a darker area, or vice versa.
When you look at brightly lit objects the pupils in your eye contract to reduce the amount of light entering the eye. This makes any dark areas in your field of view look very dark. Shade your eyes from the bright light and your pupils will expand, allowing you to see more detail in the darker areas.
HDR is needed because the human eye can deal with a much higher range of light intensities than a monitor can display.
Personally I'm all for it, and I trust Scawen to implement it correctly.
These Youtube videos are very low res- but they are shockingly impressive. This was Scawen's point in the thread months ago about implementing higher res textures- these vids prove it's more about lighting, shadowing, modelling, sound, which as community- not devs, we're unable to do anything about. LFS needs to strengthen all of these elements if it's to survive into the next generation of hyper-immersive (flashy?) titles. These guys have proven themselves every step of the way, so I don't imagine LFS being left behind any time soon. Light- and visibility, is very important. IMO HDR effects are entirely appropriate for a racing title. Flying under a darkened bridge, losing visability, then coming out the other side and suddenly being blinded by the sudden rush of sunlight, or allowing your opponent- the guy in front- to cop all the sunshine while you use his car to shield yourself as another way to gain an advantage if you're behind- (forgive me racers if this sounds unrealistic, I'm just imagining here...). Lighting can be used in countless different ways to enrich playability and immersiveness.
It would also help make a great screenshot generator... :rolleyes:
Yea. Especially a good example why HDR sucks. Have you ever seen human heads that glows in a dark room?
Unfortunately HDR is so wrongly used. In most cases it just means the goddamn "bloom" effect... which is just ridiculous. Some games even looks better without HDR/post filtering effects. I know that HDR is a great effect in theory but I have never seen game that would use it well or without the damn blooming, in HL2 (Episode One/Lost Coast) it's close to good but still too over-exaggerated.
I think it's actually very sad that nowadays "good looking game" means flashy, cartoony, blurred and over-exaggerated graphics. Maybe game developers should take some photography lessons then they would realize that a picture that is blurred and over-exposed is technically a bad picture. Bloom effect is just so easy way to make games look "better". It's also an easy way to to cover crappy textures because the bloom blurs the whole screen so you wouldn't even notice the different between a sharp and a crappy texture.
Obviously i was thinking at a realistic implementation of hdr, lfs is a racing sim, so it need a good light simulation too. Arcades can remain with their arcadish lights
Imho just actual cars and tracks will look more realistic if a sort of shader would be implemented. LFS colors are already now very well choosed and realistic. I dont think that lfs will be oversaturated or too much flashy with HDR, the devs will remain the same.
You have hit the nail on the head here, lighting is where the GFX needs to go as that will have the most impact. In reality the XBox 360 and PS3 are not that different than a high end games rig and they have far less ram available to them for texture yet the vids look great.
Lighting can have a huge impact on visuals. HDR does not matter that much but good dynamic lighting does. The day/night transition on rF for example is great (even though rF visual look too washed out) and the difference between the two NKPro lighting modes show what effect lighting can have.
right after decent sounds, balanced classes, and semi realistic collisions... 
