My, How Time Flies [Archive]

Ian.H

29th April 2007, 21:29

What's up with you Ian? You always have some pesimistic reply to these kind of topics..
Everybody moans and moans how LFS progress is slow (especially you) and yet, time flies since i installed LFS S2 alpha,

I haven't moaned about this for a long time really. I've mentioned it maybe twice in the last week.. but I haven't been around LFS for 2 years until very recently.. it looks and feels very much the same as I remember it back in patch S / R when I stopped playing with the exception that the tyres don't feel like blancmange now (they actually feel pretty good).

i, like Budha, doesn't feel like one year has pass since patch U, you know why? because i didn't explore 20, 30 % of this wonderful game, i didn't find my maximum on ANY combo (can anyone actually know what is his maximum?)..

Let's see.. I like BL1, Westhill, a couple of SO configs and a couple of Aston configs. I like the XRT, FZ5 and LX6. The rest I couldn't care less if it was removed from the game.. just my feeling however and don't expect anyone to agree.

I pre-paid for S2 over 2 years ago and still haven't received my full S2 product*.. soooooooo much is either missing, arcade style or just plain broken. Granted, not everything and it can still somewhat be enjoyed, but look outside of the box.. look at other games available.. people might not like the engine they run on, but they're still years ahead in development state than LFS is. By the time LFS catches up, people will be running boxes with DX20 and we'll all be getting 5000fps due to hardware upgrades.

I feel like i just installed it, even after almost 2 years (played S1 demo also but briefly), there's just so much to do, so much combos i didn't drive.. so many great drivers to meet, so many great battles to have... :shrug: cheer up, the glass is half full...

EDIT: i didn't see your edit, now my post sounds even better..

I played S1 for 12 months before S2 was released, a short trial of S2 that felt crap beyond belief (back in P patch etc). All in all, LFS has survived here well with me.. normally I get bored of a game within 6 months. rFactor only held my interest for 2 years as I was modding more than I was playing.

What can I say.. I had hoped LFS would have been final a _long_ time ago.. but alas.. it isn't.

Regards,

Ian

* Before anyone mentions this 'alpha' bullshit, wake up.. it's either alpha or it isn't.. people seem to use this tag when it suits them.. when people complain about LFS, yet also in the same breath tell people "it doesn't feel like an alpha version, buy S2!".. so which is it? alpha or not? :shrug:

Blackout

29th April 2007, 21:41

I wonder why people who give the impression that they don't play or give a shit about LFS even dwell around the forums. :shrug:

Ian.H

29th April 2007, 21:46

I wonder why people who give the impression that they don't play or give a shit about LFS even dwell around the forums. :shrug:

Ahh.. the fanbois come a running :D

How _dare_ someone criticise the perfect LFS sim! :rolleyes:

Regards,

Ian

Gabkicks

29th April 2007, 21:48

ian, is there another sim that feels fresher to you than lfs?

pb32000

29th April 2007, 21:49

Ahh.. the fanbois come a running :D

How _dare_ someone criticise the perfect LFS sim! :rolleyes:

Regards,

Ian

Lol, and agreed with your earlier post.

Blackout

29th April 2007, 21:51

dave

29th April 2007, 21:53

I'm back after quite a while away, I seem to be alot crapper than what I remember but i'm loving the game all over again, and I always think wow, I've not tried this combo before. I'm looking forward to s2 coming out properly and ofc purchasing s3 asap, things can only get better :)

Time really has flown since I first purchased lfs, it's unbelievable.

Boris Lozac

29th April 2007, 21:55

Ahh.. the fanbois come a running :D

How _dare_ someone criticise the perfect LFS sim! :rolleyes:

It's not like that, really... i see what you meen, but LFS can only get better, and it IS getting better lately, and it's getting updated frequently, do you know what Scawen holds in his pocket for the future, do you know what Eric is doing?... and i honestly doesn't see how LFS got dated, every other "revolutionary" titlle is bollocks compared to LFS, rFactor, GTR 2, GTR 2 with revenge, RACE, netkarPRo(it feels like ISI game to me, honestly) and the fancy graphics??
In all honesty, and i know what i am talking about, i am a graphic designer, every other titlle looks fake and game-like, not one looks real to me.. and car movements, give me one titlle that car is behaving properly on the track(and i am not talking about physics now, i am talking about graphical demonstration of car movement on the track)..
LFS set way high bars for it's time, it's way ahead of anything out there, many people don't realise that, it's just the stupid alpha term in its name, and low poly cars and objects that make it look dated...

felplacerad

29th April 2007, 21:58

Ahh.. the fanbois come a running :D

How _dare_ someone criticise the perfect LFS sim! :rolleyes:

(I usually dont open my mouth in discussions like these, Ian, but since its you ... )

Oh, come on. What did you expect? We all know what happens when a post like yours pops up. This thread will most likely be a war zone in a few hours. Though, I must insist: Saying that we can not bear having people critize our sim is not very fair. No one knows its flaws better than us, right?

At least I do, and they really bug now and again, but since the progress pace of LFS is not a matter of life and death I am ok with it (mostly ;)).

Have some faith!

mr_x

29th April 2007, 22:03

I agree with just about everything Ian says, apart from this bit:
Let's see.. I like BL1, Westhill, a couple of SO configs and a couple of Aston configs. I like the XRT, FZ5 and LX6. The rest I couldn't care less if it was removed from the game.. just my feeling however and don't expect anyone to agree.

Some of you have to admit, he does have a point or two, maybe three! and if you don't then, maybe you should face up to the reality of it all, it's painfully slow, yes we know there's only 1 coder who's working his arse off. Fair play to Scawen and co aswell for making LFS what it is.

But it's dated, it's DX8.1 stuff, DX9 has been out for a long long time now (in computing terms: a life time). DX10 is just around the corner. DX8.1 should have been dumped for the S2 Alpha release in favour of DX9, and I can only hope that when the S3 Alpha comes around (if it does) that it will use DX10 (or maybe DX11 at that point).

OK, it doesn't feel dated at all, but it looks awful compared to other games/sims that are out right now.

Ian.H

29th April 2007, 22:03

ian, is there another sim that feels fresher to you than lfs?

LFS is the only one I currently have installed as my HDD crashed a few months ago.. but if I was to reinstall something, it'd be GTR2. I'm not overly a fan of the cars tbh.. I prefer "amateur" stuff (hence the small list of cars I mentioned in my previous post).. but the physics feel pretty good to me (I'm no physics expert, so I just go by what feels "good / fun" although have driven a wide range of cars through my life).

GTR2 looks good, feels good and has some pretty damn good AI! The netcode apparently stinks however, but that said, LFS is the only game other than Virtual Pool 3 that I've ever played online with exception of maybe 6-10 races when rF was first released and the F3s were the only add-on cars available.

LFS needs a massive gfx overhaul.. I'm not talking "shiny bling".. I'm talking bump and spec maps (both of which can be used to good effect in DX8) especially for tracks, lack of tracks (more than lack of cars to me as I normally find a few cars I like and leave the rest, whatever the game is), lack of game play options (the ability to jump the start lights is a very welcome new addition, but so long overdue).. the clutch diffs still feel like a bag-o-shite even with preload.. I use a LSD in all my (few) setups... it's just not "complete" in almost all departments, some more than others... and why the sound engine hasn't received a _significant_ update by now is beyond me as this is usually the first complaint anyone has, so surely one that should be addressed as a priority.

Sorry, I just don't brown nose people (not saying you are, just a general statement) but have nothing against any of the LFS devs personally, quite the opposite.. but if I don't like something, I say it bluntly.. I don't like people beating around the bush with me either, got something to say to me, just say it.. so it's swings and roundabouts as they say.

There's no perfect sim, there never will be.. but c'mon.. 2 years and we're still running software with an alpha tag? Not too good IMO, especially to people who haven't followed development very closely.

I'm not saying LFS is shit.. I've had a few cracking races in the past week and raced more than I have in the rest of the past 2 years, but I feel LFS has become very stale.. can't help how I feel about it.

Regards,

Ian

Flycantbird

29th April 2007, 22:05

Ahh.. the fanbois come a running :D

How _dare_ someone criticise the perfect LFS sim! :rolleyes:

When I read your initial post, I didn't intend to comment, but it was obvious that you were looking to stir the pot.

But a valid point is raised. For most people, if they get tired of playing a game, they stop playing it. Saying that you're tired of playing it is
not exactly newsworthy to the rest of the community, is it?

The fanboy response is so far off the mark, that it only proves the point
that you are, indeed, just looking for controversy. Maybe you are bored
with all the other stunning Sims that have passed LFS by too ?

Greboth

29th April 2007, 22:13

Time does fly but i am not sure time flies for lfs. Does seem shocking that is is about a year and a half since i started playing lfs and over a year since i got s2. I agree with Ian on the development is slow but i woud of thought the vast majority of people buying s2 knew about the development and that it takes time. LFS does get boring at times and those times i do play less than normal but i don't ever remember one night of online racing where i have got bored of racing. I am looking into buying an xbox 360 and if i do i will probably pick up forza and pgr, why? cause i like the pick up play of them while i also like the serious side of lfs racing.
As for the graphics of lfs, they may not be upto date using dx9 (or to come dx10) but something about lfs graphics always IMO make LFS look more real than 99% of other games or sims. Call me a fanboy if you like but i play lfs for the racing that it gives, while giving a reasonable simulation experience, and as long as both of those continue i will race lfs.

Ian.H

29th April 2007, 22:36

No. I'm just asking why you keep coming here if you don't like it? Because you can't say you don't like LFS if you seem obviously interested what's going on, people aren't usually interested on things that they don't like. Or at least I wouldn't be.

I am interested.. never said I wasn't.. I would like it to be how it was for me in S1 days (I loved playing it then.. I wouldn't have bothered to start a team if I was just passing through). When I said "I feel it's only temporary" I meant that if things continue as they are (snails pace) then I lost interest 2 years for this very reason, it's unlikely to change now. If LFS stepped up 3 or 4 gears and really started rolling with fixing some issues and the likes, that temporary feeling would go away pretty quickly and I'd be back enjoying it for a rather long time.

As I said, I'm, trying to get back into LFS again.

It's not like that, really... i see what you meen, but LFS can only get better, and it IS getting better lately, and it's getting updated frequently, do you know what Scawen holds in his pocket for the future, do you know what Eric is doing?

