Am I doing it good?
- Thread starter Heath82
- 38 comments
- 2,991 views
- 5,284
- Sick_Cylinder
I don't understand some of the comments on this thread! I recently purchased Assetto Corsa Ultimate Edition - I got it for the 1950's Maserati F1 cars and a handful of other classics and I'm pleased I got it, because I find it enjoyable for those cars. However I have been shocked by the graphics and not in a good way! There is a lack of realism - possibly from poor lighting / shadows. Cars in the mirror look like poor quality back projections in an old film - I find it unrealistic in so many ways and there is an emptiness which reminds me of previous generations of games on much older hardware. I'm using PS4 Pro with a 50 inch 1080P screen. I am enjoying the game, but to me it is way behind PC2 graphically and in fact feels like a different generation of game altogether - perhaps this is how GTS players feel about PC2? - I haven't tried GTS .
- 1,240
- Jounieh
- Georgeagea
Interesting you find it this way. It seems you're more interested in colors, lighting, ambiance, overall setting etc... which is great. That's a personal preference!
For me, the original poster, and many others, we care more about the "quality of the graphics" in a technical manner, more like resolution, AA, edges resolution, meshing, rendering etc....
This is where PC2 lacks heavily, again, at least in my and many other eyes. You, and many others, might find it formidable.
Overall, if I watch a real life onboard footage and then watch same footage in AC and PC2; I find AC to be way more realistic, less cartoonish, less colorful, less saturated, more bland and boring and washed out, just a bit like real life. Some people like that, some don't.
A small example:
AC vs reality:
PC2 vs reality:
And this is pretty scary realistic:
But to each his own in the end! It's a matter of taste!
For me, the original poster, and many others, we care more about the "quality of the graphics" in a technical manner, more like resolution, AA, edges resolution, meshing, rendering etc....
This is where PC2 lacks heavily, again, at least in my and many other eyes. You, and many others, might find it formidable.
Overall, if I watch a real life onboard footage and then watch same footage in AC and PC2; I find AC to be way more realistic, less cartoonish, less colorful, less saturated, more bland and boring and washed out, just a bit like real life. Some people like that, some don't.
A small example:
AC vs reality:
PC2 vs reality:
And this is pretty scary realistic:
But to each his own in the end! It's a matter of taste!
- 5,284
- Sick_Cylinder
I think this is spot on! I sit further away on a sofa not a rig and I'm happy with the graphics in PC2 - yes they could be better, but I don't notice the things which other people complain about. I am enjoying AC, especially using the cars on the real tracks, but the graphics seem dull and unrealistic to me - as if there is something off with the lighting model. An X Box playing friend popped round and said AC reminded him of an earlier copy of Forza - I think he said 5. It's good enough to play and enjoy, but I tried the fantasy tracks and those were just too disappointing.
Re your examples - there is something wrong in PC2 with the modelling of elevation changes at Laguna Seca. I would also expect AC to be better and more accurate with the Nordschleife.
- 6,506
- Shropshire
- IfAndOr
I'll add that a lot depends on which view you use to drive with. Using the interior view will dull the lighting effects somewhat and can mask the blurry white lines etc. While an exterior view can make any jaggies etc more prominent, but will also make the lighting brighter.
When I'm not racing with @Sick Cylinder, who uses the interior view, I often use the bonnet view so I get to see both aspects.
For those with sound problems exterior views can also make the sound louder and more enhanced. But not that loud!
(If you haven't already try the increased visuals option like Mr Grumpy said, it does make a difference.)
When I'm not racing with @Sick Cylinder, who uses the interior view, I often use the bonnet view so I get to see both aspects.
For those with sound problems exterior views can also make the sound louder and more enhanced. But not that loud!
That won't help! Any visual problems will literally be right in front of your face.
(If you haven't already try the increased visuals option like Mr Grumpy said, it does make a difference.)
- 385
- Hawkes Bay
- davidb_165
To be fair that is part of your problem. I recently was forced to downgrade from a T300 to a T150 and was able to experience just how comparatively numb pcars2 can feel on a wheel with less torque. I now understand why pc gear heads rave about their high torque direct drive wheels.
The simple fact is the t150 cannot rotate fast enough to be able to convey what is actually happening to the car.
Now i have gotten used to the t150 and it feels acceptable and i guess if you were happy with the T150 on AC then you should expect that with some tuning you should be able to get something reasonable with PC2. But it was an interesting experience to see the differences between wheels first hand for me.
- 786
- United States
The thing I can't get behind AC as to graphics is the lack of accurate shadows under the cars in the mirror. They look like they are floating above the track in a way. Plus, although yes, you are at times getting a smoother experience from AC, it comes at the price of full time of day/night and weather progression (and LiveTrack), things going to be added in Competizione, which Kunos currently think won't run well on PS4 (despite SMS showing them it can... I guess it depends on your definition of 'acceptable'!).
- 318
- Hungary
I have more than 200 hours gametime in AC and around 40ish in PC2. Both games has great physics, but the similarities end here. PC2 has better graphics overall, but the car models of AC are better detailed and look more natural. PC2 has better content both in tracks and cars, but there are plenty mods for AC and most of them are optimized, so it feels like base content to me. There are no weather in AC and no night to day transition either, you can only mod to have night races. The shadows are also a bit off in the game. PC2 has great carrier mode, AC is lacking there too. In the sound department they are very different, I sometimes like the AC sound sometimes the PC2 one. PC2 has more bugs though and the online experience is a bit better in AC.
- 786
- United States
I'd say AC is the better driving sim, and the FFB communicates a lot better (but not true to life... the idea is to communicate stuff your backside and inner ear would feel irl through just the wheel - IMHO AC does this more informatively) and the car list is a bit more street car focused.
But PC2 is the better 'game', with a better career, and more content (compounded by the ability to use it in a huge variety of conditions).
I love just driving around in AC. The cars feels great (with a lot less work that PC2 makes you do to get it). But I prefer racing in PC2, with the track and car selection.
But PC2 is the better 'game', with a better career, and more content (compounded by the ability to use it in a huge variety of conditions).
I love just driving around in AC. The cars feels great (with a lot less work that PC2 makes you do to get it). But I prefer racing in PC2, with the track and car selection.
Similar threads
