>> Let's compare: the LFS servers verses rFactor.
>> The LFS servers and the game's overall online stability is excellent.
>> rFactor's servers and overall online stability is poor.
>> I'm truly glad that ISI has backed up its previous assurances that its
>> online component would be much better, compared to GTR.
>> It's very sad that some companies, once its game has been released,
>> totally abandon the community.
> I think it is early days to suggest the community has been abandoned. In
> comparison to previous ISI efforts I think rFactor multi is heading the
> right way, though for sure it isn't there yet. In general though I have
> found rFactor multi to be pretty stable, just the racelist side seems hit
> or miss.
operations, you'd notice that ISI's is downright crappy. Connection wise
there may not be a big difference, but orgainizing everything and getting
the community involved in the online experience has so far been a failure
for ISI. GTR failed, and I was hoping (as were a lot of other people) that
rFactor would be different.
Take a look at what LFS offers with its desktop (not the greatest but not
bad) and it's statistics and hot-lapping section. ISI is nowhere near this.
The developers of LFS are out in the open with the community; I saw one ISI
developer here (a token visit) and rarely see them on the RSC forums. It's
as if they have released their product and washed their hands of it.
Alanb