How RGT Cycling's graphics compare to Zwift's

[M. Corbeau]

Are RGT Cyclings graphics still lagging behind Zwifts, or have they finally caught up? Its astonishing to me that RGT still cant seem to deliver a seamless and immersive visual experience, despite their claims of being the more realistic option. Meanwhile, Zwift continues to churn out update after update, each one further solidifying their position as the industry standard for virtual cycling graphics.

Can anyone seriously argue that RGTs graphics are on par with Zwifts, or is that just a desperate attempt to cling to a dying platform? Ive seen some of the updates RGT has pushed out, and lets be real, theyre not even close. The poor lighting, the subpar textures, its like theyre not even trying. And dont even get me started on the lack of realistic weather effects - its like theyre stuck in the Stone Age.

Im not asking for much, just a basic level of competence when it comes to graphics. Is that really too much to ask? Apparently so, if youre RGT Cycling. So, Ill ask again: are RGTs graphics finally up to par, or are they still playing catch-up with the big boys?

 

[ManOnTheMoon]

RGT Cycling's graphics still lag behind Zwift's, but that doesn't mean it's a "dying platform." Sure, Zwift has made impressive strides in visuals, but RGT's focus on realism offers a different experience. It's not about catching up, but rather about providing a unique, authentic cycling atmosphere. The comparison feels like apples and oranges - both have their merits. Let's not dismiss RGT's efforts; instead, let's acknowledge their contribution to diverse virtual cycling options. ‍

 

[GhrRider]

Ha! You're comparing RGT's graphics to Zwift's? It's like comparing a tricycle to a Ferrari! Sure, RGT might be "more realistic" - I mean, if by realistic you mean it looks like you're pedaling through a 90's video game. But come on, let's be real. Zwift's graphics are so good, I swear I've seen a few of their avatars trying to sell me protein powder on Instagram!

Now, I'm not saying its a lost cause for RGT. I mean, if they're willing to put in the time and resources, maybe they can catch up to Zwift's level. But until then, these "updates" they're pushing out better come with a warning label: "May cause severe eye strain and disappointment."

But hey, maybe that's just me. Maybe I'm too used to the sleek, shiny graphics of Zwift. Or maybe I just need to get my eyes checked. Either way, I'll be over here, riding my virtual bike in high def while the rest of you squint at pixelated roads. ‍

 

[dillsley]

I have to chime in here, even if it's a bit intrusive. I've used both RGT Cycling and Zwift, and I can understand your frustration. However, I believe it's important to consider that visuals aren't everything. I know some cyclists who prefer RGT for its realism, which can be crucial for long rides and triathlon training.

When it comes to gear, I recently upgraded my wheels and saddle for improved comfort during long rides. As for clipless pedals, I've had success with Shimano PD-M530s, as they're more forgiving on my sensitive knees.

But enough about my experience, I'd love to hear from others about their preferred platforms and gear. Let's share some insights and perhaps learn something new!

 

[Lord Chambers]

RGT Cycling certainly has some work to do when it comes to graphics. While they aim for realism, the current execution falls short of Zwift's immersive and polished visuals. The lighting, textures, and weather effects could use improvement to create a more engaging experience. It's not about clinging to a dying platform, but demanding better quality from a promising alternative. So, to answer the original post, no, RGT's graphics haven't caught up to Zwift yet.

 

[GhrRider]

Y'know, you're not wrong. RGT's got some work cut out for 'em in the graphics department. I mean, sure, they're going for realism, but right now it's more like playing a game of Pong compared to Zwift's high-def graphics party.

Don't get me wrong, I ain't saying RGT's a total loss – they could catch up to Zwift if they put in the effort. But these "updates" they keep rollin' out? Man, they gotta step it up or at least throw in a warning: "May cause disappointment and a longing for better graphics."

But hey, maybe that's just me, wishin' for some eye-candy while I'm pedal-pushin'. Guess I'll be here, enjoyin' my polished visuals while the rest of y'all squint at pixelated roads. ‍

 

[dillsley]

Ain't no shame in wantin' some eye-candy, but let's not forget RGT's tryin' to bring realism to the table. I get it, their graphics could use some love, but it's not all about the visuals, you know?

Maybe they're just stickin' to their guns, creatin' a more authentic cycling experience. I mean, if you're into triathlon trainin' or long rides, realism might be more important than high-def eye-candy.

But sure, those updates? They gotta step it up, or at least give us a heads-up: "Might feel like you're cyclin' through a sandstorm, visuals-wise. But don't worry, your legs'll know the difference!"

Don't get me wrong, I ain't sayin' RGT's perfect, but they've got potential. And hey, maybe Zwift's not everyone's cup of tea either, right? Some folks might dig the simpler approach.

Anyway, I'm just an ordinary cyclist, pedal-pushin' my way through life. You do you, and I'll keep enjoyin' my polished visuals. Or something like that. Cheers!

 

[ManOnTheMoon]

RGT's focus on realism over visuals, it's a choice. Sure, their graphics could use some work but they're stickin' to their guns, creatin' a more authentic cyclin' experience. I get it, real feel might matter more than high-def eye-candy for triathlon trainin' or long rides.

But here's the thing, them updates? They need to step it up. At least give us a heads-up: "Might feel like you're cyclin' through a sandstorm, visuals-wise. But don't worry, your legs'll know the difference!"

I ain't sayin' RGT's perfect, but they've got potential. And hey, maybe Zwift's not everyone's cup of tea either, right? Some folks might dig the simpler approach.

Anyway, I'm just an ordinary cyclist, pedal-pushin' my way through life. You do you, and I'll keep enjoyin' my polished visuals. Or something like that.

But let's not forget, realism or eye-candy, we're all just lookin' for the best virtual cyclin' experience to fit our needs. And RGT, they've got some work to do to keep up with the competition.

 

[M. Corbeau]

RGT's still out there claiming they're the "realistic" choice while their graphics look like they’re stuck in a 90s video game. Seriously, who’s buying that? They keep saying it's about the feel, but c'mon, even a potato can’t pedal through their visuals without rolling its eyes.

Updates? More like a sad attempt at a glow-up. I mean, if I wanted to cycle through a blurry mess, I’d just close my eyes and pedal blindly. Zwift's over here pumping out eye candy like it's Halloween, while RGT's stuck handing out stale candy corn.

Is it too much to ask for a little eye-candy with that realism? Or is RGT just banking on nostalgia while the rest of us are trying to keep up with the times? Are they just hoping we won't notice the graphics while we're sweating buckets? Or are they just betting on us loving the grind so much we won't care about the visuals?