rF2: Endurance Pack Updated

[Paul Jeffrey]

Studio 397 have recently updated the 'Endurance Pack' DLC for rFactor 2.

Deploying the content update back on March 21st, Studio 397 have released small updates to the cars contained within the Endurance Pack DLC for the simulation. Although not significant in size, the update does address some of the outstanding issues with the content in rFactor 2, and includes some performance optimisation of the individual car LOD's as well as BOP adjustments across the pack, the full details of which can be seen below:

Porsche 991RSR GTE v1.67

• BOP refuel time adjustment
  
• Fixed side mirrors in showroom
• Fixed see through vents and holes
• Fixed sorting issues with steering wheel and side windows

Corvette C7R GTE v1.69

• Optimized LODs
  
• BOP refuel time adjustment
  
• Mapping fix on bonnet
  
• Fixed side mirrors in showroom

BMW M8 GTE v1.43

• Fixed reversed oil and water values in the onboard HUD
  
• Optimized LODs
  
• BOP refuel time adjustment

Norma M30 LMP3 v1.65

• Optimized LODs

Oreca 07 LMP2 v1.51

• Optimized LODs
  
• Reflection fix on floor diffuser

rFactor 2 is a racing simulation exclusively available for PC.

For more news from the world of rFactor 2, check out the RaceDepartment rFactor 2 sub forum and join in with the community discussion. If you like racing in a clean and fun environment online, why not check out the RaceDepartment rFactor 2 Racing Club? Get yourself in on the action!

Like what we do at RaceDepartment? Follow us on Social Media!

 

 

[Slowdive]

We're never gonna agree on very much. I agree that rF2 has clear room for improvement to the core game. It doesn't bother me as much as some people, because once I go on track, I don't notice/focus on the faults. I don't like endurance racing in modern cars and I very rarely race in single player, so my view of this is maybe skewed. I hope that you'd agree that game devs will never keep everybody happy though?

Absolutely. Of course everyone is looking at the same thing from different angles. And I understand how you would see how a certain title is more or less flawed based on how you use it. For someone who does offline endurance racing, the title might as well reside in a junk drawer as it's next to useless. It's like that beautiful cherry red sports car with a blown engine you wanted to buy as a teenager. It seems so appealing, but is ultimately pointless.

]The latest road map appears to offer light at the end of the tunnel for many of the outstanding issues and I personally am happy with the pace of progress and the apparent balancing act that S397 are undertaking.

I'm cautiously optimistic. Perhaps I'm a little less patient with the process because I have a fair understanding of the level of work involved to fix certain issues. It also seems a bit of an affront to long time supporters who have purchased the original product and some DLC, to be ignored while a cash grab continues.

The core game or DLC discussion is a bit chicken and egg (or so it would seem), but if S397 had the money to fix the game first, and they could somehow suspend payments to any staff involved primarily in producing content, then maybe you have a point.... I just don't see it that way. Are you suggesting that the money to improve the base game would come from sales of the base game? Do you think they should have taken out a loan? Maybe they should have given over some say in the development/content/direction of the sim in order to secure finance from some publishing house?

I'm suggesting that they have some kind of budget that allows for fairly expensive development work on tracks and cars. I would use a portion of that budget to fix outstanding issues. Typically where budgets are concerned, money spent on art vs programming is around 80/20. So shifting some resources wouldn't mean that all work stops on direct revenue generating projects.

OK I'm playing Devil's Advocate here, but my point is that i really don't see how your arguments hold water. Yes there are people who aren't happy and post about it in (seemingly) almost every thread in the rF2 forum. I agree wholeheartedly that "That can't be good for business". But a quick look at other forums on RD will show that the same is true for other sims and that is why I've taken the time to reply to your comments and try to show others why I believe them to be so badly flawed.

Negative posts, which present opinion in such a way as to appear factual, eg "I wouldn't hold your breath. They've been saying that they're going to release a new UI for years, but instead have spent resources working on new DLC. Since I have considerable first hand experience to know how long it takes to develop a UI, I doubt they are serious, since it's on the order of months, not years." are I'm guessing, not gonna help sell copies? Well I'm not holding my breath, but like I said, I think it'll come. Glass half full.

Sure. There are always outside detractors for any title. But my experience with the RF2 community is unique in that I often share information to help and to be helped by others and there is a shared resignation among many people who really want to like the title, that it is broken. There is a frustration level here with genuine fans of the game that you don't see with other titles.

Perhaps you would view my original post as negative and I suppose it is, but I simply want to save others a lot of time and unrealistic expectations that I have endured. I really do hope they can get their act together and address these issues soon and move on. I'm a fan of S397, but that doesn't mean that they have my blind devotion. And when a company makes promises and doesn't deliver years later, well I think a little criticism is valid.

