rF2 classified as commercial raises different expectations

Again - some of this information isn't something you can get. See my last post above though...

Regarding new people entering, I don't understand why that bothers you? You actually force people to make a refund decision as it is now. With 30 days there are LESS complaints than with 60, as people aren't forgetting, and are quickly requesting a refund if they would have wanted one. Right now more people are getting what they want, not less.


Sent from a mobile device using Tapatalk

 

"They also released Me and Vista. Can you explain what you mean more (I'm not understanding)?"

just IQing down to be on par with cndracer... replying non-sense to non-sense basically...

 

Figured I read that between the lines

I know full well what it is like to work in a small company where everybody wants to get the most out their product, but you just sometimes can't because there is only limited amount of manpower and time. Add to that the gripes of software development and a bit of common sense, and I think that should give a basic understanding of the position ISI can find themselves in. To come on here, and read some of the posts, is downright frustrating to say the least. I view this from both sides, and can speak out of experience. I don't know fully what is going at ISI as I clearly am not an employee, but where I generally have a total lack of empathy, this time I got the idea roughly, as outlined by Tim's replies.

I think you are wrong, normally speaking you don't deserve anything other than what you paid for. You paid for a product, and you are getting that product, before it is actually a finished product, as opposed to rF1 which never had a public beta. As now the first beta, with apparently clear goals (not all of them known to us, but obviously to ISI) is over, they are probably advancing into a more general beta stage, with a different set of goals and purposes.

Buying new equipment, that is your own responsibility and of any concern for ISI.

We are a bunch of customers, not publishers, shareholders, investors, of any kind. Hell we're not even the customers where the big money comes from probably!

If you read the last posts by Tim, I think he explained it good enough and new information should be available soon if understood his copy/paste frenzy this morning.

 

Another thing: offering refund to people who are making question only shows that they do mot want people arguing around here. Because if you don't accept the generous option for a refund after 6 months about the expected release date of what they call beta, automatically in their heads means that you only have a point if you go away from here.

 

I realize there is confusion for existing customers, but it's literally not a change for us, I can't explain again. I just did as told and for us nothing changes except it seems more new people understand the development, and either stay or refund. Previously there was more confusion about development and timing, now it's the older ones mainly asking as new guys seem to either accept or refund.

There is none of the other changes you're suggesting from the label change.

If you feel it's a truck or nasty, that's wrong. It's trying to do the opposite of that. Buying rF2 as is right now is much clearer than saying buy rF2 and someday this, that, etc. and that's not what I want anybody to feel and why I'd offer someone hurt that way their money back. I'm not like that, and neither is ISI


Sent from a mobile device using Tapatalk

 

I think some people feel duped, and while I don't understand it, and as I remember all the posts I made trying to explain over the past 18mo to basically try to stop people getting too excited, I don't want to have caused those feelings either.

There's no way for me to feel good when someone says this is "nasty", and although I've seen other devs ban and not refund, all I can do is offer one...


Sent from a mobile device using Tapatalk

 

With the change from beta to full release now those who bought the regular version will have to renew their subscription to online service in June 2014 or earlier. So it was a decision to secure future revenues as we all agree it has nothing to do with rfactor2 having become a stable, nearly bug-free application.

That would have been sufficient for most users (including me) I guess. What we currently have is a forum full of new or archived bug reports of which the vast majority has not yet been adressed. Bug reports may have decreased over time but not due to the product having improved but because customers don't feel that their input is useful anyway.

And in response to the discussion you see Mr. Wheatley posting on twitter:

Reading this I am almost lost for words but then again ISI has made clear for some time how us customers have to behave.

 

Great Tim. People should be happy for not being banned so. Around here we call it " ou dá, ou desce". It's when you got a girl to enter on you car you drive some km and say to her: make sex or get out of the car. It's hard to classifie this as rape because the guy give an option to the girl.

 

I said the same here in this thread too. When someone can interpret silence as something going on at a company, rather than just silence, that is paranoia at work.


Sent from a mobile device using Tapatalk

 

You missed the point quite effectively, and made a really offensive comparison nasty enough to make my time here today over.


Sent from a mobile device using Tapatalk

 

I think you have understood ISI's concept of constantly evolving product wrong. There is no beta in that concept (it was a mistake from ISI to use this word in a first place). There are also not "gold" (of course you can compare rfactor 2 current state to something that has developement seperated to clear stages of pre-alpha-alpha-beta-gold and figure out yourself in which stage we are at). ISI have said that they will be marketing the product more and more when they feel more confident with the product. Apparently now was a time to move foward and remove the beta tag (once again should not been there in a first place) in order to market it little more.

I do not like this concept personally and I hope that it won't spread to other genres of gaming (though it was said that some MMO uses this, but I think for example WOW was already very "ready" when released, and there clearly was a point of release). With rfactor 2 I am confident that I will get a good product from which I am willing to pay what is asked. But for a newcomer it can be very confusing. Sometimes people value some games the same amount but ends up with a product that is released first. With rfactor 2 you can not say if it is "released" before something else.

Of course I want rf2 to be ready (maybe this term has something to do with being able to race online with lots of people or have finished AI, and better performance from the game in order to race with decent amount of AI) as soon as possible so that I do not have to get other games in the mean while. I mean I lose my driving skill if I drive too much of inferior sims to rf2. But I do not want to be bored either...

For Cracheur: ISI is not just fixing bugs at this stage... they are adding features and also improving those features that are there already.

 

Not my intention to be rude. I will think in another analogie.
But Don't get me wrong Tim, i like you and i know that politics isn't something that you create. I just think you are oberloaded of work running the entire forum as Isi spokes man even on technical subs and selling the product.
I'm sorry. Didn't want to ofend you.

 

I guess there is a cultural difference when talking about stuff like that. I didn't say what you think I did though, anyway. But again, that could be a language issue. I just mentioned. Oh well...

 

Maybe forget the analogs alltogether?

 

Maybe. I'm not highly educated person and i'm not only talking about english skills.
I'm quiting here in my attempts to making points writing more then one line.

 

You're comparing Microsoft with ISI? LOL. That's just as bad as the guy who is comparing a 40-80 dollar game to a $250,000 house.

 

how is that, because in both cases I want it bug-free (okay, maybe I want it more bad with such house ). Thinking about that, maybe game-developers should hire exterminators

 

+1

 

No, I didn't buy the sim thinking that the C6 and Camaro would be available. It just turns out that I didn't enjoy some of the cars. I'm not interested in modern formula, just not my cup of tea. The historic formula cars are a blast, but a little difficult for me. I think I would enjoy running those with my league-mates, but I just can't make myself get into them solo. I really enjoy the Nissans, which is why I look forward to the C6 and Camaro. I simply had hoped that the sim would be further along by now, based on the expectations set a year ago. I can easily see the potential that this sim has, and I know its gonna be killer when it's completed, but the league I participate in won't touch it until it's done, so it's a $40 product that is not yet being used. I will, however, try to have patience. I don't want a refund, I'm just excited to see the day when I can hop in a car and have some true sportsmanlike league action. I'm not too upset, because I've never, ever seen a game or sim actually released at the initial projected timeline. I am a Gran Turismo customer, so been there. Thank you for taking an interest in my concerns, just discussing it makes me feel much better.

 

It's just a label that ISI removed from the title, why are people still bitching??

The game is in constant improvement, what else do you need to know???