No LAN without Pay-To-Play???

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by PCG-Smee, Jan 28, 2012.

  1. PCG-Smee

    PCG-Smee Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Was looking forward to this release, until I found that this is going to be another "pay-to-play" deal. I guess I'll just save up a bit more and get that new video card I was looking at.

    Of itself, that wouldn't be so bad . . . if I could still play IP to IP or LAN without having to pay for an online subscription.

    The fact is --- should you guys decide to shut down the servers for whatever reason or your servers crash . . . I would no longer be able to use the game for anything but offline racing.

    My biggest use of the game (I purchased 2 licenses for rFactor 1) is as a LAN game with my daughter. Lots cheaper than seeing her out banging my car around on the street . . . and a bit safer too.

    You really are doing a disservice to us who don't take full advantage of your online services.

    So, I have a question: Just how many people do you think will actually purchase this game for the riveting "offline racing"? The only "offline racing" I have read about on any forum for rFactor is to practice for an upcoming team event.

    We all know that the reason we purchase the game is to race our buds . . . and I do from time to time but not enough to justify paying an annual fee. I might as well keep sending money to someone like EA or Codies if I wanted to do that.

    As far as stopping the password protected server thing, you guys know it is either a desire to say "we're better than everyone else", or they are running a team event. Really, if you have folks who are a problem, use PEER BLOCK like all the other online servers do. Team events still won't be opened up just because the game is pay-to-play, and the aforementioned snobs will still want to run password protected servers . . . for the same reason --- because they can make themselves feel more important by exclusion of other racers.

    What you should do is NOT SHOW password protected servers AT ALL, or just show the name of the server as "PASSWORD PROTECTED" if you must show anything. Many of those servers are just up to get the team's web address out --- so taking the name off of Password Protected Servers out of matchmaker would stop the practice.

    An even better solution would be IP-to-IP instead of password protection. Tourneys as well should also be IP-to-IP or NOT LISTED.

    Not fooled. If you just wanted to raise the price of the game, just have the guts to say we need to charge more. Don't try to make it sound like we're getting anything extra. The game is pretty much useless without the LAN, IP to IP and online options.

    What say you just tell the truth?
     
  2. CdnRacer

    CdnRacer Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    1,894
    Likes Received:
    31
    There is a lifetime purchase option.
     
  3. AlanBernardo

    AlanBernardo Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good idea on the password-protected listings. I'm all for that, for sure.


    Alan
     
  4. PCG-Smee

    PCG-Smee Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is an option, but not really what I would call it.

    If you want $90 for the game, have the stones to ask for $90 --- don't pussyfoot around the issue.

    Sounds like my wife. She won't say what she means either. Look, you want $90 for the game, price it at $90 --- you'll create a lot less ill will on the part of the buying public.

    No one is harder to get along with than someone who buys a game for $45 only to find out that it is actually a parasite that will keep drawing money from his/her credit card for years to come.

    Lifetime purchase? Some of us won't be alive 365 days from now. Talk about a deal for the vendor!
     
  5. AlanBernardo

    AlanBernardo Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    147
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is a good point and one I totally agree with. Charge the price up-front and discard all this one-year and life-time purchasing. In two or three years it's likely there will be a newer version of rFactor or some other racing title that leaves rFactor by the side of the road.

    And a LAN option, free of fees and not bound to a server, should have been an option. IP-to-IP I can see why that wouldn't do it for ISI, but LAN capability would have been exceedingly nice. That would have kept the title alive for those who want to race with others but not have to pay the price. And with Hamachi and other similar type programs, LAN outside of one's own personal LAN would have been available.

    Even something like a lifetime $5 LAN-fee added to the price of the game would have been a good option to have.

    As it stands now a lot of folks are paying $90 for a game that will be history in a couple of years.


    Alan
     
  6. CdnRacer

    CdnRacer Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    1,894
    Likes Received:
    31

    I don't know what to tell ya man. It sounds to me like you have your mind made up and aren't interested in rF2. In that case there is nobody here that is going to tell you something you want to here. The pricing is the same for everyone.
     
  7. Guineapiggy

    Guineapiggy Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    So your argument is essentially if the company goes under or you die before your subscription ends ISI will be laughing? I'm not sure I buy that...

    You missed a long discussion of the pricing a good few weeks back but feel free to look it over. As for playing VIA LAN - you'd have to pay for two copies of the game anyway, what's a handful of dollars extra for the multiplayer?

