Idea: LFS Donations

[BlackSheep720]

Would you be willing to pay a donation of 5-10 dollars (about 3-5 pounds), or a license surcharge of the same amount so that LFS could be developed faster, have better features, better physics, real tracks/cars, etc? I certainly would. What's your take on it?

[al heeley]

What poll?
Actually I'm happy to pay the current price for the current content.
It's sort of like saying: "As you've paid £1.00 for a bag of 5 oranges, would you pay £1.20 for a bag of 6?"
Well I would but I've already got 5 thanks so i don't need any more at the moment.
I have run out of milk though.

[BlackSheep720]

Sorry, I forgot to add the poll. I tried to change the title as quick as I could.

[Riders Motion]

56.68$ is already too much to me, so I don't think I would pay to get updates faster :x

[joen]

No. Not because LFS isn´t worth my money, totally the contrary, but I just don´t see where you get the idea from that more money means faster development.

As for real life content, it´s not important to me, plus there´s more to getting licenses than just money, there´s too much complications. Who decides which content, Will the funding be even remotely enough to attain licenses? Probably not.

[SparkyDave]

Money wont make this sim develop any faster than it does already, this is due to the way the devs work. I respect this and really feel that LFS is/will be a much better product than any game in a box.
I respect the way the devs work and the decisions made by them, because they often listen to the ideas and criticism both positive and negitive from all of us here in the forums.

But hey, giving them extra money is already possible and just goes onto your licence page doesn't it?

just dont expect a faster rate of development. it wont happen.

SD.

[Michael Denham]

If you want to give the devs extra money, buy a bunch of S2 vouchers and hand them out to demo racers you know.

[JTbo]

I don't think that money would help as development of LFS is done at pace that fits dev's lives, so it is not being worked with monkey rage pushing to make deadline and trying to max out profits from it, so money just would not help in it.

Sure it would be nice to get everything right now, but in life it is quite stupid to except that, all good things take lot of time, also most annoying persons are those that would like to to have everything and prefferrably yesterday, then they start yelling when they don't get it immediately.

You can see these persons at servers coming and going joining at wrong places and racing generally only short races, usually trying to overtake at silly places and when they crash or spin they just quit server.

But still they do have right to live that way if they think that is way to get most of life, I know it is not :D

[garph]

We could use the money to buy 1000 monkeys and some old computers and see if they can finish LFS!?

[Indiana Jim]

Nope, that's out of the question.

This is the most expensive game I've bought and it's still a beta. Not only that, I really don't own the game, they do.

In reality we are leasing the S2 license. There's no guarantee that we will be able to use the license if anything happened to the developers. Remember that these guys are not backed by a larger corporation that would make good on their promises.

God forbid they died or got thrown in jail for violating any laws. We'd be up the creek. At least with other simulators you get to keep the rights to use the game, not here.

So, from my point of view, the $49 USD is all they should get. That's all I can afford to lose.

[Smurfen]

Nope, that's out of the question.

This is the most expensive game I've bought and it's still a beta. Not only that, I really don't own the game, they do.

In reality we are leasing the S2 license. There's no guarantee that we will be able to use the license if anything happened to the developers. Remember that these guys are not backed by a larger corporation that would make good on their promises.

God forbid they died or got thrown in jail for violating any laws. We'd be up the creek. At least with other simulators you get to keep the rights to use the game, not here.

So, from my point of view, the $49 USD is all they should get. That's all I can afford to lose.
he got a point :homersimp

[joen]

This is the most expensive game I've bought and it's still a beta.


It's an alpha actually. Which doesn't really mean a thing anyway. It doesn't say anything about the quality of a product. Look at nKPro, it's at 1.0.3 or something and it's a pile of crap.


Not only that, I really don't own the game, they do.


Like it is with most software you buy. You don't own your Windows either, you own a license which entitles you to use it. Ofcourse they own the game, it's their creation. Name me one commercial game where you actually own it.


Remember that these guys are not backed by a larger corporation that would make good on their promises.
That actually speaks more in their favor than against them. Do you have any guarantee that you can play an EA game online untill the end of time? Furthermore you're stretching enormously.

[George Kuyumji]

As others said, due to the way LFS gets developed more money wont change much.

Some years ago the Grand Prix Legends Community collected several thousand dollars to buy Papyrus and Dave Kaemmer a gift. Just to say thank you for that great Sim. I among hundred others also donated 10 Dollars and a small Brabham 1967 F1 car.
Some "trustworthy" person from within the community, his name was Eric Bourgouin or something like that, he collected all that money and gifts and didnt gave it to Dave Kaemmer, after some time he wasnt heard of again.

But a more succesful Donation could happen in LFS, with which you could buy the Devs a Test Day in a Formula car or something like that, I'm sure alot of people would donate for a cool gift.

[Viper93]

If you want to give more money to the devs just simply keep buying licenses =)

[Serpentine]

This is the most expensive game I've bought...

Wow! You must have bought some really cheap games!

[George Kuyumji]

Racing Simulations are all far too cheap, I dont understand why Live for Speed, netkarPro, NASCAR Racing 2003, GPL, Richard Burns Rally, and all those kind of Programs are so cheap, they are not supposed to be Mainstream Software, why on earth does a complex Driving Simulation cost as much as Half Life or Need for Speed???

Flight Simulator X Deluxe costs 70-80 Euro, thats quite alot more than normal Games, then the Scenery Updates, or the Flight SImulator Mods, they costs 30 - 100 Euro or even more, so clearly, the Flight Sim Community have gone a different and the better way than Race Simulations. Because Race Simulations are all too cheap, and that is why our Genre is lacking new content. Simulations are just not worth it from a commercial standpoint unless the Programmers are dedicated Motorsport Fans themselfs and great Programmers at the same time.

