Jeremy Miller tweets (Senior Programmer at ISI)

If the problem with the MM was really the one that Noel has concluded, then no amount of unstable testing would have likely helped. I mean, how likely would it be that someone in the unstable group had created a server with a name including the '*' character?

Anyway, what I don't like about this build is the delay in getmod/join button appearing. Users will simply think the server is not open for joins when the button remains grey for several seconds. The getmod information is fetched only when you click on the server, while before it was all loaded in once.

 

I bought rFactor 2 because there are new features.

In rF1,
we can drive with more than 40 drivers
the damage model work fine in rF1
The tire model in rF1 is stable and working, and the new one in rF2 is one of the feature new with the FFB that convict me to buy the game and not refund it, with in addition the real road.

So you claim the game is not now in beta but the few new interesting feature are not finished.

So please do not try turn the discussion against me, the product is not finished, so now it's time to concentrate on the feature to finish and let the customer informed in a better way.

I'm a rFactor 1 & 2 fan, but I'm also a customer that bough a product and want to use it at the same level I use rF1. And your customer that defend you on the beta phase start to be fed up you manage the situation, so please, take it in consideration and adapt your discussion in consequence.

 

It was not accurate you are right. Don't take it wrong. It was a hot reply against someone that instead of trying to help by proving me wrong in my proposal or at least debating about it, just throws it's personal critic against me without providing a single argument. I think that is not right either and should not be allowed but nobody is doing much about that. Next time I will directly reply to this type of attack by pm.

What frustrates me is that I think that what I have said is quite logical. The replies to it that I have read seem not to have understood what I propose (I actually think that some people don't even try to understand with some positive attitude before replying) and that's the reason why I trend to be repetitive. Sorry if it was disturbing. As I said just wanted to help.

enviado mediante tapatalk

 

+100500. agree

 

By your definition, iRacing is still beta as well, so is any software with any feature being worked on. Although I agree with you, you've made it impossible for me to actually do that. Congratulations. I can't give an answer to your post, or discuss in any way, because it just doesn't make sense in areas like that, and also because replying to you is "turning discussion against you". You obviously don't want any replies that don't fit your specific criteria of a reply from your point of view. Agreeing with someone isn't defending, it isn't attacking. You choose it to be those things. Fair enough.

 

What you've said is logical. The same way anything anyone says is logical to them. But the only thing that is logical in development, is what works for the people developing. It's that simple.

When you're not doing anything to accept their opinions, why should they accept yours? I think I've not disagreed with you, myself, I've given context to your ideas, usually saying something like "if it had more people, yes". What you've then done, is repeated yourself. Because of the fact you keep doing that, ignoring even posts made in basic agreement, but giving you ideas of why it's not possible, it's very clear that you're not understanding the processes you're trying to give advice about. Which leads to frustration among others trying to either help or respond to your ideas. You're actually making it impossible to agree with you because of how you are posting.

 

I don't use iRacing, because rFactor is better for me. The subject is rFactor 2, so please, take the remarks and understand them and don't try to change the debate on the other simulations existing. I will wait for the next official communication to know what is planned for the next build. One day perhaps I will get the few points I mentioned. If you prefer playing with words, do what you want, but it's not a good way to have a discussion. You are in charge of the communication, and for me you communicate the wrong things. It's my opinion, I work in the computer software and you are not in the good way to inform people about rF2. Try to imagine what we try to explain to you and make a little step to us.

We do in several post suggestions, you were agree with them, but nothing from your side since, it's sad, but that's life.

 

Mentioning other software to form comparative context related to rF2 on a specific point within the debate, is changing the debate, not taking part in it. I see.

The way people post on forums and then erect walls giving only a narrow form of reply they'll find acceptable is laughable. These kind of language games usually tend to get the person who does it (you) more annoyed, as well. It's amusing sometimes. The people who just 'reply' (which is what I thought I was doing) then find it difficult to understand what happened and why the other person is so upset. Well, they're upset because you didn't reply exactly how the person wanted you to....