It maybe being updated, it can _only_ get better.. but the updates are non-significant IMO. Now to be really blunt, it almost seems like Scawen has become semi-bored... updates happen in dribs and drabs to various elements of LFS, but never seems to completely update one section. This I think is why I (and maybe some others) feel that progress isn't happening quick enough. I've seen the recent changelogs and there's obviously a fair few updated parts.. but not things that make LFS "feel" any different than it did 2 years ago.

... and i honestly doesn't see how LFS got dated, every other "revolutionary" titlle is bollocks compared to LFS, rFactor, GTR 2, GTR 2 with revenge, RACE, netkarPRo(it feels like ISI game to me, honestly) and the fancy graphics??

I'm not a "must have eyecandy" bloke.. hell, my all time favourite game is Hard Drivin' and as I say, still enjoy the classics.. it's playability for me.. but we're looking at entire 2D graphics for things that should have a 3D appearance due to the likes of bumpmaps missing etc. Look at the car cockpits (not talking number of polys, just textures).. now tell me LFS doesn't look (and ultimately feel due to visuals) dated.

rFactor / GTR2 can look _very_ nice when the shaders are used correctly.. unfortunately, rF came with absolutely no documentation on modding, so everyone's had to learn for themselves and obviously this is more of a challenge than creating content for some.

On a plus note, I do think LFS' desaturated textures make the environment look a lot better than some in the likes of rF (I've only tried GTR2 and rF so keep my comments related to those) but considering 95% of the available tracks etc in rFactor are shitty 5 min conversions from F1C, GPL, SCGT, it's not surprising most of them look crap (I agree with you on that aspect).

In all honesty, and i know what i am talking about, i am a graphic designer, every other titlle looks fake and game-like, not one looks real to me..

Fair play.. I'm just a self-taught hobbiest but do believe that if the effort is put into other platforms, some good results can be achieved, unfortunately, this isn't the case most of the time.

and car movements, give me one titlle that car is behaving properly on the track(and i am not talking about physics now, i am talking about graphical demonstration of car movement on the track)..

Car movement is good in LFS, I won't argue there.. but when I'm racing, watching tyres deform is the least thing I'm interested in and I'm not a replay / screenshot whore so in that respect, that's a minor point IMO. All I've seen from people on other forums trying to convince people that "LFS is teh bestestestestests!!!11one" is "it has deformable tyres".. well whoopeedoo.. sorry, that doesn't impress me, especially when they're hardly noticeable when racing.

LFS set way high bars for it's time, it's way ahead of anything out there, many people don't realise that, it's just the stupid alpha term in its name, and low poly cars and objects that make it look dated...

LFS _was_ (or maybe was) ahead of it's time... but it's still stuck in that time, while everyone now has moved on and improved no-end (ISI netcode for example where F1C was almost non-playable online... the few races I did do online with rF was smooth as silk, with big grids.. where I've _always_ said / posted that LFS had the best netcode in town, it now shares that with rFactor and possibly loses out.. that we can't tell yet as the grid size is limited in LFS).

(I usually dont open my mouth in discussions like these, Ian, but since its you ... )

Oh, come on. What did you expect? We all know what happens when a post like yours pops up. This thread will most likely be a war zone in a few hours. Though, I must insist: Saying that we can not bear having people critize our sim is not very fair. No one knows its flaws better than us, right?

The problem is, my post _shouldn't_ create a war zone.. people should learn that criticism is part of life.. what pisses me off is the people whon seem to either think Scawen is their ol' man or that LFS is somehow their product.. it's not.. so why defend it so profusely when we all know it's flaws as you say. The funny side of this is how the fanbois say that "LFS is perfect" (or at least that's the impression I get sometimes).. yet that say that everytime a new patch is released.. how do you improve on perfection? you don't.. it's just that some are blind fanbois... and naturally, I don't think everyone is.. some people will discuss the flaws, some just say "STFU and piss off" or words to that effect.. just blindly defending away again.

]At least I do, and they really bug now and again, but since the progress pace of LFS is not a matter of life and death I am ok with it (mostly ).

Have some faith!

Agreed, it's not important really to those extents, and I can really take it or leave it.. but I've chosen to want to take it.. I do want to enjoy LFS again, but it's becoming increasingly difficult, but I'm trying.. that's a plus surely? :)

When I read your initial post, I didn't intend to comment, but it was obvious that you were looking to stir the pot.

Then you seriously don't "know me" at all if you think that was my aim.

]But a valid point is raised. For most people, if they get tired of playing a game, they stop playing it. Saying that you're tired of playing it is not exactly newsworthy to the rest of the community, is it?

I did stop, now I'm back and was hoping to "pick up where I left off" as such. I'm still trying to like it.. I do like some of it, some I don't.. I'm still hoping :)

The fanboy response is so far off the mark, that it only proves the point that you are, indeed, just looking for controversy. Maybe you are bored
with all the other stunning Sims that have passed LFS by too ?

I'm not looking for anything, just made a post.. take / read into that what you will.

I am bored with the other games, hence I returned to LFS. If ISI had fixed the AI in rF and stopped fscking about with this that and the other and fixed the flaws that they knew about since the release, I'd still be there now as I enjoy the modding / creation side of things.. but I'm here, trying to get back into LFS again. I've tried in the past 2 years and gave up after a few races.. now I'm determined to try again a bit harder (and the cars do generally feel better to drive now).. that doesn't mean I have to say it's perfect.

Regards,

Ian

Hyperactive

29th April 2007, 22:47

Well, I'm one of that group (or just a single person) who thought S1 was ...bad. Compared to GPL it was entertaining in short bits but all in all it wasn't anything I could take seriously. Especially when you had nascar2003 to beat! S2 hasn't really progressed the way I though it would progress and reading the latest Scawen's post about realism:
This is different from reality, that's true, but then LFS differs from reality in many ways, for convenience. For example we just appear on the grid, we don't have to drive to the race track - you know what I mean. If you want reality then just go racing in reality! :) If you want a sim then you are avoiding many of the problems of reality, and cutting it down to the actual racing. That's the purpose of a racing sim. Get in and RACE.

As a person who is all about realism in sims, (as long as it serves a purpose) I find that extremely discouraging. Only problem I'm interested avoiding when I play sims is the huge costs, time taken to keep the car in shape and the effort needed to even drive the said car anywhere.

Imho, it is all about that there is no competition. If I want to drive a realistic sim in which the car handles like a car, I have no other choise than LFS. There aren't really anything that does the hard part well. In one way the "badness" of the other sims make LFS so "good"

I really have to agree what Dom Duhan and Doug Jellison (Ellison?) (another nubs!) said on the latest automsimsport, "we really have never had what we thought were going to get...". When I was racing GPL only in the early years of sim racing activities (1999 or so) I really had a vision that the sim I'll be playing 10 years from that point will be 10x better than GPL. Few years still ahead before the 10 years come full but it doesn't look too good :(

For a 3-man project LFS doing great, absolutely awesome. But the product is still more of a arcade racer with good tire physics than a real sim :/

bbman

29th April 2007, 22:58

Car movement is good in LFS, I won't argue there.. but when I'm racing, watching tyres deform is the least thing I'm interested in and I'm not a replay / screenshot whore so in that respect, that's a minor point IMO. All I've seen from people on other forums trying to convince people that "LFS is teh bestestestestests!!!11one" is "it has deformable tyres".. well whoopeedoo.. sorry, that doesn't impress me, especially when they're hardly noticeable when racing.

You might have some points, but boy, you couldn't be any wronger about the tires... Those deforming tires are not pure eye-candy as you might think, they are one core part of the tire physics! They are what makes LfS so far ahead in terms of physics... "Hardly noticeable", yeah right... What do you think makes LfS feel so much different/better than those ISI-sims?

Taavi(EST)

29th April 2007, 23:16

For me lfs as a game has lost it's appeal for now, if patch X doesn't have anything very spectacular in it, i will probably stop actively playing it. But one thing it has over any game out there, it has the best community i have ever met, if lfs had only the moaners and the complete idiots, it wouldn't have survived this long in the 1st place. I mean you do have to have an open mind to play LFS just to overlook some of the graphical flaws such as shadows, polygon rates, texture mapping etc. The game itself is enjoyable and somewhat realistic as well, but the rate it's progressing is just overwhelmingly slow.

Ian.H

29th April 2007, 23:20

You might have some points, but boy, you couldn't be any wronger about the tires... Those deforming tires are not pure eye-candy as you might think, they are one core part of the tire physics! They are what makes LfS so far ahead in terms of physics... "Hardly noticeable", yeah right... What do you think makes LfS feel so much different/better than those ISI-sims?

No idea what separates LFS' tyres from ISI's.. only that LFS tyres feel better than most ISI stuff, although GTR2 tyres feel pretty damn good too, and don't deform. Just how accurate GTR2s are, I can't say as I've not driven one of those cars in the flesh.. all I do know is that when I drove a 911 for a while, the tyres _never_ "rubber banded" like they do in LFS (comparing to the FZ5 here as it would appear to be the closest comparison and yes, I know it's not a 911) and yes, that car got driven _hard_ and LFS tyres never used to deform and still felt pretty much the same except now they feel a little more "firm" where as earlier S2 patches felt like soaked sponges wrapped around the wheels.. but it wasn't the deforming that made the difference.

Regards,

Ian

Taavi(EST)

29th April 2007, 23:26

No idea what separates LFS' tyres from ISI's.. only that LFS tyres feel better than most ISI stuff, although GTR2 tyres feel pretty damn good too, and don't deform. Just how accurate GTR2s are, I can't say as I've not driven one of those cars in the flesh.. all I do know is that when I drove a 911 for a while, the tyres _never_ "rubber banded" like they do in LFS (comparing to the FZ5 here as it would appear to be the closest comparison and yes, I know it's not a 911) and yes, that car got driven _hard_.

In GTR2 you can't reach the cars limit and go beyond that, i know you can catch a slide but by the time you catch it you're either facing the wrong direction or going 5 mph. In GTR2 the car feels like it's in another dimension where counter steering means the opposite, because every time i try to slide through a corner then counter steering makes the car spin faster than without counter steering at all. It's just unnatural IMO.

K.David

29th April 2007, 23:28

Zachary Zoomy

29th April 2007, 23:32

has it been a year already? I'm for a demo user to say "and it was just a year ago I was cracking Patch U."

mrbogeyman

29th April 2007, 23:33

If Scavier feels the development process is heading the right way at the right pace, then fine with me. This is their project, they're not creating this for us, we just have the opportunity to follow the progress at a price. Because I think about LFS like that, I don't feel it is being developed slowly. It's like saying your neighbour is building the shed too slowly :D
Go Scavier! :thumbsup:

How can they not be creating it for us? Do you really think Scavier expect to earn a living from their hobby if nobody bought and supported it? LFS is a hobby/vision that Scavier had, it has grown arms and legs and is now a product that is produced for the sim racing community.

