ISI Planning to convert RF2 from DX9 to DX10 or DX11 like iRacing did?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Marcel van der Linden, Aug 19, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. hardtohandle

    hardtohandle Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    54
    All I see is the same things getting talked about over and over, year in and year out. Everybody is wasting their time with every word they type. I've done my share of that too.

    We know ISI are slowing dev down already, so I can only expect none of these major developments like dx or vr are going to happen for rf2. Whether or not there is going to be an rf3 who knows?

    ISI should just make a loose road map available, this super secret approach is too secret, when people wait for years for something and no sign of anything and not even any suggestion that it will even happen, that's when people get angry and it's probably not all that surprising.

    Obviously some kind of basic simple non committal road map is the answer here, it won't change nothing on the ground but people will feel a little bit more informed and that will go a long way. I am not talking about giving cast iron guarantees and dates, that's stupid and will not work, but they could do something. Like drive train for instance, people waiting years and only news is the sound of silence, that irritates people. If they could only say "oh yeah drive train... it will be done... in rf2... one day..." that's a hell of a lot better than nothing and I'm sure the same applies to dx and vr etc.
     
  2. jkn87

    jkn87 Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'm one of those who used to be in this forum everyday and play rf2 100% my only SIM but since I moved to VR and realized isi is not interested in this matter... I slowly stopped entering the forums and of course I cannot play rf2. I'm moving to AC. I still consider rf2 superior physics wise...but no VR and cartoon graphics...are important too
     
  3. Ronnie

    Ronnie Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    296
    Wait wait wait. You want cartoonish graphics?
     
  4. dadaboomda

    dadaboomda Registered

    Joined:
    May 15, 2016
    Messages:
    709
    Likes Received:
    201
    We want better graphics of course, but if you have a good pc, graphics are beautiful. We allways want better, that's normal. But move to ac because of "bad graphics", I really don't understand !
     
  5. Ernie

    Ernie Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    215
    Even modder consider to drop rF2 for their future modding projects. And pixsim isn't the only one. There were modding groups which had already left the rF2 platform, and i'm afraid some more will follow.

    A racing sim is not all about driving. It's the immersion. Not for nothing simracers around the world are constantly upgrading their simracing equipment with DD wheels, highend pedals, motion, triplescreen, etc. One of the reasons for that is to get the driving experience as nearly as possible to the real driving. And VR is the next bis step to get more and more immersed.
     
  6. Magus

    Magus Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2012
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    515
    Yes. it's a real shame ISI are currently looking the other way, with regards to VR. I also understand their predicament, as an overhaul of the graphics engine in reality is like releasing a new rf2.5. Do they do that or move on to rf3 or whatever the new project may be.

    I think if ISI do make another racing simulation, their business model will be completely different. PAID CONTENT. PAID CONTENT & more PAID CONTENT. All the other racing games have shown how successful this model is.

    I just wonder if a kick starter program was started by ISI to develop 'rf2.5' with DX11 & VR support, to just include all their own current content (any mods & 3PA are welcome to update their mods obviously), I wonder what kind of budget they would need to implement that? Is this something that has been talked about by ISI or ever considered?

    Rf2 is one of the best out there, no doubt, shame to see it lose support from the community.
     
  7. stonec

    stonec Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Likes Received:
    1,402
    As far as I understand, DX11 may indeed risk breaking mod compatibility, at least if it was ported properly so that shaders etc. were updated as well. I wouldn't oppose of mod updating though, most people only drive ISI content anyways. It's not a big sacrifice for the added benefit. The other option would be keep DX9 and implement VR as in LFS. From what I heard, this VR implementation in LFS only took a couple of weeks to code. Maybe it's not perfect, but if it works with Oculus Rift CV1 as well (not sure about that) ISI should seriously consider it. If it's really only a few weeks of work, there is nothing to lose in trialing it.
     