So my reply didn't fit into what you wanted as a reply. Would it be too difficult to reply again? To DISCUSS with me? You did mention "beta", not just the words "rFactor 2". By mentioning both those things, you allowed me to bring up other software in relation to the word "beta". Saying I'm changing the debate because I did that really doesn't seem very mature. I agree with you in terms of us having unfinished features, etc, but other sims have unfinished features and aren't called "beta", and that was going to be part of my counterpoint (you didn't actually want me to say anything else, your post told me not to).

I did not say I disagree. I actually agree, but you put these walls up and you will only accept a reply if they stay within them. Otherwise I'm "turning a discussion" or "changing the debate". No, I'm replying. I'm here, on a forum, replying to you personally about your issues. And every moment I spend here on the forum, is time I am not spending somewhere else. Whether that is time doing other work, or time this evening with my wife, or my daughter. I simply don't understand the lack of understanding that the "little steps" you ask for... I'm here, FOR YOU. I'm replying to you, FOR YOU. Certainly not for me!! That is not big steps? If you don't like the replies, then you're not OK with being on a forum. People can and will reply outside of the walls you want them to reply, accusing them of "changing" and "turning" things every time they do it is just going to stifle how good of a reply you might have been able to get.

 

Wow, so much drama over a video game. This is exciting!

In my job I work as the senior help desk analyst. I have been working on computers for almost 35 years. One of the hard truths is no matter how thoroughly you think you test something, when you release it to your users they will find a way to screw it up. I'm not even talking about the dunces who can't remember their password (they can't be fixed), I mean the ones who "think" they know what they're doing.

People who work at a help desk or design software don't **think** in the same way as those people who "think" they know what they're doing. There is a major communication barrier there that can't be easily resolved.

I understand what you're all arguing about, but I don't see the point. All software is never finished. Windows XP was released in 2001 and the last updates for it will be released this coming April. Windows XP isn't finally finished; they're just giving up on it.

 

You do know this is completely off topic, right? We're only allowed to mention rF2 when talking about software. Windows XP "beta" has been very good to us all though, much like rFactor 1 "beta" was.

 

wow rf1 is still beta? wow

 

It did get an update to fix a feature last year. I guess so...

 

Oh, right, sorry. As far as rF2 is concerned, from where it was when I first got it, until today, the changes -in my own opinion- have been tremendous.

In full disclosure, I did build a new computer between then and now so I can't even say how well it evolved on a single computer, except that there was a huge jump when I put it on the new computer.

I am also just as happy with all of my other -nameless-still-in-beta- racing sims. I try to enjoy it for what it is, today.

 

You need a sarcasm smiley in here Tim

 

I guess.

 

My hat is off to you man, you got some brass ones to admit you're rocking the help desk after 35 years.

I agree with you, rF2 has come a very long way. The same folks venting have been part of that ride so I don't understand it. Content just keeps getting better and more complex as well. A lot to enjoy and more to come. All for the cost of a few computer fans!

 

In a lot of cases, when I look at posts, they have lower end systems and aren't seeing the changes. Not always the case, but even the "looks like rf1" posts do often come from people with rf1 quality systems. Frustrating, but nothing anybody can do to stop it. Just got to move on.

 

LOL nice comeback

 

That's one of the problems which I noticed very early in rFactor 2's release (if you can call it a 'problem') - the sim looks so much better when running on very high end hardware. When people say the graphics in rFactor 2 are outdated it's simply not the case anymore, it just needs more power due to requiring higher settings and better AA to look its best. If you have a system which can properly max out this sim and still maintain a solid framerate (of 60fps+) it really does look as good as anything else out there, especially from the cockpit view.

I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing (the requirements for max visual quality), I just wish everyone got to drive the sim looking like it's supposed to, as I assume the developers intended.

 

So did I