rFactor 2 – Pricing & Open Beta Info Announced

The recent rFactor 2 Q&A has stirred up a lot of discussion in the rFactor community, especially the announced online account system has lead to some false conclusions.

To add some facts to the discussion, Image Space Incorporated has now announced the official pricing of rFactor 2.

The title will sell for $43.99, allowing unlimited access to single player & mod development mode. The price also includes 12 months of online account membership, an additional year of account membership can be purchased for $12.99.

So, what does the online account membership offer? The online account gives players access to multiplayer races, find and download updates automatically and offer a Mod ID system that will help prevent mismatches. Furthermore, ISI is working on providing additional features such as online statistics.

Player’s whose online account membership runs out can’t use the multiplayer features anymore, the single player & mod modes remain fully functional though. Players without an account can also manually download & install mods & updates.

Furthermore, ISI has released first info on the often-hinted open-beta period. The open beta will allow interested sim racers & modders to get early access to a content-limited version of rFactor 2. To participate, a full purchase of rFactor 2 is necessary, in return open-beta users will be given 18 months of online account access instead of the 12.

The release dates of both the open-beta & retail versions are still unknown, ISI has already hinted that the open-beta and even the retail release might kick off in 2011.


  • Anonymous

    So ISI, you want 13$ for next year because of piracy etc.etc. Modders and track developers will have to pay too? I would say, if you want to keep rFactor 2 on the same level as rF1 was, keep the community and make more money, you should think about paying something to mod and track developers. They made your success, not u. I would pay for extra statistics, maybe special laser-scanned tracks, even graphics updates, but now i’m concerned if I want to play this game.

  • gt3rsr

    Do I understand well that payment is only for playing on official ISI servers? Or do I have to pay every year even for playing online with our private league (where we run 24/7 servers for OUR money). If so, it’s a big BS from ISI.

    • Frank Johansen

      If you use 24/7 servers u probably got to much time on your hands which could be used to earn those fantastic annoying 13 bucks.

    • Anonymous

      Got to pay after yr 1, even for LAN.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Justin-Schmidt/100001406158677 Justin Schmidt

    so isi hosts the mods and the tracks on their servers that in case of a mismatch the game downloads the right version directly. the question is. will unlicensed mods still be allowed?

    • Anonymous

      Where does the ID come from?   

  • http://twitter.com/rfactor2liga SRF rFactor2-Liga

    everybody is arguing about 13 bucks!!! at least 1/3 of us have an iPhone or other smartphone and buy apps even bad apps for some bucks.
    at least 10% of us use iracing and spend lots of money for….
    so 13 bucks per year thats 1,083$ per month, i really do not get this. 

    furthermore the game is not very expensive, lots of other companies charge 59!!!!

    • Anonymous

      I think it’s about both the principle and practicality of the thing, specifically that 

      -  need to subscribe (and have net connection) even to play LAN

      meaning modders need subscribe to use cars and tracks they build themselves (online or LAN) – and people paying to run dedicated servers (Leagues etc) will also have to, even with cars and tracks they build themselves.  

      It is a fundamental change in that regard, hence the grumpiness, and surprise (imo).

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=645597761 Sam Binfield

    I cannot understand how people can still complain about the price. The only real worry most people had regarding the Q&A earlier this week was concerning costs. I appreciate that some people may feel entitled to not have to pay for this service, but I feel that sense of entitlement is something we really need to get away from. By controlling mods more closely, ISI are simplifying the process, ensuring that every player has the same, good experience.

    • Anonymous

      That assumes there will be a surfeit of mods.  Who was speaking about “entitlement”?

  • yorch sincla

    Accounts online are made for:

    -Automatic updates/patches/new content via the game.
    -Make easier mods installations and updates
    -Prevent piracy—>C’mon, every body knows that two things make Rfactor so huge, the most important the modding community of course, the other: the abillity of play online with cracked versions.

    I understand the “principle” some are arguing, and i feel the same, but at the same time I understand 100% the reasons of ISI of making this new system. i don’t think they have in mind “making money thanks to mod creators”, thet have their own reasons, the ones i explained above…

    In my opinion.

    • Anonymous

      Yes, but it does have consequences.  If it alienates modders such that the content which drives people to bother pirating the game doesn’t even exist…..then what was the point?   I wish there was another way.  

