This is very interesting. I understand that depending the way the pilots enter in the server the lag happens or not. Is it ok? What i don't understand is what you say "people who come first time in the server" and "regular members", Coul you explain what are you refering to? Thanks
All of our members dont produce lag. Only newcomers do. Im pretty sure about it, we have seen it happening all the time. We had a passworded race, some members left during race with no lag at all, so we thought problem was solved. Next day, open day, we had races and when members left it was ok. When newcomers did there was this repeating in and out that stopped only with restarting weekend. As I know (perhaps you know better?) ISI is trying to fix it, they havent yet, so perhaps some additional info helps them.
how to become "regular member" in the server? Do you mean first time ever or first time in what time period?
I suppose first time ever. That is what we noticed anyway. All these people that produced lag I have not seen them before and Im almost every night in the server. Other members too came to the same conclusion.
How server differentiates between "old" player and fist-timer? Does it create a file somewhere with player names? I don`t think so.
Maybe if weekly builds would be released to some of the people within this forum, the testing would me of better quality. We need real advances and stable builds. Noel, How can you be sure next week the problem solving build will be released? If it is already solved, you should release the patch or the corrected files. I bet it will not be the only change and hence it could happen that the build you are planning to release doesn't finally pass your internal testing and leave us with the problem for at least another week. Doing that is among ither things a lack of respect to your customers Enviado desde mi GT-I9505 usando Tapatalk 2
You really should read Jeremy's Twitter page. Jeremey said the bug was fixed and passed internal testing and is released to the full test team and if this weeks tests go well it will be released next week.
I agree with you here. It would be nice if they took the code base from 228, patched just the lag bug and then did a special build just for that fix. Then they could go on developing new stuff (and most likely creating all new bugs). But I don't know how their dev environment is set up. This may not be as easy as it sounds.
Just confirms what i wrote. you have the solution but your program is more important than our needs. I will put it the other way. If this tests go wrong we will all be screwed another week more, but who cares about that? Sure isi doesnt. Tou already have our money Enviado desde mi GT-I9505 usando Tapatalk 2
So, payed users should never update to newer builds without fully testing for bugs themselves. Really, really???!! wth...
And people wonder why ISI doesn't spend more time communicating with their user base. It is so hostile it isn't worth coming here.
it's about as silly as putting a new track on the schedule without having tested it either... who's to blame?
And do you think hostility comes for free? or because we are tired of false promises. It is clear that you havent had to give explanations to any commu ity. You should know that comunities charge money to the members for online championships. At this state we cannot hold a serious championship. When championships cannot take place due to problems, it seems quite unfair to do so. And now we are guilty for not testing a tested build which is supposed to improve previous build. You nailed it there. Isi must feel the pressure or this development will be endless. If you expect me sitting here and wait you will be disappointed Enviado desde mi GT-I9505 usando Tapatalk 2
I think ISI must think from this point of view. We have bought a non beta program focused to online races, that as result of this bug, is useful only in offline mode. I supose that most of you think that using rFactor (1 or 2) only in offline mode is like throwing money out the window. Some leagues have opted for using rFactor2 and now we don't know what to do. We have pending the Montreal Race, without knowing when can do it because of the ISI's error. We know that ISI has the problem, more or less solved, but we don't. And we don't have the date of the new release. Do the pilots have to uninstall their build 228 and back to the 218? Do they have to do a backup of their userdata folder? Can they use the plr and controler files of the build 228 in the 218? Someone said that we have to test better the builds before use it in a league. I whould agree with him in an ideal world. The pilots race in different leagues. We have pilots from 5 or 6 leagues. If some leagues update the build and others no, what must the pilots do. I want to remind everyone that this is not a beta program. This error has provoked a big problem in our comunity. Is this our problem? YES it's a problem of the clients of ISI. Is it a problem of ISI? YES I think thak the clients of ISI deserve a better attention.
i install all my builds to the default "\rFactor2" location. when a new build is released, and before i install and test it, i rename my current install location: \rFactor_228 (example) now the new build will install to default location and be ready for configuring and testing. if test of newer build fails, i only have to delete it (or rename), rename the backup folder to default and all is returned to the previous build. this renaming method also works for switching between builds for leagues running different builds, using the build number in the folder name tag makes it easy to identify it quickly. takes only seconds to rename a folder.
Yes, i agree with you, but the problem is not mine. The problem is that there are 22 pilots in the league and it's almost impossible to control how they install their programs. Furthermore, it wouldn't be work of the league admins.