[jtw62074]

I too have a hard time with the view that LFS is too expensive. Good grief, I'd pay a lot more for it than they're charging. Spent probably double that last night at the bar for three hours of entertainment :D

I've spent probably pennies on the hour for the entertainment that LFS has provided, not to mention the perks like having some fun folks to chat with here in the forums from time to time :)

Want expensive? Try our game:

http://www.virtualrc.com/eshop/eshop.aspx?pcid=1

We charge $120 for the base game pack which doesn't include all the tracks. Those are extra. Granted, Virtual RC Racing is more of a niche thing. RC racers are used to spending a ton on their hobby, so most of them view it as well worth it in comparison to a weekend of racing.

[JTbo]

Yeah, at this summer, track day at local track is 60€, LFS is less I think, or maybe same? *runs to conversion site* £40.6 it seems to be, track day costs bit more than LFS S3 license and that is only part of costs, then you need to buy fuel, also wear to car and if you crash, that is going to cost quite a bit.

Also amount of fun it offers is just massive, I can't think anything that has offered better value to money than LFS.

But sure higher price can scare those who don't know from LFS, but again LFS is not in shops afaik so this is not happening, also one can get LFS in parts so buy S1 and after hunger increases buy S2.

[PaulC2K]

And its still worth every penny Todd.

Out of interest, are you guys aware that your early-ish testers still have the 1yr unlimited licence? im pretty sure i did the last time i looked although seeing as i spent 6mth with a dodgy USB lead and only got it fixed when spotting Peter in Turin back in June... and how come its always him im seeing and never you? :p
Thats probably why i think its worth every penny though ;) Still got 1yr old tracks ive not used though (3 of the 4 that came out with Halifax got a few laps, Heemstade, Messina and [insert other] around same time) as although i wasnt bad with kb it lost its main appeal.

As for the line about RC folk being used to that for a weekends racing, thats true, but can you imagine how much it'd cost to get to do what LFS Simulates in real life, makes £36 (which is pretty much what every game is released around in the UK, £30-40) a bargin, and i'd bet 90% of the people playing LFS have played this more than pretty much every other game they've bought, probably only comparable to the likes of maybe quake/wow/css/gpl level of game where you've gone back time after time without it losing the appeal most games do after a month or so.


Personally i wouldnt have a problem paying for additional content, provided it wasnt done at the expense of normal progress. If it ment hiring an additional person to either share the building of car/track models or the new guy handled the lot, couldnt give a hoot (within reason). I've never had a problem with paying for additional content, provided its value for money, and anyone that says LFS isnt worth what they've paid or twice that is pretty tightfisted (whether thats what some have been getting at or not) but it does seem fairly obvious that they're going to do this as a 3 man team and it'll be finished when they feel like it.

So, i'd pay for additional content provided progress wasnt harmed by this, but dont see paying any sum of money would speed things up because they clearly dont care about any time-line, they want to do it their way under their control.
It wouldnt suprise me if theres very few of the pre-S1 folk still playing by the time LFS developement stops, i'd put money on S3 final for 2010 at the earliest.

[alland44]

Would you be willing to pay a donation of 5-10 dollars (about 3-5 pounds), or a license surcharge of the same amount so that LFS could be developed faster, have better features, better physics, real tracks/cars, etc? I certainly would. What's your take on it?

NO !

I put my money in the danish society, trying to strengthen our organisation and spread the news :)

Never give a man fish - Better learn him to fish, himself !

And hear this, "young guns" :smileypul

Creativity can`t be bougth, with all the money in the world.
rest where we are, and wait untill next phase comes our way :)

[Vykos69]

The development speed of LFS is in NO way (no as in vacuum) correlated to money.

[mrodgers]

FWIW, most games for the PC you find in the store here in the US are at Walmart usually for $29.99. After a few months they are usually $19.99. When the next version is out, the old version is often $9.99 Not all of them, but most. FSX, sure, it is much more. But the usual is as I've listed.

Console games are a different matter. They are usually $60.

I'm not complaining or saying LFS isn't worth it. I just wanted to state what it's like here in the US. Vastly different than the UK, where you guys say 24 pounds is cheap for a game.

And, yea, the $0.01 below a whole number for price is ridiculous. I think they believe that $29.99 looks more appealing than $30 and it tricks folks into thinking it isn't as expensive as it really is. It's been like that forever.

[alland44]

FWIW, most games for the PC you find in the store here in the US are at Walmart usually for $29.99. After a few months they are usually $19.99. When the next version is out, the old version is often $9.99 Not all of them, but most. FSX, sure, it is much more. But the usual is as I've listed.

Console games are a different matter. They are usually $60.

I'm not complaining or saying LFS isn't worth it. I just wanted to state what it's like here in the US. Vastly different than the UK, where you guys say 24 pounds is cheap for a game.

And, yea, the $0.01 below a whole number for price is ridiculous. I think they believe that $29.99 looks more appealing than $30 and it tricks folks into thinking it isn't as expensive as it really is. It's been like that forever.

U american guys, and your dollar :Looking_a

The dollar is nearly worthless over here - Or its very very low, for the time beeing.
If all Americans gave 10 dollars (extra), then you paied the full price :)

Now - What about that :)

EDIT :
I`m looking forward to an American, who can give a good answer to this question !?
Hehe !

[TypeRCivic]

Nope, that's out of the question.

This is the most expensive game I've bought and it's still a beta. Not only that, I really don't own the game, they do.

In reality we are leasing the S2 license. There's no guarantee that we will be able to use the license if anything happened to the developers. Remember that these guys are not backed by a larger corporation that would make good on their promises.