    The key to the matter is that ISI supported a piece of software for years for nothing with extra content and multiplayer and they can't keep that business model up anymore, they need a modest but steady income and online play is the way to do that.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 28, 2012
  8. brabham67

    brabham67 Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    4
    I don't mind paying 12.99 for another year of onilne access. If that money goes towards helping ISI continue ongoing development of rF2 and, future titles, I think its a small price to pay. For disclosure purposes, and a bit of perspective from my point of view, I am an iRacing member and have thrown alot more towards that game in the last few years, than I ever will towards ISI by paying the yearly fee for the next 10 years!!!.
     
  9. Guineapiggy

    Guineapiggy Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    Besides, if you stick LAN multiplayer in the free domain it wouldn't take too much for someone to be able to play online for free bypassing the connection fee; I'm fairly sure you could do it with a good piece of virtual private network software like Hamachi. I used to use Hamachi to play BG2 multiplayer as if it were over LAN to bypass a few issues and it's not hard to do.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 28, 2012
  10. PCG-Smee

    PCG-Smee Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    LAN costs ISI nadda, zip, zilch. My equipment, connecting over my network.

    IP to IP DIRECT also costs ISI NOTHING. If we connect IP to IP, we are bypassing ISI's servers.

    So, they are charging for things that DON'T COST THEM ANYTHING. They have restricted the game for increased income.

    Yeah, I am interested in rf2 . . . and can afford the cost . . . I just also realize that there is a point at which GREED rears its ugly head.

    Hi Greed. How ya been?

    I mean really, is there any other reason for the charges for IP to IP or LAN option? Please explain, if you know how it costs ISI or strains their servers, or interferes with online gamers.

    When my computer connects directly to the IP of my buddy's computer . . . it's no different than when I connect from my LAN addy to my daughter's LAN addy. ISI is TOTALLY COMPLETELY ABSOLUTELY AND IRREVOCABLY BYPASSED --- until you write the EXTRA code to force the connection through your servers.

    Get real, there is ABSOLUTELY NO LEGITIMATE REASON for this restriction. NONE AT ALL . . . Oh, Hi again Mr. Greed. Yes, talking about you again.
     
  11. Guineapiggy

    Guineapiggy Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    There's no reason save the ones you've chosen to ignore - like the fact it's their software and they can charge for its usage, especially as the fee is far lower than competitors, not to mention, that, again, the last piece of software was being updated and expanded for free for years. The money will cover extra content, expansion of features and the kind of service we've come to expect from ISI. The service provides ISI with somewhat better protection against piracy cutting in to their profits, means that there's now an updater service built in to the software and also means that installing a game on another machine isn't a massive headache to name but a few advantages.

    Oh, and if you or your daughter have ever sent a text message you've been charged for something that costs nothing. Do you get this disproportionately angry about that?
     
  12. brabham67

    brabham67 Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    4
    Well put.

    @PCG-Smee - If you feel as strongly as your posts suggest, why not ask for a refund? Vote with your wallet. Your not being ripped off, or held hostage, because you can get your money back. To be fair to ISI, they did lay out the fact that LAN access came as a part of the paid side of the game before the release of the beta.
     
  13. [NAR]Steve

    [NAR]Steve Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    314
    Likes Received:
    11
    It amounts to a little more than $1 a month to play online....I don't see the big deal. If they asked $50 a year for online services, then I could see people being a bit miffed, but $13 a year? :confused:
     
  14. PCG-Smee

    PCG-Smee Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sure hope they do that better than the other folks . . . I just love it when my flash design software phones home and sees a different IP . . . or maybe a new HDD or new sound card . . . and requires me to wait until they are in the office to update their records and turn my software back on.

    The Kaka seems to be getting a bit deeper. Nope, I didn't read the entire page but I might not have started out on such a positive note as this post did. One more reason to avoid this mess. Thanks for the heads up.

    This is getting to look more and more like ISI has become an EA entity. Sorry, no thanks.
     
  15. AlanBernardo

    AlanBernardo Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Messages:
    147
    Likes Received:
    0
    The reason ISI does it the way they do it is, quite simply, as you say, for money. If they can do it and at the same time not turn off loyal or would-be customers, then I don't fault them for doing it. I wouldn't call it out-and-out, unadulturated greed. They just want to make a bigger profit, which, if they plow some of that profit into improving the game, I can't see who would be against that. It is a small amount of money, and the returns could be greater.

    Still, all in all, I don't think you're posts about this are over the top. You tend to exaggerate-- like what's next, the end of the world?-- but I don't really care for some of the stock responses here made by others.


    Alan
     
  16. PCG-Smee

    PCG-Smee Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know I sometimes go a bit to the dramatic . . . but when people blindly accept anything just so they can play a game it shows very little maturity. For instance, Codemasters and Massive Incorporated teamed up for Digital In Game Advertising (D.I.G.A.) for titles like Toca.

