Granted both those games are shit, but if you're looking to graphics as a sign of quality of a racing game, you're doing it wrong and missing the point.
The best sim racing games out currently have been released 10+ years ago and although you can modify and improve the graphics, it's all about what happens on track, not outside.
Excellent force feedback, realistic AI, good competitive scene with safety and skill rank based races, laser scanned tracks, VR, etc.
No one cares what the grass or trees look like, if possible deactivate that shit so you can better render the cards, asphalt, curbs and keep constant (high) frame rates.
I guess my sarcasm wasn't obvious enough, but we're agreeing with each other.
I agree with everything you just said. The simulations come first, of course (if the goal is realism).
My intended-joke was about people who use racing games as some sort of graphical metric, which is precisely what's happening in the thread that I quoted.
Yet, as we both seem to agree, racing games are a far-cry away from graphical masterpieces.
(Though, there's a bit of truth in what I was saying. Racing games look kinda pathetic, especially given what other genres are doing.)
This is too funny. The irony.
With this one, I feel like I missed your point, or you missed mine. Apparently, I wasn't very clear, so I don't blame you, if that's what happened.
I haven't read your other posts in this thread, so I have no idea what type of meme I walked in to, if I did.
You hit the nail on the head. I think that's why Driveclub looks so good even to this day. Look at the environments. It was an experience just driving through the tracks in Driveclub. The environments in GT and Forza look like shitty toy dioramas in comparison.
I would say that Driveclub probably isn't aiming for quite the same level of realism, so it's a mildly apples-oranges comparison. But still, you're pretty much saying what I'm saying.
We're at a point where a racing game should be able to be realistic and also look nice. It's kinda silly that we can't have both; especially, as
Setsuna Mudou
said, the simulations were already excellent many years ago.
Racing fans (Which includes me),
I understand the need for simulations, and realism. I totally get that.
But... c'mon now. The games don't need to look like ARMA 3, in this day and age.
And, if we're being honest, ARMA 3 is probably still doing more simulations than modern racing games, and it came out (literally) a decade ago.
Developers can clearly do better, especially with the budgets they have available.
If I was a betting man, I'd wager that most of the budgets go to paying for royalties, rather than actual gameplay/graphics upgrades.
Maybe I'm alone in this, but I would totally be down for fewer cars for improved gameplay and graphics; and especially graphics. I feel like the gameplay is already quite nice in most racers.
.