 

[Denis Betty]

A little criticism? From you? That must be a wake up call.

 

[Slowdive]

A little criticism? From you? That must be a wake up call.

I think my actual criticism of S397 has been pretty measured, but gets blown out of proportion because of fan boy reaction.

 

[Denis Betty]

I think my actual criticism of S397 has been pretty measured, but gets blown out of proportion because of fan boy reaction.

the ambivalence by the devs, who would rather focus on pumping out new eye candy rather than a solid core sim

I'm done wasting my time trying to make RF2 work properly

I've waited patiently for months to see some response to glaring issues, but instead I just see more cash grabbing

man, the graphics are just painful

in my opinion RF2 is at the bottom of the graphics barrel.

You take any and every opportunity to criticize S397. You are making it a personal crusade to run down rF2 on the forum. Everybody who reads these forums can see that.
You make unsubstantiated claims and when somebody requests that you back them up, you just state that you are in software development and you know best. After several requests for where you would find the money for core game development, you finally cough up an arbitrary figure from thin air and back pedal by saying that they should use part of the money they've been spending on content. No evidence to back any of this up and no explanation of how they pay bills, while the content takes longer to arrive. You've accused S397 of cash grabbing on more than one occasion with no way to substantiate that claim. In short, you do everything in your power to discourage others from buying anything from S397. Then you claim to hope that the game get finished to your personal satisfaction.

We are not going to agree on anything. I see your arguments as full of holes and totally unsupported supposition. Martin was correct, it's pointless trying to reason with you.

 

[John-Eric Saxén]

The core game or DLC discussion is a bit chicken and egg (or so it would seem), but if S397 had the money to fix the game first, and they could somehow suspend payments to any staff involved primarily in producing content, then maybe you have a point.... I just don't see it that way. Are you suggesting that the money to improve the base game would come from sales of the base game? Do you think they should have taken out a loan? Maybe they should have given over some say in the development/content/direction of the sim in order to secure finance from some publishing house?

Well obviously they have a team of which part is devoted to doing content and part the core game, so I don't entirely agree with your argument that it requires suspending the payment of artists to fix core game bugs. A dev studio always consists of both artists and coders and artists do none of the coding and coders do none of the content/artwork, at least 95% of time.

 

[Denis Betty]

It wasn't a literal suggestion, I was pointing out flaws in the idea that S397 could somehow divert efforts away from content and toward core game developement. ie How would they fund it?
As I've said many times, it looks to me, as though there is a balance to be struck. The fact that some people are unhappy with that balance as it stands is quite obvious. But there are others who are happy with the balance. Speculation about what proportion are unhappy, doesn't really acheive anything IMO - unless your aim is to have a negative impact on the reputation of the sim/devs.
Constantly bombarding every thread in the rF2 forum, with negative comments is not IMO going to help that reputaion either.

 

[Slowdive]

You take any and every opportunity to criticize S397. You are making it a personal crusade to run down rF2 on the forum. Everybody who reads these forums can see that.

I stand behind everything I've said. And no, I don't take every opportunity to slam them. I rarely even post. But I guess I can understand how a shill may take umbrage any time someone is critical of their favorite sim.

I also notice that you didn't list any of the positive comments that I've made in regard to RF2, or any posts trying to work through various bugs with other users. So I don't think you'll be winning any awards for honesty any time soon.

You make unsubstantiated claims and when somebody requests that you back them up, you just state that you are in software development and you know best.

I've already explained my logic, however you appear to be incapable of comprehending some pretty basic reasoning. I'm afraid I really can't help you with that unfortunately. But in case you've missed it for the umpteenth time, I've stated that it's merely my opinion. It's worth about as much as your hot takes on RF2, except unlike yourself and Martin, I don't have quite as much ego to believe that my opinion is fact.

You've accused S397 of cash grabbing on more than one occasion with no way to substantiate that claim.

A cash grab is when you have a flawed base product and continue to sell DLC. Software developers do this all the time because there are a certain percentage of consumers, much like yourself, that will buy anything put out by their favorite developer irregardless of quality issues. It's that kind of blind consumerism that results in half baked, buggy software being pushed to market prematurely. The fact that you would try to be dishonest with other users and sugarcoat the issues with RF2 actually makes perfect sense in that context.

I guess perhaps it's true that I really do everything in my power to undermine the product, like helping my friends and other users to fix their issues with RF2 so they don't just uninstall it in disgust. I also make ridiculous claims without evidence that it's a great driving experience and has great potential. You really nailed me on that one Sherlock.

