Let me get this straight. NeoGAF has many users complaining about screen tearing and frame rate issues and it's just a 'subjective' issue. Any game should be of a stable frame rate be it 60fps (e.g. Forza) or 30fps (Forza Horizon, DriveClub) - nobody likes or enjoys a fluctuating frame rate. Seems this reviewer didn't enjoy the frame rate and screen tearing either: https://www.destructoid.com/review-assetto-corsa-383268.phtml Team VVV also have a few videos indicating the frame rate is an issue such as this (listen to Martin's comments): As for subjective opinions - read this thread: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1269198 and look at the many comments praising the physics and lamenting the frame rate and screen tearing. It's a real issue for many people and I wouldn't be surprised if it's the post processing. I've seen a 63fps increase with the post processing turned off. BTW, I'm not here to bash Kunos just because under my name it states 'beta tester'. I have owned AC back when it was little more than a demo that you needed a netKar Pro licence key to access and I own and play AMS, rF2 and pCARS plus a load more SimBin and SMS releases.
Whether it was worth it, will be seen in the future, and it will be juedged by them, not us. For they know the numbers over time and after some months, not us. They said they saw now way to assess whether a hardcore sim has a market on PC or not, and that is because at least for racing - nobody has ever tried. There simply never was a hardcore driving sim on any console. And remember, just some days ago I took Flak here for saying that I think most consoles racers have no realistic clue of what is coming at them with the AC release, since many console players do not even have a wheel. Stefano says they did this to assess whether a sim has a market on consoles, or could build a market. In some months, after some updates and DLCs and with sales naumbers established, we know the answer. Or better - THEY will know the answer. Until then it is a guessing game.
I especially see this: Playstation Lifestyle 5/10 USGamer 4.5/5 Eurogamer Italia - 8/10 Digitalspy - 3.5/5 Trusted Reviews - 3.5/5 Pushsquare - 5/10 Digitally Downloaded - 4.5/5 God is ageek - 5/10 We got this covered - 3.5/5 "Devastating critics score" looks different. And Stefano said he expected such polarised ratings. However, the rating go from 50 to 90%. Several marks of 80 and 90%. Two of 50%. I have seen videos with varyinf fps, yes, and screen tearing on PS4. I did not say it is not there. The question only is whether it really is such a big issue like some people say. Because quite a lot of people you can also read who say that one gets used to it fast, or that it is not that bad at all. I saw three long review videos so far, and 3 or 4 player videos. Tearing, fps drops, yes, but mostly: fluid frames, tearing not a big issue. And anyway: Kunos takes note of these feedbacks for sure. I recall the reported earlier that when they had their first build, the were desperate after the reuslt, for they had a frame rate of I think around 4 or 5 on PS4 and thought for some time it was impossible to gte much more out of it. But they got, mostly the game runs indeed with frames around 60. The latPC. Lets see whether further optimzation of PS4 code can be done. Kunos is VERY good in code optimization. Many people like PC, despoite the terrible state it was in at release, it was much much worse than what we got with AC, it doe snot compare. Obviously, AI and physics in PC have seen tremedous improvements over the past year or so, and the sales and player numbers are good. - Why are people so eager to spell doom and desaster for AC? Maybe I get Ac for my own PS, if for no other reason than to see with my own eyes. I have a very hard time to beleive that Kunos released somehtign in such a terrible state as some people imply or claim they did. Not after what I saw of them in the past 6 or 7 years.
Well, yes, you are right there. Not that it matters but I am retired... So I do have the time to find out weak/strong points in a game. If their company is too small to get things fixed, they should not have gone the console way, thus taking valuable time/manpower out of the PC version development. I never called any of the issues a 'game breaker', lets be clear on that, but they are there and AC should not be neglecting them. About the miles/km thing: there are cars equipped with tachos in miles, be it less than the ones in Km, others have dual gauges. But as you stated yourself, it shows the cars instruments in factory status, though this could be debatable. Anyway: there is slider for the units to change from km in miles. Analog to that we want a BAR/PSI slider...can't be that hard. On top of that, the game API seems to send tire pressure in BAR (since my RS Dash app picks it up like that), while in the garage it shows PSI. But I have a "workaround" AC devs will love: a convertor on paper ! I think it is plain stupid having to use it, just because a game developer sees this as a non issue. I suspect they are hoping for a mod, like with many other things that are missing. But then again, maybe the majority does not even care about tire pressure, so it could very well be a non issue for "your racing simulator" Another one that is really disturbing, though not game breaking either: WHY does the overlay (and other apps) show the race position and delta times to other cars only at the beginning of a new lap ? When I overtake a car (or when another car overtakes me) I want to see my exact race position at that moment, not having to wait until I cross the line... probably not an issue because it has not been answered AFAIK. This and dozens of other issues and the way AC "support" forum handles (or doesn't) is really p.....ng me off on a regular base. As much as I try to like AC, without the mods (some of them are way better than the originals) I would not even have touched it after a while. Still use it for hot lapping on tracks I like and don't have in other games (Road Atlanta being one of them)...