Taavi(EST)

29th April 2007, 23:33

It's like saying your neighbour is building the shed too slowly :D
Go Scavier! :thumbsup:

Not quite, i mean you bought a room in his shed and paid him so he can put that money into building the shed and all you see is him finding the best way to open windows while the roof is almost nonexistent.

Ian.H

29th April 2007, 23:38

In GTR2 you can't reach the cars limit and go beyond that, i know you can catch a slide but by the time you catch it you're either facing the wrong direction or going 5 mph. In GTR2 the car feels like it's in another dimension where counter steering means the opposite, because every time i try to slide through a corner then counter steering makes the car spin faster than without counter steering at all. It's just unnatural IMO.

Hmm, I thought that was pretty sorted in GTR2, but it's probably 4 months since I played it last, I'd have to re-check.

F1C had this problem, rFactor has inherited this problem and it's _really_ annoying! How countersteering when you've only just overstepped the boundaries can increase the rate of the spin baffles the hell out of me.. if it wasn't such a serious flaw, I'd almost find it funny :)

Regards,

Ian

BrandonAGr

29th April 2007, 23:38

I don't know about you people, but I just enjoy racing, there's a reason I have played LFS more than any other game I have ever played, it is simply fun, and continues to be that for me. So here's to another year of great developments and racing action!

Cr!t!calDrift

29th April 2007, 23:43

Wow..I grew up on patch U (figuratively speaking :))

Anyways, well, it's great that we can still celebrate it, even if i had only had the demo experience :D

Tweaker

29th April 2007, 23:45

Ian makes very good and valid points. The only hard part is: Typing them here for fear that people that are so BLIND to how true Ian's comments are. LFS hasn't been all that it is cracked up to be for the past year and a half, it really hasn't gone leaps and bounds ahead of other sims that are rapidly surpassing this game. Slowly deteriorating as we speak, because we haven't had any sufficient content from Eric.

Surely, if we wait long enough we will get something, but we've never had to wait a year :zombie: or even longer...

Yes the devs run at their own pace, but you can't blow off Ian's comments as if he is completely pulling these feelings out of nowhere as if he has no reasoning for it. Scawen works his butt off for trying to get the game frequently updated, and Victor has a rough time handling a lot of web situations... but the real downfall is wondering where Eric is, or any updates from him.

Some people here do see that LFS has lost its appeal, and indeed it is true for most of us. It can be quite boring online when you keep using the same things over and over again, and there is nothing new to try. STCC kind of keeps the online play alive a little bit, but that's all we have to live on these days. And we get a lot of new players coming in to play LFS who believe this game is always flowing in with new updates (the kind of reply people get in "Should I buy S2" threads). Those updates aren't as fast as they once were, but yeah, we still get some from Scawen more than anything else. But it is those players that haven't been around as long as others such as Ian and myself... so you get different kind of attitudes for how the development has changed with LFS over the past 2 years or so. It has been 4 years since I started playing S1, that is a long time to stick around and eventually get tired of some things and see the big picture.

And note: I have no problem with how LFS currently feels, I could play it in its current state and it feels fine for the driving aspect. It is just the visual aspect (cars & tracks) that really bother me because either they need to be updated (detail on cars is very low), too many boring configs, lack of some new tracks, could do with any kind of new car, etc. It is the only reason that makes me feel LFS as being 'dated'. Everything else is just fine, and I could care less with how the physics feel at this point, it's all about the looks at this point in time, and that has gone nowhere. The BF1 is just a blueprint traced unfinished model, hardly any effort other than the cockpit/steering wheel.

Bladerunner

29th April 2007, 23:55

mmm...the question of time....

for an Old Fart (tm) like me, there is always the risk that I will never SEE S3, let alone get the chance to play it!...

As for S2, I am not a fanboi, but compared to all the other games/sims/etc I have played, the OVERALL favourite is LFS, not TDU because "teh gfx roolz", or NFS because "it's got teh NAWZ", but LFS because of the blend of aspects that make for an enjoyable experience.

I can take almost any race sim (with possibly the exception of GPL) and hit decent times within a few days of playing...why? because of the 'built-in' playability that software publishers need...if a game was TOO difficult, then people would be complaining too!

Why do you think that GTR/GTR2 TOCA series, the endless NFS clones are always being revamped? Its to get your money!! Maybe add a few more (different) cars...update the gfx a notch or two, but its still basically the same game, and tens of thousands of kids buy it for the PS3's, XBOX's and PC's....and the publishers get richer....

This is where LFS wins the battle hands down...we KNOW that the finished product will have cost us all £36.00, but in the meantime, yes, we are all 'beta-testers' in a way.
When it IS finished, how much of the content will have been added as a direct result of OUR input? I would hazard a guess at quite a lot!
Scavier are doing a pretty good job so far.. as somebody said earlier in this thread, who knows what Eric is working on at the moment? As for Victor, it's obvious that he isnt sitting on his butt...look at the work he is doing on making the stats easily available for anyone to use in their own apps/websites/whatever.
I can think of no other race based game that has this much COMMUNITY input.

Final Word...OK, LFS may look a bit 'dated' nowadays, but given the choice when flying London-New York....Concorde or A340??
'nuff said? :D

Gabkicks

29th April 2007, 23:58

most of us assume scavier are working very hard on LFS, but how hard are they working really?:scratchch maybe they have something great to add to lfs that they are working on...

Taavi(EST)

30th April 2007, 00:07

If this thread was here 6 months ago i would have been defending lfs at all costs, but now I'm a bit disappointed already, i just hope X has some serious content to deliver.

Bob Smith

30th April 2007, 00:16

LFS tyres never used to deform and still felt pretty much the same except now they feel a little more "firm" where as earlier S2 patches felt like soaked sponges wrapped around the wheels.. but it wasn't the deforming that made the difference.
LFS tyres have always deformed, both vertically and horizontally, for as long as I've been around. Only the effects are more noticeable and (hopefully) realisitic now (although nobody says it's perfect). Part of the reason it wasn't so noticeable before was that everyone used to run maximum tyres pressures (due to funky tyre physics).

I think patch X should be a nice improvement but from what I've read, won't include lots of the stuff that people are hoping for, that seems to be planned for patch Y. Fingers crossed, Y really needs to be a killer, since it should include all of Eric's work since patch T (53 weeks ago).

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 00:21

LFS tyres have always deformed, both vertically and horizontally, for as long as I've been around. Only the effects are more noticeable and (hopefully) realisitic now (although nobody says it's perfect).

Fair enough Bob.. I stand corrected.. this I didn't know.. just remembered a lot of commotion about it when people noticed so thought it was a "new thing".

I think patch X should be a nice improvement but from what I've read, won't include lots of the stuff that people are hoping for, that seems to be planned for patch Y. Fingers crossed, Y really needs to be a killer, since it should include all of Eric's work since patch T (53 weeks ago).

Shame.. I fear I may not be around for patch Y (not that anyone will care or that I'm important, heh), especially if that's another 6-9 months down the line going on current rates :(

Regards,

Ian

Taavi(EST)

30th April 2007, 00:27

I think patch X should be a nice improvement but from what I've read, won't include lots of the stuff that people are hoping for, that seems to be planned for patch Y. Fingers crossed, Y really needs to be a killer, since it should include all of Eric's work since patch T (53 weeks ago).

So it's probably time for me to pack up my wheel, throw out the desk extensions and go on a vacation from lfs.

Boris Lozac

30th April 2007, 00:51

So it's probably time for me to pack up my wheel, throw out the desk extensions and go on a vacation from lfs.

Yes, if you can't wait a month or two, than farewell... or buy a "programming for dummies" and go create your own sim..

Cr!t!calDrift

30th April 2007, 00:56

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 01:03

or buy a "programming for dummies" and go create your own sim..

Sorry Boris, that's _the_ lamest sentence that's been contributed to this thread so far.. that's nothing more than a cop-out statement.

You're not alone, that's a very common response, the problem is, Scawen et al are paid to do this, they _have to_ deliver.. there's no choice about it.. we as paying customers have the right to express out displeasure with development progress, it isn't a case of "don't like it, do it yourself".. most people here don't claim to be professional coders, which is what Scawen did the moment he started charging for LFS (and before anyone jumps up and down, no, I'm not saying Scawen is some kind of coding hack trying to be a programmer).

Regards,

Ian

Taavi(EST)

30th April 2007, 01:10

Yes, if you can't wait a month or two, than farewell... or buy a "programming for dummies" and go create your own sim..

I didn't mean it as bye, i will never play this game again, what i meant was that i will probably just skip the patch X by spending more time in the "real" world and just pop into the forums once in a while and when patch Y comes out i will be on it again, just like i was during the winter.

Oh and BTW Boris i think you need some sleep. :tilt:

keithano

30th April 2007, 01:18

I just realized I don't play it nearly as much as I used to...

The game needs some sort of a bang..

I suggest that the atmosphere needs a bit of tuning, because it's kind of...well..the music is ok but, it's really bland.

I mean, it's just plain, it doesn't have any significant atmosphere.

Maybe something like 'EA Trax' or a menu screen that shows dynamic LFS racing in the back or something..

Speaking of which...what if I made a GIF file for the background? Could it be animated?

Seriously, Buy S2 and give yourself a bang. Talking from the perspective view of a demo user is just useless. You don't know any real excitement after buying S2 and joining a serious league. You haven't tried most of other S1 and S2 cars yet ( I suppose that you haven't cracked LFS ).

Tweaker

30th April 2007, 01:22

Yes, if you can't wait a month or two, than farewell... or buy a "programming for dummies" and go create your own sim..
"MONTH or two"?

Are you in fast forward or something?

All you argue is how LFS performs with physics, how it looks when the cars drive, behavior, etc. Yet you say:
(and i am not talking about physics now, i am talking about graphical demonstration of car movement on the track)
Do you REALLY think that is Eric's job with how the cars have bodyroll, tire deformation, etc? That is all Scawen's work, and that IS the physics. What people are tired of in here is the lack of updated content (Eric's stuff)... that is a lot different than the frequently updated works of Scawen (eg physics, gameplay features, etc).

