any official final release date?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by williang83, Dec 11, 2013.

  1. stonec

    stonec Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,399
    Likes Received:
    1,488
    Well of course this is all speculation, but for a small team like ISI, I doubt they put significant resources in working on another game during the time they developed games for EA. Anyway, my point is that we are now close to the time from first release at which rFactor was 99% release-ready (last major patch came out 2 years and 2 months after release), while rFactor2 is, with an optimistic estimate, at least a year away from having the existing features in the game completed.
     
  2. Jamezinho

    Jamezinho Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's all taking far too long. Nearly two years in and I don't feel the sim is as far along as I was expecting. Too many things are buggy, broken or yet to be implemented. Silly issues like popping under-car shadows and grass/gravel entering the cockpit should have been fixed long ago.

    UI is atrocious.

    Nearly two months since the last content dropped, and two months between builds if we get one by Christmas.

    The modding scene is pretty barren.

    As Empty Box said earlier, this game can be so, so good at times but so disappointing all too frequently.
     
  3. Alesi

    Alesi Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    469
    Likes Received:
    7
    +++
     
  4. realkman666

    realkman666 Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    919
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree, but for the last point, it's too be expected. More complex, not finished, more work needed. Few people have the talent to make a Longford or a Croft. Look at all the crap for rF1, is that what you want? It will be the same for AC, even if they release decent tools.
     
  5. Jamezinho

    Jamezinho Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    0
    Certainly not. I stay well clear of the quick conversions.

    I hear what you are saying and agree: rF2 is more complex and less able modders will fall by the wayside. Still a worry though, for a game that relies heavily on modded content.
     
  6. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest


    By doing a silent official release ISI can charge people an additional $12 a year for them to be able to go online while the title continues this beta thing.
     
  7. Jamie Shorting

    Jamie Shorting Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2013
    Messages:
    2,628
    Likes Received:
    3

    Lol. Obvious troll is obvious but I'll respond anyway. I dont have the lifetime and haven't been charged yet. Got rf2 the first hour it was released.
     
  8. Noel Hibbard

    Noel Hibbard Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,744
    Likes Received:
    40
    Goes back farther than that.
     
  9. UOPshadow

    UOPshadow Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2012
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    3
    They totally should revamp the UI.
     
  10. realkman666

    realkman666 Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    919
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just hope groups like Reiza, MAK and URD will start making complete series. I don't mind the scattered content, but a full series would attract more people. And please, GSC for rF2. Even a port, anything!
     
  11. Jamezinho

    Jamezinho Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,256
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen.
     
  12. Guimengo

    Guimengo Guest

    F1 2000, I think.

    When you first got it was in the official beta period where you'd have 18 months of multiplayer post official release. It's not trolling when it's a fact, Jamie. You still have about 15 months to go.
     
  13. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,345
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    Nope. That's plain wrong.
     
  14. Noel Hibbard

    Noel Hibbard Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,744
    Likes Received:
    40
    Actually I think it goes back to SCGT which was released in 1999 if I recall. Who knows how long the engine was in development before SCGT was released.
     
  15. williang83

    williang83 Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    287
    Likes Received:
    153
    Ok first of all I clearly left intent that I simplified the vision about “three phases ALPHA->BETA->Final Release”, but honestly usually it does not go far from there (at least in common companies who try to work as best as possible, since there is a whole university topic and a lot of books made of years and years of experience from programmer from the 80's up to current days ...... ).
    Just to describe my own experience I had the chance to work on different projects small or big, TI or end-user software. My last one was for a mobile company which required my company to develop the system used under the grounds that would be used by them to manage their HUGE customer base since they provided service in 4 different country. This project suffered from constant new/change request from the company. To sort this project out we did what most companies who really care about software quality does which is work on limited features per build. So before to be released each BUILD went from alpha (each programmer had access to the shared code and could work on a local version to test their own code), to beta (most of time called just test phase where public or not some people has the task to find flaws, the difference is that interns know what they do, so they create specific case tests, public testers just use the software until the find a bug to be reported), and for last but not least the build get released. Sometime those phases are called differently, sometime someone add some sub phase but the core idea remains the same (BUT SOMETIME SOME SMART #$% DECIDE THAT IT IS BETTER TO SKIP OR NOT PAY ATTENTION TO THEM). So usually even before to start working on a new BUILD (with new features) it is a good idea to develop the actual build at 100% (unless we have a urgent request) or else you will find yourself creating code above unfinished codes and in the best scenario you will extends development time, in the worst you will find that when finished a lower layer you find everything that rely on that layer screwed up.

    That said expect for the UI (which is totally copy and paste from rFactor 1) there is not much finished here (forget about bugs that are “normal”).

