Talk:RFactor

Timeless
The article was suffering from being out of date as well as having many references to dates, which were often referred to future events. Like awaiting features or upcoming patches. I rewrote it to be more timeless and a bit more generic thereby. It's still far from perfect, but maybe a better point from where the quality can be enhanced. Some paragraphs still need some updates. For example, the community-section could be longer, since the community is what made the concept of rFactor a success in the first place. Also the section about the initial reaction should be about the history, since the game is on it's last year and the successor rFactor2 is announced. I appreciate feedback. Dahie (talk) 06:50, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Logos
I've uploaded 4 logos from the EPS file distributed on the rFactor Website (http://www.rfactor.net/downloads/rf_logoset.zip, http://www.rfactor.net/index.php?page=downloads ).

JamesHoadley 09:46, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Linklist
I suggest to clean up the link list of this article. As rFactor is support by many dozent modding teams, links to their webpages should be removed and only links to common ressources like rFactorCentral or should be included. Better link to pages, where you can get them all then advertising for just few mod-teams.

--Dahie 17:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed, it should be ~6 items long. The mod and circuit lists should probably be culled altogether, there's a whole plethora now. Maybe the different sources should be described (i.e., GP4, F1C, original creation etc). --JamesHoadley 12:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Needs Updating
This article is really old. It talks about stuff coming in the future but those things are already present in rFactor. Also it's written like a website or an article, not like an encyclopedia's page. (unsigned by User:84.50.172.75)


 * Yeah, it needs updating. The list of tracks and mods (now extremely non-comprehensive and out of date) needs to go, along with all the league spam. The last two edits were people moving their leagues higher. If that was done it would be much more encyclopedic, and I think there's only minor technical updates to rFactor, so it would be pretty much right, Good Article standard. Any thoughts anonymous one? --JamesHoadley 06:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The system requirements are also out of date with the current version.


 * I took the first step and removed the outdated and senseless lists. So the first thing is done, I'd be glad if more people get involve and restructure the article. Actually there is a lot redundancy at the moment.Dahie 11:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Good move, I did a lot of the initial editing, and updated those lists, but I haven't added much content for ~1.5 yrs. All of the external links other than Official and Reviews need to go to, it's too long and probably against Wikipedia's policies anyway. Any thoughts? --JamesHoadley 14:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

POV
"As noted above, if the former fails (an unlikely scenario), it will be a good but tiny game." Last sentence of the Initial Reactions paragraph... Sounds like POV to me, feel free to add if I misunderstood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GBobly (talk • contribs) 22:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Motosports Article?
I realize this is a video game about racing, but at the end of the day it is just a video game. Unless there some sources somewhere that suggest it's used by racing teams or drivers, I question whether or not it really belongs in either of the motorsports categories it's currently listed in. ==Sabre ball t c 01:37, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I concur, other premier racing sims such as Live for Speed and netKar Pro do not have motorsport cat tags. Even iRacing.com which has official sanctioning of some online racing from NASCAR, Grand Am, and IndyCar (at a level where these results are posted on the official websites and winners receive real championship trophies at the official awards ceremony) does not have real world motorsports categories. This points to these tags being motivated by fandom rather than neutrality. I don't think any of them need such a category tag. Perhaps rFactor Pro could be considered worthy of beiung included in the category, as it is a middleware for professional teams, but it does not receive a mention in this article. I'm going to be bold and pull these cats. Bakkster Man (talk) 14:57, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * On second look, iRacing.com is rated mid-importance by the motorsports project. Perhaps this is the category it should have, rather than the sports car specific one. These are projects, rather than categories, so I think the assignment is appropriate. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:00, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * rFactor is used by pro motorsport teams and race drivers, be it pro or the original version. Make a bit search maybe next time before.

Original research?
A lot of this content seems like original research, which should probably get deleted. It seems unlikely to be able to source all of the content in this article. Maybe the page history holds more information on the sourcing? I'm not going to do it, but would support deleting a decent amount of the very difficult-to-source content, even if it is well-written. Mrfoogles (talk) 07:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Update: have done some of that. Most of the rest is likely sourceable to AutoSimReview articles? Mrfoogles (talk) 16:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)