    The general consensus among the gamers was "so long as the money goes back into the game" it was ok. In my opinion that would have been great, but it wasn't going to happen and I told them so. It's rather naive, actually childish, to believe that profits like those will go back into the game. It doesn't happen. When sales drop, so does the corporation's willingness to invest any more time or money in the title and it dies. When it dies, so do the servers. Not because no one plays the game. No, but because they have a new title to play.

    Now, when ISI's servers go down, you can throw the game away unless you are into playing by yourself against the AI.

    With EA it's DownLoadable Content (DLC) for the games. Everyone "assumes" that the money goes into game improvement. It doesn't. Every year, it's the same thing at EA. This charge or that charge promises continued development and/or improvements in whatever the product is this year. At EA, the DLC for Hot Pursuit was supposed to help continue development of the game. It didn't. The corporation got fatter, but the game didn't get better. The problems didn't get fixed. All their patches did was fragment the community thus assuring that people would tire of a lack of competition and go on to the next offering (conveniently published one year later).

    With Toca Race Driver 3, once it went to the first patch (1.3) that was the end of the development. The programmers went on to the next project . . . don't know what it was but it wasn't Toca Race Driver 4. However, they still collected ad revenue from Massive's DIGA pushing the ads on players' computers under the guise that it would help improve the game. It didn't. Not ONE MORE RED CENT was spent on development, patches or even a new version.

    I'm not saying ISI fails to keep their word, but . . . I was a customer early on, long before the 1.255 patch. Upgrading used up two of my 5 actiivations. Prior to that, I used one activation for the original install and another for the first patch (1.250) upgrade, leaving me with only 1 activation when my computer crashed. I eventually had to purchase a second copy of the game because the promise to us that we would not lose activations wasn't kept. So, I paid almost $100 already just for the copy of rfactor 1 on my computer . . . as well as the activations purchased for my daughter's computer (she's still on her first set of activations because hers was purchased after the 1.255 patch).

    Yeah, I learned how to copy the trymedia folder after all that, but it would have been nice to see these folks issue their activations upon request as promised (yep "just ask" didn't last very long . . . did it guys?)

    Nope, I don't trust corporations. Did the programmers make the decision to do this? Probably not. Corporate most likely did, and just as they made that decision, money and profit will color their desire to make further improvements or repairs/patches to the game.

    I see too much of EA and Codies here to justify purchasing a game and paying to play. I think it's a very poor way to treat faithful customers, and I think that --- if they had REALLY thought it through --- none of this would be getting drug up again by me.
     
  17. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,079
    Likes Received:
    2,862
    We're not stupid mate. We know what the deal is, we know what we're getting, and most of us can see both sides of the argument. I'm ok with it so I bought it. You make your own mind up.

    *Oh, and by the way - I know plenty of people who used 10+ activations in rFactor because when you 'run out' all you have to do is request more... there's no cost...
     
  18. Guineapiggy

    Guineapiggy Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    535
    Likes Received:
    0
    Preeeeeetty much. You seem to operate on the idea that it's unacceptable because you aren't willing to pay the money - we are. That does not mean we've not thought about it, that does not mean we've not weighed it up. Sorry you didn't know about requesting more activations, you could have saved some time and money.
     
  19. PCG-Smee

    PCG-Smee Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well great for them. I was in a league, and they REFUSED to honor their promise. THEY REFUSED. No 10 activations for me. Only the original 5. And, no I'm not accusing anyone of being stupid. I am, however, saying to proceed with caution. Too much control over how YOU and I use the game should set off the warning bells.

    There is NO LEGITIMATE REASON for the ban on LAN and IP to IP play without paying other than greed.
     
  20. PCG-Smee

    PCG-Smee Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    I didn't get more activations because ISI refused to honor their promise. I raised hell in the old forum after they refused to honor the agreement. Of course, it's my word against theirs.

    Money? The money isn't the problem. It's a matter of principle.

    IF YOU WANT MORE FOR THE GAME, BE A MAN ABOUT IT AND SAY SO. That would be the HONEST way to go, and I would have more faith in what you say.

    But instead, the game will require you "pay EXTRA to play online".

    Let me tell you, I'm a repo man and bill collector. No shortage of work for me in this economy. You don't do what I do for 15 years without being able to read between the lines. Too many excuses make me very wary of corporate ISI.

    The programmers always provide a great product, it is the control over my game. It is the deception.

    ISI CORPORATE, JUST TELL THE TRUTH.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 29, 2012

Share This Page