Remove rFmod Petition

**kleanphil** · 01-26-12, 07:39 AM

ethone ,wouldnt that make it easier to individualise the content needed to download instead of packs

**Lazza** · 01-26-12, 07:42 AM

DeM: Tell us how you really feel mate... just remember without them we don't have a product either.

**K Szczech** · 01-26-12, 07:48 AM

I have a suggestion - an option to generate ModID automatically from dedicated server.

When I setup my dedicated server, I provide information necessary for ModID like racing series and tracks - it shouldn't be difficult to add such option.
This does not affect any ideas behind ModID - it only makes it's preparation more lightweight.

Combined with automatic downloading of ModID by rFactor2 (if components are installed) this should make the "burden" of ModID barely noticeable for both users and admins.

**MaXyM** · 01-26-12, 08:00 AM

Would this ID be generated for whole content installed on the server or just for runinng one?
I hope you ment second option. For example if dedic is running with a racing serie and 3 tracks rolling, the ID would be generated only for those 4 components.

However... Why to generate such kind of ModID? Comparing 4 Ids (component IDs) instead of one will not overload the server I'm sure. However it is just about technical resolution. So from user/admin point of view - doesn't matter

**WiZPER** · 01-26-12, 08:00 AM

Have been trying to preach the same solution, nothing so far...

**D.Painter** · 01-26-12, 08:04 AM

Hey guy's I do remember Tim saying he closes thread at 15 pages so I'm guessing this one will be shut down soon.

But really I think we've come to a point were we've pretty much covered all we can in a constructive way. Things are starting to repeat itself now.

All we really can do now is give the ISI team time to review what's been said, suggested and try to see if something can be implemented that's more suited to all of us + themselves.

Maybe we should look at Graphic for awhile to give Shum64 some support like he has here. Trouble with trying to test things it's a bit like this topic, It's not fully implemented so it makes it hard to know what is going to be the final end result. So what should we give feedback on? Anyway we can still do with a change of subject for a while.

**K Szczech** · 01-26-12, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by MaXyM

Would this ID be generated for whole content installed on the server or just for runinng one?
I hope you ment second option.

Of course I meant the second one - that's the idea behind ModID anyway.

Originally Posted by D.Painter

But really I think we've come to a point were we've pretty much covered all we can in a constructive way.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by D.Painter

So what should we give feedback on?

I believe people are allready producing more feedback that ISI is capable of processing

Personally, I'll focus on graphics, because I have actual experience in that area.

**Satangoss** · 01-26-12, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by Nand Gate

Lols @ angry trolls making demands during pre-release BETA (this is actually Alpha). Keep your troll-pants on and save your energy - you still have 6 months more whinging ahead of you.

If there's something that I learned from years on Internet, this post describes it exactly: the biggest TROLL stuff that could exist is the people who just post to blame others to be a troll.

There’s nothing more unproductive and dispensable to any discussion.

If you don’t have anything to say, just call someone as a “troll” or “whiny” or whatever… just be a toady.

**michael1** · 01-26-12, 10:55 AM

There is nothing wrong with rF2 format -1

**thuGG** · 01-26-12, 10:56 AM

Arguments?

**Satangoss** · 01-26-12, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by michael1

There is nothing wrong with rF2 format -1

Elaborate.

**Gjon Camaj** · 01-26-12, 01:00 PM

I have not implied that we want to prevent the way leagues administer their races. I am aware of the need to quickly put tracks and cars together and how the current implementation of the package system makes this very difficult. This is something that will be worked on at some later point.

We are building this system in stages and setting the foundation so we can more easily add robust features in the future. We are finding bugs, trying to smooth out the process and soliciting reactions along the way. I expect people to be passionate about the parts that are most important to them, but I am extremely surprised at some of the rudeness.

I'll temper my attempt at humor, doesn't seem to translate well.

**kart38** · 01-26-12, 01:04 PM

Would it be possible for ISI to release some content the way they are envisioning the community doing things, that would give everyone a glimpse at how they see this idea working.

Just an idea, and no I'm not fishing for us to get content before they were already planning on releasing it. I just see that as the most obvious way to give us insight into how this will work.

Jason

**x_stefano20** · 01-26-12, 01:28 PM

Isi, please, split tracks from other contents!
+1

**cocis** · 01-26-12, 01:51 PM

Isi, please, split tracks from other contents!

+1

**magicgioanca** · 01-26-12, 01:54 PM

Isi, please, split tracks from other contests!

**marcobost** · 01-26-12, 01:54 PM

ISI please, split tracks from other contents!

+1

**Relesys** · 01-26-12, 02:26 PM

Isi, please, split tracks from other contents!

+1

**totonno_hard** · 01-26-12, 02:29 PM

Isi, please, split tracks from other contents!

**mianiak** · 01-26-12, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by kart38

Would it be possible for ISI to release some content the way they are envisioning the community doing things, that would give everyone a glimpse at how they see this idea working.

Just an idea, and no I'm not fishing for us to get content before they were already planning on releasing it. I just see that as the most obvious way to give us insight into how this will work.

Jason

There is no point in doing that. The way people have been releasing stuff already is exactly what your asking for.

Thread: Remove rFmod Petition

Thread Tools

Posting Permissions