Game is getting worse by the update; now unplayable.

Wish I could +1 your post there... I'm glad that graphics aren't the primary focus! Some other 'sims' out there being developed may look nice but their vehicles are horrible to drive which is the most important factor in any 'sim'!

Unfortunately open/public beta's have pro's and con's when it comes to peoples expectations, I often wonder what percentage of lost business this equates to and whether its a worthwhile tradeoff?

I know that this will be an awesome sim!

 

@ Tim,

Okay, you said something like this before, but now I get it better. As I translate to my own field of expertise;
you're building a race car engine and trying to make it better; changing pistons, crankshaft, camshaft and so on.
While making it faster, you let people try out the power.
The engine is not running okay, but tuning it after each change, is a lot of work and you can't put that time and effort in.
As the engine has enough power, you make it run proper.
The other way around would have resulted in a nice running engine with no horsepower.

As I understood before, there would be SOME development on the performance; not a priority, but some, more to the last bit.
But as I understand now; it could go either way and is not important right now.

Do I get it right now?

If I do, I don't mind that than, now I understand.
But as for me; I'm just sad. Doesn't really matter, I'm just one of the few and should be patient then.
But you don't mind if I'm out for reporting bugs in this build as I can't play it whatsoever? I just go back to 90 for now, 101 has no use for me or for ISI for me to test it.

 

If people leave a title for good while it is still being developed, then they are being a little silly in my opinion. Of the titles that I have beta tested, 75% changed dramatically just prior to release. The fact that a gold date has yet to be set, and no mention of any build being a release candidate suggests that we may see the same thing here.

When I sign up, or in this case pay, to participate in a beta, I understand that everything is in a state of change and not to expect anything to remain as it was when I started the sim up for the first time. About the only thing that could make me abandon a title completely during development would be serious lack of respect from the dev team, and I have yet to see that with ISI as far as rF2 is concerned. This being my first experience with ISI I can't say how this compares to other titles they have worked on.

All I can say is if the sim doesn't meet your needs right now, be patient and see where it ends up. You might just be passing up one of the best sims to come. Only time will tell for certain.

 

I really appreciate the time you've taken to write that post. Current way of development has its pro's and cons and I've not lost my faith in this company to achieve the best it can, but that post just proves there's a lot more going on then a lot of us think.

Thanks

 

I do recognize the difference, I'm only saying that FPS being solid and free of stutters, the rest of SIM can be evaluated and developped in a better way (mainly physics aspects).

 

Off course I'm not bailing out on this one, but it really comes down to my trust in ISI; what's to say that when I never was able to play the game right in a handfull of beta versions, I will be in the gold one?

I know they are going to finetune the performance, but seeing how very bad this one has become; only a miracle can help out here!
Never once has anyone from ISI asked me in a topic about it, just to get a headstart for when it's on the table.
And if you do want a guy that's crying his eyes out because of how crappy and unplayable this game is; I'm your man!
Think a bit of research is in order, even now.

To make my point; you guys trust in ISI, that's okay, but think back: RF1, the AI........never seen worse AI than in that one!
Would be fixed.......in which patch was that?? There was a fix, but worthless. Even now, in this one, the AI started off with that same behavior........ Just saying; nothing (good) was done about that.
Tell me I'm wrong........

If I'm the only one not being able to play this version; that's okay with me, as long as it's just this version.......but coming gold and I'm still not able; I don't want to get things like "well, you should have rang the bell before" or "well, you're the only one, sorry for you".

But as I learned here; you may not say these things because you might agonize a mod and get some very arrogant feedback, saying you don't get it at all, don't understand anything and implying you're stupid; that's what I did learn......

Sorry, my hopes are not really high guys.
Counting the times that someone really has been helped here on this forum on a SERIOUS problem......by a mod.......

 

Wim

I don't know if you have read this from the "getting started thread", but i thought i'd post it anyway.

These are words that Tim wrote awhile ago, so it seems that any one of us can have and will have problems at anytime.I know this dosen't help your situation but it's there in black and white, and i do hope that future builds work for you.

 

Hi Bryan,

Yes, you're right. I did read that and expected the game to be bad sometimes, but not in a straight line downhill; seems there must be a wonder to get it even right on my system and as I said; trusting ISI is the keyword here.....

 

Hiya Wim

I gather from reading some of your posts that you are not feeling to clever (hope you get better soon).
Perhaps you need to take some time out mate, atleast until you are feeling better in yourself, you know
it could be something your overlooking because your not well, but like i said i hope you get better soon.

 

Navigator,

If these problems you describe were IsI's fault, I would expect that more of us would be having the same or similar problems.