I think you may be right, I don't believe we will agree on anything. I believe I've incorrectly assumed that you were capable of setting your bias aside and having a reasonable conversation. But I think it would be best if I just moved on and you return to your echo chamber with the other fan boys where you can present "facts and evidence" to each other on how amazing it is that RF2 has no flaws and how S397 only makes perfect business decisions. Just be sure to avoid the punch bowl.

Take care.

 

[dajdosta]

The problem is when someone claims he would do better business than professional company even though he doesn't have access to 1% information needed to see the whole picture.
How delusional.
We have it here in bars when "experts" watch soccer and always "know better" then the coach.

 

[Denis Betty]

I also notice that you didn't list any of the positive comments that I've made in regard to RF2, or any posts trying to work through various bugs with other users.

Because I was making a direct response to your claim that -

I think my actual criticism of S397 has been pretty measured, but gets blown out of proportion because of fan boy reaction.

I thought you wanted a reasoned argument?

So I don't think you'll be winning any awards for honesty any time soon.

But I guess I can understand how a shill may take umbrage any time someone is critical of their favorite sim.

Or maybe just hurling libelous (and clearly false) insults is more your style? I can honestly say, hand on heart, that I have never spoken to or had any correspondence (other than possibly asking one or two questions on an open forum... I don't remember, but it's possible) with any staff member or associate, of any racing sim. So, your accusation of dishonesty doesn't hold any more water than your flawed arguments or your illogical reasoning.

I've already explained my logic, however you appear to be incapable of comprehending some pretty basic reasoning.

Seems a bit rich, coming from someone who is incapable of supporting his theories. Your logic is imaginary, it's logic which doesn't hold water. it's impossible to divert funds which don't exist, but you consistently ignore any reasoned argument which doesn't fit your agenda.

A cash grab is when you have a flawed base product and continue to sell DLC.

Well, you'll accuse me of semantics, but I looked this up. And, just as I thought, the first two definitions I found read - "When movie studios produce unnecessary and often poor quality sequels in order to obtain more money." and "A product designed primarily or solely with the intent of generating profits." Say what you like, it is documented fact that, in parallel with new content, including some free content, S397 have been working on new shaders and a new UI. So, your claims of a cash grab seem to be unsubstantiated, incorrect and, if I'm honest scurrilous. If, as you claim, you are "a fan of S397", why would you post these (potentially) damaging lies about them and their product on a public forum?

The fact that you would try to be dishonest with other users and sugarcoat the issues with RF2 actually makes perfect sense in that context.

That's two accusations of dishonesty, could you give example please?

I guess perhaps it's true that I really do everything in my power to undermine the product, like helping my friends and other users to fix their issues with RF2 so they don't just uninstall it in disgust. I also make ridiculous claims without evidence that it's a great driving experience and has great potential. You really nailed me on that one Sherlock.

Well, you got me there. I don't really see your positive side, although I have seen your comments about the driving experience, which I failed to mention - apologies for that. I've made clear concessions that there is plenty of room for improvement in rF2 myself - you wouldn't know it though, from reading your fan boy jibes.

I've already explained my logic, however you appear to be incapable of comprehending some pretty basic reasoning. I'm afraid I really can't help you with that unfortunately. But in case you've missed it for the umpteenth time, I've stated that it's merely my opinion. It's worth about as much as your hot takes on RF2, except unlike yourself and Martin, I don't have quite as much ego to believe that my opinion is fact.

Your opinion of your own grasp of logic is juxtaposed to my opinion of your grasp of logic. It's not that I don't understand what you're trying to say, I just fundamentally disagree. Your assertion that S397 could "fix up the base game" with funds that are redirected from content, doesn't seem to take into account what effect this might have on the future production of content. What effects would it have on users who are eagerly anticipating new content?

But I think it would be best if I just moved on and you return to your echo chamber with the other fan boys where you can present "facts and evidence" to each other on how amazing it is that RF2 has no flaws

You can make unsubstantiated scurrilous claims on a public forum if you so choose, I guess. But equally, I can reply to them and find fault with them.

On a broader topic, just reading through this thread, it seems clear that there are still a few legitimate buggy things left to address with rF2. These will affect enjoyment at different levels, for each individual I guess, so perhaps we should all try to take a balanced view

There are other instances, where I'm open and honest that rF2 is not without flaws. Your final comments just seem spiteful.

 

[Slowdive]

Because I was making a direct response to your claim that -
I thought you wanted a reasoned argument?

I'm done with you. You haven't made a good faith effort to have a conversation. You dismiss my arguments without stating a good logical reasons as to why, you don't require the same degree of rigor for your own biased assertions, you try to present one sided evidence to the public by cherry picking posts to suit your narrative. In a nutshell, you are dishonest, biased, and disingenuous in your attempts to have a conversation.

