For next couple of "content drops" are we going to be looking for Fuji and Portimao? That would give us WEC 2023. But for 2024 we'd need Losail, COTA, Sao Paulo, Imola and Fuji as far as I can see. Cars... well for 2024 do we just need the Hypercars and some extra GT3 cars, as LMP2 and GTE will be extinct. We only have the Vanwall at the moment I believe in Hypercar class. So that means we need Cadillac V-LMDh, Porsche 963, Toyota GR010, Ferrari 499P Peugeot 9X8, Glickenhaus 007... plus BMW, Alpine, Lamborghini and Isotta Fraschini. That's a LOT of work!
Cmon ppl LMU will need updates probably have DLC'S if s397 is making the sim/game they will be the 1s updating it doing the DLC'S more time away from rf2. Since 2012 i would have to say MSG is the worst when it comes to info/communication, but that's the modern world we now live in. Just waiting for posts to be removed as disinformation or misinformation.
Please just get this right S397! So much potential in S397/Rfactor2 and it's community. Just please, please, please get this right. Cheers!
Is LMU the end of rF2? Just my 2 cents on the whole situation around MSG, S397, LMU and rF2. All these political and capitalist things give me a headache, but still it has to be talked about. It is exclusively my thesis. Nothing more, nothing less! I hope very much that I am wrong.
Just with the title alone... It just adds more tension to a already fragile platform not only due to It´s own shortcomings, but also due to the sheer user speculation on YT. You speak about headache while adding more pain to It! Just my humble 0,02€.
Then it is time to clear the air from the official side. My criticism is mainly directed against the more than modest communication. And as i said, i hope I'm wrong.
Youtube is full of this kind of content and I'm sick of it. It's pure clickbait designed to get more clicks and comments. I avoid it completely. They're playing with our mind for their economical benefit.
Your video doesn't present genuine curiosity in the title, it presents fear. That's one of the main issues with the world today. For me, that's a major part of the problem, not the solution.
I haven't seen the @memoNo1 video, but I think you're wrong to focus on the form (youtube video blabla). It's the background that counts. The background is simple if I correctly understood Memo's concern that many people share : The arrival of LMU implies a lot of things that could clearly be negative for rFactor 2 (could + seems) + extremely significant slowdown in the improvements/development/content of rFactor 2 + communication from MSG towards rFactor 2 and these users ("fans") quite catastrophic to be honest (we miss Paul...). So what the "fans" are simply asking for is a communication to know where we are going with rFactor 2. As I said, it is not a question of giving billions of information whose most MSG would not wish to give them away. Just give the information you can share, not necessarily a lot, but give what are the prospects for rFactor 2. It's a logical and fair request, we're not asking them for the moon!!
I worked for a software firm for over 20 years - also in a niche market - and we NEVER gave our clients a roadmap of where the product was heading. We had a "focus group" to sound out ideas but we were under strict instructions to not give pointers on where we were going with the next release, nor when a particular feature would appear - if ever. If you go down that route, then surprise, customers start complaining that the "promised" item didn't appear when they were expecting it... I'm sure we have all seen this I'm old enough to be a bit philosophical about this. I buy something when it does what I want at a price I'm prepared to pay. Next month there might be a new feature I would like or it's cheaper but I've made my choice.
Well, first of all, I can see from the likes that this topic is attracting a lot of interest. Let me come back to the core of my statement. I have the suspicion that rF2 is now finally being put on the back burner. Ultimately, users have the right to know whether or not rF2 is being planned further. Should it not be developed any further, it would still exist. That is clear. But there would be no further development like in AC by the community.
With typical and tactical PR chatter, the discussion is very cleverly led past the core question, or rather, it is discussed to death. A clear answer will probably only be given in the future. Sure, there's a lot of money at stake... I think we both know where the direction is going. Otherwise it would have already been clearly denied.
