IRacing Pricing

> As little as $13 a month for a year subscription. That's with limited
> content, though. Additional cars will cost $15 and tracks will cost
> $15 to $25.

This translates in to a $500+ plus racing game over a few years. It
even more expensive when I factor in the cost of a divorce after
my wife finds out I've spent over $500 for a single racing game.

Jeff Reid wrote:
>> As little as $13 a month for a year subscription. That's with limited
>> content, though. Additional cars will cost $15 and tracks will cost
>> $15 to $25.
>
> This translates in to a $500+ plus racing game over a few years. It
> even more expensive when I factor in the cost of a divorce after
> my wife finds out I've spent over $500 for a single racing game.

I would tot up the cost of wheels & pedals and graphics cards & cpus
over the last few years for racing sims. However, SHMBO might Google
it...

Still dead cheap compared to other hobbies and entertainment though. As
shocking as it might seem a family outing to two baseball games wouldn't
leave you with much change from your $500...

My last visit to the cinema cost me 2 months iRacing subscriptions! Just
for me and the wife, 2 drinks and popcorn.

wrote:
> http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=309713
>
> As little as $13 a month for a year subscription. That's with limited
> content, though. Additional cars will cost $15 and tracks will cost
> $15 to $25.
>
> Pat Dotson
> UltraForce Simulations LLC
> http://www.ultraforcesim.com

Screw them. They expect me to pay $20.00 just for a 30 day demo? I have
to pay $20.00 to find out if it is worth paying a monthly fee or not?
Don't think so.

Tim Wheatley wrote:

> Pat,
>
> Unfortunately I can't say which cars and tracks are out when, but I
> can tell you to expect more than one track - that one's for sure!
> Tracks often have more than one configuration also and you get all the
> configurations. For example there is one track known as an oval
> primarily that has the oval layout and three roadcourse layouts and
> you'd get all of them as a single track.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Tim

Gee, sounds just like LFS except the cars have real names. Except LFS I
don't have to pay a monthly fee.

Tony R wrote:

> Probably more informative than the original...
>
> There is a ton of rubbish being written about iRacing.
>
> If the pricing is too steep they won't reach the required volumes for
> viability. It is simple economics but the sim racing world has been
> doing its own thing developing add ons with no recourse to licensing or
> copyright for years since the big developers disappeared that there is
> an expectation that anything more than a one off $20 dollar outlay for
> several years entertainment is a rip off.
>
> iRacing is a wake up call and those who don't recall dial up bills for
> racing online and products with a short shelf life as bigger and better
> products from major developers came along don't seem to get it.
>
> Having a major developer with the financial acumen to develop the
> product and the foresight to move sim racing out of its little nerdy
> niche is a major opportunity IMHO.
>
> iRacing need to be commercially viable to push sim racing along just
> like the Boston Red Sox needed to be commercially viable to take on and
> beat the Yankees. It is not about John Henry simply pumping money in
> because he is a fellow sim enthusiast just as he is a Red Sox fan, it is
> about getting the infrastructure in place for sustainability and future
> growth. This seems to be beyond the sim racing for free attitude
> prevailing on RSC.
>
> Given the track record I believe they will get the sums right but it is
> a whole different model from existing titles, which is proving hard for
> many to get their heads around.
>
> Cheers
> Tony

Big talk that amounts to nothing because we don't even know if this game
is any good or not yet. For all I know it could be crap and not worth
even $1.00 per month.

wrote:

> This should be part of the r.a.s. FAQ! Anyway I'm in charge of all
> things official here
>
>
>
> A little hint to iRacing : When you publically start talking about
> subscription price and all, it would be also informative to start
> talking about your sim and it's features. A weekly blog, each week
> just add a video, a couple of in-car screenshots, gameplay, etc...
> and start talking about the real reasons why you are promoting it as
> the end-of-it-all sim. True physics talk, not PR bull****, everything
> about gameplay, the game engine, multiplayer, tracks, cars, etc... Or
> else people start speculating and it's not good publicity.
>
> It's time you start promoting your sim.
>
> -- ymenard
> -- official

Agreed. I don't even want to race an 'effing Solstice.

MikeWhy wrote:

> I wouldn't believe a word of it anyway. They said all that was
> necessary: try it and see for yourself. $20 for the 1st month.
>
>

I'm not playing that sucker game. If they stood behind their product
they would have a free 5 day trial or something like that. Only an idiot
would pay $20.00 for a demo.

Tim Wheatley wrote:
> I remember well my $600 phone bill and that was back in 1999 racing
> GPL over a 56k dial-up paid per-minute. Them were the days.

Wow! What a sucker. And I suppose you're another one of those dorks that
thinks GPL was realistic?

Tony R wrote:

> My last visit to the cinema cost me 2 months iRacing subscriptions! Just
> for me and the wife, 2 drinks and popcorn.

That's your fault for agreeing to pay their highway robbery prices on
the food and drinks. I sneak my food and drinks in and have never been
caught.

I wonder why this bloke's name is "Backspace"? How about you realise
you've made a mistake and then delete yourself!? <Deliberate crudeness on>
(for probable communication necessity) - "Backspace" - get it? hehehe hahaha
hohoho. <Deliberate crudeness off>.


"Backspace" > wrote in message
news:waXnj.24804$4w.24259@pd7urf2no...
> Tim Wheatley wrote:
>> I remember well my $600 phone bill and that was back in 1999 racing
>> GPL over a 56k dial-up paid per-minute. Them were the days.
>
> Wow! What a sucker. And I suppose you're another one of those dorks that
> thinks GPL was realistic?