rFactor 2: The Big Interview (Part 2)

227
220
Multiplayer will draw in far more new users than solo play I think. I know they are focused heavily on getting the Multiplayer aspect working at the expense of solo racers. But the Multi still has lots of problems as well. Go over to the S397 forum and read the complaint message from a driver at the 24hr Le Mans race. They have much work to do. You might think you are being forgotten, or ignored, but in reality, it appears they don't have a large enough team to work on many of the broken solo racing issues until they finish the multi-player upgrades. Realize too, the UI, which is the core of all future updates is close to 2 years overdue. They can't proceed with much beyond new content until they get that dang-blasted UI re-worked.

I don't buy that multiplayer is the only way to bring more players in. A well polished offline experience could absolutely draw a ton of players in, especially since there are no real options in the sim market for an immersive offline experience.

For all the flak F1 games get they atleast deliver a well put together offline mode and most the userbase is almost always playing the offline career mode. Look at all the people begging for a simple custom championship mode for rF2. The sim racing market is craving a well put together immersive offline experience with a great driving experience. It would be nice if a developer went for that instead of trying to copy what iRacing is doing.
 
1,767
745
I don't buy that multiplayer is the only way to bring more players in. A well polished offline experience could absolutely draw a ton of players in, especially since there are no real options in the sim market for an immersive offline experience.

For all the flak F1 games get they atleast deliver a well put together offline mode and most the userbase is almost always playing the offline career mode. Look at all the people begging for a simple custom championship mode for rF2. The sim racing market is craving a well put together immersive offline experience with a great driving experience. It would be nice if a developer went for that instead of trying to copy what iRacing is doing.
There is no way to grow the user base. rF2 is on the wrong side of the coin. rF2 is the closest to simulation u can get. No bling...pure racing. For bling u go ACC, F1 2019 and Pcars. Soon Pcars 3...ehm, AMS2.
Bling games enough...pure simulation is very sparse.
 
I'd also like to see the possibility to set the AI strategy ourselves. It was possible in F1 challenge 99-02 (the first game using the same engine) to set the pit stop strategy of the AI cars and the tyres used in the track's .gdb file. You got far better dynamic racing with more overtakes when the cars weren't all on the same pitstop strategy. Chiming in on that is that the tyres the AI uses for the races aren't realistic. They qualify on hard tyres while I use supersofts. This is possibly something that is overlooked when talking about the AI.
 

BrunoB

Too much Goebbels
1,716
912
But then the 'permission' was revoked once iRacing was created and David Kammerer bought back his code from Sierra. IRacing did eventually allow the mod to once again be released, after the modders went to court, but some changes were required before that occurred.
(btw: one of the worst online races I have ever participated in was with that mod, I was a last minute replacement with very little experience with the car. I was mauled repeatedly by truly much faster drivers. The car needed repairs everytime I pitted. We finished quite high in the standings, but only because we kept our crippled car out there while the faster boys broke and quit.) ((somebody printed up a cd-rom case label for the mod, I've probably still got that in a box....somewhere...))
Lets not derail this thread too much Dave - but
1. The reason the orig GTP version (v1.0) was ordered to partly change the mod was mainly because the install didnt need NR2003 installed FIRST :)
2. and secondary because the v1.0 included a great roster of cars that could infringe some licence rights.
2. The lousy Kaemmer/iRacing court thing against a modder (Tim McArthur) had nothing to do with the GTP mod.

https://www.reddit.com/r/simracing/...ne_gtp_the_mod_papyrus_didnt_want_you_to_see/
 
I'd also like to see the possibility to set the AI strategy ourselves. It was possible in F1 challenge 99-02 (the first game using the same engine) to set the pit stop strategy of the AI cars and the tyres used in the track's .gdb file. You got far better dynamic racing with more overtakes when the cars weren't all on the same pitstop strategy. Chiming in on that is that the tyres the AI uses for the races aren't realistic. They qualify on hard tyres while I use supersofts. This is possibly something that is overlooked when talking about the AI.
If you think about it, you'll realize the GDB is absolutely the wrong place to put series-specific strategy rules. ISI got away with it in F1C because they only had one series (F1) to deal with.

Needs to go in that file which summarizes the series when you create it, can't think of the name right now (old age sucks in this regard).
 
If you think about it, you'll realize the GDB is absolutely the wrong place to put series-specific strategy rules. ISI got away with it in F1C because they only had one series (F1) to deal with.

Needs to go in that file which summarizes the series when you create it, can't think of the name right now (old age sucks in this regard).

It is, but it is how I remember how it worked with F1C (rFactor 0). In GP4 and other games you can set the pitstop strategy and the setup of the AI at the start of the race. That may work even better. An alternative is simply a file that comes with the mod. It'll just require a bit of editing, then.