God forbid they died or got thrown in jail for violating any laws. We'd be up the creek. At least with other simulators you get to keep the rights to use the game, not here.

So, from my point of view, the $49 USD is all they should get. That's all I can afford to lose.


I agree with this.....you pay $49 US Dollars and if you want to give a friend an unlock an such people freak out and want you baned. I paid the money and they're telling me what I can and can't do with it. I'll go pay the $50 for the newest GTR-2 and install it on my PC and 50 of my friends PC's and have fun. With LFS it's different and me no likey, but I love the game and play all the time:thumb: Hopefully s3 will be alot better in many aspects.

[TypeRCivic]

U american guys, and your dollar :Looking_a

The dollar is nearly worthless over here - Or its very very low, for the time beeing.
If all Americans gave 10 dollars (extra), then you paied the full price :)

Now - What about that :)

EDIT :
I`m looking forward to an American, who can give a good answer to this question !?
Hehe !


I guess that why we are in america and your in DENMARK.......So what excatly are you trying to get across???????

[PaulC2K]

RE: Yanks and their US Dollar making LFS rather expensive...

WELCOME TO OUR WORLD!!! :p

We (Europeans) frequently get screwed over compared to the American market, key reason being astronomical Tax to be fair, and the 1 time you have to pay slightly over the odds and its like its 'OMG can you believe this!!!' ;)

This is a game/sim produced in europe, bend over and take it like a man ;)

[th84]

I think it was worth every penny...and then some.

Btw, allan, I would still give the extra 10$ :razz:

[mrodgers]

I agree with this.....you pay $49 US Dollars and if you want to give a friend an unlock an such people freak out and want you baned. I paid the money and they're telling me what I can and can't do with it. I'll go pay the $50 for the newest GTR-2 and install it on my PC and 50 of my friends PC's and have fun. With LFS it's different and me no likey, but I love the game and play all the time:thumb: Hopefully s3 will be alot better in many aspects.
You would own GTR2 no more than you own LFS. Giving your friends an unlock or installing GTR2 on friends computers is the same thing, it is stealing. You don't own the software, you have a license to use the software. The way LFS is doing it is just a better way of protecting themselves against piracy.

[Shotglass]

Like it is with most software you buy. You don't own your Windows either, you own a license which entitles you to use it. Ofcourse they own the game, it's their creation. Name me one commercial game where you actually own it.

nah the guy has a point
if for any reason the devs would have to shut down their business and the licence server youve paid 24 pounds for something you cant use anymore

[Yaamboo]

FWIW, most games for the PC you find in the store here in the US are at Walmart usually for $29.99. After a few months they are usually $19.99. When the next version is out, the old version is often $9.99 Not all of them, but most. FSX, sure, it is much more. But the usual is as I've listed.
Here PC games are 29,90 euros. The Sims 2 has been 59,90 since it came out, and still is. Which is around 40 and 80 dollars. So I wouldn't say LFS is expensive from a Finnish point of view at least.

[keiran]

I agree with this.....you pay $49 US Dollars and if you want to give a friend an unlock an such people freak out and want you baned. I paid the money and they're telling me what I can and can't do with it. I'll go pay the $50 for the newest GTR-2 and install it on my PC and 50 of my friends PC's and have fun. With LFS it's different and me no likey, but I love the game and play all the time:thumb: Hopefully s3 will be alot better in many aspects.

And what you are saying is illegal. Guess you've never read the terms and conditions that come with any piece of software? Read that and tell me you have more `rights`. When you buy GTR2 you don't buy the software, you buy a license to use the software and the publisher holds the rights to do basically anything they want.

Anyway, LFS is not expensive in its native country (far from it). Although I believe it's all relative at the end of the day especially with the US since it would appear your cost of living is cheaper than ours.

Keiran

[Indiana Jim]

RE: Yanks and their US Dollar making LFS rather expensive...

WELCOME TO OUR WORLD!!!

We (Europeans) frequently get screwed over compared to the American market, key reason being astronomical Tax to be fair, and the 1 time you have to pay slightly over the odds and its like its 'OMG can you believe this!!!'

This is a game/sim produced in europe, bend over and take it like a man

I don't think the question here is not how much or how. In this thread it hinges on your hatred for Americans. Why do you have to retort with hate when an American posts his views? You didn't say anything when the Europeans posted their displeasure with the price, did you?

To boot, the Americans have been supporting the additional money for the devs, in fact the person who suggested it is an American.

I think some of you folks should consider treating people in nicer ways.

[Vykos69]

nah the guy has a point
if for any reason the devs would have to shut down their business and the licence server youve paid 24 pounds for something you cant use anymore

In that case, and that was said years ago already, there would be a license removal patch for last version.

Again: LFS dev-speed isnt related to money. ;)

About prizing. The dollar is worth less than a EUro or even less than a pound. So you have to come up with that. If you think that's too much, you might wnt to ask your goverment to subventionize LFS, should rise your state debts a lot, isnt it? :P

[th84]

I don't think the question here is not how much or how. In this thread it hinges on your hatred for Americans. Why do you have to retort with hate when an American posts his views? You didn't say anything when the Europeans posted their displeasure with the price, did you?

To boot, the Americans have been supporting the additional money for the devs, in fact the person who suggested it is an American.

I think some of you folks should consider treating people in nicer ways.

After a while, you just get used to that crap.

[Shotglass]

In that case, and that was said years ago already, there would be a license removal patch for last version.

whoops missed that ... i was wrong then

[sinbad]

Crazy thread. Of course, I reckon 90% of us would pay a bit extra (a few extra quid is nothing when you consider many of us have paid £24 for nearly 4 years of licensed LFS) for extra content faster.