      • http://twitter.com/Ghoults myName

        As far as I know c.a.r.s. is the only direct competitor about beign a mod platform. And c.a.r.s. seems to be purely about money milking in regards to mods so rf2 still has its good thing going and has a lot of promise in it. But if rf2 started throwing around microtransactions it might just tip the scales to the c.a.r.s.’ direction. Or to the direction of going nowhere.

        I don’t think you are making any sense however :). Read my post again. You do not need to pay extra money for isi to create an account and to fight piratism. LFS fights piracy really well too without needing “yearly fees for online access”. There _is_ another way. It just makes less money for ISI. That is to look at what lfs has done and try to improve that. ISI could just offer things for microtransactions what people want isntead of offering things people need. Sharing online skins for the cars is one good example and LFS has a microtransaction mode for it too.

        I’m not saying ISI are money hungry bastards nor just greedy but maybe ISI just does not understand what is microtransactions as a business model. It is not about first paying one time fee for the game and then paying for it second time by adding tons of smaller fees for every feature of the game. Sadly that’s the way things seem to go in modern gaming. First was probably world of tanks with both monthly sub fees and “real money equipment” and now eve online seems to want to follow by adding a doll dressing up scheme in their mmo. And console markets have been strongly effected by DLCs where in some instances it seems like the original game was cut to smaller pieces to make room for DLCs.

        It is all about bigger profits. I don’t see ISI as a bad guy. Sure, I don’t rate theur past games very highly in physics aspect of the games but at least ISI have given us a great platform which has made it possible for things like awesome mods like historix mod among many others to exist. I have no problem showing my support to ISI by paying little more for their game. I just don’t like the doors this yearly online fee opens up and where it might lead.

        In the end it might drive mod makers away. Maybe they stop doing what they completely because the only other option for mod making is c.a.r.s. which sounds much more hardcore pay for everything model. 

        Which is why I don’t get your point Curt. You say paying extra for yearly online fee is required to fight piracy among other things. And that might drive mod makers away. But that’s not true. You don’t need yearly fee to provide these things. There is another way.

      • Anonymous

        Thank god ISI are not going the way of micro-transactions.

    • http://twitter.com/Ghoults myName

      You don’t need an account for updates or patches. Installation and updates don’t get any easier either. How does simply having an account do that? And more to the point lfs for example has accounts and usernames that stay so you can use them for bans and tracking people. LFS has them for free and has had for almost 10 years.

      Preventing piracy is good but again can be done without the need for actively paying yearly payments. Again just look at lfs. You could even forget the whole piracy argument fails altogether when the whole game is built on using material that is copyrighted but without permissions of any kind from the cr owners.

      All the reasons you have listed are not good. Same service is available for free. What you are effectively paying is online access and that’s it. You could see it as a yearly DLC or a system like xbox live. It’s a microtransaction for the online mode of the game.

      I don’t think the 13$ is a meaningful sum. Nor that it’s any kind of dealbreaker to me in itself. It’s not much. But it does not really offer content itself either. What it does it opens the door for microtransactions which is effectly just an annoying money milking scheme. Since we pay yearly for online access there might be more things coming. Like paying for more mod slots, some other extra fees and payments. World of tanks here we come? Hope not.

      This whole ordeal is not about “preventing piracy, making updates easier or just helping the community”. It is a business strategy. I understand that company like ISI needs more money than just one time fee to support its games for 6 years or what it has taken since rf1 but I hope a full prized game with microtransactions for typical features that come with all other games for free is not the way they have chosen.

  • Anonymous

    Amazing that some are complaining about the price.  Its just over $1 a month and that like you buying a chocolate bar once a month.  


    • Anonymous

      I don’t think you’re getting it.  It isn’t necessarily about the money.  See Rantam’s post above, and check the discussion at ISI forum – specifically Mak Group dude’s comments.

      • Anonymous

        Yeah Curt, like everyone was thinking about the points in Rantams post when they were moaning about the money.   For them it is about the money, they want everything for free.  Believe me, I get it.  I’ve been around long enough.

      • Anonymous

        well, fair enough.  
        Even so, I do think complaining about the money is legitimate too.  Why wouldn’t it be?   

        If it’s so small an amount, why bother to charge it?  

      • Anonymous

        Well I guess because it’s a small amount to us but when you multiply it by all the rFactor 2 users it will pay for the servers and the service.  
        I do think we should have a free MP option though, its only right.

      • Anonymous

        yes, you’re right – to them it adds up, but to us it’s almost negligible (well, to us pampered westerners, at least – i hope!)   I increasingly think it’s very fair and reasonable……I’m coming round to it.   

