Funding vs timeline clarity

Discussion in 'Wish Lists' started by torig, Jan 3, 2019.

  1. torig

    torig Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2019
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    23
    Hi,

    I am very new to simracing. Because I invested a lot of time (hours for days on end) in research I found out that rfactor 2 has the most accurate physics. I learned of the situation with ISI and Studio 397, read roadmaps and watched videos.

    Would it be possible to share actual product dev roadmaps on calendars, clarifying eg feature A is a 4-months effort (if all goes well) planned to run from then to then?

    Secondly, it’d be great if we could pre-buy a DLC, vote for upcoming features or help raise funds (crowdfunding, equity, or a subscription-based model) to (help) accelerate development. It’s kind of bizarre to a relative newcomer how much negativity is out there about new content being released - in a herculean effort by a relatively small group of motivated and skilled people.

    It either doesn’t tick someone’s wishlist (making it rubbish), is too expensive (7-10-15 bucks, really?), or isn’t ‘perfect yet’, or the ‘wrong priority’.

    I just wish there were a mechanism to help ensure more focused development which in turn is profitable and ensures longevity, but also offers more homogeneous content quality. Seeing graphical fidelity improve is fantastic (as that’s what led me to discard rfactor 2 initially, before the research) but at the same time it’s a very slow process and the content will be this mixed bag...
     
    Korva7 and bwana like this.
  2. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,345
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    The new UI started development in 2017 I think, late 2017 there was an early screenshot or two. Mid last year it was slated for late '18 release. Latest roadmap they're 'confident' it will materialize in 2019. No indication of which part of 2019.

    I'm not taking a shot at S397, but something that seems to be often overlooked by users (and it happened with rF2 in 2012) is that you can't really tell how long something is going to take, before you do it. Only if it's something you'd done before, and you're just doing it in a new place/environment, so you know what steps are required and how long each will usually take, can you really have a good guess at it. The new UI we knew they were building from scratch using a new system, presumably they've found better or different ways to do some things, then incorporated some other ideas they had (like competition infrastructure), probably reimagined some of those other ideas when it started to come together in the UI, maybe came up with a new idea or two they then had to plan and find space for, etc.

    So it's not easy to give even rough timelines, and when you do - and then fail to make it - you are open to criticism.

    We have the monthly roadmap now, which varies in content and quality, but it's giving some idea of what they're up to. We didn't have that before, so that's at least an improvement even if we probably still lack clarity on what areas of the game will be developed in future, known bugs (or quirks) that will be fixed/improved, etc.

    You're new to simracing, and you're all keen and stuff, and that's good. But you really shouldn't expect to see some massive overall improvement with rF2 in the next month, few months, perhaps year or two. We should have a new UI, I hope it will do more than just replace the existing UI and it sounds like it will, and we can certainly hope we will see some new and improved features coming in the next year or two.

    Funding is another kettle of fish, but I'd be concerned you hope that if 'we' throw some more money their way we'll have a load of new features in 3 months. Sim racing is a slow progression.

    rF2 is the best at what it does well, it's getting better in some areas it lags behind in (graphics, soon UI), but in some ways it's also hardly changed in 6 years. It also tends to look like a technology demo, with some new feature implemented and shown off and then not implemented game wide, or built on, for years... by which time other games are doing basically the same thing.

    Finally re some old content, I believe when licenses to the content expire they can be limited on what they can do with it. So homogenous content may never happen, it's just a product of content that's released across years.
     
  3. torig

    torig Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2019
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    23
    Thanks for this detailed response.

    Re the first monthly roadmap, I understand what you are getting at. However, just do a google image search on the word roadmap. In product development you typically have assumptions around how long a development activity will take. Otherwise managing and allocating resources would be impossible. If you can’t budget resources - it’s a commercial enterprise after all - how will you ever have a chance to recoup and profit on your investment?

    I get that sharing such detail based on assumptions opens one up to criticism, but sincerely believe that seeing all parallel activity that’s ongoing and planned could actually reassure the community more.

    Re being keen, absolutely, but doesn’t mean I expect change within the next 3 months. Actually having read up on the UI, on the DX11 changes, PBR coming, new content, I’m pretty pleased that in such a short time good progress has been made already. With regards to waiting one, two years, the latter timeline is just too long. The very best physics engine is all but dead. Like I said, I had to do a lot of reading to fall in love with rF2 (or at least give it the chance to charm me) instead of just jumping into iracing or AC.
    It needs to be in a state to compete more with these for ‘attention’ - though especially for AC they cater to different audiences.