But I think the idea that it's anything like as simple as that is bonkers. Almost as bonkers as the idea that a thread like this could pursuade SCAVIER to drop their whole working philosophy, which (in case you hadn't noticed) seems to be quite successful.

[Indiana Jim]

It's an alpha actually. Which doesn't really mean a thing anyway. It doesn't say anything about the quality of a product. Look at nKPro, it's at 1.0.3 or something and it's a pile of crap.

Like it is with most software you buy. You don't own your Windows either, you own a license which entitles you to use it. Ofcourse they own the game, it's their creation. Name me one commercial game where you actually own it.

That actually speaks more in their favor than against them. Do you have any guarantee that you can play an EA game online untill the end of time? Furthermore you're stretching enormously.

Okay, you say:

Like it is with most software you buy. You don't own your Windows either, you own a license which entitles you to use it. Ofcourse they own the game, it's their creation. Name me one commercial game where you actually own it.Perhaps you are a little confused here. Windows is an operating system, not a game. In fact, any PC manufacturer that calls his computer an "MSDOS-PC" and uses Windows as an operating system must pay initial royalties to Microsoft. Those royalties are included in the license that MS issues with Windows.

But I presume that you are not aware of the law that the EU passed last year. In essense, the new law on software says that any software sold in Europe has to be sold as "open source". In other words, the software developers have a legal obligation to surrender the source code to the buyer. LFS included. In that sense, yes, you own the software.

That was debated in an EU court against Microsoft, for which MS developed the new operating system, Vista.

For this reason I said that if the LFS developers get in a legal jam with the EU laws, we might be out of all our investments in LFS.

Okay, here:

That actually speaks more in their favor than against them. Do you have any guarantee that you can play an EA game online untill the end of time? Furthermore you're stretching enormously.Sorry to disagree with you, my friend. I have owned Flight Simulator since it was developed in Champaign, Illinois, at the University of Illinois back in 1996. A company was formed after the developers graduated from the university and named it Sub-Logic until Microsoft bought them out and introduced FS4 in 1993.

I have all the versions of Flight Simulator clear to FS2004 and I have been able to play them all online without having to pay any extra money.

In case you don't know, there are many online networks for MS Flight Simulator, the largest are Vatsim (http://www.vatsim.net) and IVAO (http://www.ivao.aero). Vatsim has about 80,000 members and IVAO about 60,000. I have been a member of IVAO for 6 years and before that I was a member of SATCO which started back in 1997 using FS4. IVAO was formed in 1998 and Vatsim in 2001.

If Microsoft goes belly up, we can still use Flight Simulator on those networks. They are completely independent from Microsoft. We can't do that with LFS.

My point is that what comes on the CD (or downloaded) I should be able to to use even after the developers dissapear. This means, yes, until the end of time.

Regards

[joen]

Perhaps you are a little confused here. Windows is an operating system, not a game.

Hence why I used the term "software"... I know how to differentiate a game from an OS thank you.
An operating system and a game both fall into the category software wouldn't you agree?


In fact, any PC manufacturer that calls his computer an "MSDOS-PC" and uses Windows as an operating system must pay initial royalties to Microsoft. Those royalties are included in the license that MS issues with Windows.
Hmm, yeah. What does that have to do with anything I said. I know how MS licenses work trust me.
How often do you see the term "MSDOS-PC" being used these days anyway? I never see it.
Mostly they're just called a "PC" or a "Designed for Windows XP/Vista PC", and occasionally still "IBM-compatible PC", as IBM created the original version of what we refer to as PC's these days.


But I presume that you are not aware of the law that the EU passed last year. In essense, the new law on software says that any software sold in Europe has to be sold as "open source". In other words, the software developers have a legal obligation to surrender the source code to the buyer. LFS included. In that sense, yes, you own the software.Your interpretation of that law is incorrect or incomplete at best.
And besides, being able to see the source code of a piece of software does not make you the owner of the software. Even if for instance the Windows source code was opened up completely, wouldn't mean you would be allowed to alter it and distribute your own version. You do not have the same legal rights the owner has.


That was debated in an EU court against Microsoft, for which MS developed the new operating system, Vista.
So let me get this straight, MS developed Vista FOR the EU?


I have all the versions of Flight Simulator clear to FS2004 and I have been able to play them all online without having to pay any extra money.Good for you. I am however pointing out that not all games (if any) have a 100% official guarantee for it. I know that's a stretch and a bit anal but so is the scenario of all three LFS devs vanishing from the earth so to speak or LFS getting in trouble with the EU.
Just because you are able to point out a game that you're able to use years after purchase doesn't mean it's like that with all games. You certainly don't have any legally binding guarantee by the creators.

If the LFS devs would have to go out of business they could make sure people are able to keep on using it. For instance by releasing a patch which would permanently unlock all copies. And they could give out details to the community how they could set up their own masterserver. After all, the servers which LFS are played on are independent of the developers.

[PaulC2K]

I don't think the question here is not how much or how. In this thread it hinges on your hatred for Americans. Why do you have to retort with hate when an American posts his views? You didn't say anything when the Europeans posted their displeasure with the price, did you?

To boot, the Americans have been supporting the additional money for the devs, in fact the person who suggested it is an American.

I think some of you folks should consider treating people in nicer ways.
Or maybe it just hinges on the fact that you cant interpret something thats said as hatred for something thats just a passing comment where you never give a single thought for anyone else in the exact same circumstances when its on the other foot?