And what a laugh it is to hear you say the usual "go make your own sim" phrase. How ignorant can you be? This isn't about who is better than our 'beloved devs', it is about how they have failed to meet our expectations based on what they've done from the get-go when development was on a charge. One thing is for sure, this community is definitely capable of making it's own content to improve the game in much shorter time then Eric. Hell... Boris, you've made your own addons for the game, don't you feel that the time invested by Eric is a bit slow? You and I love to do graphic design, but it is clear when someone has designer's block and cannot get anything done with a job.

I think it was 2 years ago that XCNuse started playing around with 3D modelling, and look at what he is creating now. He could make 10 nearly-finished car models in the same time it takes for us to wait for a new steering wheel in the FO8 from Eric. If one person in the community can pump out content on their own, then they are obviously driven by what they want to achieve. I felt Eric was very involved with creating new content all the time back then, because it showed in all the creations he was releasing. But since nothing has really ever come of him other then a traced BF1 that is still unfinished, what are we to expect? How should we feel? Should we just keep saying to ourselves... "Ahhh lets wait, something will come soon, I just know it!!!". I don't want to give Eric a hard time, he wants to do his own thing. But as Bob Smith explained, dating back 53 weeks for the time to make some content, he better have loads of things finished or this game will really go nowhere, and "fanboys" will have a hard time trying to stick around from the loss of faith. Which is why I've always wanted to see teasers from what Eric is working on, like we saw in pre-S2 era (the height of development).

But the exposure to this simulation (that was given a tagline of "work-in-progress, be a part of its development") has changed ever since S2 was released. Either they don't want to show anything they are working on for fear they will mess our expectations up based on possible boundaries they encounter in the future (eg LX8, a set S2 Final completion date, ideas that are never possible), OR that they have nothing to show us at all and really cannot give us these little 'teasers' of development perhaps??? Nowadays we are just getting little releases from Scawen in the form of a surprise patch, or test patches beforehand. Being led to believe that Eric is working hard and we will be surprised with what he is finished with is not very reassuring with a long wait. Don't most development projects for games or software at least have the decency to give the public a few paragraphs of relief by explaining what is to come in the future and that we shouldn't need to worry? Or do we have to keep listening to community fans that have a great deal of false hope and belief?

It probably is a good thing to take a break like Taavi suggests to himself. Then again, Ian.H is a perfect example of someone who took a 2 year break (?) from LFS, and can see that nothing much has changed on the visual side. So is it really worth it? Or will we just wait for any form of content from any of the devs, and then play it to death to complain about more updates? The game is easy to get bored of, especially because it is a driving game.

Boris Lozac

30th April 2007, 01:32

Sorry Boris, that's _the_ lamest sentence that's been contributed to this thread so far.. that's nothing more than a cop-out statement.

I'm sorry, but i don't know what to say to you guys anymore.. :shrug:
Now that things finaly got up to pace, with very frequent updates and all, you are doing these "glass is half empty" arguments..
Please tell me what is dated here, graphics?? Depends how you look at it, car interiors-definately dated and guess what, they're gonna be updated soon, what is else dated?? With all high res updates, LFS looks marvelous, totally realistic, not cartoony like others, AND most people with low end computers can play it... let's see what else is dated here... sounds?? the best there is, gives ME the INFO, not your friend sitting besides you.. and guess what, it got updated, and it will be even more updated soon because Scawen doesn't have to worry about compatibility anymore...
Next.... multiplayer experience, dated?? Not a bit, still the best feel that i got a car beside me, still the best feel when battlling for position, i have no fear to go bumper to bumper, still the best representation of moving cars, and the number of players increased for 10! yes, 10!... is there room for improvement? of course there is, the player leaving the pits glitch...

You say that netcode is now dated, and surpassed by rFactor?? Right.. it can have a 1000 players at the same time, and ZERO lag, i can't race there... cars just doesn't look realistic on the track, and there the story ends for me... You say deforming tyres are just eye candy and you don't even notice them? off course you do, just look how cars behave on the track, and compare it to the RL footage and than compare it to the rFactor race and tell me what you saw... That's the "eye candy" deforming tyres(among other things) that give you that realistic behaviour on the track...

I agree though that we need more realistic stuff, but we already seems to be getting them, like the false starts, quali from pits, NO reset, etc, etc...

Tweaker

30th April 2007, 01:35

I agree though that we need more realistic stuff, but we already seems to be getting them, like the false starts, quali from pits, NO reset, etc, etc...
Again, all content updated from Scawen, not Eric.

Boris Lozac

30th April 2007, 01:39

Oh and BTW Boris i think you need some sleep. :tilt:

I work nightshift in the Printing house, so these forums keep me awake.. ;)

@ Tweaker

I agree with you, i know what you're saying, i was the one that posted a thread "Scawen, what Eric is doing?" or something like that...

I hear you, but i can't see where all this pesimism is coming from, i am 98% sure that we WILL get a nice graphic update till S2 final... :shrug:

Woz

30th April 2007, 01:48

The way I see it at present is LFS is still the king because everything else has not completed the package properly. There are many sims out there but all, including LFS have their faults. Its just the LFS faults are far less than everything else out there.

GPL - Great in its time but very dated now but still has big following.

ISI - I lump all the ISI sims in here (F1C, rF, GTR, GTR2, GTL). No real pickup races online because no real people online, last time I checked rF there were 6 people online. No real good stats collection online and dire tyre physics close to and over the edge of grip. While some of the later products (rF and GTR2) can look very good most people tire of eye candy very quickly. Yes there is modding but that brings its own pains as the rF mod cummunity appear to love ports of old tracks and modding mods.

NKP - Has a huge amount of promise, looks good and good physics BUT people who complain about the snails pace of LFS should look at NKP. A year gone and now the people who purchased initially have passed their year of updates and still don't have a product that works as it should. As their is no AI this makes this a hotlap sim without stats recording. The promised dev kit is now 9 months late and still no sign of it etc.

DR - I have not managed to get a look at this yet but again another sim with promise as comes from the people that created RBR. Again 6 months+ since the initial online test and that has gone dead. Hope this is not the new Racing Legends :)

NR2003 - Great for its time and still the best Nascar sim but after iRacing attacked the community it has killed the mod scene and now this is looking dated, more than LFS.

iRacing - Well, they have shouted about their glorified NR2003 "mod" for ages now but not even a demo video of what we can expect. I expect this will be a pay to play monthly fee from what it sounds like and they have already attacked their own customer base in the form of the NR2003 community so no idea what reception this will get if it ever comes out.

Well thats it. This is why LFS is still the tops. All of us would like to see more cars and tracks but LFS will remain king and be the bigest pull for online racing until something really does come out with a better overall package.

Taavi(EST)

30th April 2007, 01:52

I have to agree with Tweaker, all i need right now from the developers is a bigger insight to what's to come in the future, what's still in work in progress stage, right now all i see is them being as quiet as possible on their work. Why? I mean if Eric would gather up all his stuff and took screens of them and showed them on the official page, what's wrong with that? Or is there nothing to show? Just prove me wrong and i will be back to being a 100% fanboy, fighting off all the skeptics just like Boris here is. (no offense). I know people will think that the teasers will be just a little portion of the real stuff that's coming, even if they are all that's coming. Just say it out, that this is all. I hate being tricked into thinking that something big is coming and there actually isn't.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 02:03

I'm sorry, but i don't know what to say to you guys anymore.. :shrug:
Now that things finaly got up to pace, with very frequent updates and all, you are doing these "glass is half empty" arguments..

But not much that changes how LFS feels (by feel I mean overall environmental feeling, not physics feeling).

Please tell me what is dated here, graphics?? Depends how you look at it, car interiors-definately dated and guess what, they're gonna be updated soon, what is else dated?? With all high res updates, LFS looks marvelous, totally realistic, not cartoony like others, AND most people with low end computers can play it... let's see what else is dated here... sounds?? the best there is, gives ME the INFO, not your friend sitting besides you.. and guess what, it got updated, and it will be even more updated soon because Scawen doesn't have to worry about compatibility anymore...
Next.... multiplayer experience, dated?? Not a bit, still the best feel that i got a car beside me, still the best feel when battlling for position, i have no fear to go bumper to bumper, still the best representation of moving cars, and the number of players increased for 10! yes, 10!... is there room for improvement? of course there is, the player leaving the pits glitch...

I know it _will_ be updated, it's not an if, but a _when_. 2 years is a _long_ time to be waiting for any substantial update.

As for the comment on sounds, I'll guess you forgot the <sarcasm></sarcasm> tags... please don't tell me you were serious.

You say that netcode is now dated, and surpassed by rFactor?? Right.. it can have a 1000 players at the same time, and ZERO lag,

I didn't say the netcode was dated, neither did I say it _had_ been surpassed by rFactor.. only that LFS was once most definitely king in this area, ISI have caught up and rF _may_ have surpassed, but I can't say for sure as LFS grids are limited to a lower number than rFs so you can't do a large comparison.

ISI's netcode isn't perfect, it does warp occasionally.. maybe LFS' was "so good" because it once held only a few cars in comparison. I don't think this is the case, but until you can run similar comparisons of the likes of 35+ grids, you can't say which has the upper hand.

i can't race there... cars just doesn't look realistic on the track, and there the story ends for me...

Fair enough.. I don't think they look too bad personally (and nah, I don't think rF is all it was meant to be either, just don't think it looks too bad myself).. see attached.. I'd love to see some definition in road surfaces like that in LFS. Bump and spec maps make a big difference as I'm sure you're aware and the cars appear to be rolling ok, even without tyre deformation.

You say deforming tyres are just eye candy and you don't even notice them? off course you do, just look how cars behave on the track, and compare it to the RL footage and than compare it to the rFactor race and tell me what you saw... That's the "eye candy" deforming tyres(among other things) that give you that realistic behaviour on the track...

When you're charging behind someone at 140mph, you're not looking at how "pretty" their car rolls in the corners.. you only care that there's a car infront of you. The game's meant to be played, not stared at.. but I really doubt that if tyre deformation wasn't visual that you'd see much of a difference in how the cars look around the track.

I agree though that we need more realistic stuff, but we already seems to be getting them, like the false starts, quali from pits, NO reset, etc, etc...

After 4 years or more. This always has been a sim, not an arcade game.. so why has it taken so long to get these fundamentals in place? Why add some code to handle scripting when there's _far_ more important things to worry about? Taavi's shed analogy is spot on IMO.. that's exactly how progress has been recently from what I can see.

Regards,

Ian

Taavi(EST)

30th April 2007, 02:03

DR - I have not managed to get a look at this yet but again another sim with promise as comes from the people that created RBR. Again 6 months+ since the initial online test and that has gone dead. Hope this is not the new Racing Legends :)

Hmm, what game is that?