    To those who say that GSC 2013 is a rF 1.5 I would say that you might be right but under my point of view rF 2 is more 1.5 too because I see no huge improvements in all point of view. Yeah I know that most gamers of these days are used to accept games with just some update called as new version, with a bumped price sold as totally new product…..and they are happy about that too….

    To the smart guy who said "80% (at least) of the users doesn't know how to use it properly", i would answer are you happy about this? Good for you that you feel so hardcore. Why don't you dive inside the real word racing since you are so expert? I feel sorry for you for this childish comment made of well build thoughts and details (cons or pro).

    Again, not complaining about the product itself (although it might seem), just wondering about the path. I afraid that we will end up with a rFactor 1.5 (better physics, rain, better tyre engine and a better netcode), which would totally different from what i was/am waiting for.
     
  16. Noel Hibbard

    Noel Hibbard Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,744
    Likes Received:
    40
    williang83, in your eyes, what would bring it up to 2.0 status? Do they need to emulate more aspects of racing like driving the car carriers between tracks and setting up the temp garages and stuff like that? If RealRoad, massive physics improvements, totally new tire model, improved AI, HDR, improved driver swap (damage transfer ect), automatic content downloads, automatic skin xfers, virtual vehicles, new content management system, ability to rejoin a race after a dico and weather aren't worth more than 0.5 then man I can't imagine what your vision of 2.0 would be. I am not even taking into account the content that comes with rF2 Vs. rF1.

    BTW, the GUI in rF2 isn't a cut and paste from 1.0. I am not just talking about OSC file changes but the underlying engine has had some improvements.

    Again, do you really own rF2?
     
  17. realkman666

    realkman666 Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    Messages:
    919
    Likes Received:
    0
    Instead of insulting people who speak the truth, that people don't know how to use rF2, you might try to accept that development is slow. rFactor 2 is one of the most complex games to setup and to understand I've ever seen, so it's very likely that most people can't get it to work fine. It's still unpolished and buggy, and also lacking documentation. This is all true and that explains why people can'r get into it easily. Until there's more polish and an improved structure, it will be so, no need to be an asshole about it. It's simple facts, it's not about feeling hardcore.

    It's rF2 because of its novel features, while GSC is rF1.5 because it's a very polished and improved rF1. I'd rather have the new unpolished features that come with all sorts of problems, but if others prefer the easy-to-use older stuff, I will not call them names. I understand that they want something different than I do.
     
  18. Noel Hibbard

    Noel Hibbard Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,744
    Likes Received:
    40
    GSC is rF1.0 with a really good mod and RealFeel preinstalled. I don't see how GSC is worthy of being labeled 1.5 (even though it brings absolutely nothing new to the engine) yet rF2 isn't worthy of 2.0.

    Oh wait I forgot, GSC uses the rF1 build that was used by Lexus for the IS350 game which is identical to rF1 only it added support for 8 forward gears (the IS350 has 8 forward gears).

    So the feature list for rF2 isn't worthy of 2.0 yet the addition of 8 forward gears (also included in rF2 BTW) to rF1 is good enough to bring it up to 1.5.

    There is some seriously flawed logic here.
     
  19. Nimugp

    Nimugp Registered

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    140
    As said before, this is wrong. I don't know precisly how it is, but the time started when beta started, and the 6 extra months was to cover the beta period, and would be lenghtened if beta would last longer. It turned out it did, and as far as I know (not sure, since I'm on lifetime so didn't really pay attention to it) it was lenghtened, and if I'm not mistaken it was lenghtened a bit more even then beta period (I believe then if you were here at the beginning, that you would end up with about 2 1/2 years).

    I do have to add though, that for me this wasn't 100% clear in the beginning either.

    I do recall [MENTION=1]Tim Wheatley[/MENTION] mentioning quite some time ago, that we did receive rFactor 2 at a stage way before rF1 was released. So the comparison between the two isn't really valid.

    PS: 99% sure I didn't post wrong info, but please correct me if I'm wrong ;)
     
  20. stonec

    stonec Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,399
    Likes Received:
    1,488
    Well, rFactor was released as a multiplayer demo only in November 2004 with minimal content, in terms of features it lacked a lot more than rFactor2 at beta release. August 2005 the "full game" was released and January 2007 the last major patch saw daylight (one further patch was added in late 2007, only stating "security fixes" and "performance improvements"). My feeling back then was that the progress was very quick and almost all features were finished or brought to a good state already at the end of 2006. With rFactor2, for a reason or another, this is not the case. Increased complexity of game, less developers working on the core game, other difficulties? We can only speculate, but the progress feels a lot slower with rFactor2.
     

Share This Page