Its just made to be this huge statement as to how unjust it all is that Americans are being ripped off, the fact that you pay about 60% of the price for every other game on the market doesnt seem to concern you, what DOES concern you is paying more than average for ONE game. Where is the outrage that we're (Europeans) paying more for every other game on the market?
Maybe its just arrogance that you think you should get it cheaper, or maybe its just far easier to MAKE ASSUMPTIONS (like my last comment ) about someone which fit your pathetic little adjenda? We can all take comments completely out of context and turn you into a 'f*ck everyone else USA rules we have a devine right to have everything cheaper than everyone else like we do for all other games' type character, its fairly easy isnt it, just make assumptions and twist things to be convenient.

So how about in future instead of making rash assumptions about someone you actually read a little more into what the person is saying instead of assuming every comment about americans HAS to be negative so start bashing before actually reading. You ignored the fact that there were 2 winking emoticons and a tongue pulling one and just interpretted everything as some Yankie-bashing excersise and figured rather f*ck what it really was, lets bring out the US Patented Friendly-Fire™!
You pay no more than anyone else for this game, You paid £12 per licence, just as everyone else who has paid for their licence, the fact that every other game you've bought has been cheaper than the European price makes you LUCKY, but apparently what it actually makes you is down right UNGRATEFUL of the fact.

[PaulC2K]

After a while, you just get used to that crap.
And if your too stupid to have recognised the same thing then your just as stupid to actually recognise someone spouting rubbish because they'd rather turn am in-jest comment into a case of national hatred.

That is the sort of crap people have to get used to.

[al heeley]

This needs a bit of calming, it's a good rational debate, lets not allow a few o/t rant posters drag it into the rubbish bin please:thumbsup:

Note: for all non-brits whinging about exchange rate issues, none of you have been supporting any 'additional money' for the devs, they still get exactly the same £££'s each time no matter what the exchange rate. It's still up to the individual to choose whether to spend their money on it or not.

[PaulC2K]

This needs a bit of calming, it's a good rational debate, lets not allow a few o/t rant posters drag it into the rubbish bin please:thumbsup:

Note: for all non-brits whinging about exchange rate issues, none of you have been supporting any 'additional money' for the devs, they still get exactly the same £££'s each time no matter what the exchange rate. It's still up to the individual to choose whether to spend their money on it or not.
The thread was suggesting donating additional funds to speed up progress, i think we all know that additional funds wouldnt speed it up, and i think that point was made within the first 5 posts. I think most people would be willing to entertain other options they'd pay for additional content or something, but on the context of paying for it to speed up progress we all know it wouldnt make an ounce of a difference because it will be done at whatever pace it takes the 3-man team. If it would speed things up and bring additional content i'd be more than happy to do so, partly because its kinda got to a point where it feels like a significant patch is a year appart, and as i said in my original post i geniunely dont see S3 Final before 2010 and i'd say thats optimistic. But they're not so much interested in speeding up developement more a case of getting it done their way, which has its + & - points, some which could mean half the people here from the beginning will have lost interest in sim-racing by the time its finished which to me is a great shame, but then so would be rushing it.

[tristancliffe]

I think it was Vykos, in another thread, that mentioned (and reminded me) that Scawen was considering alternative ways of 'finishing' LFS, doing away with the Stage format, because of the time it took to get to S2. (Remember, LFS was originally pencilled to be finished (S1, S2, S3) over a period of a year, which went out of the window in the first few months).

So perhaps we'd have a £3 upgrade to a version with rain, £2 to get day/night cycles... who knows, it's just conjecture on my part (PLEASE DO NOT TAKE THIS AS FACT)...

Anyway, I'm happy to play LFS no matter how or how quickly it's developed until something better comes along. So far that hasn't happened, and as such I've been playing LFS almost exclusively for circa 4 years.

[joen]

I think it was Vykos, in another thread, that mentioned (and reminded me) that Scawen was considering alternative ways of 'finishing' LFS, doing away with the Stage format, because of the time it took to get to S2. (Remember, LFS was originally pencilled to be finished (S1, S2, S3) over a period of a year, which went out of the window in the first few months).

Wasn't there an S4 planned originally as well? If only for a short time? I think I remember reading that somewhere once, but I could be wrong. I hope they'll stick to the original plan though, wouldn't the alternative way cause a fragmentation of the userbase?

[tristancliffe]

Correct, there was S4 planned, to be released quarterly.

Why would it fragment the userbase? As long as a)everyone pays the same and b) there aren't too many updates to get confused with (e.g. 50% of people have rain, 50% of people have day/night, but only 20% have both) then I can't see a problem. Obviously chucking out every new feature as a pay-to-play patch will cause problems, but waiting 4 years for S3 would be as annoying...

Who knows how they will do it - I bet they've thought about it and have a plan. Maybe they'll just have car/track packs for sale, and leave the physics as free patches, so we all get rain, but only those that want it get 'The Rally Pack' or 'The Supercar Pack' or 'Track Pack 3'.

[joen]

Correct, there was S4 planned, to be released quarterly.
Boy, weren't they an optimistic bunch :D


Why would it fragment the userbase? As long as a)everyone pays the same and b) there aren't too many updates to get confused with (e.g. 50% of people have rain, 50% of people have day/night, but only 20% have both) then I can't see a problem. Obviously chucking out every new feature as a pay-to-play patch will cause problems, but waiting 4 years for S3 would be as annoying...
I guess most people would upgrade instantly/soon with every new update so the problems would be temporary I guess.
As far as waiting for S3, I guess those same features would be delivered in "sub-stages" as well in the form of incompatible patches so the waiting would be just as long in the original plans I think.