        The MP gets me, as it does you.   But like I say, I think I am coming around to it.   C’est la vie.  And if it means ISI/rF continues in essentially the same way, I guess it’s the best we are going to get – because so far rF has been the best software and paradigm we’ve ever had, by far.  I always loved Dave Kaemmer’s stuff, but I just can’t afford iRacing, and I found myself spending a lot of time in rF racing offline, checking various mods, and tracks.  I loved the profusion of content, the punk of it, which iRacing just doesn’t do and has no interest in doing.   I hope this modified paradigm isn’t going to change all that too much – I hope modding and league racing won’t suffer because of it – or at least not much.   

        On the positive, it will be great to have ID’s for tracks and mods, persistent lap records for each mod, online accounts which will ban discovered cheats, etc.   And a great new game engine, of course.   

        Yes, I think I am coming around to it.  The shock is wearing off.   :D

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HEJQFMZIIWS55MFDYTKUR2F5KI Firefox

        Small amount for the individual but with many individuals the amount rises :)

      • Anonymous


      • Ricoo

        I don’t want anything for free, I bought almost all racing sims out there.

        But I don’t see why I should pay just for a matchmaking online system.

        I repeat it costs nothing to ISI, no server, nothing.

        It is just unfair and I don’t like that.

      • Anonymous

        How do you know it costs ISI nothing ?   Explain that to me so that I can understand

      • Ricoo

        They don’t have to pay for online servers. It’s just a feature added to the game. You pay for it when you initially buy the game. A subscription for matchmaking system and online stats is a joke. LFS has that for free for 10 years, and it’s produced by only 3 people.

    • Ricoo

      I don’t mind paying a lot more for engine updates and new tracks and cars, but this pay for online matchmaking looks wrong for me (and I am nice with my words).

  • http://www.facebook.com/Novum Joacim Novum Nilsson

    Only thing that change is that ISI is expoiting a market.. To make money..
    But the question is. Will they use there “money” to make something good out of it?

    Im not to fond of this..
    I think “cars” team has an edge here…

    I will buy this… i loved RF1

  • http://twitter.com/SuperRantam Rantam

    (Please Montoya delete this one, it was a double post, my fault)

    • http://twitter.com/SuperRantam Rantam

      (Please Montoya delete this one, it was a double post)

  • http://twitter.com/SuperRantam Rantam

    We at HistorX are having a very interesting discussion about this.

    far from being a “13$ yearly fee is expensive” discussion. From the
    player point of view we even think that’s even cheap. So it’s not really
    being about the software being expensive.

    But as we’ve already read right here from the modder point of view things aren’t that clear. Most of you
    may have not think about the implications of that because you don’t mod (which of course we understand), but there’re implications indeed.

    Some members from HistorX think that we’d be just creating content for a game which otherwise wouldn’t be that interesting (unless ISI really release good content for it). At least for rF1 it was like that: without all those mods rFactor probably wouldn’t be that successful. So ISI would be
    (directly) getting money from modders’ work using this business model in rF2.

    There’re could be legal/licensing issues also: someone (ISI) getting money from not licensed content (modding) may attract the attention of car manufacturers, brands and racing series or track owners.

    We think a different business model would had a better approach from themodder point of view. But disabling the multiplayer features if you don’t pay that fee is a tricky thing which has a lot of implications.

    For example, probably the modding content won’t last much. I mean, probably we won’t be able to do what people is doing with GPL/GTL/GTR2 or even rF1. Once the game is not supported anymore by the developer andthey decide to discontinue/close that online service people simply won’t be able to race it online, which probably is the only thing that makes people still modding and playing those games.

    This is not big deal for small mods: you may need just some months or a year to do it so it may yet enjoy a few years of use. But what about bigprojects? There’re a lot of people/teams focused on those: Virtual_LM, CTDP, Team players, US pits, WSGT and much more. We at HistorX needed more
    than a year to create our first version and the current one is reaching right now 3 years of development (luckily we’re close to release date now). So this “game due date” may discouragemodders involved in big projects.

    What will happen if suddenly that online service has a problem? People won’t be able to play online as they do right now, as they won’t be able to connect through a simple IP, for example.

    I’m just doing some brainstorm now, but probably it would have been betterjust changing a bit the business model to make it look good from any point of view. For example charging players each 1 or 2 years for a new version of rFactor (basically engine updates and content) but letting people freedom to continue playing previous versions if they want to do that. I wouldn’t have a problem even
    if that mean i had to pay more than those 13$.

