NoGripRacing.com

Go Back   NoGripRacing Forums > PC Racing > rFactor 2

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 26 April 12, 16:30   #1
gears
Donated
 
gears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Higgs Boson
Age: 46
Thumbs up Long-Term Project - Refreshing Attitude

Tired of a "new version" of a game coming out every year when it's really just a huge $59.99 patch of the old game with new skins?

Here's a few snips from Tim about the long-term vision of rF2:

Quote:
This is a beta, it's going to slowly ramp up, features are going to added. Like I said above, it's very possibly that in 3-4 years time we could get a license and build some content that blows you away. It's not a short-term thing. Of course the major things will usually come first, but really it is only loosely planned. We wanted to do the infrastructure and physics first, we're not done with them, but now the focus is shifting a bit to how it looks and performs.
Quote:
There are features (and content) we've mentioned that will not be in rF2 for over a year from now, probably some feature that someone wants might not even be added for two years. rF2 isn't a boxed product with a 'FINISHED' stamp on it, it never was, it never will be.
http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/5174-Next-Update

I'm loving this. Expect rF2 to be supported for years to come - with features and content and updates. This is great.
gears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 April 12, 17:55   #2
mrpowcz
 
mrpowcz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Cze/Germany
Age: 24
Default

Yeah I knew immediately rf2 is worth every piece of money, yes it sounds like ultra fanboyism and I don't hold back that, but rf1 was already the ultimate package for me. Best FFB out there, especially with latest real feel from gsc (pssst doesnt that mean gsc has it too lol), literally any famous car and track there ever was, huge grid support, good fps.. OK theres one terrible thing about, the UI. GTR2 has the perfect UI ever made. But thats not something that matters once youre on the track, so what.

After few years rf2 will have all of this as well + much more advanced tyre model, and better graphics. I can't imagine how GTR3 or AC can beat this, by that I'm not saying I already condemn them but I just can't imagine what could they offer more, besides better graphics but that's really low priority for me.
mrpowcz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 April 12, 23:15   #3
SwiftyOne
 
SwiftyOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Norwich (England)
Age: 58
Default

That to me is rather "disappointing" So, saying that, rF2 will "ALWAYS" be in Beta?

"rF2 isn't a boxed product with a 'FINISHED' stamp on it, it never was, it never will be".

How much more money will I have to add to this "Beta" then? They must start charging for these updates soon, or ISI won't make money

Swifty
SwiftyOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 April 12, 23:34   #4
kamikaze666
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Default

they're not like iracing
kamikaze666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 April 12, 23:46   #5
gears
Donated
 
gears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Higgs Boson
Age: 46
Default

@SwiftyOne

You are taking it too literally (I assume on purpose).

Of course there will be a "finished product" that will be released. And of course it won't always be in beta.

But you already knew all that

The yearly fee for online matchmaker service will take care of the cost of future content.

$12.99/year for matchmaker service includes all updates and future content.
gears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 April 12, 23:51   #6
jgf
 
jgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Columbus, OH
Age: 61
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gears View Post
@SwiftyOne

You are taking it too literally (I assume on purpose). Of course there will be a "finished product" that will be released.

The yearly fee for online matchmaker service takes care of the cost of future content.

$12.99/year for matchmaker service includes all updates and future content.
As opposed to $25 for a disk in a jewel case and free tracks, mods, cars, sounds, utilities, etc. til the next "latest, greatest" is released?
jgf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 April 12, 23:56   #7
gears
Donated
 
gears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Higgs Boson
Age: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgf View Post
As opposed to $25 for a disk in a jewel case and free tracks, mods, cars, sounds, utilities, etc. til the next "latest, greatest" is released?
The yearly fee is optional. You can buy the game and just use the free tracks and mods. You will still get all patches.
gears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 01:01   #8
Kazumi
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gears View Post
@SwiftyOne

You are taking it too literally (I assume on purpose).

Of course there will be a "finished product" that will be released. And of course it won't always be in beta.

But you already knew all that
It's like it already is just presumable better (1st Version, then the version with the Nissan content) and of course as you said not beta by then.