Who knows how they will do it - I bet they've thought about it and have a plan. Maybe they'll just have car/track packs for sale, and leave the physics as free patches, so we all get rain, but only those that want it get 'The Rally Pack' or 'The Supercar Pack' or 'Track Pack 3'.I think that would be a good idea, seeing as the difference over time between S1 and S2 is basically only in the content as well.
Anyway, it's not that I don't have faith in how they'll do it. Ultimately all is fine to me, I'm not going anywhere :)

[Kim Gripping]

I'd pay €30 for S3, if only development would go faster, things from other race simulations ( rain, more damage, blahblah ) got included, etc. etc. etc.

But until we see a faster and more productive progress in the development, I'll spend the money on another beer next time, I'm going out. :)

[Cue-Ball]

Who knows how they will do it - I bet they've thought about it and have a plan. Maybe they'll just have car/track packs for sale, and leave the physics as free patches, so we all get rain, but only those that want it get 'The Rally Pack' or 'The Supercar Pack' or 'Track Pack 3'.I think that a lot of LFS' current users would be open to car/track packs. As long as the quality was high, I'd pay for this kind of stuff without hesitation.

The only problem with this is that it could negatively impact how easy it is to jump in and play. Right now LFS is one of the only sims that you can connect to a server and KNOW that it's going to work. Releasing cars/tracks as add-on packs could cause problems when you try to connect to a server that's running a car/track you don't have. This could be fixed by making the executable the same for everyone, but having separate unlocks. But this could get unwieldy for Scawen to code and manage.

[tristancliffe]

Or you have LFS.exe intelligently hide tracks/cars you don't have perhaps. Or link to the relevant purchase page if you choose one you don't have.

Or allow all car/track packs to be used offline (if you've downloaded them), and have a quick LFSW check when going online to see if you have the relevent licence.

I'm sure there are ways to make such a (hypothetical) system work, but I'm not a programmer, the creator, or a good businessman, so who knows what Scavierge decide.



Scavierge = Scawen, Victor, Eric & Geraldine, and I thought of it myself :D

[Cue-Ball]

Yeah. There are options on how to handle it. The point I was trying to make was that you only really have two main choices: 1) You don't handle it and you end up with rFactor-like server joining problems. 2) You handle it in some way, but then you have to deal with the overhead and programming that it requires. Which means that we get fewer new features and enhancements because Scawen has to spend time getting things to work properly.

Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

[jtw62074]

And its still worth every penny Todd.

Thanks. :)

Out of interest, are you guys aware that your early-ish testers still have the 1yr unlimited licence?

No, I had no idea. You sure? I'm not too worried about it quite frankly, but maybe need to have the guys take a look at it.

im pretty sure i did the last time i looked although seeing as i spent 6mth with a dodgy USB lead and only got it fixed when spotting Peter in Turin back in June... and how come its always him im seeing and never you? :p

Ah, yes, it's just bad timing I think. The new guys are in Slovakia and we so far have not all gotten together in the Netherlands to work (Trencin, SK, instead a couple of times per year). The last event I went to I think was the 1/8 Euros in Luxembourg. This was quite some time ago though. Probably before we released V1, come to think of it.


Personally i wouldnt have a problem paying for additional content

<snip>


I'd be happy to pay for additional content too. Whatever they put out and want to sell I'll most likely buy :) In the mean time though, there is so much content already that I still haven't even driven all the tracks, much less in reverse, nor have I had serious seat time in all the cars. So I've got plenty of unexplored areas in LFS for quite some time yet. On the other hand, additional content is always welcome.

[Hankstar]

We could use the money to buy 1000 monkeys and some old computers and see if they can finish LFS!?

Nah.

All you'd get is another Need For Speed sequel.

[RMachucaA]

No.

They set the prices, if they failed to plan properly its not our fault, its theirs. They dont have a publisher pushing them and making them stick to a schedule, we have to assume that role if we want to see anything finished from them. We basically have taken that role anyways, we are funding their development literally, paying for a beta ffs, what else you want?

Give them extra money for something they should be doing anyways? you might aswell go get some kneepads and kneel under scawens desk.

[PaulC2K]

No, I had no idea. You sure? I'm not too worried about it quite frankly, but maybe need to have the guys take a look at it.

Just checked now and it says my licence is expired, however im pretty sure that for a few of the events early last year (maybe late 05) i was able to join the event without any hassle. I guess theres the possibility it was taking track purchased credits i had from my account rather than using an extended/expired 1yr licence.

I dont know if theres a specific way to check short of clicking on 'Register Now' and seeing what happens (which could be it takes a credit without asking for confirmation, meh sod it!... okay i'll try with a track ive bought!! i thought Amstetten was Heemsteade or however its spelt, looks similar from the pic)

YEY, Paulie wins! :D:thumb:
Information
You have a valid VRC Racing License and are registered free of charge. Success!and a quick check of my balance, still says 28 credits

Racing license statistics
28-11-2004 - 01-01-2006 ExpiredMy credit purchase shows added credits from tracks, but none removed (but then it does say 'purchase history' so maybe it doesnt all activity).

If you need me to run any test then drop me a PM and i can check things for you whenever you need confirmation of any changes etc.

Paul

[PaulC2K]

No.

They set the prices, if they failed to plan properly its not our fault, its theirs. They dont have a publisher pushing them and making them stick to a schedule, we have to assume that role if we want to see anything finished from them. We basically have taken that role anyways, we are funding their development literally, paying for a beta ffs, what else you want?

