Jeremy Miller tweets (Senior Programmer at ISI)

Too right -- without stability a sim is nothing. Imagine a 24 hour server and dozens of drivers running a Le Mans race and it pops to desktop in hour 22. For me, rF2 is already great, but any further improvements - particularly when you are working on the core MP code which is what it seems the latest builds are focusing on - then taking time to sort the issues are good.

Come to think of it, if ISI could hold off the build until after the the SimHQ Sebring 12 hours i'd be a v happy bunny (**...dives for cover from forum users...**)

 

Oh the joys of being a developer right Lazza? As a developer this thread just aggravates the crap out of me. People have no clue what is involved with developing software. I love it at my job when my boss says:
Boss:"well can't you just move this over here and then look for this and that and then show me this... shouldn't that be easy?"
Me: "No not really because.... well it isn't worth the time to try to explain it to you"
Boss: "so how long will it take then"
Me: "I am not real sure"
Boss: "Well just take a guess"
Me: "3 years"

Hahaha.

 

This is an easy question to answer. Just read this page from bottom to top.:
http://rfactor.net/web/rf2/devscorner/rfactor2-build-notes/#198

Keep in mind that not everything a developer does makes it into the dev log. Often time you will spend a whole day fixing a bug just to break another and then fix the other bug and create another and then at the end of the day you have finally fixed the origional bug without breaking anything else. How would you like to read a dev log like this:
-Fixed bug 1 but created bug 2, 3 ,4
-Fixed bug 3 but re-broke bug 1
-Fixed bug 2, 4 and 1

There is more to development than meets the eye and ISI is a very small team. Give them some slack.

 

@Noel

Cool if we technicians would hold back your car for longer time than neccessary you would cry, especially after done a payment for the repair. Or better it needs 1000's of afterworks because of tons of mistakes. Yes every job is diff but leads to same result if the consumer is not happy with the result.

 

Thats the reason why i am disappointed and why I think the development will take 3 or 4 years if it ever happens. Unexpected things happen in any project not only software ones

Enviado desde mi GT-I9505 usando Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

We should do DA (Developers Anonymous) meetings for frustrated developers to release the frustration and talk about our feelings and such.

 

I see what your saying but the difference is your car is a necessity the game is not. You also bought into a beta... and for a ridiculously low price and the game works for the most part. And who are you to say the developers are taking "more than necessary" time to fix bugs? Not sure if you are a mechanic but even a mechanic will tell you that things don't always go as planed and take longer than expected. But for the most part you can predict how long it will take to fix a car. The same can't be said for fixing bugs in software.

 

I have to agree with Noel.

With developing it's rarely as easy as saying "OK guys, we're at 1, get to 2 as soon as possible"

When you start at 1, then 1.1 gets in the way. But to make 1.1 function correctly 1.1.2 needs to work correctly but in doing that you need to alter 1.2.1 so you need to add 1.1.3 to make 1.1.2 work correctly.

Granted, I'm only a student still working towards my BSc, but I've even had enough exposure to development to understand it's never easy. Especially when working with things so complex and new as this. Frankly, the thought that this is the field I'd love to go in to both scares and excites me lol.

 

@Noel

I see but a consumer and non pro not, as me as well, just the result. Me isn't a mechanic but a master of those and teacher for trainees. I know something about consumer as a business man myself in the past. Beta or not, fundamental things should be complete, at least after Beta.

 

Not to mention, rF1 had tons of bugs in it's final state and it was still a very heavily used sim with minimal complaining. rF2 has already fixed some of these bugs.

The only thing I can agree with everyone on is the join/leave bug. That build shouldn't have been released. It is unfortunate that adding new code to allow race rejoins means there is an added risk for other MP related bugs. I suspect you guys will see far fewer updates going forward. But people will bitch about that too.

 

What fundamental thing are you referring to that isn't complete enough to race? You make it sound like you paid for a game that doesn't work at all.

 

@Noel #627

Because there where not much choice available and if it was a underlying ISI engine. Now those one inspired by it dev mostly there own Engine and we have much more choices. It was a diff time and competitors are not sleeping. Its more risky today. There is no room for half things anymore. Game wise rf2 loose, its just the physic which dominates atm.

 

They were and they are.

 

Agree its enough to race.

 

Indeed, as i can see your touch on this software and i'm happy you are onboard.

 

^^ Noel its not complete in the way ppl would like it to be to move across to rf2 from rf1 from everything i have read. Maybe that's what he is referring too. i have not played rf1 since rf2 was first available have watched it blossom since then. Yes its slower than 1 would like on the build side but for content you cannot complain.

 

Do you know what usually happens when a software development team is behind on time and has a strict deadline (which happens most of the time btw )? They drop features. They write ugly code. All sorts of bad things happen. I've heard of a 'development time rule' once, take the estimate of the amount of time you expect a programming project to take, double it, and add three months to get the actual. Also, the 90-90 rule: "The first 90 percent of the code accounts for the first 90 percent of the development time. The remaining 10 percent of the code accounts for the other 90 percent of the development time." As much as you might want the development to go faster, it isn't technically feasible. It's kind of like a baby in it's womb. It will take 9 months no matter how much you complain, and if you force it out earlier, there will be severe problems with it. Though for whatever reason people seem to understand that a baby takes 9 months to make unlike their understanding of software.

 

@coops

Yes i have experienced the same that people keep on using rF1. Not that is a bad thing but why is that. It shouldn't be, rf2 had have to blow everyone away after such a long time between the version. Than rf2 comes out with dx9, why is that, and why a stonage dx engine used from Unreal to the limit is still not fine ?

Don't get me wrong i just don't get it.

 

See I have to disagree... The game is just as complete if not more complete than rF1 is. The hold up personally is content. But I think people are going to be very surprised at how rapidly content will start to surface as the ball starts rolling.

My league would jump on rF2 if there was a more complete field of cars. We do multi-class endurance racing and rF2 is already ahead in that department. One bug in rF1 for example which affected endurance racing was that damage didn't transfer on a driver swap. This has been fixed in rF2. Take note that this bug was fixed yet it isn't in the dev logs. Another example of how much work goes on that most people never know about.

 

+1!