At that point it will (or should) be kinda like a finished boxed product.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gears View Post
The yearly fee for online matchmaker service will take care of the cost of future content.

$12.99/year for matchmaker service includes all updates and future content.
That's not so good if you play casually but as they said, might allow them for more interesting licenses in 2, 3 or 4 years
Kazumi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 12:10   #9
Chronus
 
Chronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Local Group-Milky Way-Sun-Earth
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gears View Post
@SwiftyOne

You are taking it too literally (I assume on purpose).

Easy to see.


EDIT:

Quote:
Originally Posted by gears View Post
Tired of a "new version" of a game coming out every year when it's really just a huge $59.99 patch of the old game with new skins?

[...]

I'm loving this. Expect rF2 to be supported for years to come - with features and content and updates. This is great.
The idea of continuous development (as iRacing is also inevitably doing, even though its bizz-model is different) is very attractive. It means we will not be hung-out to dry in wait of patches that might correct some things and introduce new problems; dev cycles will ensure bug corrections and new features as well as improvements to existing models and features.

But will it be enough, bizz-model wise, to ensure ISI is mostly focused on rF2? Dunno.

Last edited by Chronus; 27 April 12 at 14:43.
Chronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 15:18   #10
gears
Donated
 
gears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Higgs Boson
Age: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronus View Post
The idea of continuous development (as iRacing is also inevitably doing, even though its bizz-model is different) is very attractive. It means we will not be hung-out to dry in wait of patches that might correct some things and introduce new problems; dev cycles will ensure bug corrections and new features as well as improvements to existing models and features.

But will it be enough, bizz-model wise, to ensure ISI is mostly focused on rF2? Dunno.
I seems they are not too worried about that

Quote:
We're perfectly happy with a trickle of sales (it's the community that seems to have an issue with that and wants the community to be larger during testing). When it's being marketed, it'll be when we feel the product should be. If someone comes here at the moment and gets scared off, that's OK, they might go to another product, they might not, but we'll still be here.
- Tim Wheatley

In Gjod we trust
gears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 15:40   #11
Chronus
 
Chronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Local Group-Milky Way-Sun-Earth
Default

Eheh.

Hope so.

On another matter...Tim really, really fits in nicely there. iRacing and Tim were ok, but ISI and Tim (or ISI with Tim) is MUCH better.
Chronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 15:57   #12
gears
Donated
 
gears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Higgs Boson
Age: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronus View Post
Eheh.

Hope so.

On another matter...Tim really, really fits in nicely there. iRacing and Tim were ok, but ISI and Tim (or ISI with Tim) is MUCH better.
I never knew Tim was with iRacing. Maybe that's why he has such Zen-like patience.
gears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 16:19   #13
Chronus
 
Chronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Local Group-Milky Way-Sun-Earth
Default

Yep, he was with them. Did quite a good job and helped build a good, positive image of iRacing.

I think that ISI's way of doing things and its bizz-model fits nicely with him.

Good to have him there.
Chronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 19:33   #14
David Wright
 
David Wright's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Default

I think you have to accept you will essentially get what you pay for. I do have a lot of sympathy for games developers. It does seem we are happy to spend a fortune on quad core processors and graphics cards on a pretty regular basis but apparently won't pay $50 a year for the game.
David Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 19:47   #15
Chronus
 
Chronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Local Group-Milky Way-Sun-Earth
Default

Good, state-of-the-art or even slightly-above-average computers we purchase are quite more expensive than what iRacing costs in over 2 years or what rF2 will cost, but they also can be used for things other than games and sims.

But I agree with that point. 50 Euros or even 100 Euros per year is not that big an amount to spend, yet most people complain and still expect the best graphics/sounds/AI/physics/multiplay. And dev companies have to survive.

If AC or rF2 or GTR3 are extensively moddable, imo, that amount is quite small. On top of that, these sims are expected to have good content out of the box.

From the bits quoted by gears, rF2 seems ever more interesting.
Chronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 20:04   #16
Scorz
 
Scorz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: UK
Age: 35
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronus View Post
Easy to see.