I think the answer is simply this: priorities. It seems they have other ones than you. I would not subscribe to the two exmaple you agve, too. For me, these are simply uninteresting. For Kunos, it is a question of personnel and time allocation. And yes, maybe lacking interest as well. If you do not like it, I recmmend you simply do not play it!? Instead play a racing title that you like better. That way your time gets better spend, instead of focussing on what is bad in life. I could try to start a thread on why I do not like rF2. Instead, I run two threads on why I like Raceroom and Assetto. Feels better to me!
I'll quote you now: sigh..... At my age I don't need lessons about how to spend my time, I am doing fine, thank you... I just wish you would stop idolize AC the way you do, ignoring all of its issues as if there weren't any. It is getting boring after some time.
I do not idolize it, I just like it, but give the pros and cons a more balanced consideration. I try to keep separate the hear-say of othrrs from what is more founded in claims and empiracl observation. The past 30 minutes I searched for PS4 videos that showed a full car field in racing, from cockpit - this is what the player would need to expect what he spends a lot of time with: driving in driver view, eiether with many cars in sight in front of him, or none. I found videos on Spa, Silverstone, and Imola, with many cars. Honestly said - in this setup there was hardly any tearing to see at all. And while you once again start to aim at me personally, I cannot help to form the impression that you think you have some personal bill to settle with Kunos, for whatever the reason is. You do not like AC, I got it. Got it already longer time ago. Simply don't play it then. It was a bad investement for you, bu of limited proportions. Bad stuff happens, get over it. We all got bitten by bad stuff we bought at times. BTW, old man: I'm almost 50 myself. So what... -In the end, its like I said already earlier, somewhere above: what is an issue for the one guy, is a non-issue for the other. The things you listed have much less convincing power for me, than they have for you. You will need to live with that. VIDEO LINK ^A screen torn apart? Serious frame issues?
Here is Digital Foundry's analysis of the console versions: Any doubts now there are frame rate and screen tearing issues? Having watched the video it is clear neither console hits 60fps, even with just 10 AI cars on screen. Forza Motorsport 6 manages 20+ AI in rainy conditions at a locked 60fps on the same hardware. Perhaps performance will be patched in over time but anyone who states there are no frame rate issues are being very disingenuous.
When AC reached 1.0 Kunos basically stated this is the finished game. Many people myself included understood anything after that was a bonus. That included extra features, fixes and free content. Fanapryde you should click on over to the AC forum and read Skybird's RRE thread. There are haters over there that attack him for being a RRE fanboy that sound just like you.
I tried to ask this on the AC forum, but haven't got an answer, so thought I try here as well: How do I get ac to launch only in the rift? Feels like I'm losing performance having it full screen on the monitor as well?.. Having a laptop and launch ac through steam vr, other games like Dirt Rally, War Thunder and LFS start up with just a small window on my pc screen, any thoughts?
Constantly blowing smoke up AC's ass and classifying all issues (bar his own AI problem) as non (important) issues, would be an indication for idolizing imo... Every game/sim has its strong and weak points, and deserve to be pointed out. But sweeping all issues under the carpet and saying they are not important is not the right way to go. I don't compare his threads in both forums, have not even seen the R3E thread in the AC forum.
I don't actually know, but have you tried [windows key + P] and in the menu chosing "second screen only"?
Thanks, pressing W+P brought up the screen options, but for some reason nothing happens when I try to change it.. Going into screen settings as normal the rift isn't showing as a second monitor.
Yeah. I can run the game just fine as it is, but would rather put that extra power on some eye candy instead of on a screen I don't use.