    Anyway those are just some things that come to my mind or which I’ve heard the other guys at HistorX talk about…, but please don’t take it as a HistorX statement or whatever. These are just my words. And for sure I could still writing things about this without problem. It has simply opened a bit discussion among us. I guess that the more we know about rF2 will bring new thoughts about this :)

    Kindest regards

    Ps. please, and again, notice I’m not talking as HistorX here.
    Ps2. We’ll be discussing it at our facebook page ( http://www.facebook.com/Histor… ) or at our support forums ( http://historicgt.8.forumer.co… ), in the case you want to discuss about it there also.

    • Anonymous

      you might want to change that FB link?     lol

      should read /Historix   …. right?   Atm it directs to some Spanish guy, Histor Alves or something.  :D

      Interesting comments.  They reflect my sentiments – though I’m not a modder, I imagined the issues you mention would arise.  The game-engine is the main thing, but then 3rd party content comes next and has been crucial for the success of rF1, and it’s arguably been the main reason for interest in rF2.

      If ‘protecting’ rF2 undermines the supply of 3rd party content, it seems a little self-defeating.   No doubt everyone wants rF2 to succeed, and we all surely understand the desire/need for ISI to both make money (ongoing) and to protect rF2 from piracy….but this seems somewhat self-defeating.    I think the idea of paying for a later update is a much better one.  Most everyone would buy it, would they not?  And/or maybe a bi-monthly phone-home for online licence-validation, or some such, which would allow LAN and league use to continue largely unaffected.  Sadly I’m quite disappointed – it’s taken the edge off my anticipation (as it has done for others, by the looks)

      • Anonymous

        Seems to me that the answer is to allow free LAN (which they obviously should by default anyway !), free multiplayer so you can have your own dedicated server and have anyone connect for free…. but… if you want to join their servers with the extra things they can maybe offer, then you have the OPTION to pay $12.99 a year.   Less wreckers maybe, stats, etc..  like iRacing.
        You’re paying for the service so I dunno if ISI is liable for the unlicenced mods that are played on there.   Thats like your ISP being responsible if you download porn or the lastest movie.

      • Anonymous

        y – agreed.     Personally I loathe Steam(ing pile of ****) – I think it alters the relationship to the product.

        Anyway – looks like ISI have already decided this is how it’s gonna be and it simply isn’t up for modification.   (ironic?).  

        I hope it works out….and once we get used to the idea everything be essentially the same.  I do so hope so.  

      • http://twitter.com/SuperRantam Rantam

        (Thanks, links corrected)

    • Ricoo

      Moreover I would find it unfair if ISI would make money with mod which was initially based on SimBin products.

      • http://twitter.com/SuperRantam Rantam

        Apparently somebody flagged my comment. Classic. Some guys are just plain fun… :)

    • http://twitter.com/Ghoults myName

      Quote starts:——————-
      There’re a lot of people/teams focused on those: Virtual_LM, CTDP, Team players, US pits, WSGT and much more. We at HistorX needed more than a year to create our first version and the current one is reaching right now 3 years of development (luckily we’re close to release date now). So this “game due date” may discouragemodders involved in big projects.
      …I’m just doing some brainstorm now, but probably it would have been betterjust changing a bit the business model to make it look good from any point of view. For example charging players each 1 or 2 years for a new version of rFactor (basically engine updates and content) but letting people freedom to continue playing previous versions if they want to do that.”
      Quote ends.  ——————

      But you’re contradicting yourself there :). If the game changed every two years wouldn’t that alone discourage big modding teams a lot? Plus I don’t think selling the game very 2 years with relatively small changes is that easy. Especially when it is full price everytime. And providing support for multiple revisions. Having many versions of your game used actively is not good situation for the developer.

      With that approach after 2 years you have already two versions. After 4 years of the original release you would already have 3 versions.

      If a good/big mod takes 3 years to make then you end up releasing content for a game that you can no probably buy anymore. Will rf1 be sold after rf2 release? Probably. But will rf1 be sold when rf3 is out? Probably not. Of course it is tighter and shorter schedule we are talking about but still… And everyone waiting for that mod would have to buy all the versions of the game which would be just as expensive.

      In hypothetical situation would you like to develop historix for rf1 when rf2 has been out for a year? Or would you work on a 2 or 3 year project knowing that the actual release is for a game one or two revisions in to the future without not knowing what kind of changes there will be?