The fact is; we're not.

I have logged onto other people's computers to trouble shoot their game for them.

Most of the time I have them up and running in just a few minutes.

Others... well all my time was wasted because what their computer really needs to just be stripped and the OS reinstalled.

Unless your computer is running "top notch", you ARE going to have troubles, and you can't expect IsI to make up for a poorly running computer.

Install "TeamViewer", send me a PM with your "User ID" and password... and we'll work out a time when I can log onto your computer and check things out for you.

And... My faith is not in IsI, nor is it in myself...

Here to help,

Bryan

 

Take Birtwell's advise Wim...

 

Yes if anyone can sort it Bryan will...you can trust him, he's a good guy.

 

Nav

Cheer up, I know how you feel I had a nasty problem around/after the 101 update, turned out it was an hardware issue
At the time I was convinced it was build 101 (I gt suspicious when to my surprise no one else was moaning about the same thing)

Fps for me after going to build 101 went down by a small amount but That's understandable as HDR seems to work now so makes sense.

One frustrating thing is there seems to be inconsistency's between cars and tracks I think diferent version releases of tracks/cars have a rough optimisation to the build it was released in, one of the joys of beta testing hey.

I'm not sure what settings your running at and your pc spec looks fine but do try on the lowest settings 1st and step settings up,
There's bound to be a limit at some point, at gold (or closer to gold) when ISI are concentrating on optimisations across the board maybe we can then enjoy higher graphical settings.

I downloaded f1rft 2011 mod for rfactor -wow f1's on Monaco and it looks totally beautiful ! When I remember how rf1 used to look and what the earlier mods looked like there is no comparrison ( & I never used rf1 pre-released ), reverting back to your original sim is a good tactic sometimes during this beta process (-;

Try lowering your settings or in the meantime try rf1 (again?) for a while after posting your settings/spec in the problems section then retry/retest each build, I'm fairly confident good things are coming for rf2 .

Good luck

 

These are my settings, Afterburner settings are available from OSD icon, then click spanner icon and you can limit fps, but it should be same to set vsync to software, however I trust more to external app. If it is still causing that odd slowdown + showing lot of fps after slowdown/during it, then it must be some application or process running on background making issue, I can get that effect by running winamp 2.91 or task manager (even task manager is minimized).
View attachment 3613

View attachment 3614

View attachment 3615

View attachment 3616

View attachment 3617

This is the issue, but with new beta GFX driver and adjusted settings I haven't spotted that issue at all, but haven't yet tested with winamp running.

 

Bryan, I don't want to waste your time because my system is performing OK except for stutters which there also may be a fix for but not bad enough to bother me but in case it is important I am running a 5900 series on a pretty decent Alien machine about 2 yrs old. Anyway, do you have any guides or references to guides on getting PC to perform well, such as command line stuff, etc. like I've sen people tinkering with but is not documented as far as I know like the -fullproc in rf1 etc. Also I wonder if such a guide would help others also so that we are not reporting performance problems b/c our PCs not performing well overall and it is not rf2 fault. Also, And I believe this is related also, my PC keeps alt tabbing back to Win 7 desktop I. The middle of a race and that is driving (no pun) me crazy and seems to be worse with current build but I doubt it has anything to do with current build and I am not running any other programs, I.e. browser, etc. so I'm in game and system simply changes to desktop but not to another app or anything just the desktop. Clearly, there must be something causing this such as stupid Windows or Java update or something stupid like this so would love any tips you have because getting rid of these daemon (or whatever you call them) programs may also help performance. Any tips? Sorry for rambling...

 

this happen with me when i have antivirus schedule scan or that scan from some microsoft anti-spyware that i forget the name.

 

That is pain from modern automation, software is so helpful that it shoots user to leg so to speak.

I have XP and even from XP I have turned most automatic functions off, like indexing etc.

Antivirus works manually, no automatic updates or scans.

That is one of the big reasons why I'm still in XP, more modern OS tends to do things that I can do myself when I want, but they do it 'background' but often reason of odd behavior is those functions.

Killing every service that one does not need to do things one does on computer is good start for any issue, if rest is checked to be ok.

But I don't know if with modern OS you can actually get rid of all unneeded as things are so related to each other that maybe there is no chance to optimize it much?

I have Vista too, I did optimize it a bit, idle memory consumption was roughly halved, but certain things did not work too well after that and every update turns them back on.

Basic principle of computing has been that any thing that is on memory takes resources and adds to possibility of error, that has been forgotten completely and every piece of software adds more junk that potentially causes more issues, every software is checking updates and no matter what they say, they are not really aware of gaming situations. Making sure that nothing is doing anything automatically and periodically is first step, then kill all processes that are not needed, make sure they are not starting back up again, then getting rid of bloated useless software, like real player, there is real alternative for it which is easier for system overhead etc.