EDIT:



The idea of continuous development (as iRacing is also inevitably doing, even though its bizz-model is different) is very attractive. It means we will not be hung-out to dry in wait of patches that might correct some things and introduce new problems; dev cycles will ensure bug corrections and new features as well as improvements to existing models and features.

But will it be enough, bizz-model wise, to ensure ISI is mostly focused on rF2? Dunno.
I totally agree with both gears and yourself. I think this model is an excellent idea to follow iRacings lead but without the crazy content costs. I have a special place for rF2 already, you can feel something really great in there just waiting to be let loose.

I really get a sense of the passion for racing that has gone into rF2 that i don't get from any other sim. With extensive modding support that the title has, it means that it will only get bigger and better and i don't think we need worry about graphics as they will eventually shine.

I'm really pleased to read they are going down this road It's gonna be a constantly evolving sim
Scorz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 20:18   #17
Brock Yates
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Default

It is nice to see that there will be driving and modding home for years to come
Brock Yates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 12, 20:55   #18
kamikaze666
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Default

but please, give us auto downloading from servers so that public racing can also shine...
kamikaze666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 08:34   #19
zaril
 
zaril's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Italy
Age: 50
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronus View Post
Good, state-of-the-art or even slightly-above-average computers we purchase are quite more expensive than what iRacing costs in over 2 years or what rF2 will cost, but they also can be used for things other than games and sims.
iRacing has cost me 610 $ from February 2010 with all the contents road, and some oval, not so much for the service, and having made ​​few official leagues, I did not have all the credits available.
My 2 cents is that ISI is damn late, even if the quality of the work is and will be excellent.

Luca
zaril is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 14:55   #20
gears
Donated
 
gears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Higgs Boson
Age: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zaril View Post
My 2 cents is that ISI is damn late, even if the quality of the work is and will be excellent.

Luca
Late? Late for what?...... Your arbitrary deadline?

I'm sure they didn't get your memo. It won't happen again
gears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 15:11   #21
Chronus
 
Chronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Local Group-Milky Way-Sun-Earth
Default

I think I know what he means - but I don't see it that way either. If ISI were trying to compete with iRacing, then yes, they would be facing an uphill battle against them.

But the companies have wholly different business models and their projects have different objectives in the long run.

It may come as a surprise to some, but many of us will prove that they are not mutually exclusive - I will continue with iRacing (should it continue to evolve) and eventually will also purchase rF2 and its services.
Chronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 18:00   #22
PortuguesePilot
 
PortuguesePilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Portugal
Default

hi, there.

will it be possible to buy rF2, pay for it once, and never pay again?

honestly, i never got into iRacing because of its business model and if ISI is going to emulate said business model making us pay for every little add-on, or 13$ a year or whatever it may end up being, then i must say that i am starting to feel a bit disappointed and pushed away from rF2 as well...

plus, i can't really see how rF2 can be mod-able AND have an official update/content adding cycle simultaneously. the free add-on mods would, in a way, jeopardize the revenue ISI could make with the official, paid add-ons. i guess that, if they wish to use an iRacing-like business model (or similar), then i fear that, eventually, down the line, free add-ons will be discouraged.

i may be starting to become too old, though... most folks seem to be all well and dandy with this "continuously paying for a game you've paid before and you already own" strategy, even if it's just 13$ a year... even it's just 1$ a year! i miss the days when you'd buy a game once and there! that was it! it was yours, you could do with it what you wanted and you'd never had to pay for it again... i surely miss those times. i don't like to pay over and over again just to add a car or track or a new tyre model. i'd rather buy a good game now, enjoy the most out of it and then, in 2/3 years time, buy a new one.

i always criticized iRacing (which seems to be quite a good simulator) because of its business model. i even said that "you can have the best graphics, best physics, best FFB, best on-line experience, etc... but if you'll implement the 'pay for this, pay for that, pay for everything, all the time' business model, then i'm out".

back in the heated pCARS discussion that occurred here a few weeks ago, i criticized the more-than-probable DLC-charging commercial policy that they will adopt for exactly the same reasons. i even said "i am not a cow. i don't like to be milked". it leaves me quite sad to see that the same may end up happening with rF2, the simulator that i was looking forward to the most.

