We are orphans

Don't try to rewrite what happened. The community did support ISI by spending $83 on lifetime licenses in 2012/2013 and an ever-changing beta release that began with minimal (historic) content, beautiful mixed weather Nissan at Mills early WIP images that always looked better than rF2 had in the ensuing 11 years, many "finished" car renders and promises, broken night lighting that kept breaking with updates for 2 years, force feedback that went from extremely detailed where you could tell when the flatspot of a tire came around to something less by the end of 2013, etc. 2 years of minor forward movement, seeing content never come out, cars made several years before being released to immediate obscurity (Howston), the loss of important staff and the release of 3 competing games gave people options where to go - and not an expensive paid public tester role.

It is not the community's fault. Remember you were banned for years? Remember the stand off persona of Pier against criticism where everyone was wrong about everything?
 
From my point of view, all we can do now if for some reason we do not want to use another simulation (even LMU), which is my case, is :

1/ To understand as best we can all the different aspects of rfactor 2 in order to optimize them and configure them in the best possible way and get the most out of them (for example the very poorly done weather system which requires understanding a certain number of things and a whole bunch of tests to know exactly what will happen depending on how we configure it, the sound parameters as well as the legacy sound parameters, the graphics parameters, all the parameters concerning realism, how Real road works and how to use it well, FFB parameters both in your steering wheel driver, in the rfactor 2 files and in the UI in order to have a realistic FFB, and so on);

2/ If your priority is like me the realism and the credibility of driving cars, be able to find out a lot and of course have your own judgment to determine which are the most realistic cars in the game, whether ISI, S397 or from modding;

3/ Determine what your priorities are in terms of circuit and find the circuits best suited to your needs.
For me these are the Nurburgring layout as well as the albuzz version (who has a patreon) of the Targa Florio whose version is incredibly promising and will probably be finalized in a few months maximum;

4/ Optimize your hardware as much as possible and if you can, prioritize what is most profitable according to your need in terms of purchasing hardware to improve your experience.



If your option is only rFactor 2 like me (for your own reasons) unfortunately don't expect anything and focus on these four points.

rFactor 2 was bought about 2 years ago I think, ONLY to create LMU and possibly other licenses, which has the direct and automatic effect of stopping developments, updates, improvements, and car and track content of rFactor 2 :(.

This means a lot of bad things for experienced users of rFactor 2 and the death of rFactor 2 on all these main aspects.

The only solution if for your own reasons you want to stay exclusively on rFactor 2 despite the situation.

In any case, this is how I adapt to this unpleasant situation.
 
pilAUTO said:
rFactor 2 was bought about 2 years ago I think, ONLY to create LMU and possibly other licenses, which has the direct and automatic effect of stopping developments, updates, improvements, and car and track content of rFactor 2
Click to expand...

This isn't true. It's more than 3 years since Studio 397 was bought by MSG. rFactor 2 has seen a big update in features and content in the first 2 years after that. They gave it a really big boost, greater than it ever has had.
 
Bernat said:
This isn't true. It's more than 3 years since Studio 397 was bought by MSG. rFactor 2 has seen a big update in features and content in the first 2 years after that. They gave it a really big boost, greater than it ever has had.
Click to expand...

it's true that they brought a whole bunch of things the first year, then almost nothing, and you know the rest for the last year.

Indeed I could have slightly qualified my post on this subject :).

Nevertheless I remain convinced that their real and final objective was what I explained, that is to say to use the physics engine in particular of rfactor 2 to make other games under license like LMU, and to completely abandon rfactor 2 because it did not correspond to the strategy time.

And obviously it is not at all to our advantage us fans of rfactor 2.

But I am not trying to convince you and you will not convince me either even if it was good to recall this small point of nuance.

The fact is that rfactor 2 is dead on most aspects, and that people who do not want at all for one reason or another to use another simulation (even LMU) must find a solution to continue to use rFactor 2 in the best conditions and even in better conditions than ever before.

To do this, I think that my little strategy (in quotation) and you have a very good way to optimize the rfactor 2 experience to make it truly much better than the one we had even 2 years ago when all the features were there and almost all the content.

We can improve things if we want to, a bit like if we optimized, I don't know, for example, a software, or a sports car that would be too heavy but that we could significantly slim down by removing what is not really necessary for performance, and so on.

Besides, I wonder how many rfactor 2 users are in this situation, namely not wanting to use another simulator for a reason that they would have their own.

There may be few people, I don't know in proportion.

The other simulations don't appeal to me at all in terms of the physics engine, and LMU doesn't suit me at all in terms of content, whether it's a circuit, or simply ultra-recent prototype cars/GT that are equipped with driving aids and absolutely breathtaking aerodynamics, with incredibly high-performance tires.

Personally, I don't really like the WEC circuits, not enough for me to want to go on them on a simple simulation after work :

The Nordschleife and the Targa Florio are infinitely more interesting in terms of driving and much more stimulating for various reasons and even quite a few reasons.

And then there is not enough variety in the cars and there never will be even with history in DLC.

So I have no choice but to stay on an rfactor 2 that I actually love, so it shouldn't be a problem for me, but the fact that it no longer develops and improves and that there is no more content I find it really unfortunate and personally I deplore it.

So let's look for other ways to improve rFactor 2 and enjoy it even more despite the situation! :)
 
Bernat said:
rFactor 2 has seen a big update in features and content in the first 2 years after that. They gave it a really big boost, greater than it ever has had.
Click to expand...

Nothing they could do would change anything imho.

Was always going to fall on deaf ears while the most complaints came from people don't even use it :rolleyes:

jim-carrey-jim-carrey-dumb-and-dumber.gif
 
Taranta said:
:rolleyes::( rF2 = LMU.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes::( GTL - 90% GTR2 - 91% rFactor - 92 % AMS - 89%
AC - 92% ACC - 92% AMS2 - 92%
rFactor 2 - 79% Lemans Ultimate - 73%
( Under 80% is the lowest 28% on Steam )

Steam reviewers don't matter, keep telling yourselves that.

Negative reviews with a ridiculously long playtime aren't the only type of review that cause developers to raise their eyebrows. Gardner, for example, is troubled by reviews that have very short playtimes. “One thing that really doesn’t sit well with me is that reviews with so little playtime on record are given the same weight as someone who has finished the game,” he says. “Perhaps if there were separate pools of reviews where there is a minimum required time played to enter a pool A vs pool B, where people have only sampled.”

Another contentious issue is review-bombing, where users will collectively review a game negatively on account of some perceived slight. This could be a change to the game that a section of the community dislikes, but it can also have nothing to do with the game whatsoever. A controversial business decision by a publisher, or a statement made by the developer which the community disagrees with, can both lead to games taking a critical beating on Steam.

“It's terrible how users can use reviews to bomb negative feedback on what could be an unrelated issue,” says Goode, “Buying the game, writing a 'review' laying into the developer, then refunding it... it's a problem for everyone - obviously for developers, for Valve who seem to enable rage-filled, immature hate, and for the players who are just trying to see if they may like a game for what it is at that current time.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top