No magic tricks really, just making sure there is less stuff running, any eye candy fancy meters and sidebars off, all are potentially making issue as they are taking resources, best practice is turn everything off, then enable one by one and test after each to know what is causing issues.

But just because of efficiency and fast operation of OS I have win98 style windows and other graphical elements, I have even disabled show contents of window when dragging option, pointless eyecandy and for some reason there are lot less of issues, if I turn all bling on, there are odd hangs of windows sometimes when I work really quick, times waiting disk increase etc, so every bit of not used computing power can be used somewhere else, also it adds to kind of 'buffer' so if there is something that uses computing power, memory, disk, temporarily, I might notice it less or not notice at all as there is enough available power for what I'm doing and what ever computer does which it should really wait and do when I'm not doing it.

One of the most annoying things is icon cache generation in XP and it does it always when I start clicking something open, so there I wait that 3-5sec for icons to be generated again 'at background, so user hardly notices' as maker of software had it in their imagination.

But then again I'm not perhaps typical user, I navigate folders by keyboard mostly, just type beginning of folder, hit enter, type beginning of next enter, if I need to go back just need to hit backspace, a lot faster than with mouse, also one reason why I like XP, with Vista it takes so much longer to go from folder to another because way it works.

Anyway, that might give some insight to optimization and how to make computer perform fastest possible, no magic tricks, just basic maintenance, same thing with cars, well kept wins hands down badly customized

 

As far as tweaking your system to make sure it is running at it's best, here is a link from a guy that covers pretty much everything. http://www.tweakguides.com/TGTC.html On that page, click on the button that says download under the Windows version you have, not the one that says buy now and you will get a pretty detailed listing of things to do and how to do them for XP, Vista and Windows 7.

 

I disagree with that guide on few things (have quickly read few things for WinXP only), for example page file, you don't really gain anything by setting low and high limit to different sizes, but you will loose that time when windows adjusts page file, but when you set min and max to same size, it takes no time from windows to adjust page file and also page file does not get fragmented even partly when it is always same size. Of course it takes more space, but then again you would always need to have space of max page file available anyway.

For disk cache, setting that to services is useful especially if you end up using page file as that is lot of reads and writes, also it speeds up modding as you start and exit rFactor2 (upgades, tires, at least those still need restarting whole software) Also adjusting settings, loading tracks, exiting tracks etc is faster as that is again loading same stuff back and forth.

Those settings put on book seem to be quite typical safe settings that does not cause much harm for anyone, but are not tweaking to max performance on usage that for example I'm experiencing.

Say if you browse videos on youtube, still setting cache to background mode is better as for every page you need to load flash etc, again get lot better performance with setting differently from what guide suggests. If I don't remember wrong, it did affect to how much memory is allocated for cache and maybe how cache is cycled, background mode is similar to how more modern Windows versions work with their cache.

I don't know also why guide says that most recent drives come with SMART technology, I'm not quite sure, but I think that I had SMART at Pentium 3 era perhaps? I'm 100% sure that I have had such for over 10 years though.

Overall however I would say that guide is good starting point of beginners to get their system to some solid running level, also I like effort that is made to put stuff to single book and how it is available free and anyone having it useful should really support makers of guide as price is really small to get guide with pictures, it has been lot of work to put guide together so they have earned their money, imo.

It is just that I used to tweak Win 3.11 already, played with ram disks and disk cache softwares back then, made Win3.11 to start in two-three seconds and this was time before Win95. So I have had time to experiment things quite a bit and to find things that work best for my usage.

 

Thanks for the reply's guys.

It is undoable to adres all of you individual, so I pile it up here, okay?

Now as Brian, said; I'm not feeling to well...... I'm absolutely loaded with morphine and it makes me bitter sometimes.
So, sorry for some things I said that sounded a tad bitter or something like that. I can erase it now, but I'm not a coward and it would be hypocrite. I leave it and although it was "under influence"; I have to stand by my words as a man.

As for Bryan Birtwell's offer; I would like that very much.
I do have, however, a pretty fresh install of W7, specially build for this game, not even having an antivirus installed (just download things I did before and know there are no virus in there) and I know that's a bit stupid, but I just want to rule out those things.
I left the install as it was, updated, but not changing serious things.
But if there was to be a hardware problem, shouldn't it be there just as much in the previous builds?

As to all other advise; I look into that all asap, but am not able to sit behind the pc for that long at the time.