I must say that the lack of exposure rF2 is getting is frustrating me a lot these days. There is no doubt in my mind that ISI have made the very best racing sim. It deserves to be known by a lot more users.
The way I look at it is that every decent sim racer in the world already knows about rF2. I don't care if casual Steam racing game players know about it or not. If good sim racers want to join rF2, they already know enough about it to make an informed choice, they don't need steam to promote it. Plus, when rF2 is on a holiday sale for $15.99, do you really want the impulse buyers on the pubbies? Quality is more important than quantity.
Then why the multiplayer is so empty if every simracer already knows about rF2? Of course quality is more important than quantity, but the levels of quantity right now are quite scary and I wonder how many people will renew rF2 subscription next month...
Like I said before, at the end of the day it's a business decision on ISI's part. It wouldn't do anything long term for pickup racers online since the average Steam user only plays a game for a month or two. People who run in leagues, no pickup racers will.
This incredibly short-minded, elitist-hardcore view is what really kills slowly rF2's online and maybe other sims. What simracing needs is to grow up, not to stay forever just for the classic elitist simracers. Also your comment just shows an incredible ignorance regarding where most simracers come from (licensed non-simracing titles). Everybody is a noob at the start, you were a noob, I was a noob, etc. I know certain people who came from F1 2013 and they are very good simracers now, so what's wrong with it? What is the point of being so mind-closed to move on, when the simracing market is so incredibly small?
There seems to be a lot of.... well, I'm not sure what it is. Basically very recently I have been pushing rF2 HARD on my community, really trying to "sell" it to them. The question I get most off everyone (Every person said the same) is "Is it worth the money?". I checked, rF2 is currently cheaper than AC yet each one of them already owns AC despite in my opinion offering far less in every aspect. I discussed this with a friend and he simply said "shiny sells". Which is probably true. These guys are not newbies to sim-racing, they just simply don't know enough about the sim to "invest". Again, I'm not making a "for Steam" argument. Tim has stated they have no plans, that's fine by me. But there is 100% an issue that people simply do not know enough about rFactor 2. Again, the current revenue stream may be absolutely fine with ISI and they may be happy with everything. I'm just sharing my very recent observations. EDIT: I just want to add, what this community has over the other sims I have been involved with is Tim. So many sims lack this regular customer-facing member of the team that communicates on a daily basis. That's a massive plus to me.
If the multiplayer sales rely on people who race in leagues, this product will not last long. I know about a couple of high-quality endurance leagues that run rF2, and FSR where I come from. But tbh more leagues are still using rF1 at moment, and even if they all converted to rF2, that alone will not carry the product. Also leagues need to find new members from somewhere and this mostly comes from random causal racers.
Maybe, maybe not, that's just your guess. @ R2P GTR2 is more popular than rF2. Now why someone would prefer GTR2 over rF2 is completely beyond me but some people will just never want to change no matter how hard you try to convert them.
ISI is maketing a no-holds barred hard-core racing simulator, rF2. RF2 requires knowledge of setup and driving techniques comparable to what would be required in the real thing. Talent is necessary to race the cars at speed along the virtual tracks. ISI's competitors who are marketing their simulators on Steam have designed their simulators to be more accessible enabling a wider audience with less talent and technique. (AC at ten-tenths requires talent but maybe not so much at nine tenths, I don't know haven't driven AC much.) Casual Steam gamers won't drive a sim if its too hard. GPL, critically acclaimed, was a commercial failure because of its steep learning curve. Just selling rF2 on Steam would not guarantee additional profit for ISI. ISI would have to design rF2 to appeal to a broad audience in order to recoup the fees charged by Steam, but then maybe it wouldn't be the rF2 we know and love. SW
Simcade will always be more popular, there is no denying in that. Anyway the simcade vs real does not explain why rF2 has constantly much less players online than rF1. At the very moment rF1 has around 400 players online and rF2 less than 200. I don't understand that people would rather play an inferior 2005 product with ugly graphics in 2014. It's the same situation as if Battlefield 2 was more popular online than Battlefield 4. Clearly this situation is indicative of the current issues with rF2.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=129485071 They must be simcade too. Really, open the eyes. By the way, simcade is such a misleading definition. Those simcades that people often talks about are not popular because they are easier to drive, they are popular because they have nice licenses. People wants to drive Ferraris, BMWs, F1s and such. For me rF2, AC etc are easier to play using driving aids than games like NFS Shift or Forza, even with gamepad. Realistic physics if anything makes the cars more natural and predictable than games with fake physics, where you don't know what to expect from the car.
I wonder as well. if one manages to get rf2 going one way or another and is able to race, its frigging brilliant. everything else around it is just utterly frustrating and imo that's the cause we see MP decrease. people only put up with so much. I've got loads of patience once I set my mind to something and rf2 has had my mind since the start but recently I've been thinking of throwing in the towel. But then again, launching our first rf2 championship next week so lets hope something magical happens because I really wanna keep committing to it.
Not sure this is true. Previously, my only racing experience on PC was stuff like F1 2010, realism-modded NFS Shift and similar. It didn't take me too long to get RF2-competitive with a 100% AI. It's a little harder, but mostly it's a lot less "flashy" than those other titles.
Bringing more people into a system where those familiar with the product aren't getting online will do what, exactly? Create even more people who aren't getting online. The online system needs some "adjustment", which is obviously fairly high priority, but suggesting more users will simply fix that, is just incorrect.
1) iRacing is mostly a pubby racing game. Yes, there are leagues but most of iRacing as I understand it is "get on at anytime and race". 2) iRacing is Simcade. No weather, static track surface. The line dividing sim and simcade has moved with the features rF2 has. Weather is necessary for any sim and there's just no reason every current-gen sim shouldn't have it. The only reason to not include it is because it's too hard. I consider the F1 games to be more of a sim than most current gen sims. Even if they don't handle quite the same and everything else, they simulate things even rF2 doesn't- like tire management.
His logic doesn't make any kind of sense. Now game features determine how "hardcore" a sim is, instead of the handling of the car itself What a "guy". Now talking about "features". Can you adjust multiple (in/middle/out) differentials while driving? Adjustable brake map? Adjustable torque curves? Adjustable brake bias at different brake pressures? Adjustable multiple (up to 10 or something like that) TC&ABS settings? And about weather, does rF2 simulate wind effects? You see? I mentioned several things that iRacing has, and rF2 doesn't. Following your logic I guess this makes iRacing less simcade now.