Nothing is to be gained by continuing this as it reminds me of conversations I've had with fundamentalist religious types. It's like talking to a wall. You may have the last inevitable slanderous reply. So knock yourself out.

 

[Slowdive]

The problem is when someone claims he would do better business than professional company even though he doesn't have access to 1% information needed to see the whole picture.
How delusional.
We have it here in bars when "experts" watch soccer and always "know better" then the coach.

Yes, I guess you've never in your life thought that a company or sports team could do a better job. Hypocrite.

 

[Case_]

I'm done with you. You haven't made a good faith effort to have a conversation. You dismiss my arguments without stating a good logical reasons as to why, you don't require the same degree of rigor for your own biased assertions, you try to present one sided evidence to the public by cherry picking posts to suit your narrative. In a nutshell, you are dishonest, biased, and disingenuous in your attempts to have a conversation.

Nothing is to be gained by continuing this as it reminds me of conversations I've had with fundamentalist religious types. It's like talking to a wall. You may have the last inevitable slanderous reply. So knock yourself out.

I just want to say I absolutely get where you're coming from. It must be very frustrating to try having a conversation with a person like that.

 

[Denis Betty]

I just want to say I absolutely get where you're coming from. It must be very frustrating to try having a conversation with a person like that.

I know, I'm sorry, can't think where I got it from.

 

[Emerson Meyer]

Out of curiosity... based on the only source available regarding the player base, i.e., Steam Charts, can you deduce that the current business model is a stunning success?

Sorry, but I can´t.

Anyway, you went in no time to attack the statements from @Slowdive, talking about flawed logics or lack of substanciated arguments. Well, show me yours! (Anything but the old "they need to make money to survive").

Three years since the first time the "new UI" was announced... and keep announced since then... a dozen times.

An additional note.

In short, you do everything in your power to discourage others from buying anything from S397.

Any criticism toward this sim is taken as a crime. What a joke!!

When a front page article from one of the staff members called Pcars a "frustrating experience" where were you to say the same as above? Or the policy regarding Pcars is different?

In fact, this kind of action is pretty common regarding some developers. No matter what, it´s all wonderful. The only demand you can freely do is for new content. Otherwise, you are invited to stop.

And the excuses are always the same... small team, money to keep developing (developing what? new content?) etc, etc.

As Mark Twain said: Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

 

[Case_]

Edit: Nevermind.

 

[Denis Betty]

Out of curiosity... based on the only source available regarding the player base, i.e., Steam Charts, can you deduce that the current business model is a stunning success?

Is this directed at me? Where did I say the business model was a stunning success?

talking about flawed logics or lack of substanciated arguments. Well, show me yours!

I'm not the one spouting accusations of cash grabs and the like on a public forum. You'll need to be more specific. Which of my arguments would you like to see substantiated?

Any criticism toward this sim is taken as a crime. What a joke!!

Not true, I'm happy to admit that there are problems with the sim. I've also suggested that we should try to give balanced feedback in our comments. I'll give an example.... again.
"On a broader topic, just reading through this thread, it seems clear that there are still a few legitimate buggy things left to address with rF2. These will affect enjoyment at different levels, for each individual I guess, so perhaps we should all try to take a balanced view (perhaps something like Alex does in post #43)."

When a front page article from one of the staff members called Pcars a "frustrating experience" where were you to say the same as above? Or the policy regarding Pcars is different?

What policy? I've never played Pcars, so it's not a frustrating experience for me. I have no idea whether it's a frustrating experience for the guy who wrote the article. I don't see any reason for him to lie about that though. Did he accuse the devs of making a cash grab, or suggest that anybody should boycott the product?

In fact, this kind of action is pretty common regarding some developers. No matter what, it´s all wonderful. The only demand you can freely do is for new content. Otherwise, you are invited to stop.

I don't see anything wrong in saying what you think. Nobody is saying that everything is wonderful. There is always room for improvement. But you should be prepared for people to question your reasoning. If you make statement like this one -

I have considerable first hand experience to know how long it takes to develop a UI, I doubt they are serious

when there is evidence of the WIP on the UI in another thread, you can reasonably expect people to find fault with you logic and to question your motives. I'm not the one spouting lies and presenting them as "facts".

 

[Case_]

Is this directed at me? Where did I say the business model was a stunning success?

Neither of us said anything close to this. But, you know...

 

[MarcG]

There's been thousands of individual downloads (read Purchases) of the RF2 DLC, (Sebring, GTE, GT3 etc), anyone can take that as an interpretation of whether they're selling well or not but the only true people who would know is the Devs themselves, not a vastly minor minority on an internet forum!