i know that dev teams have to survive and have kids to feed and whatnot, but they also had to survive and they also had kids to feed in the 1990's and in the early 2000's! didn't they? and didn't they survived just swell before this milking strategies were ever devised? they wouldn't starve to death or go unemployed if they only charged for the game once. or have things changed that much?

maybe i didn't read well enough and maybe i'm making a storm in a glass of water, i don't know... but i wish ISI would allow a chance for the "pay once and enjoy the game forever" choice to happen...

or else i'll be stuck playing GTL, GTR2 and GTR-Evo forever... i only paid for those games once a piece and they still give me lots of joy and respect towards ISI/SimBin. when i'll be forced to allow milking, that respect will be dead gone and any sort of joy that i could take out of the games will be severely hindered.

i'm sorry if my opinion offends any of you. it was never my intent to offend anyone. and if i am mistaken about anything, please explain to me where and why. i'm open to being corrected...
PortuguesePilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 18:28   #23
Chronus
 
Chronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Local Group-Milky Way-Sun-Earth
Default

Maybe someone will explain better than me what rF2's bizz-model will be.

As far as I know, it's not following iRacing's path.

With regards to iRacing, it's not "milking" either. The sim and service are the same thing right from the beginning, it's not as if you sign up and pay the initial fee for something that changes later on. There's some confusion there if people think this about iRacing.

You pay a monthly bill. Not that expensive.

Then, you pay for each car and track. Which I consider expensive. But if I and others want to try it out and/or compete at higher levels, than so be it, we accept the costs and live with it.

Not milking because no one is forcing you to accept their terms - with the exception of something that happened in 2011 and 2010 when you couldn't use certain cars you already paid for because management grouped them with newer cars (and unless people purchased these new cars, regardless of wanting them or not, they couldn't race with their own cars).

It could considered milking if...physics development stopped or worse went backwards. Then we'd be getting an inferior product for the price of a very good one. That would be milking, which fortunately is not the case (even though I don't like the physics of all cars).

As for rF2 being moddable (FULLY moddable, not something like what "they" are proposing for pCARS)...

I still don't know how moddable rF2 will end up being. If it's not as open as rF, I for one will not purchase it. If it is, this community will continue to thrive and mods will continue to be produced by those that really want to do it - I will be one of them.

We will have to see. But in regards to its bizz-model, certainly a little information can be quite dangerous and lead to misunderstandings (which, considering the work done thus far by Tim, is not ISI's fault at all).
Chronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 19:12   #24
mrpowcz
 
mrpowcz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Cze/Germany
Age: 24
Default

I'm pretty sure it will be as open as rf but the packaging of mods is painful.
mrpowcz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 20:05   #25
gears
Donated
 
gears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Higgs Boson
Age: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot View Post
hi, there.

will it be possible to buy rF2, pay for it once, and never pay again?
Yes.

But you won't be able to play online after 1 year. You will still get patches and updates, but no online service.
gears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 20:14   #26
brabham67
 
brabham67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Federal Way, Washington, USA
Age: 39
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpowcz View Post
I'm pretty sure it will be as open as rf but the packaging of mods is painful.
This. It's the only thing really hanging out there for me that needs an acceptable resolution for both IS and the community.


@PortuguesePilot The only different thing that ISI is doing with rF2 is charging a yearly fee of $12.99 for the use on online multiplayer(Matchmaker) and the update service. The first year is part of the initial purchase price.

Even if you don't renew the yearly online access, you still get all of the patches and DLC, you just have to install them manually. (Unless this has changed, It's the way I understand it.)

I used to be the "I'll never pay to play" type myself. But I figure if I'm spending $1000's on hardware to play games, than maybe a monthly or yearly fee, provided it holds value to me(patches, DLC, ect..), isn't such a bad thing.