      • http://twitter.com/SuperRantam Rantam

        I understand your point, but i don’t think I’m really contradicting myself. I mean, if rF2 is good enough mod teams working on big mods may stick to it for some time even if a later version is already available.

        And this may be not just because them want do to such thing, but because they’re ‘forced’ to do that as a proper mod takes a good amount of time to be developed and most modding teams (if not all) are far from having the human resources necessary to do it faster. They usually can’t keep up with professional game developer teams. Look Codemaster, for example. It looks like they’re going to release a new F1 game every year. That of course is great from the player point of view. But a modding teams need to think in long term development unless they really get enough people working, which is not the general case.

        Keep in mind also that moving to a new platform is usually costly for a modding team. At least on time: they will have to learn how the new platform works. The development performance will suffer just because of this, at least during some time. Of course the less the platform has changed, the less impact this will have. But still there will be some impact.

        Of course, modding teams may stick to a game which has been released some time a go also because they plainly love what it offers and don’t need anything else for the moment. Look GPL for example: after so many people some people still loving developing stuff for it. Despite i think GPL is a bit too aged right now i understand that.  GTL, GTR2 or rF1 aren’t that old yet so they may have some life left yet.

        And it’s like that in other gaming genres also, look around. If you know the FPS Battlefield series you probably know that mod teams
        still are working on BF2 (for example) because it basically offers all they need and
        has been out for enough time to let them complete their work. With flight simulators you may find something like this also.


      • http://twitter.com/Ghoults myName

        You are correct. The battlefield example is indeed a good one :). And from a modder’s perspective the 2 year model (new version of the sim every two years) indeed “leaves behind” a finished version which is good modding platform. I’m not really sure if that is a good path for a game developer to take though. Especially when their product is first and foremost a modding platform and not a full game in the traditional sense. Releasing new platforms instead of improving the old one with compatibility in mind just seems a bit more sensible for me :).

        However the biggest problem I see with that kind of model is the costs. Paying full price every two years is not all that tempting. But nor is the yearly online fee plus the original game.

        I really hope ISI is not going into microtransaction direction. I hope the yearly fee is the only one that is added on top of the boxed product even if the boxed product is only sold online. It is a bit hard to compare the two models when we don’t really know the full specs of the RF2 :).

  • http://twitter.com/DevinXXS Devin Braune

    Why should we pay 13$ a year? OUR servers, most of it OUR cars and we bought the game -.-
    Did u ever think about people under 18? Most of them don’t have so much money and I think most of them won’t buy rF2 anymore now! You take a shit on such people, you get your money and you’re all happy ISI. Congratulations, you are heroes -.-

    • jswarthoff

      good, we dont need kiddies online

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HEJQFMZIIWS55MFDYTKUR2F5KI Firefox

      Parents must have gotten really cheap these days if the average allowance is less than $13 a year…

      • http://twitter.com/Addy_711 Adam Mansir

        Firefox, see they already spent their allowance on a computer to run the game, a broadband internet connection, $44 for rF2, wheel and pedals. How’s a kid supposed to come up with $13 in the next 12-18 months on top of all that?

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HEJQFMZIIWS55MFDYTKUR2F5KI Firefox

        Work perhaps?
        I delivered papers, mowed the lawn and cleared my neighbors driveways from snow when I was a kid.
        I earned enough to keep my gaming going so to speak.

      • http://twitter.com/Addy_711 Adam Mansir

        hah yeah my internet sarcasm didn’t come through. Yup they can pull some weeds or shovel some snow

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HEJQFMZIIWS55MFDYTKUR2F5KI Firefox

        Sarcasm is indeed hard without the “I’m soooo serious” voice :)

  • http://twitter.com/GeraArg Gerardo

    The end of piracy. 
    That’s the only reason why many are crying like kids.

    • Ricoo

      Free online account linked with the bought game is enough to prevent pirates to race online and it will be inefficient to fight pirates who just want to play offline. That’s not the point.

    • Guilherme Cramer

      I do not appreciate being put in the same category as warez d*uche bags.

    • David BEHAL

      Well i don’t think so.
      Most pirates never play online, it’s the price of using pirates games.
      With their new policy ISI is telling them “even if you pay the game you won’t be able to play online either unless you pay even more”, i don’t think this will encourage them to buy the game.(adding to the fact that i won’t be surprised if the MP part lock be cracked soon)

      For myself, before i was aware of all that story i was thinking of buying the game as soon as it will come’s out but now i’m seriously questioning myself i will or not, 
      Chance are i will buy it though but i will certainly wait for some times, just to see what will happen.

