Agreed, why would VW pay LFS dev team to promote their 2 year old car in a game where the active users are on the decline and also why would Rockingham pay to be in such a fringe project?
You wouldn't buy a road car based on how well it drove in a track racing computer game and likewise I wouldn't drive the 45 miles from my home to Rockingham for a track day because I'd just driven a 3 year old BMW F1 car around it in LFS. There's very little commercial reason for either party to think LFS will help boost their profitability or profile.
I made it clear from the very beginning that I speak for myself only, to avoid exactly this kind of rant.
In any case, yes for me their pricing policy is offensive. I could perfectly live with less "fresh air" for a way more reasonable price. I don't need to be their slave either, you know, nor being treated like some kind of brainless dummy who needs to be punished even for spinning out of the track, or paying extra money every once in a while for content and/or services that is widely available through the competition for years (scattered amongst it, though).
By "fresh air" I meant (and still do) that they brought a new approach to the sim-racing scene which seems to attract many people (americans and british mostly, who I guess are used to this kind of marketing/pricing practices), not me though yet. It's not at all hypocritical for someone to recognize that something he's not attracted to has brought fresh air to the general scene. Not hillarious either! It's called "honesty" and/or "integrity" in my books.
I'm into simming for many-many years and I've purchased many sims, including gtr2, lfs, rfactor and nkpro. Those 4 keep covering perfectly my current needs, for a price way less than iRacing's corresponding content and/or services, especially if we calculate it for the period iRacing showed up until now.
As for the future of LFS, imho moderated track modding may be a good solution giving a new push to the current state of the sim (at least until the devs come up with something else). Perhaps a system where users will submit tracks to the devs and they'll decide whether they are worth to get released or not (released by the devs I mean). They can always ban from their master server unapproved tracks, making them pretty much useless.
If LFS is dying? It might be a little too late to ask that. LFS died a long time ago. When was the last update report? November, 2009. And what did it contained? Only a few lines of text, nothing concrete. So what makes you all believe the devs are still worried about this?
They moved on, they don't care anymore about LFS.
If I am wrong, devs, come say that I am wrong. And I say DEVS, not simple users that still believe in Santa Claus.
The last post about the development work from scawen was in March, which was indeed just a few lines of text. The one you mention in November was FAR from just a few lines of text.
Again, lets not let facts get in the way of a good troll eh?