If I were you, I would wait until rF2 has been released, than you can try the free demo and see if it's something you'd consider buying, or even braking from your "No pay to play" mold. If in the end your answer is still no, then there is no harm done.
brabham67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 22:24   #27
PortuguesePilot
 
PortuguesePilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Portugal
Default

if things are as you guys are saying, then it's ok with me. i was fearful that a milking strategy of sorts was being prepared for rF2 too...

cheers.
PortuguesePilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 12, 23:58   #28
jgf
 
jgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Columbus, OH
Age: 61
Default

"milking strategy"? perhaps. Or just a variation of the classic "Barbie Doll" marketing - sell you the base product cheap then nickel and dime you to death for the accessories.

But don't blame the developers or the marketing department. Why do they resort to these tactics? The explanation lies in a joke older than I am: "Why do dogs lick themselves?", answer - "Because they can".
jgf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 April 12, 00:53   #29
Kazumi
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Default

Mhh I don't mind paying for (true) additional content so that looks okay. Even if I hate monthly/yearly fees, it's just stupid when you kinda miss a few weeks/month and not use it at all you pay for nothing in some games. Of course ongoing support and content makes this less stupid, or not stupid at all per that definition

If they do it right it will be worth 13$ for the second year.
Kazumi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 April 12, 01:00   #30
mrpowcz
 
mrpowcz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Cze/Germany
Age: 24
Default

Some people think ISI made packaging so difficult on purpose to discourage low quality modders as they will be too lazy to bother. Hard to say, Im a bit worried it will discourage the good ones as well, it should be changed until release.
mrpowcz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 April 12, 13:53   #31
Chronus
 
Chronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Local Group-Milky Way-Sun-Earth
Default

I agree.

I'll wait and see.
Chronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 12, 02:24   #32
Stratman
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Default

$13 a year for online play is pretty cheap if you ask me, and ISI really supports their products, how many updates did they give us FREE OF CHARGE for RF1?
Stratman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 12, 08:25   #33
DoubleT
 
DoubleT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: California
Default

ISI's business model for RF2 is a very, very good one...for all involved.
I love that for less than one quarter of it's full cost, they're prepared to continually develop and optimize it...in addition to added content and matchmaker service. This absolutely beats buying a $60 game every year or two, which does not interface with the "old" game in any way.
I'd rather pay the $12 to get ISI to use every feature of the gaming engine to it's max potential before moving on. This is a reasonably small cost for continued work.
If RF2 continues to excel, that'll bring new clients every year. It could potentially have a 'GPL-type' life-cycle. This would increase the visibility while keeping cash flowing to the company for future products. Either way, it's a win for all RF2 users and ISI.
I don't expect them to work without being paid...and neither should you.

Last edited by DoubleT; 27 May 12 at 13:44.
DoubleT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 12, 08:45   #34
Lunsmann
 
Lunsmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gears View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by PortuguesePilot View Post
hi, there.

will it be possible to buy rF2, pay for it once, and never pay again?
Yes.

But you won't be able to play online after 1 year. You will still get patches and updates, but no online service.
Has everyone forgotten the Lifetime Licence option?

Pay once and have full online access for as long as ISI support RF2 (thus the lifetime of the product).

It cost me just $80 for this option. And it has been available right from the very first beta release.
Lunsmann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 12, 08:50   #35
Lunsmann
 
Lunsmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpowcz View Post
Some people think ISI made packaging so difficult on purpose to discourage low quality modders as they will be too lazy to bother. Hard to say, Im a bit worried it will discourage the good ones as well, it should be changed until release.

I think you may have a good point mate. It actually reminds me a lot of modding F1 Challenge 99 - 02. Every mod was separate, with it's own exe and its own track folders etc. Of course there are a lot of differences, but it does look like ISI are trying to steer modders back to an evolved version of that games way of doing things. And it will discourage tinkerers.
Lunsmann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 12, 11:19   #36
xanaxkamikaze
 
xanaxkamikaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Atlantis
Smile Waiting Patiently

I am not a beta man. I have no interest in trying the beta.
But I have seen good things from videos and I have read good things on forums. I am looking forward to the day when our league does a long race with a large grid with the finished product.
xanaxkamikaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 12, 21:36   #37
Ivo Simons
 
Ivo Simons's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Default

About the packaging and people not liking it. Remember we said the same about rF1 packaging in 2005.
Ivo Simons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 May 12, 06:14   #38
Lunsmann
 
Lunsmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Default

I think the real issue right now is the hard linking of mods and tracks - Online is going to change from what Gjon said in one thread - we will see of course but that is one aspect that really must change.