That's you assuming. WHY would it have already been denied? Because you want it to be? I now work for a competing product and another company, and I'm here giving my real assessment that includes an awareness of the doom narrative you're pushing, but a refusal to accept it as the only one. Because it isn't. Until a statement is released EVERY narrative is open, not just yours. As I said earlier in this thread, and @trichens said above, you can make statements and be wrong. It's generally better to under promise and over deliver. A huge part of under promising can be careful and considered communication.
No, they don't. Users don't have any rights whatsoever, if users were invested in the company in some shape or form perhaps even shareholders then that's where they'd have a right to know, but we're not, we're just gamers at the end of the day playing a product like any other game out there.
I respect your point of view, even if I do not entirely share it. On the other hand, to complete it, I would say that even if as a simple user we cannot have the same rights in information as shareholders or employees of the company, frankly, we have to see things differently : It's not a question of rights on the part of users or legal obligation of MSG, but it is a kind of moral obligation towards people who have been following and consuming rFactor 2 intensively for sometimes almost 10 years (that's my case). What I call moral obligation translates into a certain logic of explaining the future of rFactor 2 given that objectively concerns about its future are quite legitimate given the current situation, and the logical necessity to opt for a brief but quality communication because indeed some of the long-time rFactor 2 fans are worried and have objectively logical reasons to be worried. Moreover, a few sentences from real facts but responding to major concerns would be sufficient, no need to write a 500-page book revealing all the secrets of MSG. Here's what I think. - Legal obligation = no. - Moral and logical obligation = yes.
In fact, you are certainly right. But experience so far shows us something different. Almost all racing simulations for the PC, with a few exceptions e.g. F1, are long-term projects today. Without continuous development, there would only be a few users from the time of release, because the games are not finished during the development period until the release. Continuous development is part of the business model and a good marketing element. A sudden stop is like a broken promise.
Moral & Logical maybe but they don't have to exist in business and rarely do, when you see people get made redundant by finding out on social media/emails or when after a job interview you're told "if you don't hear from us you haven't got the job" then you shouldn't really expect any different from a games company telling us whether or not they're gonna continue to support a title. The very fact that the initial outlay is so cheap, coupled with DLC that costs peanuts in the grand scheme of things and yet here we have users wetting the bed because they think they're "owed" some sort of announcement, it's quite ludicrous really, it's self entitlement, nothing more nothing less.
I think people are confusing this a bit. Continuous development isn't a marketing element, it's a necessity especialy for small studios. I often get the impression that people have no idea how expensive software development is these days. You can't get away building PC games - and this includes racings sims - like twenty years ago, when a small group of three to five people could development a full blown sim in a relatievly short amount of time. The level of detail, that we have reached is also our biggest obstacle. And this applies to sound design, track/level creation, building the cars and the physics or just the general assets. Software prices to develop those games have grown aswell and lisencing, that we so often ask for, propably consumes the most money without a single wheel spinning ingame. That said - and this is more a general impression that I get from modern game design - there are very nice examples like Battlebit that show that the level of detail isn't necessarily what keeps people playing a certain game. It's the amount of fun. We often forget how powerfull our brain is, so why do we keep adding more and more eye candy instead of concentrating on the fun factor. And I don't mean the fun factor in the sense of creating arcade racing games instead of racing sims, but creating immersive, unique and smooth user experiences. Little example: there is no racing sim out there where I can join a competition system with a group of likeminded - my racing squad - as it is possible in other gaming genres, while devs get drown in safety ratings and scoring systems. It's all a matter of priorities.
Imo a piece of software is simply a product like any other product. With software there are a couple of options these days. RF2 is a single purchase package with occasional DLC offers and free updates on the core of the game. You buy it, and that's what you get. You don't have to pay annual license fees, maintenance costs etc. So imo we have no right to demand or expect anything. Being passionate and curious on what the future holds I can understand though. I'm not sure it's beneficial to assume personal worst case scenarios. It's not good for your mood, and it doesn't change a thing. All you can do is friendly ask for some information. When its even clear or not they still have the right to not share any of it, and you just have to be patient.