Boris Lozac

30th April 2007, 02:07

fighting off all the skeptics just like Boris here is. (no offense)

But i was just like you some time ago, search for the locked thread i posted, asking Scawen to give us some Eric plans..
It's just the timing of you guys is all wrong, now, more than ever, it looks like we will get something from Eric, i agree that some teasers would be great, but there isn't any (yet), so what can you do.. Drink some Cola like i do ;) good things started to happen to me lately, so i kinda feel a little optimistic.. that's it..

Again, i am saying, your timing is off...
If we don't get anything graphics wise (especially interiors) till S2 final, than you can say me "I told you so", and i am catching a plane to England to slap Eric in the face.. ;)

If Scawen is reading this, please consider peoples worries here, these are all old school fans "complaining" here, not some dorRIFTazzZZ! noobs... give us a clear answer on wheather or not Eric is doing/planning on doing something for the S2 final..

The updated cockpits for all cars (possibly some 3D stuff, rather than 2D) will do it for me, as everything else can be updated via high res stuff from community, and maybe some more detailed car exteriors, polygon wise... i think (and i think most here agree with me) that these stuff would be MORE than enough to satisfy these pesimist! :)

Electrik Kar

30th April 2007, 02:10

I would gladly hand over all of my original high-res stuff if the devs, and you guys, thought it would help. Unseen as well is totally dedicated to churning out high-res textures for the interiors and the like. But it is unfair to harp on Eric like this- if there's anything I've learnt over the past year it's just how time-consuming his job must really be- not only texturing, but modelling, and track design- his input into the game is already staggering. And moaning probably won't help him work at his job any harder; it definitely won't allow him to work any faster.

Hyperactive

30th April 2007, 02:13

There hasn't been said anything that suggests that "something big" is coming. I realy hope that false starts wasn't it.

What is coming, I don't know but my hopes are pretty low. False starts and diff preload with the balancing of the TBO/GTR are really something that I was expecting a lot sooner. But then again there are bucketloads of stuff that should be implemented. I am not saying that I fully understand how LFS is planned to develop in the next 365days but in my list of things-needed-to-be-done engine damage, rewindable replays and better aero/collision model are a lot, LOT higher than insim... Imho there shouldn't even be any hesitation which to choose to update next :/

Another thing that is funny is that certain people always have these obscure release dates for S2/S3. Tbh, I wouldn't expect S2 full before 2009. It is not the "slowness" of the development that bothers me, it is the stuff that seems to be on high priority.

Although I can fully understand why the speed is slowing down. The main coder, Scawen has a family now. Priorities change.

Taavi(EST)

30th April 2007, 02:19

Again, i am saying, your timing is off...
If we don't get anything graphics wise (especially interiors) till S2 final, than you can say me "I told you so", and i am catching a plane to England to slap Eric in the face.. ;)

I'm probably coming with you in that case. (sorry for being offensive)

The updated cockpits for all cars (possibly some 3D stuff, rather than 2D) will do it for me, as everything else can be updated via high res stuff from community, and maybe some more detailed car exteriors, polygon wise... i think (and i think most here agree with me) that these stuff would be MORE than enough to satisfy these pesimist! :)

If the high-res, high(er)-polygon cockpits are the only things we're getting, they need to be mighty perfect, i was expecting a small update within the interiors, The bigger hopes for me are in the environments. As in new tracks (at least new configurations), some new cars to play with. Plus i would really like to see the DX8 being used thoroughly, as in better quality shadows, bump maps, specular maps, etc.

AtomAnt

30th April 2007, 02:37

mmm...the question of time....

for an Old Fart (tm) like me, there is always the risk that I will never SEE S3, let alone get the chance to play it!...

Geez man you're only 3 years older than me and I plan to be around to see cars fly.....lol

Electrik Kar

30th April 2007, 02:48

i would really like to see the DX8 being used thoroughly

I've been playing Stalker in DX8 mode recently, and have to say, its a beautiful game in DX8- crisp, detailed.. and smooth as butter. I reckon there's plenty of room left yet in DX8 for LFS to improve graphically.

MAD3.0LT

30th April 2007, 02:51

Im Far From a LFS fan boy and still beleave LFS is one of the best if not the Best racing sim i have played it dose lack small details in some aera's but it feels better then any other sim i have played.
Most other racing sims have bad compatabilty with the DFP and bad Force feedback but lfs is allmost on par with the feeling of the cars.

I feel LFS really needs a big update i been here for a really long time befor even hex editing was done to mod the cars pre demo days and to me not much has changed in the visual department and personaly i dont care about the looks of the game its about the content and feel for me.

PS i wonder if anyone thought maybe eric is busy working on S3 stuff IE new cars+tracks? (i hope he is) i really dont want to wait 2 years to see S3 cause by then ill be doing my on racing :P

SamH

30th April 2007, 03:22

Shotglass

30th April 2007, 04:09

every time i try to slide through a corner then counter steering makes the car spin faster than without counter steering at all.

naturally with the bogus tyre curves gtr2 uses

it really hasn't gone leaps and bounds ahead of other sims that are rapidly surpassing this game.

what are these other sims you speak of ?

deggis

30th April 2007, 04:25

and reading the latest Scawen's post about realism:

As a person who is all about realism in sims, (as long as it serves a purpose) I find that extremely discouraging.
Before I thought these "arcade" things that have been there for years for no real reason because Scawen hasn't put "yet" any effort to them. I remember Scawen wrote similar "joke" post to that auto handbrake thread. After that I started to think that is this approach really the one he wants to take. That post pretty much blows away half of the features everyone is waiting for S3...

It's really akward that the tyre physics are extremely hardcore but everything else is just made with "easy to play" approach. I wonder does this all come back to that LFS started as a small freeware indy project, maybe with a bit blurred future plans and now Scawen wants to keep this "small indy game that's fun to play" image. As much I'd say Kunos is an a-hole because the way he has treated nKp customers but I really admire his hardcore approach, even that the end result on certain things is not the best possible in gameplay-wise.

and why the sound engine hasn't received a _significant_ update by now is beyond me as this is usually the first complaint anyone has, so surely one that should be addressed as a priority.
I don't know what to say to this because I remember you said while ago in the sound imporovements thread that you'd still prefer pre-V/W sounds. Can you describe "significant"? And what you are expecting from the sounds then? I sure hope you're familiar the way the sounds are produced in LFS. Now after Patch W it's the best prove about synthesized sound potential - not like there would be much competition in this synthetisized sounds area, only netKar Pro with it's "simulating distorted onboard movie sound quality" sounds and Todd Wasson's experimental sound engine.

I've been playing Stalker in DX8 mode recently, and have to say, its a beautiful game in DX8- crisp, detailed.. and smooth as butter. I reckon there's plenty of room left yet in DX8 for LFS to improve graphically.
I agree. And what would be the point of adding few fancy DX8/9 effects for as long as we have lo-res textures? I really wonder what's the reason for that, I mean even the default skins are 512x512. It can't be keeping the download size small (not like we're still in 56 kbps modem era) and as some tests seems to prove, using hi-res texture addons doesn't actually make that much difference to fps, so it can't be that either. Seems like someone is obsessed with lo-res textures size.

.

Tweaker

30th April 2007, 04:45

it really hasn't gone leaps and bounds ahead of other sims that are rapidly surpassing this game.
what are these other sims you speak of ?
You forgot to put "sims" in quotes :rolleyes: Again, people are just on it about the physics. I am talking about the visual aspects.

Cars in LFS are very low detail, hardly any qualities to them. As with other popular titles, there are much nicer looking car models, higher detailed wheels, cockpits, hell even windows from the inside. The list can carry on for a while. Even GPL has blurred sidewall animations.

Tracks in LFS are really not complete in my opinion (of course they will be touched up, but when?), there is still some work to do, or else they will feel like a flat/planar track with no proper fringe, bumps on kerbs (and yes there are bumpy kerbs that can be driven both directions), poorly designed chicanes on pit exits/entrances, texture bugs, lack of crowds (no ambiance), etc. Look around and you'll see. Nothing is complete of course, but then look at the animations. Poor driver modeling for the body and helmet, no decent animations while driving... not even a pit crew in the pitlane. What about lights (and day/night), better smoke, glowing brake discs, exhaust backfire, sparks, real looking dial clusters, sun glare, wet weather, pace car, proper penalty flags, AI that work and can drive fast, built-in telemetry, useful pit strategies, shattering/breakable objects on tracks & cars, damaged body panels (and fall off), dirt visible on the tires, rewind in replays, proper gearbox simulation and stalling, blown engines / mechanical failures, racing line grip levels (marbles), track temps... There is probably a lot more to list.

And tell me, no other sim beats LFS in respects to those things? :really: Some of those things are in games dating back even before LFS was born. We don't have ANY of this, and it makes a driving game 10x better. Are people really still waiting on S3 till they think they will get this stuff? LOL.

These things are what you need to have in order to make a competitive driving game in the market these days. Else you can just say "oh but you don't need that", and continue to spread your beliefs that LFS is the "BEST" and has all you ever need in a driving game. As far as I know, people that love LFS's physics but cannot "love" the game like you do (those on RSC that hate LFS fanboys) really want more like what I listed above... or else it just isn't an interesting game for other enthusiasts and we look and make a complete ass of ourselves by not accepting it. We are still very much in a fantasy world with LFS's limited visual atmosphere, but that still doesn't mean those things listed are completely impossible or should wait years and years down the road... or else, once LFS finally gets those things, it won't exactly be "groundbreaking" like LFS really sets out to be, right?

DeadWolfBones

30th April 2007, 04:52

I have to agree wholeheartedly with SamH's comments.

The bottom line is that I'll keep playing LFS until something better (subjectively speaking) comes along, and right now I don't see anything out there--or anything on the horizon--that comes close.

Of course I get frustrated from time to time with the slow development process, and of course it's a little ridiculous that 2+ years on from the S2 release we still don't have a S2 final. Of course we'd all like to have all the features we want, and of course we'd like to have them RIGHT NOW.

The thing that keeps me from getting too worked up about these wants is that I just love the feeling of playing LFS, even in its current, unfinished state. Not even NR2003 or GPL come close for me. Tonight, for example, I dropped in on the CHOPS Sunday Cup race without any practice and had a great battle that ended with me making up 12+ seconds in 7 or 8 laps and making the pass on the final turn of the final lap. My heart was pounding, I was sweating, and my hands were stuck in a clenching position for an hour after the race. And this was a race for third place! In a race that doesn't mean anything in a larger sense (i.e., a league or anything). That's what keeps me playing LFS--the knowledge that I can log in on any given night, play with guys I know and trust, and have a great, close race without worrying about weird physics inconsistencies or bad multiplayer code ruining things.