  8. T1specialist

    T1specialist Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2012
    Messages:
    237
    Likes Received:
    163
    When it comes to business models I don't think simply selling content in itself is enough. You want content that is popular and well made. You want your pricing structure to make sense for the customer. When it comes to cars this means that some portion of the cars you want to sell need to have a name that makes people buy it. Something like Kodi zr or Howston dissenter will never fill your pockets in the same way something like a ferrari, bmw or porsche badge will. Similarly with tracks if your content is not laser scanned it is harder to sell it. Spa will always outsell Plumberton park fantasy raceway. No matter how amazing extreme quality the latter is. This does not mean rf2 content quality is lower. Not at all. And even a fictious car can have super realistic physics. A fictious car can look just as good. Just like a real one can have poor physics. But when you are selling stuff you want your stuff to have what is the basic expectation. With cars I think that expectation is real cars with real licenses. With tracks it is laser scanned. Personally I'm fine with well made fantasy content but I know does not create the same desire in people as real content.

    The new automobilista dlc is interesting thing to look at how it goes. Their cars are licensed but their tracks are not laser scanned. At least not that I know of. Will that change how desirable people see that content? Does the price match the expectation? Does the expectation match the content? I have no doubt that content is well made. Good physics and good graphics. But to release a dlc track in 2016 that is not laser scanned. Financially it is cheaper of course to make content without having to pay for laser scans but I think it will also financially sell less. Licensed content and laser scanning is always a risk and if the content doesn't sell it can ruin your company. But if it does sell it tends to sell a lot.

    In the past fantasy car content has been proven to be a good seller though. Live for speed has moved a lots of copies while relying mostly on fantasy cars and tracks. However that was 10 years ago. Nowadays lfs is trying to sell one laser scanned track for 12£. I don't know how that works for them. Maybe it does. In the end lfs sells dlc packs. First you have the free demo (same as raceroom for example). Then you have S1 dlc that comes with some number of cars and tracks. S2 dlc is more cars and tracks. S3 dlc is just one track at the moment with no promise of more coming but it is still called S3 package. S1 and S2 especially did sell well and at one point lfs had the largest amount of online players. Their business model suffers a little bit from the common dlc issues (there are people with S2 and S3 which fractures the community a bit) but at the same time it does away with subscriptions and as such if you own you can enjoy all the features the sim has to offer. You can come and go which guarantees that there is always influx of old players when new stuff is released. The game doesn't ask you for money if you come back to a year later.

    Then there is raceroom. A game that is a free demo and then lots of dlc. I think the bankcruptsy of the company proves that this is not the way to go. Raceroom is also not a free2play. It is free demo with many paid dlc. I think they are also selling cars skins. So yeah... So the next question is could free2play work as a racing sim. We have not seen anyone truly try yet (simraceway was not f2p, it was free demo with paid dlc). In true f2p game almost all content is available you for free. But you need to grind it to get to play it. Or spend money to get there quicker or buy premium items. If rf2 (or simraceway or raceroom) was free2play you'd need to play the game for like one hundred hours before you unlock one of the top tier gt or formula cars. To get it to work you need big playerbase because you want continuous queue of players into the matchmaker. If you make it scheduled hourly races you lose a lot of players who want to play now. You also need big playerbase because not many people will spend money on the game. If you are building a f2p game you need to accept that fact a lot of people never pay one single cent. But some do and some do pay a lot.

    The main thing about free2play is that it completely transforms your gameplay and your business model. Something like a single player career mode does not work in f2p. So you need a big online structure with servers to support that approach. Extremely different compared to rf2 but also I think impossible direction at this point.

    So if we ditch the f2p mechanic and grinding then you end up with a system like iracing. You pay subscription and you pay for each piece of content. And then you pay a monthly fee. You get a system that is expensive but you also get a system that offers sense of quality. All the cars and tracks are licensed, laser scanned and fully supported physically. A high downforce car that relies on ground effects is built just like that. If a car offers a unique thingy the sim has it. So the price of the content can be high as it is almost the expectaction of the people that it costs a lot to make the content.

    Then you have the monthly fee. Again there is lots of content you get when you pay it. You get this pseudo league system with scheduled races, a ladder for progression, metrics like safety rating and iracing and different series with somewhat unique rulesets that are true to the sport they are trying to mimic. And you get also other people to race against and competition. As far as the content buying goes you can buy your content relatively safely because basically every car is guaranteed to be used online. In ac, automobilista, pcars or raceroom you may accidentally buy piece of content no one uses. Iracing system avoids that which makes it full roster of cars viable choises. With other games you are always taking a risk of getting a lemon. Buying something no one else uses online. Which in itself makes that piece of content less valuable. If you don't have a big audience your dlc prices also need to be higher because you make money by selling few higher priced items and not many lower priced items.

