ISI has stated that rFactor 2 is long term. I think you can safely assume that it will be supported for much longer that rFactor and I would not be surprized if it's lifetime would be 5-6 years minimum, not 5-6 years maximum.
5-6 years is a great expectation and provides a great platform for my sim racing hobby. I'm not worrying beyond 3 years to be honest because so many other factors come into play. Value for money .... no question / no squabble from me. Cost out the lifetime membership and the market will decide. I hope ISI find away to offer it. Edit: Original post replaced with this.
Good luck with that. Would you also call Ford and ask them to guarantee that i get another 100,000 miles outta my truck too?
From a ford? Asking for 100k might be a bit much. Its far from unreasonable to ask that a car works for 100k. Btw I've taken 2 past 350k
OMG ...... people worrying so much about the future forget about the present and will end up with no past ...... deep eh?
rFactor wont be the only (modding friendly) racing game the next 10years and is still with dx9. Perhaps next year will be dx12 released and with the next console gen 2012/13 graphics will make a huge step. I think going behind 5 years is a bit risky, not only cause of the visuals. Everything is getting faster, more and more race games show up and at one point rF wont get new customers cause of the technical drawbacks. Only way is to expand rF2 also with new engines. If this will happen a LTM would be a gread idea BUT was anything said about the future plans on rF2? New content ok, still as fast, big and good as modders do? Addons (i hate dlcs)? Would be great to hear about that before i had to make a decision. I love rF but im already disappointed about other games where great support was promised and now i have to pay for those "patches".
It's not necessarily locked into always being Dx9 just because it is on initial release - and as has been eloquently explained elsewhere, Dx11 actually doesn't provide anything better looking than what can be achieved with Dx9, it's just better optimised for some things and will run those things faster.
If you pull the trigger it won't be on me, you put the dog in that position and I had nothing to do with it. Your post just shows how absurd some of the responses are. Pardon me for standing up for something I believe to be wrong. If you want to live life following the leader then go ahead.
Always? Even with rF1 graphics im fine but it needs to be optimised to >=dx11. Much better multicore support and so on, +fullproc dont do the job good. Models are models and with enough polycount it looks good but the new technics provide a better look on those and much faster then every dx9 tuning. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhhJwGKV-yw We hear nothing about whats planned and thats the point. The few features that are announced are cool but not ground breaking. A player with 1-2h a week have to pay the same price as a fulltime racer (most of the users in rF Forum ) with 3h a day. Both love this game but on what base should be the price set? On the time you "can" have fun like some freaks think?
I've not tried offering a games shop $5 for a recent first person shooter because I'm crap and will just play the single player part... badly. I reckon I'd have no luck though. If I wanted rF2 for offline only I'd pay about half the usual new game price, once. For online I'll pay a third of that in a year, and again each year. I don't see the problem. Multicores have already been discussed elsewhere, what a lot of people miss is that this isn't a CM game where the physics have about an equal requirement to 5 or 6 other aspects of the game - rF2 needs a fairly modern CPU running at 2.4GHz to make the physics actually work in realtime (with another core to handle the other aspects). Physics is largely linear so you can't go stretching it across 6 cores.. and with enough power to run all that, the rest of the game probably doesn't need much more than a similar second core.