And I can assure you that I was not at any time busy worrying about the lack of bump mapping or realistic hi-res cracks in the pavement.

...which is not to say that these things are not important, but rather to say that LFS is good enough in its current state at the task of simulating driving that it keeps me from worrying too much about those things. Others might not find the simulation as engrossing, might thus have more time to focus on the aesthetic details. That's fine, every community needs critics to keep things moving forward. And it's fine if someone doesn't find the game to their liking, can't handle the wait for updates, etc etc.

One thing that I think has helped my enjoyment of the game substantially is that I've had a couple long breaks in my LFS career. One from mid-S1 to the release of S2, and one from August of last year to January of this year. Each time I came back refreshed and fell in love with the experience all over again. Maybe if you're going through a rough patch re: your interest in the game, taking a break would help?

Bottom line #2: LFS has easily the highest time played and enjoyed/dollars spent ratio of any game I've owned, and that alone ensures that it's been worth my money. In no way can I fault the devs for their slow development process when I've been pleased with the game (as such) at every step along the way. Rather than seeming like the long awaited ends of various kinds of torture, the updates that come with each patch are presents to me. They make a game I love better. Perhaps this is a product of lowered expectations of the sim world as a whole, I don't know for sure.

I guess I'll stop rambling there. Like SamH said, this probably paints me a fanboy, but hopefully one who's understanding of those who aren't.

:thumbsup:

Ball Bearing Turbo

30th April 2007, 05:07

Damn.

Ian and Tweaker are right; I'm taking my rose colored glasses off. I think Patch Y, as Bob alluded to, will probably either really make or break LFS's development for a lot of people. If it doesn't deliver I could see a lot of dissent happening around here TBH. Months is one thing; but when we start talking about years between changes that really affect the experience, something is strange. A year is a long time folks!

Pre S2 was the glory days, even more so than pre-S1 (yes I know I wasn't active, but I lurked for a long time in the shadows). I don't know what to think anymore TBH :shrug:

I still have tons of fun racing though! :)

I've played a lot of GTR2 this week, but I can only handle it a week at a time because the cars are so limited (wow, a bunch of GTRs. How exciting.) and the tyres are ridiculous compared to LFS. But it sounds "ok" most of the time, and has a couple of decent tracks. The fact that I get bored of it in less than a week is encouraging, because LFSs dynamics are just that good that I come back for more no matter what.

So I'm still a fanboi (:razz:) albeit one who's wondering WTH is up with the future of LFS.

Shotglass

30th April 2007, 05:39

first of all dont try to put me in any fanboy category and think youre done with me all youll accomplish that way is get me pissy

You forgot to put "sims" in quotes :rolleyes: Again, people are just on it about the physics. I am talking about the visual aspects.

its about the whole package and while lfs is far from perfect on visual it doesnt completely drop the ball like its entire competition has done so far one one aspect or another
hell most of them even drop the ball on visuals and completely ruin their nice models and highres textures by trying to compete with farbrausch 30

Cars in LFS are very low detail, hardly any qualities to them. As with other popular titles, there are much nicer looking car models, higher detailed wheels, cockpits, hell even windows from the inside. The list can carry on for a while. Even GPL has blurred sidewall animations.

and how much of that do you actually notice while youre in a race ?

Tracks in LFS are really not complete in my opinion (of course they will be touched up, but when?), there is still some work to do, or else they will feel like a flat/planar track with no proper fringe, bumps on kerbs (and yes there are bumpy kerbs that can be driven both directions), poorly designed chicanes on pit exits/entrances, texture bugs, lack of crowds (no ambiance), etc. Look around and you'll see. Nothing is complete of course, but then look at the animations. Poor driver modeling for the body and helmet, no decent animations while driving... not even a pit crew in the pitlane. What about lights (and day/night), better smoke, glowing brake discs, exhaust backfire, sparks, real looking dial clusters, sun glare, wet weather, pace car, proper penalty flags, AI that work and can drive fast, built-in telemetry, useful pit strategies, shattering/breakable objects on tracks & cars, damaged body panels (and fall off), dirt visible on the tires, rewind in replays, proper gearbox simulation and stalling, blown engines / mechanical failures, racing line grip levels (marbles), track temps... There is probably a lot more to list.

wile one half of your list would really add something to lfs the other half is really nothing more than eye candy you hardly ever notice past the first few minutes of playing the game and admiring the scenery
this is not doom or fear where the graphics enhance the gameplay

These things are what you need to have in order to make a competitive driving game in the market these days.

if the market is ferrari27 and the like id gladly pay another 24£ to make up for the loss

lets be honest lfs is far from perfect and it feels like its standing still rather than moving but claiming that its falling behind is far from the truth as there currently isnt anything that even manages to overtake in the first place

id like to see lfs progress faster than it does as much as any other guy here (although in a different direction than many here as id rather not have a silly hardcore mode and dont care too much about erics work being the kind of guy who played quake 3 with picmip 8 if you know what that means) but the fact is that lfs is progressing in a slow but steady gait much like a tuin and much like that all others around him/her arent moving at all (hell that ferrari game with the grand new engine will still use isi physics ... the isi devs dont even recognise theres something seriously wrong with their tyres and believe that you need some special setup to keep a car sideways ... and kunos seems to prefer googling for underaged asian girls for his avatars over coding)
and as far as astropsychology in respect to turtles like lfs is concerend im a believer in the big bang hypothesis

Tweaker

30th April 2007, 05:42

and how much of that do you actually notice while youre in a race ?
An argument of someone that could care less of LFS looking better, just what we need. :shrug: Never going to get the message across with you then. *check*

Shotglass

30th April 2007, 05:51

how convenient to end a discussion on a single line

Breizh

30th April 2007, 06:00

Just play some other game while LFS gets to the point your pet peeves are fixed... When have Scavier shown they were coasting on LFS' success? What would you do better in their shoes? All the complaining in the world is no help. It is just stating the obvious (Scavier only have so much brain power/time/resources), and/or (depending on how it's said) plain disingenuous.
All I would add is one more developer to the crew, and the hard part as I see it would be for that dev to fit in without counterproductively rocking the boat.

LFS will be done when it's done, no sooner or later. That's what "alpha" means.

Taavi(EST)

30th April 2007, 06:00

It's not about seeing those things while you race, it's the satisfaction of knowing that it has been dealt with. Then again, if we get dynamic shadows, its going to be much harder to judge your braking points, lol.

Hankstar

30th April 2007, 06:06

It didn't click that it's been two whole years since S2 Alpha hit the shelves (so to speak) until I read this thread. Two years in the alpha phase really is quite a long time, regardless of how much I love playing the game. That's more observation than critique though as I've no idea how to code, well, anything.

I can sympathise with those players who are concerned about LFS being overtaken by other sims with more cash and which are being developed faster, however a lot of LFS' rivals that I've tried are wide of the mark when it comes to the core issue of how the car feels when you drive it. To me, that's step one in making a good sim and everything else should be secondary.

Although as a long-time fan, I too am wondering what happens next (and when) for this killer little indy sim :up:

Lotesdelere

30th April 2007, 06:09

The thing that keeps me from getting too worked up about these wants is that I just love the feeling of playing LFS, even in its current, unfinished state. Tonight, for example, I dropped in on the CHOPS Sunday Cup race without any practice and had a great battle that ended with me making up 12+ seconds in 7 or 8 laps and making the pass on the final turn of the final lap. My heart was pounding, I was sweating, and my hands were stuck in a clenching position for an hour after the race. And this was a race for third place!

because LFSs dynamics are just that good that I come back for more no matter what.
Yeah! :thumb:

BrandonAGr

30th April 2007, 06:31

Bottom line #2: LFS has easily the highest time played and enjoyed/dollars spent ratio of any game I've owned, and that alone ensures that it's been worth my money. In no way can I fault the devs for their slow development process when I've been pleased with the game (as such) at every step along the way. Rather than seeming like the long awaited ends of various kinds of torture, the updates that come with each patch are presents to me. They make a game I love better.

+1

I understand how some of the posts here are upset with the slow progress in some areas of the game(content), but I would have to disagree with the attitude that the devs still fundamentally owe us something, they have already delivered for the price I have paid.

JJ72

30th April 2007, 06:37

Wonderful thread ain't it?

The only thing that I see though.....people who defend LFS like crazy, and people that get pissed because of "what might have been.." are basically the same. - you all are emotionally attached to the thing, and THAT IS THE POINT in my opinion.

Put things in a more objective perspective, it is pretty unlikely that LFS is going to be the one and only sim, a sim that is miles ahead in physics and can stand just shoulder to shoulder compare to most of the driving games out on the market, just think about the odds.

If that is going to happen, it would either take a lot of investment, a lot of manpower, or a lot of time - obviously we ain't having the first two so we are taking a hell lot of time. And that is granted in my opinion.

Did you heard about LFS when it's just a few line of codes? Nah, you heard of it when there's already a workable demo with huge potential, so everyone goes BANG!!! THIS ROCKS!! Without knowing the time already spent in the project beforehand, now that excitment wears away we realise it is moving too slow, but what I think is, it is always that slow and you shouldn't realise it only by now.

Can't blame people of their impatience, since everything in this world is moving at lightspeed. Games are getting giantic, more flashy then ever, even more influential then movies as a media, it's a very comptitive market, so realistically saying the chance of a indie group making a big break in such a technology and labour intensive industry is almost zero.

You think LFS looks and sound bad?? It probably should or else the guys in major game studios should be sacked!

Fact is, there is no reference in this kind of small team basement race sim project that we can use as a comparision, remotely we can think netkar, and do anyone feel that the development of netkar is signicficantly faster than LFS. (if it's actually faster to start with?) R-factor is built upon a physics model that can be dated a decade ago, a whole decade! I don't think it is particular quick as well in comparison.

Hyperactive

30th April 2007, 06:54

The best memory I have from GPL is when I was racing against the ai at Mexico with full race gp or something. It was a long race and I had put much effort into it to get a good result. I was leading on the last lap when my engine broke because my own aggressive shifting to get myself pass of jim clarke (or some of those :p). It is those moments that LFS misses completely. It is also the moments I miss so much! :shrug:

Imho, engine damage and better collisions should be on top of priorities, much more important than some +12 racers (how many full 20 slot servers you see?). When looking at games like Gran turismos the most wanted features are engine damage and decent collision detection. On LFS scale of things these are below insim, a programming interface for racing sim. Not to be rude but if LFS aims to be a perfect sim for programmer/racers (in that order) we are pretty much on right tracks? What about the hc sim racers who are after close racing, car management through races and more visual and audible experience of being there?