I am just a little fed up with dumb and unrealistic AI decisions regarding strategy. It makes the game too easy imho.
 
150
511
There is no way to grow the user base. rF2 is on the wrong side of the coin. rF2 is the closest to simulation u can get. No bling...pure racing. For bling u go ACC, F1 2019 and Pcars. Soon Pcars 3...ehm, AMS2.
Bling games enough...pure simulation is very sparse.
Such logic! My brain hurts :confused:
 
199
144
I agree that if you buy all of the paid content you are spending more on that than on the game itself. I don’t see that as a problem though, none of this content is required to enjoy rFactor 2 and we don’t anticipate all our users to buy all our content. And we’re not the only racing simulation where your statement is true. Both in RaceRoom and iRacing, if you add up all the content and compare it to the base price of the game, the content is much more expensive than the simulation itself.
I don't see a problem with DLC ending up costing more than the game either, in fact, if the game is successful and complete,, then that is where DLC should take over. In the extreme cases we have two of the worst examples out there...RaceRoom and iRacing, which I have stopped supporting 3 years ago. (iracing would be a different story though if I were an online player)

The wages of most folks are stagnate, while inflation and worthless dollars buys us less. This is a trend that isn't going away, and is worldwide. The gaming industry is going to have to come to terms with this, and the most efficient and value oriented will be the most successful in the future. Buckle up.
 
I don't see a problem with DLC ending up costing more than the game either, in fact, if the game is successful and complete,, then that is where DLC should take over. In the extreme cases we have two of the worst examples out there...RaceRoom and iRacing, which I have stopped supporting 3 years ago.
Fun fact: If you add up the best priced options for getting all of the currently available DLC for both rF2 and Raceroom, the DLC currently available for rF2 is still almost twice the price of Raceroom Premium pack*, while Raceroom also offers a lot more cars and tracks as part of that content.

So why exactly is Raceroom one of "the worst examples" of "extreme cases"?

(*Excluding Steam/Summer sale discounts in both cases.)
 
199
144
Fun fact: If you add up the best priced options for getting all of the currently available DLC for both rF2 and Raceroom, the DLC currently available for rF2 is still almost twice the price of Raceroom Premium pack*, while Raceroom also offers a lot more cars and tracks as part of that content.

So why exactly is Raceroom one of "the worst examples" of "extreme cases"?

(*Excluding Steam/Summer sale discounts in both cases.)
Marcel used iRacing and Raceroom to make his point...I don't necessarily disagree with him either.

I understand that you are a big fan of RaceRoom and have been a defender of their pricing Martin, (which in part, is why you have responded to my post..no?) but like RF2, RaceRoom had the chance to succeed much like AC did, but chose high price DLC to make up for lack of sales volume instead of encouraging sales with lower price DLC while the spotlight and interest in racing games were at their highest levels. (This is also where crowdfunding and finding investors come into play, and are positive when creating software.)

So, I'm not sure at what point you came to appreciate R3E, but in the beginning, and for some time, they did not have "Premium Pack" and the costs of development (R3E desperately needed it) were put on the early supporters, and high priced DLC. If anyone wants to forget that, then they won't hear this argument, and fail to understand why the player count is so low. That said, they started to make better decisions in the last couple of years and it is showing in better gameplay, but their pricing model, design, (internet connection only) and the games age will always hold them back, and imho, doesn't have much if any, growing room.

So this is why I believe R3E is one of "the worst examples" to use as a measure of defending DLC pricing. Where to next? Train and plane simulators?

Know your market.
 
So your arguments are based on years old facts that are no longer relevant. Gotcha.

BTW let's make one thing clear - I am not defending Raceroom because I am a big fan of it (I wouldn't put it like that anyway, but let's just go with it). I am defending it simply because saying that it is somehow one of the worst examples of high price DLC and bad pricing just doesn't make a single bit of sense to me, considering the relevant facts (by which I mean the current ones, not years old ones). There's no "big fan" part in it, there's just the "being fair and as objective as possible" part.

Speaking of which, now you've added "the game's age" as something that will always hold them back...yet rF2 was first released pretty much at the exact same time.
 
150
511
rF2 is a pure PC sim, not a console clone. The rF2 engine is not created to have bling on the screen. Its made to replicate systems. That is simulation!
I don't know man... have you seen the latest PBR shader updates, plus what Marcel has mentioned about the coming updates to the track and onboard shaders?

Seems like bling is coming! Add another one to the arcade trash pile. Hopefully some team will come up with a 8bit color 320p resolution sim to save us. Now that will be pure simulation!
 

Are you on VR, Triple Monitors, Ultrawides or ... ?

  • VR

    Votes: 348 36.5%
  • Triples

    Votes: 172 18.0%
  • Ultrawide

    Votes: 206 21.6%
  • Single Screen / Other

    Votes: 227 23.8%
Top