    I think what we have seen with these different approaches is that you get more money by selling little content to more people than trying to sell more content for small amount of people. We have seen that dlc of any kind can work as long as it is content. Dlc with just features does not really work. Packaging your online mode into a yearly dlc has imho done more harm than good for rf2. If we look at other games that offer subscription we see a heavy bias towards offering online features. Matchmakers, ladders, ranks, etc.. We have even some games that offer some of that without no yearly fees. Lfs has online skin downloading, stats collection, team database and ranking system but no yearly fee. Similarly I don't think concepts like VR dlc don't work.

    Rf2 is a little bit unique in that it tried to get its users to create content. However I think there are some decisions that don't really support that approach. I think the biggest mistake is that rf2 is a modding plaform mainly for people who use 3dsmax AND who are old rf1 modders. Imho a modding platform needs to offer functionality and guides to get new people making mods. Not to focus so heavily on people who only modded its predecessor. When you start from scratch you are completely at the mercy of people who are making guides and tutorials. If you can't use the same tools or if you don't have the insights from rf1 you will struggle HARD. Ac as a modding platform took off really well because it made it possible for people who had not made any mods previously to start making mods. You did not need to be a nkpro pro modder or netkar namie modder to know the intricasies to get your first model into the game. Ac is also super simple game to mod compared to rf2.

    So what would I do with rf2 at this point? I'd create a guide for new people with 0 modding experience about how to create content for rf2. It could be too late for that but it is worth a try. I would not create tutorials for rf1 to rf2 car conversions. Not guides for 3dsmax. A general guide that explains the file structure and the structure of the 3d model with clear explanations on how to set it up. I'd drop the yearly fee. Or I'd offer some content for it. Ladders, special skins, rankings, ratings. A dlc with laser scanned tracks is probably too big of a risk. But the goal should be to get more people onboard. If you have people you can then have everything else.
     
  9. hitm4k3r

    hitm4k3r Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2016
    Messages:
    989
    Likes Received:
    2,105
    I think this topic is pretty good to chime in :),

    I guess most people are overreacting a bit regarding VR. The game does not break out of nowhere incase VR is not implemented, and in case that it get's implemented at a later stage, there is nothing to gain or nothing to loose. So I would stay a bit more relaxed and see how the whole VR topic evolves and consider an implementation at a later stage, when things have settled down a bit. ISI will certainly not go bankrupt if they don't go the VR route with rF2 or if they offer VR support at a later date than other developers in this market. So it makes no sense to take a risk and support a niche within a quite big market at such a high cost when other aspects of the game need bigger focus (clutch, improved weather implementeation etc.). It is obvious, that VR is fascinating and pretty hyped, but so far I haven't seen any realistic figures and statistics of how many people, who actually own rF2, will really use VR. And as long as you run a business without making depths, relying on anticipations alone will not turn out for the better.

    Regarding the yearly fee of 12 bugs or how much it is: this is kind of a difficult topic, but I think alot of complains regarding this topic come without showing enough responsibility of people when hiting the "buy"-button. Nobody is forcing people to pay a yearly fee, and if you are supposed to do so, it is your own decision. I personaly made the desicion to buy lifetime for something like 40 eruo, when rF2 was on sale in the steam shop wich I can only recommend. Everything runs good, the workshop works great and everything is butter smooth. Considering that I will get updates and additional content (tbh more than I can use) for free is a pretty nice deal if you ask me. And in case DLC's get a thing, I will pick them up when I like them. Whether I buy something or not, is my cup of tea and not ISI's. I own Assetto Corsa aswell, picked the first DLC and and the one with Brands. And I am fine with it. In case that you pay a yearly fee for rF2, it is for me nothing different than paying for a DLC in AC or PC per year. The fee helps financing further development and licensing aswell as the infra structure behind the updates etc. So all in all, most developers have different business models, but in the end they are all doing something similar. With the exception of iRacing: people oversee the fact that they more or less rent the content and pay for an infra structur, that is obviously pretty damn good. But to each his own. I will be able to use rF2 till the end of my life, even if Steam gets shut down, wich will mostly like not happen within the next ten years. Some people could argue that you get MOOOAR cars and MOOOAR tracks in other games, but I am pretty satisfied with all the stuff I got for this sim ... for free. And even if it might cost 10 bucks: people are spending tons of money on equipemnt (VR *cough*)or a monthly fee of ten bucks for WoW, so I think the margin is really small for rF2.