Single player is also an issue - right now the ONLY way to use any track with any car is the All cars & tracks mode - on it's own with ISI "mods" it is not an issue - but start adding in third party mods and what is going to happen? How many mods work together in RF1's all cars and tracks mode? Very few - including the big (lauded) teams mods. CTD's and mas errors in the extreme. How is RF2 going to handle this?

Separate tracks from mods in single player and the packaging is the best thing since sliced bread. Honest opinion.
Lunsmann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 May 12, 16:56   #39
Vince Klortho
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

As far as I am concerned, the "all cars and tracks" mode in RF1 is the only way to go. I make every single mod I get work with it. I end up with every mod merged with each other and it makes combining them very easy. I think the directory override option in RF1 was one of their worst ideas EVER ! Right up there with the current modding system that links cars and tracks. I can see the point of it for people running servers or leagues but to link tracks to cars is absurd I think.
Vince Klortho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 May 12, 17:35   #40
Chronus
 
Chronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Local Group-Milky Way-Sun-Earth
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince Klortho View Post
As far as I am concerned, the "all cars and tracks" mode in RF1 is the only way to go. I make every single mod I get work with it. I end up with every mod merged with each other and it makes combining them very easy.
Totally agree, Vince.

Fortunately, I have found enough mods/tracks that don't have any problems so that, as you say, combining them is not difficult.

Obviously, ISI's strategy will take into account some of the incompatibilities that we've had to deal with in the past. Certainly one of the reasons for the packaging system in rF2.
Chronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 May 12, 18:26   #41
gears
Donated
 
gears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Higgs Boson
Age: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vince Klortho View Post
I think the directory override option in RF1 was one of their worst ideas EVER ! Right up there with the current modding system that links cars and tracks. I can see the point of it for people running servers or leagues but to link tracks to cars is absurd I think.
I believe they are reconsidering that... Many modders have said the same.

And that's what this beta is all about:

It's up to you guys, the modders, to tell ISI what's good and bad about the current system and how it can be approved. They are listening
gears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 May 12, 18:47   #42
Chronus
 
Chronus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Local Group-Milky Way-Sun-Earth
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gears View Post
They are listening
Lets hope modders are also paying attention to this - at least those that can "tinker" with the beta, explore it, have a feel for it. ISI is quite open about this, so this is an opportunity not to be missed.
Chronus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 May 12, 03:25   #43
CaptSlower
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Default

I hope they REALLY are listening because

1. the ridiculous track and car packaging setup should be rectified straight away, priority item because like myself, there are many people out there refusing to commit to Rfactor 2 for this reason alone.

2. Concentrate where your strengths lie - please please please outsource the 'ui' part of the game next time lol. The ui needs work and it is awkward.

3. See point 1.

4. See point 1.

Seriously though, I am dying to get this but refuse to sign on when such a poorly implemented mod/track organisation system is still in effect.

tbh every rF2 person should be united in this particular cause otherwise it will probably remain, and that would not be good for us.

And before people start saying, well this IS a beta, I would expect something as fundamental as that to be sorted out at the earliest stages, and it has been 7 years since the first game, so lets be honest here, they have had the time.

Oh and ISI, feel free to pm me when it's sorted and i'm in lol.

Last edited by CaptSlower; 6 May 12 at 13:58.
CaptSlower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5 May 12, 03:25   #44
CaptSlower
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronus View Post
Lets hope modders are also paying attention to this - at least those that can "tinker" with the beta, explore it, have a feel for it. ISI is quite open about this, so this is an opportunity not to be missed.
provided you are paying of course
CaptSlower is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 15:10.


Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

www.nogripracing.com 2003 - 2014
Page generated in 0.21516 seconds with 10 queries