Hankstar

30th April 2007, 08:10

That's what I love about GPL - the need for some mechanical sympathy. I've lost more than one race by having my '67 V12 Gurney-Weslake explode behind me because I was abusing it. I'd dearly love to see engine damage in LFS - too many people are getting away with murder :)

I think this thread is valuable - there seem to be a lot of long-time fanboiz (;)) coming out of the woodwork, as it were, and speaking honestly about their desires for LFS :up:

Bladerunner

30th April 2007, 08:13

Geez man you're only 3 years older than me and I plan to be around to see cars fly.....lol

Seen that already...just hit a barrier at 10mph in LFS :D

Blackout

30th April 2007, 08:21

Well, can share my concerns on many things mentioned in this thread.

Had to play again with patch W last night, after getting used to the false starts the fully automated starts felt silly. I really don't have much expectations with the upcoming X patch because the great false start feature should have been done ages ago as it does bring a ton of fun to the starts. I take X as granted.

But as mentioned already, patch Y should be the real treat, and I'm really looking forward to that and of course, like many here, will be very disappointed if it doesn't deliver *something big.

*better grip loss on spinning wheels and clutch for example (all to support better starts)

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 08:35

Well, I've read the thread and I think I understand where folks are at.

Ian, your posts *do* read as trollish downers at face value, at least to me, but listening to the interaction, as people pull you up on individual points, it's becoming clear that actually you're probably as much a fanboi as me. You're just frustrated at the apparent lack of progress. If you're yearning for rapid progress in LFS, I can imagine you'd be frustrated at this point.

If you think my posts here sound like trolling at face value, I suggest you resign from being a moderator as you obviously have no clue. If I was trolling, I'd say LFS is bollox and rF or [insert any other sim title here] was the best! I haven't said either, and I won't. I don't think LFS is crap, I don't think GTR2 / rF are the best things since sliced bread, but both either do various things period, or better than LFS.. however, LFS feels better through my wheel for the most part. I _am_ pissed off at buying a product over 2 years ago to receive nothing but a half done alpha version with more arcade features than sim.

I've said many times before that I like the workers' co-op ethics that LFS is developed in. On that basis alone, I'd probably forgive Scavier anything. I like the fact that this ethos leads to the development of code that is right, rather than code that will do.

Hah... umm, so you've seen and understood all the code in LFS, right? If you haven't, HTF can you make a statement like that!? There is no 'fact' in your statement, it's just what you (want to) believe.

I don't, personally, care about the pace because good things come to those who wait, and I'm having a kick-ass time with it as it is now.

Good for you.. but I'm a little sick of waiting for 2 damn years for almost nothing. I don't give a flying [...] about insim or outsim or some scripting language because people are too lazy to perform actions manually.. this is a _race sim_ (apparently), not a coding 101 class.

I don't like GTR2. It's a personal opinion. I just don't think it's got anything on LFS, physics-wise (and that's my primary interest, incidentally). Things happen in LFS because the environment is a physics emulation of real-world environment. It's not perfect, as you know, but as time passes it does get better.

It may not be as good as LFS is physics wise, but it'sa damn sight more of a complete game than I think LFS will _ever_ be.. at least before I'm too old to be able to focus on the screen properly.

I know that rF is nowhere on the radar regarding physics, because the cars and tracks in rF *don't* exist in a physics emulation. You have to (more to the point, you *can*) create your own values, when you code a mod for rF. This is very unattractive to me.

Just because you can't fill in the numbers to get it to feel right, I don't see why you (and apparently most people around here) find that so hard to accept. End of the day, ISI and Scawen et al do the same. Physics don't "just happen".

Graphically, I agree that LFS is missing out on some eyecandy DX8 tricks. I don't know if those are coming or not. Perhaps it'd be nice if they were, but they'd be simply eyecandy for me. I'm already fully immersed when I'm racing. For some people, perhaps these fx would assist in the immersion. At the end of the day, if the effects come at the expense of the physics, I'll pass thanks.

Immersion. Driving on tarmac that looks dead flat (and bad due to the most appalling texture mapping I've ever come across) because there's nothing but a single texture isn't very realistic neither is it immersive. For the textures used (ie: low-res), Eric's done a pretty good job.. but why are we still living in the 90s in this respect? low-res was 10 years ago... and no, I don't have an ASCII White to play games on.. I can't even use DX9 properly without it stuttering like crazy.. but c'mon.. why is DX8 not even being exploited? LFS may aswell be using DX7.. and infact, looks like it is for the most part.

But you'd sooner have some coding interface added instead? Because that's what's happening.. we haven't got graphics updates, but we do now have a scripting language <sarcasm>YAY!</sarcasm>.. so when were the physics being worked on when Scawen was coding this pointless interface? ;)

So I'm a fanboi. Boohoo :)

Now that's just sad.

Regards,

Ian

Blackout

30th April 2007, 08:42

Well I can agree on that insim coding whatever thing. It can feel a bit pointless. But is seems that Scawen is outsourcing his work to the community, all kind of small thing that he doesn't want to spend his time can be done by people who have the time. I could imagine that it's time well invested to lessen the workload off Scawen. But on the other hand it worries me as I'd like to see the data, replay and such analyzers built in LFS and done properly by the man itself.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 08:44

I don't know what to say to this because I remember you said while ago in the sound imporovements thread that you'd still prefer pre-V/W sounds.

This would be like me driving a Nissan rather than walking.. it'd be taking the lesser of 2 evils.

Can you describe "significant"?

Something that actually works? Something that doesn't sound like spaceships hovering in a plastic tube at the bottom of a bath? Seriously, I can't believe you have to ask that given what the current sound engine sounds like.

And what you are expecting from the sounds then?

Preferably something that made the cars sound like...... cars, not synthetic echoing spaceships. Sorry to piss on your bonfire, but the LFS sound engine is nothing but a _seriously_ bad joke right now. Look at everything's DaveWS has tried to do with the sounds.. he's not even come close to anything sounding like it should, but has worked his plums off trying.. the sound engine is like ISI's tyres... inherently flawed.. you can't build a stable house on sloppy foundations. Scrap it and start again.. there's no hope for it.

I sure hope you're familiar the way the sounds are produced in LFS.

Fully aware, thank you.. and have in the past said that once developed, the method used would offer the best solution, however, no one's bothered with it.. lets just add new coding interfaces instead of the important stuff.

What do you think goes through the minds of people who have played the likes of GTR2, rF or damn, even some NFS title when they try LFS for the first time? I can pretty much imagine... "my damn ears!"

Now after Patch W it's the best prove about synthesized sound potential - not like there would be much competition in this synthetisized sounds area, only netKar Pro with it's "simulating distorted onboard movie sound quality" sounds and Todd Wasson's experimental sound engine.

And RBR IIRC, which lets face it, is in a completely different league to what we hear in LFS.

I agree. And what would be the point of adding few fancy DX8/9 effects for as long as we have lo-res textures?

Hmm.. I wonder what the solution to that could be then...............

I really wonder what's the reason for that, I mean even the default skins are 512x512. It can't be keeping the download size small (not like we're still in 56 kbps modem era) and as some tests seems to prove, using hi-res texture addons doesn't actually make that much difference to fps, so it can't be that either. Seems like someone is obsessed with lo-res textures size.

Simple reason... LFS is stuck back in 1999 while all other games developers realise that it's now 2007.

Regards,

Ian

BrandonAGr

30th April 2007, 09:11

If you think my posts here sound like trolling at face value, I suggest you resign from being a moderator as you obviously have no clue. If I was trolling, I'd say LFS is bollox and rF or [insert any other sim title here] was the best!

but it'sa damn sight more of a complete game than I think LFS will _ever_ be
...
Preferably something that made the cars sound like...... cars, not synthetic echoing spaceships. Sorry to piss on your bonfire, but the LFS sound engine is nothing but a _seriously_ bad joke right now.
...
and bad due to the most appalling texture mapping I've ever come across
...
Something that doesn't sound like spaceships hovering in a plastic tube at the bottom of a bath?

Now you are definitely sounding trollish

Wenom

30th April 2007, 09:25

Jesus, what a bunch of ladies whining about the progress of LFS. Like theres nothing else to do than rant here.

Tweaker

30th April 2007, 09:28

Jesus, what a bunch of ladies whining about the progress of LFS. Like theres nothing else to do than rant here.
GJ Sherlock :up: :detective

SpikeyMarcoD

30th April 2007, 09:30

Shame.. I fear I may not be around for patch Y (not that anyone will care or that I'm important, heh), especially if that's another 6-9 months down the line going on current rates :(

Regards,

Ian

From what i read on another thread its not a matter of months. Y should come fairly quick after X. Guess even quicker in the testpatch circus :D. Cant find the post now, but it was Scawen himself so guess pretty reliable.

JJ72

30th April 2007, 09:32

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 09:35

Now you are definitely sounding trollish

Wrong.. if I was trolling, I wouldn't have given any reasons as to why I made such statements. You're just blindly defending. I've backed up why I feel the way I do.. I haven't just said "this is crap".. I've explained why (I think it is).

Regards,

Ian

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 09:40

nah. it's never about LFS's progress. Just periodical unleash of frustration that is a natural part of being a part of LFS community, IF this is about progress of LFS someone would have said something about HOW actually we can find that extra development pace instead of adding adjertives to how car sound in LFS and so.

Huh? It's not rocket science on how you speed up development pace. I don't doubt that Scawen is coding his nuts off, and having a littlen of my own, I can completely understand that he'd want to spend time with his family, but I also run a business and I can't just "drop everything" and hope no one complains.

Put it this way, you come to me with a handful of cash and tell me you want a web site that does X,Y,Z. We agree to a contract (ie: I say yes and take your money) and I explain that some parts will take a little time.. to which you feel is no problem, you'd like it to be right.

2 years later, after me just sending a few paragraphs of updates but tell you how much I've managed to tweak the code adn optimise this that and the other that'll make no difference to how to the site is used / perfoms, are you still going to be happy when you say "hey! what's happening to my site?" to which I reply "it'll get there but you need to be patient.. I've just added a sweet as feature that will allow people to make comments on your site!".. even though your site doesn't really need a comments page. Will you still be impressed with me / my work?

tell me again how are we suppose to compete against over game developers in terms of graphics and sound with our business model. Go big, go commercial, or go open source? Do any of these and LFS won't be LFS no more, I suppose.