Last night I was able to play AC on a console, a PS4. Only with gamepad, however, but that allows to compare what I see with ProCar on console with gamepad. Its pretty much what I expected to see. The maximum number of cars has been reduced, you cnanot have more than 16 cars. It is no PC, it is console, I already expected that. The hardware of consoles can get you only so far, and not farther. The driving - after tuning the gamepad axis a bit more to my taste, I found it to work even better than in Project Cars (where I cut down the axis sensitivity mercilessly). As far as you can compare the physics on one platform with a wheel to the physics on another platform with a gamepad, the console version to me feels the same way like what I am used to on PC. Iexpect to learn that if I could run my G27 on PS4, it would feel and drive identically, or very close to that. The car characteristics in their behaviour are the same, it seems. That also is true for the AI. Its the AI I know from PC. No need to say more there. If there are differences, to me they are not obvious. Sounds are if not similiar then at least very close on both platforms. My host has a problem with his TV's loudspeakers, so I cannot be final there, the TV had limited sounds capability. Now, screen tearing. is it there? Yes. Is it annoying, distracting too much, intense, game-breaking. Big and loud NO. I saw the occasional "blitz" on the screen, sometimes, occasionaly, not often - and that was it. How some people in forums can describe this is such a biggie as they do, is beyond me. When doing many laps on the same rack, after some time I tended to not even notice it anyore. Distracting? I use that word for VERY different standards of problems. Frames: we had no frame counter active, and I personally do not care for frame picking and numbr counting anyway, what counts for me is what I can see with my bare eyes, what jumps to my eyes, what is obvious to perceive. Obviously you see a huge difference between 10 and 20 frames, or 15 and 30, or 20 and 40. But the higher on the scale you go, the less obvious a doubling of frame rate is to the eye. 30 to 60 makes a bigger change than 60 to 120. What I say is this: from cockpit views, I had perfectly fluid, smooth frames, even at start, even with the lots of smoke then, even with all cars in front of me and in sight. That is what counts, and what decides the issue, at least for me - perfectionists and fetishists are free to disagree, but I do not share their view. I do not care whether it is 50, 55 or 60 frames, or even 45 on average. It simply is not important for me. I don't care. In replays, with trackside camera, and especially with arcade cameras behind the cars, frames seem to become a bit more vulnerable, and maybe also more fluctuating. That is surprising, i would expect frames in cockpits with instruments displayed always being lower than from the outside, but maybe it is due to more environment to be seen and console hardware dealing differently with it. Conclusion: cockpit view rules. in AC anyway, always. AC has the best-looking car cockpit modelling in business. And on PS4 it gives you an advantage in frames, it seems. The shadows he had tuned down, there seems to be some issues with them if set to higher values, I read. I could play for maybe 45 minutes, and tried with full car fields on 4 different tracks, amongst them Nordschleife and Spa. Its like I thought before: there is space for improvement, but the amount and noise level of criticism is due to a combination of wrong expectations by some people thinking they should handle this like any console arcade racer, and an effort by some to paint this as bad as possible, just because they want to bring it down, for whatever a reason, or demand utmost perfection from all start on. I do not use my console much, I only got it because it was extenely cheap and allows me to occasionally enjoy a soft spot I have for NHL. I would not mind to spend money on AC for PS4, however, since I think I somewhat ripped them off in the past when buying their new releases early and already then saved money due to their opening sales. For the same reason I buy content in RR even if the cars or tracks are not so much my interest. --- Earlier in this thread it was again voiced fear or criticism of using resources for doing the console versions, and that this would or could do damage to the PC development. I never shared this view, not even last year, and Kunos denied this to happen, saying that any achievement made for one version, most likely, if techncially possible, would make its way into the other versions as well. Good exmaple for this is recent version 1.08's gain in performance, that the vast majoirty of PC players benefit from, the estimation and claims range from 15-25% in gained frames. For me, I had to reduce car fields since 1.06 by 4-6 cars to have frames between 50 and 60 on my PC, but now am able to once again have these frames with maximum cars allowed on track, so yes, 20-25% plus in performance sounds like a reasonable value to me. One might want to note, where this gain is coming from: it is a side product from their work on the console, optimzations done for PS4. What they achieved when trying this, is what then was transported to PC version as well - and gave the PC the fruits of their console work as well. --- The Raceroom thread in Kunos' forum - the equivalent to this AC thread here, currently is 46 oages thick and has 880 posts. It lasts since over one year now. Currently it is a bit calm due to the lack of news to be reported , hlidays season and lacking releases, but that could chnage again when Sector3 becomes more active on its side again, too. "Do not choose between the two - play both!" AC and RR are different, but they nicely complement each other, and together cover more ground in real world tracks and cars than the other sim titles there are. Its a winning combination! P.S. If I would criticise one thing in AC PS4, then it is some options and design decisions. Already on PC I did not like that some things, like keyboard commands, were arbitrarily limited in availability for edits, and on console you also are limited in some options to chose from, leaving the player just some interval settings instead of full freedom. I wonder why. Instead of the aI being set between 80 and 120, you now have just 4 settings, and the differences between are quite steep. That is something I did not like. Maybe it has some technical reasons, for example that they have reduced the FOV to a setting between 50 and 60. That is fine for me, since I use around 55 on my single screen PC all the time, too. But of course, some people used to run extreme low FOVs in PC, and now complain, and want to do 35. Maybe Kunos figured that the cost in frames with higher FOV, or TV screens at very narrow FOVs, are not worth it, so that they are somewhat protecting the players form themselves - and the game from these players then making criticisms on the grounds of extreme settings. I don't know. Some options and design decisions appear to be questionable, imo. The general menu design is okay. Different from the PC version, but as good or bad as the PC version. The menues never were smething that caught my mind.
Its why last time i'm often posted in this thread instead main R3E. I haven't any problem with R3E, but in AC after 1.8 AI is so stuped. I'm race 100 laps of Vallelunga and see how AI's with McLaren 12C GT3, 458 GT2 e.t.c. can't overtake RUF 12R even on the straights