    Re the funding, and your next paragraph, I’m especially worried about the demo-like quality as you describe it. I have no issues with change taking a year, year and a half, but then it needs to be a massive jump up in a lot of areas. Marcel highlighted the history and futufe at his DevCon presentation, in that presentation he indicated that just licensing content could take 3-6 months to strike a deal. But you’re right that maybe I am making an assumption they are resource constrained while that may not be the case. With such a small user base, no recurring revenue, I’d think that any change needs to be well measured. It would be good to hear the studio’s perspective on funding vs plans to recoup.

    Fair enough re expiring licenses. That again is a function of funding though. How important is it to ship with that content, what’s the cost to renew and update and can that investment be recouped?
     
  4. Seven Smiles

    Seven Smiles Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,099
    Likes Received:
    1,152
    1. No, speaking as a software engineer, you can estimate how long something is going to take fairly accurately and as you actually implement bits of it the estimates get better.
    2. They have done it before, though I think much of it came from rF1. Even if the personnel have changed the team should have a pretty good idea of what's involved.
    3. They could have released at least a partial UI using the new architecture.
    4. Content Manager (for AC) is an excellent (partial) UI written by a modder, part-time.
    I really struggle to see what is taking so long. A good UI is hard to design (but the design ideas have been around for decades) but pretty straightforward to code.
     
  5. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,345
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    @Seven Smiles I'm sure that is often true. That begs the question of why, as you said. Presumably they aren't sitting around twiddling their thumbs, and the timeline has changed, so they haven't found it easy to estimate.

    Time will also tell how much of what they've been doing is 'just' UI and how much is functionality, which definitely can take longer (and have changing targets over time).
     
  6. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    12,345
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    I feel like you're describing an internal roadmap, what we see is the public one. I'm sure they have more specifics than we see - feature-wise they have to, or they'd be turning up to work every day and throwing darts at a wall deciding what to work on - and I'm not sure as users we have the right to see those.

    Maybe they just don't want to say if they've spent most of a month not actually doing much on what we're waiting for, but instead working on a project that provides them some extra income for the future.

    Either way, progress hasn't been fast. dx11 and other 'recent' developments have been good but not lightning fast if you've been here 2 years plus, so as a newcomer I'd again suggest just cooling your heels and not getting too excited. But hey, hopefully my pessimism is unwarranted :p
     
  7. Emery

    Emery Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,035
    Likes Received:
    1,654
    Sharing detail not only opens one up to criticism, it also tips your hand to your competitors. Rather than setting your expectations with what you'd like to see, compare S397's roadmap to what the competitors are sharing!

    As for licenses, it is not only a matter of money, but also what is available to be licensed. The obvious example was when Porsche was locked into an exclusive license for many years, so it wasn't even possible to license them until recently. At the other end of the licensing spectrum, there are possibly brands that have no desire to be licensed or they place such stringent requirements that pursuing the license is not worthwhile (suppose they insist models must have 500k polygons).
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2019
  8. torig

    torig Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2019
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    23
    p
    I don’t mean this cynically, but what competitors ? rF2 can’t be compared to AC or iracing as if on equal footing. rF2 can’t match them in terms of sales or recurring revenue (1.4+ million copies sold of AC; over 98k active iracers), available or licensed content, “2019 look and feel”.
    I just wish they could compete given the great physics and FFB.

    I wonder if they shouldn’t actually have better opted for an alternate course: to become the de facto engine for sim racing, via licensing, to only work on that as well as performance.

    Fair for vehicles but then they could focus on tracks instead?
     
    Louis likes this.
  9. torig

    torig Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2019
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    23
    You’re not making me more optimistic :(
    They can filter out whatever they want but at least show interdependencies of a few things that are being worked on.
     
  10. MarcG

    MarcG Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    6,854
    Likes Received:
    2,234
    Tracks are no different, some charge more than others to be licensed which may put them out of reach.
     
    Seven Smiles likes this.
  11. patchedupdemon

    patchedupdemon Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2017
    Messages:
    1,602
    Likes Received:
    1,151
    From a developer standpoint the less said the better, specially when they can’t keep to their own internal deadlines.
    There’s missing deadlines and then there’s missing them by years, I’m great believer in S397 but they make themselves look amateur when they grossly underestimate develment, and then when they do release they release with blatant issues and bugs
    My wallet has been open so far but with every release of content I’m getting worried about the quality of release
     

Share This Page