Give them extra money for something they should be doing anyways? you might aswell go get some kneepads and kneel under scawens desk.
I hope thats not suggesting that if the unthinkable happened and progress was stretched further than they could manage that you'd rather see them fail than try to help them out?
I can understand to a point that they're in complete control and they could just effectively hash-job it to get it finished within 'budget' rather than run out of funds and be left with an incomplete product, but the way you put it almost sounds like you'd have no sympathy and wouldnt want to offer help of keeping things going, you'd done your bit and that was your role complete.
Each to their own i guess, and i'd agree the community shouldnt be almost held to ransom to finish their project if they've just took their time and its their fault its incomplete, but i would hope that people would understand both sides of the arguement whether some chose not to pay while others feel people should help.

Hopefully that scenario will never arrise though, though i have to wonder just how they are coping on the budget side of things. When you consider that progress is far slower than originally anticipated (possibly assumption, not sure thats been said officially, but i'd bet they never expected 2+ years between stages) so thats one heck of a strain on the original plans for developement. I dont know how involved Victor is these days, so maybe thats one aspect its had where it was felt Vic's part needed to go to lift some strain on the purse strings to help subsidise the project.
Im just quite suprised we havent seen or heard anything on the proposed Rally Pack from about 2 years back, it was commented on yonks ago and seems to have vanished quicker than a fart in a bathtub. I would have thought such projects might have been released as addon packs for minimal fees (maybe rally as a freebie as it was originally intended to be distributed openly).

I dont know what Eric is up to these days (not many people do since S1 and frequent progress reports are no more) to know just how much work he has on his plate when compared to Scawen who (i think) is left to do everything non-model/gfx based.

Still, its all 2nd guessing assumptions based on the little tid-bits we pick up isnt it.

[spankmeyer]

Here PC games are 29,90 euros.

Are we living in the same Finland?

Last time I purchased a new PC game (Supreme Commander) the prices for new games were hovering around 50€ mark.

[Motordirex]

Donations...damn I offered to fund LFS but they never replied! haha

LFS is 3 guys remember. Perhaps they dont want any extra money because then we would expect faster updates. We would demand it if we've already paid for the services.

They are watching and listening to our suggestions for this, suggestions for that...no matter how stupid some are. When they get to them, you'll know because it will be released.

I wouldnt push it, because they might turn around and say screw you all, cant make everyone happy all the time and call it quits. Its 3 guys...3 guys, not a corporation.

[PaulC2K]

Donations...damn I offered to fund LFS but they never replied! haha

LFS is 3 guys remember. Perhaps they dont want any extra money because then we would expect faster updates. We would demand it if we've already paid for the services.

They are watching and listening to our suggestions for this, suggestions for that...no matter how stupid some are. When they get to them, you'll know because it will be released.

I wouldnt push it, because they might turn around and say screw you all, cant make everyone happy all the time and call it quits. Its 3 guys...3 guys, not a corporation.
Plenty of people have paid for S3, you dont hear them demanding S3 be released do you? I paid up my £36 before S1 was released, and i'd bet maybe a thousand others did around then.

If you'd been around longer than a month you'd have realised this is nothing more than the usual goings on here, people are always asking when the next feature is coming out, someones always making the suggestion that we should have spinners, NOS and fatboy exhaust pipes, and basically 75% of the posts on here are repeated nonsense. If the Developement team took any of this to heart they'd have ditched LFS before it even hit S1 stages let alone now.

This specific thread that you've chose to post in, saying 'Perhaps they dont want any extra money because then we would expect faster updates' is about the suggestion that if they paid more would it speed up progress, so yes i guess if the dev team did take people up on that offer then a few people would kinda expect faster updates, thats what the idea would be not to pay to speed things up while they take just as long.
Its people throwing ideas around, not making demands, just tossing ideas back n forth as to ways they could help, in this case it wasnt really going to work as it goes against what the Dev team have always stood for, progress at their pace, not at the whim of customers or publishers.

[Motordirex]

Plenty of people have paid for S3, you dont hear them demanding S3 be released do you? I paid up my £36 before S1 was released, and i'd bet maybe a thousand others did around then.

If you'd been around longer than a month you'd have realised this is nothing more than the usual goings on here, people are always asking when the next feature is coming out, someones always making the suggestion that we should have spinners, NOS and fatboy exhaust pipes, and basically 75% of the posts on here are repeated nonsense. If the Developement team took any of this to heart they'd have ditched LFS before it even hit S1 stages let alone now.

This specific thread that you've chose to post in, saying 'Perhaps they dont want any extra money because then we would expect faster updates' is about the suggestion that if they paid more would it speed up progress, so yes i guess if the dev team did take people up on that offer then a few people would kinda expect faster updates, thats what the idea would be not to pay to speed things up while they take just as long.
Its people throwing ideas around, not making demands, just tossing ideas back n forth as to ways they could help, in this case it wasnt really going to work as it goes against what the Dev team have always stood for, progress at their pace, not at the whim of customers or publishers.

No need to get upset but you went from one direction to the other.

If people have paid for S3 already, cool, good for you, how can I pay? I wouldnt be demanding its release even if I paid, because Im an understanding and open minded individual. Others on the other hand, arent. I was just putting myself in the shoes of the developers, and of all of a sudden all these donations started flooding in to hurry up the next phase. The demands on improvements are alot as it is, and some are just outrageous! Now the same people with these stupid ideas have already donated money to have their lame improvements implemented...no thanks!

I say buy the S3 license for its release, then take what they give you based on their own creations and some positive input from the community.

[boosterfire]

Yes, and we have not actually what we paid for S2. Considering that S2 is a full version, the current one is not, rather S1.X or something, even though it says S2 Alpha. I'm not complaining, just saying that people can't really complain if they bought S3 before they even had S2. It's taking risks; as Indiana said, the devs could be put in jail for whatever reason tomorrow and people would most likely never see that money back or S3 at all.

