rFactor2 Test Build 107 Released
- Thread starter 88mphTim
- Start date
Actually, I'm with Maxym on this one (generally speaking, not necessarily every sentiment). I don't see the need to abstract things behind config files (which doesn't always explain what each value is sufficiently) or even worse, on a forum that isn't directly linked in the app. Right now, that we're in beta, this is somewhat acceptable, seeing as getting the beta requires coming through these forums. However, new users (once it goes Gold) may not ever step a foot in here, or even be aware of its existence.
IMO, there's no reason some fairly basic, commonly touched things shouldn't be exposed in the UI. I've never had to go into a config file for LFS or iRacing--or any other piece of software, come to think of it! It's cheap/lazy software design.
While I, personally, understand that there may be budget restrictions that would make taking the time to do such a thing (how long would it actually take, anyway?) unfeasible--ultimately, the budget doesn't matter to the average user. For example, what difference does it make how much value HRT gets out of its money if they're still coming in at the back every single race?
IMO, the only time a user should HAVE to go into a config file is if there's a definite reason that 99.9% of the users (that's one in every thousand) absolutely should not be touching that value.
I'm baffled whenever someone suggests something that would make the software better for every single person across the board and is met with resistance by both the community and even a member of the developer's studio. I think this is a case where Maxym has a certain reputation preceding this discussion, and instead of people honestly listening to his words, they just argue against him. Is this something that should be changed in the next build? Doesn't have to be...but it is something that ISI should definitely consider going forwards. Making something accessible to a wider audience doesn't HAVE to be a bad thing.
IMO, there's no reason some fairly basic, commonly touched things shouldn't be exposed in the UI. I've never had to go into a config file for LFS or iRacing--or any other piece of software, come to think of it! It's cheap/lazy software design.
While I, personally, understand that there may be budget restrictions that would make taking the time to do such a thing (how long would it actually take, anyway?) unfeasible--ultimately, the budget doesn't matter to the average user. For example, what difference does it make how much value HRT gets out of its money if they're still coming in at the back every single race?
IMO, the only time a user should HAVE to go into a config file is if there's a definite reason that 99.9% of the users (that's one in every thousand) absolutely should not be touching that value.
I'm baffled whenever someone suggests something that would make the software better for every single person across the board and is met with resistance by both the community and even a member of the developer's studio. I think this is a case where Maxym has a certain reputation preceding this discussion, and instead of people honestly listening to his words, they just argue against him. Is this something that should be changed in the next build? Doesn't have to be...but it is something that ISI should definitely consider going forwards. Making something accessible to a wider audience doesn't HAVE to be a bad thing.
88mphTim
racesimcentral.net
Everybody accepted that things which the vast majority of users should not be in INI files, and that is why they won't be. The argument had no basis from the first time that was stated, and the choice to manipulate answers to continue arguing adjusted points of the same type, already answered, is just not right and pointlessly argumentative. Your reply actually agrees with both sides, states both sides points, and backs up the fact that the issue, won't be an issue, showing how absolutely pointless this is.
Options which large numbers require, will be in the UI. There are options which don't even exist yet, that aren't in the UI either. That's because we are still developing the software, adding options, editing the UI, etc. It'll be done when it's done, and will cater to the cast majority. The minority, the MINORITY, may want further options, and those will be done by editing INI files, like every other software, ever.
Options which large numbers require, will be in the UI. There are options which don't even exist yet, that aren't in the UI either. That's because we are still developing the software, adding options, editing the UI, etc. It'll be done when it's done, and will cater to the cast majority. The minority, the MINORITY, may want further options, and those will be done by editing INI files, like every other software, ever.
Knight of Redemption
Registered
LOL way to go for the most wildly inaccurate statement ever...Glad to hear more stuff will make it to the UI this time around, I want to race not get a degree in INI editing...
Kknorpp001
Banned
You likely haven't been around simracing very long, its a niche because that way it gives developers full control of their sim. If they go too mainstream and needing large budgets then they will need to make more compromises in the direction of the sim, they will need to target the largest possible audience. These arent people into sims so they will end up with just another arcade racer like all the others before and those that have sold out for bigger budgets. No offense but I think you may be much happier buying a playstation and a copy of Gran Turismo then RF2 going by your comments here.
Id love to see MaXyM purchase a real race car, then whine about how it isn't setup properly out of the box (or shipping container) and he needed to strain himself learning how to start it up which probably could have been done with a huge red button on the wheel instead. If one line in a config file is such an issue yet he'd rather write 500 lines complaining about how this is too hard for many to bother learning in an unreleased early beta version which will likely change as Tim has mentioned.
Its not like you need a hex editor and edit the .exe its a simple config file needing the extreme modding tool provided with windows, the notepad app
ROFL awesome.
Kknorpp001
Banned
Dude your name is great. Blackbox. No wonder you don't like config files. LOL.
Man, I'm in simracing for about 14 years, co-founder of simracing.pl, biggest simracing portal in Poland, leagues administrator for 8 years and after that quite experienced programmer and project manager, working on big projects for big companies (ie pharmacy) as well as for end users. Believe me, I know what I'm talking about.
Last edited by a moderator:
K Szczech
Registered
Believe me, sometimes you don't.
I'm not saying this case in particular, but often enough.
buddhatree
Registered
Really?
Then how would you like ISI to come to your work place and tell you how to do your job? How would you like it if they were constantly complaining and nit picking every little thing? how would you like it if no answer you gave was ever good enough? How would you like them to harass you day after day after day?
Reading your posts, I highly doubt you would be as patient as Tim has been.
And btw, nobody here believes for one second you are doing this for "the customers" as you claim. Nobody believes you are concerned with sales of rF2 or how well "new" customers can play the game "out of the box".
Nothing about you is altruistic.
You just like to pick at small little things and tell ISI what bad, horrible job they are doing.... over and over and over again. That's what you are about and that's your only concern.
Yet you seem to have a considerable about of time to argue with a company you have no investment in other than buying one of their products.
my customers comes and complains. its he same as I come here and complain - I have right to do that.
Difference is that I try to minimize probability a customer start to complain (even in beta stage) while here I may get an answer: go away to learn how to edit config files.
but finally I'm not complainin to ISI. once I clearly said that wil not report any issues anymore.
I'm reacting to some posters who think that it is correct way.
Difference is that I try to minimize probability a customer start to complain (even in beta stage) while here I may get an answer: go away to learn how to edit config files.
but finally I'm not complainin to ISI. once I clearly said that wil not report any issues anymore.
I'm reacting to some posters who think that it is correct way.
buddhatree
Registered
LOL dude!!!! You constantly do that: you lie.
<-rofl faceYou over exaggerate and twist things... which is the same as lying.
Do you even believe your own lies? You do realize we've all been here since the beginning right? We can read.
LOL that's not what happened and you know it.