    Anyway, I think this helps to illustrate my POV on the subject. Many people make it sound like, as if some aspects like VR or Steam-only are something that makes ISI win or lose completely and if stuff like DX9 is the end of the world. Let me tell you, it is not. So stay relaxed, enjoy what you have and see what the future brings. I experienced the move from DX9/DX11 to DX12 in another game today, and it was a total mess leading to the game being unplayable. ;)
     
  10. Nazirull Safry Paijo

    Nazirull Safry Paijo Registered

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,417
    Likes Received:
    35
    ISI not working on VR?

    U guys shud follow wut theyre doing with Elite Dangerous.

    edit : its ROUGE SYSTEM! mind me the tongue slip (yes i type with my tongue kbye)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 17, 2016
  11. elbo

    elbo Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    171
    Because no one has every gained anything by being the first to occupy a new field...that never happens. ;)
     
  12. Nazirull Safry Paijo

    Nazirull Safry Paijo Registered

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,417
    Likes Received:
    35
    hype boys will never understand that.

    In racing, philosophically, you will spend every penny available to go faster.

    In simracing, that should be err....simulated too.

    If spending thosands of dollars on rig upgrades but u got beaten by a setup of a boy with a momo sitting on a kitchen stool using a 17 inch CRT monitor, you should be ashamed.

    But in reality its all abt pleasing urself.
     
  13. Minibull

    Minibull Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,559
    Likes Received:
    19
    We all know someone who "was faster than the other guys, but didn't have enough money or sponserships"...
     
  14. Will Mazeo

    Will Mazeo Registered

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2015
    Messages:
    2,227
    Likes Received:
    1,584
  15. F1 2004

    F1 2004 Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    558
    Likes Received:
    128
  16. Boldaussie

    Boldaussie Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2015
    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    21
    I love the irony. I have to move to steam as it is the "future" and the 21st century if I wish to continue to drive online with rF2 while ISI refuse point blank to keep up with modern graphic development, which in turn leads to modern graphic cards being unable to work as efficiently as they should. Read the forums on graphics issues alone would be a third of all problems. It doesn't matter if it will make rF2 run better or look better, it doesn't have the later dx's or other support for add ons. The masses believe it doesmatter, that is the point. Placebos rule.

    They are only "now" assisting modders with a step by step guide on how to mod in rF2. Its an almost impossible slog in this day and age of NO time available, without this type of help. A pity its years late and the modding community is tiny in comparison.

    As much as we all know it shouldn't be so, it is a latest and greatest NOW society in spite of whether the latest and greatest is in any way worthwhile is a moot point. The point is, to sell something you MUST have what the people with the money to spend on said product want. They want "LABELS", Don't provide them at your peril, but unfortunately ISI is the ostrich of the sim racing crowd now. In a declining and more crowded marketplace, this is no longer optional. I think ISI are smarter than we all think. There is a reason they are not moving down that path. I hope I am wrong.
     
  17. pmarin2

    pmarin2 Registered

    Joined:
    May 26, 2015
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
  18. stonec

    stonec Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Likes Received:
    1,402
    It's quite simple to understand their decision really. DX11 offered little obvious benefits and a huge workload, not only for ISI, as probably all mods needed to be re-done as well. It wasn't until Rift support that DX11 had anything much useful to offer racing sims. Automobilista and Raceroom are staying with DX9 as well and seem to have no problems with that so far.
     
  19. David Wright

    David Wright Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    23
    Reiza have announced they will be moving to DX12 in 2017 and S3S have shown R3E with DX11 graphics.
     
  20. MarcG

    MarcG Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    6,732
    Likes Received:
    2,095
    FYI with reference to Reiza that is with their next sim not AMS, AMS is essentially a re-branded GSC with work to gradually cease when they move onto their next Sim full time (hence no DX11/12 as no point).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page