That said, I'm the first one to complain of the way Scavierge (good insight, Tristan :tilt:) work, but I understand that we can't change it, just give opinions hoping that one day they will change things. Also, as Vykos said, the developpment is absolutly not related to money. What would you want them to do? Produce faster because they're richer? No... what people would want them to do is hire somebody else to help doing LFS, which is not going to happen because they just don't want to.

Also, appart from a few people that have helped in the development of LFS, they have never accepted donations of any kind, would it be money or work. If you go asking them if you can help Scawen or Eric, they'll most likely not answer. The only time it happens is when they need help with something side-related to LFS like websites, or when something really outstanding that creates a general cheer in the community comes up (DaveWS' sound pack that becomes official).

As for the question of who owns what, they indeed own it, and we're allowed to use it. Considering that LFS is 95% multiplayer and 5% hotlapping (and hotlapping is only interesting if you compare your times with others, so it can actually be considered multiplayer, it looses all it's sense without a database of times), if the LFS Mserver died, LFS would simply die. So we own the right to play, only. Other games, where you play in single player, you own the finished product, but not the code of it. You own the CD, but not the information contained on it.

Another thing, we can count ourselves lucky that LFS is actually not completed and actually not as popular as some other games. If it was the case, Scawen would most likely have no choice but to create patches on a more regular basis or he'd lose everybody, and we'd most likely have to pay to get the best servers possible, and continuous updates. In some ways, LFS is very similar to MMO, it IS a MMO, but not as massive as other games, something we should be grateful for up to a certain point (there's a balance to achieve between having people to play with and a game that becomes over-populated, inevitably falling in some kind of money making pattern).

[PaulC2K]

No need to get upset but you went from one direction to the other.

If people have paid for S3 already, cool, good for you, how can I pay? I wouldnt be demanding its release even if I paid, because Im an understanding and open minded individual. Others on the other hand, arent. I was just putting myself in the shoes of the developers, and of all of a sudden all these donations started flooding in to hurry up the next phase. The demands on improvements are alot as it is, and some are just outrageous! Now the same people with these stupid ideas have already donated money to have their lame improvements implemented...no thanks!

I say buy the S3 license for its release, then take what they give you based on their own creations and some positive input from the community.
Ummm, not getting upset, nor different directions, just telling it like it is.
This forum has the same stupid topics repeated day in day out, LFS progress is done at the pace of 3 people - their pace and their methods. if 3 people say they'll do things faster for more money then its probably only fair to actually do things faster when taking that money. the dev team 'listen' to the 'when is it coming out' and similar day in day out and are still hear 5+ years on, i think a thread where people are offering to donate to help isnt likely to be the straw that broke the camels back.... and i think that covers everything, oh and plenty of people have paid for more than they've received, some like myself back in 2002 and while i'd love to have a completed S3 with everything the dev team have planned for it, i'd want it how they'd want it - done correctly, but the majority of people know the score and accept it (part reluctantly, part in agreement) but theres always going to be people wanting the world tomorrow and those people havent put the Dev team off getting this far.

To be honest/accurate nobody has actually paid for S3, whether they think/claim they have or not (yeah, even though i just claimed i did in the last post) as S3 upgrade has no price on its head yet, what you can do is send them money and that is put into your account, its a non refundable amount which you can use it for whatever you chose thats LFS related, whether its licences, uber LFS SMS messages :really: or to access premium pubstats, i have £11.99 thanks to damn Pubstats taking something like 0.000001 from my £12 (damn you pubstats!! :D) so i'll have to send another quid (or more) in order to get S3 someday.

If LFS ended tomorrow, maybe you could argue about not getting S2, but nobody would have a leg to stand on regarding S3, it doesnt exist and they have never taken a penny for it. The only great loss would be on the potential of LFS, not a financial one to the community.

[Christofire]

There is a method to protect software from the dangers that people are worried about here (i.e. the developers stopping development for whatever reason), but this is usually used for larger projects.

Games are sometimes protected, but in this case (as money isn't the driving factor) it's debatable if it is a viable option. Would the community be willing to pay an annual subscription for LFS if there was such protection (to cover the costs)? Would the devs want to take advantage of such a service?

I think this should be a decision for the Devs to take - I bought the license knowing it was a very small team, and the risks associated. It'll be heartbreaking if LFS was to stop before completion, but I've had way more than £24 of fun out of it.

I mean, £24 will get me about 220 miles on the bike, I've done 7976 miles (so far) in LFS. If that were miles on the road, that would cost £870 in fuel alone. Not only is it a cheap racing sim, you actually save money (and CO2 emissions) while driving!

It doesn't get much better than this! :thumb:

[EeekiE]

Also, how many times have you "died" in LFS? :shy: I reckon if damage modelling is ever beefed up that would be a nice statistic to log on LFSW.

[GruntOfAction]

Trust me if I could I would donate myself to help the development of LFS because right now theres only 3 people working on it.

And its the quallity of a game from a 80 person crew.

I can't imagine if they hired like 30 people to help with it...

Heck with that many people S4 might be a possibility.

[boosterfire]

Trust me if I could I would donate myself to help the development of LFS because right now theres only 3 people working on it.

And its the quallity of a game from a 80 person crew.

I can't imagine if they hired like 30 people to help with it...

Heck with that many people S4 might be a possibility.

As I said earlier in this thread, and as Vykos point out too, if you'd give money to the devs, they will not hire an extra team member with it. The devs decided to work with the team they have now, and I don't think the community has ever influenced them in doing so. LFS development is totally not money related.

Oh, and S4 has apparently been considered in the early development of the game, but that idea has been dropped a while ago to three stages instead.