      If you remember the start of rfactor 1 i takes more than a year to get serious mods to play online, before that ISI basic content was … well very basic.
      The problem here is that you probably will run out of your first year free subscription before any decent mods come out and need to pay again to be able to use them online.

      For me if ISI persist in this wrong way the big risk is to see MP almost dead after one year because everyone will have reached the end of the free subscription and most won’t necessarily pay for more (cause of the lack of interesting content then, mostly)

      Adding to that privates leagues using their own servers and their own mods(for which mod autoupdate will be a plague cause most use modified mods), i don’t see why anyone at these leagues would have to pay anything as the don’t need anything from ISI more than the game itself, it’s not about the cost itself, which is very cheap, it’s about the principle to pay someone else for something you provide yourself, 

      Also 100% agree with Rantam, how about modders ?
      Will they all take the risk of starting long term projects on a platform with hypotheticaly no long term future because of a questionable policy ?
      How about the fact that ISI will make money selling rights to play mods that the community made ? (causing potential licences issues)

      Once again it is not about money but about principle.
      For leagues, LAN player, and modders, ISI must provide direct IP multiplayer for free or i really fear that many will stick with RF1 which still can do the job very well for free.

  • http://twitter.com/sigmatc24 Mister Sigma

    I think the annual fee is ridiculous comparing to iRacing. But in the other hands modders are creating superb work too. So as far as ISI will keep updates coming in order to raise the quality of the sim. No problem it is fully justified

  • http://twitter.com/Pascalwb Pascal Warboard

    Online leagues have own servers, and why every menber of league must pay 13 USD for year, when, he bought game for 44 USD, and he has own mod, own server and close comunity in league. People will still play rF1 or they buy C.A.R.S it is not better than rF2 but this shit….

    • http://www.facebook.com/fabio.pittol Fabio Pittol

      Following your logic, “he” doesn’t have his own mod, as “he” didn’t pay for that, unless “he” has built it.

  • Anonymous

    But the way to prevent piracy is in my opinion “simple”. Look at this:
    Cdkey is needed to create personal online account where the cdkey is connected (with restricted nickname, those statistics, i don’t know – setups and whtevr ISI planned). Creating other account is forbidden with this cdkey, so pirates can only play in SP mode/they need to buy game to play multiplayer.
    The problem is that some people can share their accounts, so ISI should have an option to ban accounts logging from several computers in one day and that would for me work. Everyone would be happy i think

  • Ricoo

    It seems not everyone share ISI vision about online multiplayer, a quote from RaceRoom about GTR3:


    Development Team

    Re: rFactor2 to charge for online use

    « Reply #7 on: November 03, 2011, 08:16:09 AM »


    As Marcus states currently
    there are no plans to charge for online racing. And i do not expect us
    to change our minds on that anytime soon either.

    • Frank Johansen

      They have another philosophy, lets sell the same game 5-6 times with some additional content for every release.

      • Ricoo

        At least you have additional content, not a bland matchmaking system. You are free to buy or not those expansions, and if you don’t, you can still play online.

  • Anonymous

    I not a fan of paid subscriptions  in gaming, but with such a ridiculously low annual fee, I just can’t complain. ISI  knows what they’re doing.

    • David BEHAL

      The problem is when you accept to put even a small part of a finger in this kind of mechanism you can be sure that you’ll be soon eaten to the shoulder.

      Accept that today and tomorrow all we will have to will be games sold in X parts for X times the price of a today’s full game (like Valve as done with HL2) or all kind of paying DLC to have the full game, paying MP like on consoles, or worst of all games will only be rent-a-game style like i-racing (after all if gamers are ready and pleased to throw hundred dollars/year for games they will never own … )

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1711429307 Chris Wright

        Sorry, I don’t agree. iRacing has been extortion for years, rFactor’s pricing will hopefully give them some much needed competition.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002382175429 Michael Nephalim

    My question is this — Can you purchase the game for single offline play? I don’t race online, have no desire to. Don’t give a crap about racing online. Just want to purchase the full game for my own personal OFFLINE use! So what’s the deal?

    • David Francic

      You need to buy it and then when your licence expires you will still be able to play offline and download all updates but wont be able to play online.

  • Steve Brown

    Pay to play online? no fukin thankyou lol. Looks like I’ll be downloading this and using Tunngle to play online. 

    stupid devs, so fukin greedy these days

Back to top