Jeremy Miller tweets (Senior Programmer at ISI)

The more people trying unstable builds the best. In this sense I would completely change actual complicated system where people just do not know even where to download the unstable build.
I wonder why having a passworded forums is not enough. Considering that only experienced users should be able to participate is artificially reducing the amount of people and ways of things being done.
I would also worry myself how having a separate install can be considered experienced since it is the only thing that is required to properly test unstable builds.

ISI's point of view of not wanting false feedbaclk of unexperienced people will become later in false bug report when stable is released.

Considering all the problems that can occur, reducing the number of variables would be highly desirable, better than discriminating people from testing. THAT I KNOW, there are three diffeeent ways to install rF2. Update, clean install in a new directory and clean install over an existing directory.

IMO, the second one should be advised as the safest preventing about losing content. In any case the installing and updating system should be reviewed. For example I don't know why default install path use program files when it is not necessary to be in a such problematic folder. Separating content from the core is not necessary either. Those experienced users that ISI claims for betatesting unstable builds typically have a different install structure than the default one.

enviado mediante tapatalk

 

When I participate in the unstable builds I let the game go where it wants to as a new user would do the same. I haven't had any issues in testing with the default locations.

My main rF2 install is in C:\rFactor2.

 

lol

 

Yes, that is why there is the unstable release testing. I don't understand your post including me in some category, I assume you still misunderstood my post completely and the context of the response, as well as the post by willz.

 

Screw this!
YOU apparently don't understand but go in full attack mode when some people are trying to explain.

Examples of you clearly NOT understanding:
- I for one don't wish to have something non-functional. (Don't get it then!!)
- How many people have rF2 and don't know about this forum? (Don't know about this forum; you don't get the unstable out of the blue)

Now you can keep on saying people don't understand you, misread your posts and not getting the intention, but your words are pretty clear.

So about the attack; P** off!

 

Using more system RAM in order to allow more cars, bigger tracks with more objects, etc. is a great addition from using 64-Bit, but the above quote from Tim is what really gets me excited.

 

Sorry but I do not let the game go where it wants. Splitting the install in to two and using program files is not in my preferences. Letting the game go, would overwrite previous installation, by the way. When you change the core "default folder" it will propose the same folder for content. I understand it should keep proposing the user documents folder mainataing the saparate structure to be consistent if that is preferred.

As I said it is

enviado mediante tapatalk

 

A lot, believe me.

 

It is not sim racers it is the human f....end race that has bad attitudes.
Ruben Miranda

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

64-bit is great news. But remember large grids bring CPU issues too with more AI to process. I also hope third party developers build tracks with sensible textures and not go for silly sized ones in areas where they don't really matter.

 

That is what they should have been doing for years anyway, 64-bit has nothing to do with this

 

Except that with more memory available, builders may go and use much bigger textures now. Just hoping it doesn't go crazy in that direction now XD
Like with the cars, where they are talking about using much higher res sponsor logos on the cars, rather than the jagged, small ones we have now. Still, textures should be related to ram and vid memory, hopefully not too much impact on framerates.

 

Exactly Minibull.

 

Can anyone tell me if 64bit integration will have any impact on the use of multiview?

As of now multiview cuts my frames in half. I am guessing this will have no effect but not really sure

Thanks

 

i dont think it will have anything to do with multiview,

try running without multiview, adjust your fov etc so it looks as good as poss,

I never run with multiview on and actually like the stretching on the outer sides of the side screens which help give a feel of speed, multiview really kills fps for not much gain imo

 

Thanks Adrian.

I didn't think it would effect it, just curious.

I don't use multiview and I think most cars are OK in cockpit without. Its the open wheelers I don't like without it.

 

speaking of which, I think I read something here once about ISI using one big texture for the whole car instead of multiple sharper textures put together. Is this so and is it a big disadvantage?

 

Because you can, doesn't mean you should

 

I certaily would be pleased if rain is fixed and stability issues are minimized. I dont mind if 64bit support is included so far it is sufficiently debugged.

I've heard rumours of unstable being released by the end of this week. I don't know how reliable are them.
Did Jeremy tweet any clue about it?

enviado mediante tapatalk

 

Jeremy Miller @jeremymmiller · Jun 2

Builds over 724 will not show up on the 660 matching server. We are moving to new data layout and storage.



Jeremy Miller @jeremymmiller · Jun 4

My target (reserving right to change) is have unstable ready by end of next week. Updates to real road, possible 64 bit and new matcher



Jeremy Miller @jeremymmiller · Jun 5

To be clear. I said 64 bit was possible. Not a sure thing in the next build




Jeremy Miller @jeremymmiller · Jun 5

OpenSSL to 1.0.1h. Client and server side. Server side changes are running now. Build 660 is no longer vulnerable.