And perhaps there lies the root of the problem... the business model.

Why would LFS "not be LFS anymore"? Surely LFS is the game we play, not by who / how it gets developed? Software development isn't like hiring a tart for the night and sharing her with your misses.. it's about getting the end result.. it's not a sordid, dirty thing if another person was to join the team like many would see a threesome.

I have nothing against the Devs personally in the slightest, but do feel that too many here see them as "friends". LFS is a commercial entity, they _have_ to deliver certain goods. They're not our friends (although are friendly).. they're a business to which we've paid for a product and yet to receive. I think this is what clouds a lot of people's judgement. I have some clients that think the sun shines out of my arse because I've done them a favour, given 110% or whatever.. it doesn't, I've been friendly with most of my clients as it does help IMO.. but at the end of the day, they've paid me to produce $something, if I don't deliver within a timely period, I'd expect them to get pissed off with me too.

Regards,

Ian

Paranoid Android

30th April 2007, 09:42

From what i read on another thread its not a matter of months. Y should come fairly quick after X. Guess even quicker in the testpatch circus :D. Cant find the post now, but it was Scawen himself so guess pretty reliable.

Nope, patch X was to come quickly, and then a longer development period would go on to implement physics changes and new interiors etc, in patch Y.

Electrik Kar

30th April 2007, 09:42

I mean even the default skins are 512x512

In a funny way, that's a good thing, because atleast then people are maybe be more motivated to search around the different skinning sites, becoming familiar with the broader community. But, on the opposite end, it's a shame if people don't do that...

IMO there definitely should be a quality higher-res skins pack available either from the main site, or coming with the game, by the time S2 goes final. There are so many great skins out there now; they should be used to show LFS off. A choicer selection of setups wouldn't go astray either.

Tweaker

30th April 2007, 09:43

IF this is about progress of LFS someone would have said something about HOW actually we can find that extra development pace
The thing is, we are powerless in this respect. What can we do other than voice our opinion or give constant suggestions? All we can rely on is that the devs hear us, and quite possibly let them see some reasoning behind what we say. But I'd bet it is just disregarded as the usual banter on forums and it gets no chance or fair view from the devs or others.

If I wanted to see the pace become faster, the only possible idea would be to have more developers on the team. But I think that is highly unlikely to happen. We can't go into saying how the developers should work on their time schedules and ignore their living duties... Though, as we are all customers, I think it is OK to be worried about what goes on behind the curtain, and try shed some light on what needs attention from the devs.

If you look at a lot of improvement suggestions, they are never in the realm of physics updates. Kind of a sign, and I think it holds true that the physics are pretty damn good right now, and perhaps the focus should be directed on other things right now for S2 final (e.g. visual content and gameplay features).

Electrik Kar

30th April 2007, 09:49

If you look at a lot of improvement suggestions, they are never in the realm of physics updates. Kind of a sign

We're sending mixed messages really. One of the latest polls suggested that physics improvements were at the top of people's concerns for development. Graphical updates were relatively low down on the list.

Tweaker

30th April 2007, 09:51

What poll was that? I'd just like to see, dunno if I remember it, or have even seen it.

keithano

30th April 2007, 09:58

Just a side note, quoted from Scawen who posted this just now:

A note about timing, it will definitely not be released fully this week, there is too much to do still. Patch X release should be around Friday 11 May or a week later on Friday 18 May.

Well, to Ian. H. It's somehow different to your website case, the devs havent made any promise nor any contracts with us regarding his job. What we bought is the contents that is already existed, what other patches or updates that come after your purchasing of license is like an extra.

More also, using the same concept, we can't expect anything from the devs for S3, this is simply because we haven't purchased the S3 license. Once it is released, we will buy the S3 license and we will get the contents that come along with the first S3 patch, and well, that's it. No contracts, regulations or whatever promises from the devs to state that they will further update S3, just like we bought S2.

I hope I am not sounding offensive to you, I clearly understand your point. And if you feel any offensive from me, I hereby apologize to you. Ya, I am fairly new to this community as you can look at my registration date. Therefore, at this moment, I haven't any complaints yet. However, I do understand your position and concern, and you have stated a strong point that most patches have been done be Scawen. He is doing a good job, but for eye-candies and some high-res graphics that all of us expect from Eric, does somehow do not have any clue about them. Yep, 53 weeks from the last update from Eric is a long time. It is, and DX7 is already out-dated. Maybe they want to keep the older computers on running LFS? Well, that isn't a point. For me, I am also looking forward for Scawen rewriting the code to get advantage of the dual core processor. He has stated that it is on his list, but need to take any a month to do so.

Well, last but not least, this is one of the best threads that I've ever seen in this forum. Despite the funny team recruiting threads at the team section, there are still too many pointless threads. Keep this one as a clean and high-quality discussion.

sinbad

30th April 2007, 10:01

Most of us have probably settled into the realisation that there is no point hoping for anything, ever. It's a shame, I know we get "updates" but rarely one that makes a great deal of difference.
They must surely have considered the possibility of people getting bored of the current cars/tracks, like Ian H. Maybe they have decided that there is nothing they can do about it, maybe they don't want to do anything about it.

It doesn't matter, but when there isn't even a possible release of a major update marked on the calendar it's easy to imagine a lot of people drifting away.

Madman_CZ

30th April 2007, 10:03

The way I see it with the graphics is like this. Progress with dx has vastly improved and is still continuously being improved with the support of dx10 now but pc capabilities ( hardware ) have also improved greatly since s1 was released. Now, if I was Scawen would I really want to spend the time to upgrade the gfx half way through development and then probably having to do it again to dx12 ot whatever stage we will be at for s3 few years down the line when people again will complain about how dated LFS looks. Surely it makes more sense to work on the grounding fundamentals ( physics, online play and other features) and then rework the gfx engine based on the dx that is out at that time.

I have just spent the last hour reading this thread, Ian and Tweaker bring up valid points and with some I couldn't agree more but I would rather see the graphics left well alone and get other things finished first and then rework the rendering gfx engine.

Obviously talking about graphics it isn't all about just dx, modelling also plays a big part and I do agree that quite a few things in LFS look low poly and do need a serious upgrade. I think the cars could possibly do with remodelling and some of the tracks too. Saying that though when I play is still have a blast, the visual experience for me is still enough to get me to enjoy this game, there are other things that irritate me more that the gfx. Taking my league race experience for yesterday, have any of you played Fe Green Reversed??????? OMG...if you haven't then i suggest you try it... the amount of times you can flip the car just by touching the kerbs slightly is ridiculous, and then when you do flip if you happen to touch you wheels on the barriers you instantly get a shot of NOS and take of like a rocket!!!! (referring to extreme flight). These are the things that bother me the most about lfs and that need fixing asap, not the graphics not the sounds. I wouldn't consider myself a fanboy, but I have become a great fan of lfs. It has over the last 2 years really grown on me, so much infact that I haven't touched another racing sim for the past year and a half (Excluding MBTR truck racing of course).

I truly hope that Eric has a vast amount of stuff ready for us, by the sounds of it 2 remodelled track environments and gtr cockpits as he's been getting most of the bashing around here from people which I think is to the fact that he has been the least active member of the ScaViEr crew on these forums, it would have been nice to have Eric appear here, say hi, drop a few lines to the community, show us what he has been working on with some mouth watering screenies. I think the fact that it has only been Scawen and Victor who post has made Eric an easy person to attack as many see this as him not being as active with the community. But I guess that's his personal choice. I think Eric has been working hard over the last year and he will prove us all wrong come patch Y :D

mad

Hooligan.

30th April 2007, 10:05

I just don't understand one thing, the devs have made some serious money from this project already and they fully deserve it, but why don't they invest some of that money back to lfs, i mean they can hire some help and take advantage of the fact that they have a great product in making. There is so much to do that is pretty much clear it would take forever for them to finish this game. I don't know, it feels like the lfs can knock down any competition with some serious work, but i feel it's imposible job for a two man team. They can get some skilled ppl and in no time (a year or two) we can have an almost perfect racing game and maybe some licensed content (licensed content is not expense, it's investment, because license content mean more sales and more sales mean more money). Well i also understand that they maybe have theire on vision of how things should be done, of course, but i also think it's kind of waste to see this game not coming, in therms of speed of development, to what it really can be.

JJ72

30th April 2007, 10:06

Glad you see the point Ian. :)

First, they don't work trapped in a office with a boss watching their back, they are their own boss and we are just customers, and just not the usual customers, we are a group of loyal customers who have more then a fair share of patience, so their motivation is their own quest in creating what is a great online racing simulator - so it's down to them really. Money might also be a motivation, but they are bold enough to quit their all time job for this, so I guess their economical needs aren't pressing enough to make them superhuman. :)

They might be moody and not very transparent, they keep things in their head and do make huge promise, it's the nature of "artists", however it's the same character that make LFS possible, it's why LFS have gone down a different route, and that's why it is special - special in a sense that with different priorities than usual game developers, they manage to use very little man power to create what is a very respectable sim.

So to me it is PERFECTLY NORMAL that LFS is lagging behind in other aspect, again just think about the odds.

I am a freelance designer as well and I know how it is, doing a website is one thing, it's merely handful of weeks for a project to be completed. But making a sim is a matter of years, keeping up the same level of commitment and concentration over such a long time is difficult, furthermore they ain't nobody who is trying to build their reputation, they are already accomplished individuals in their own field, just trying to do things the way they want to be after years in the industry, so in a sense, this is a hobby project, just a very big and serious hobby project, if a hobby project become the same as a standard practice, then there's no point doing it right?

If scavier set out to do LFS with the same priority as common game developers, we won't get LFS as it is. It could be something more mainstream, more updated, however less unique, and for that genre we have more then enough choice already, and still there's no way they can compete against big companies all on their own.

You think they are slacking, maybe part of it down to the differences in your priority and theirs, take insim/outsim for example, it is a coder's sandbox that does not matter to you, however to some people, people who make their own cockpit/controlling device/remote host control it is important, and they do make up of part of sim racer's population, I don't mess with insim myself but I could understand the value of that.

All in all, the problem is the same as the solution.

the problem of LFS is that.... it is just what it is. the business model is the problem, however without this business model...LFS will never happen, it might have been sold to some publishers, revamped and dumbed down for a BTCC game.

So fact is, the root of the problem, is the root of everything. change it, there's no LFS to complain about. and I wouldn't bother if it becomes GTR3 or TOCA4, people will complain about the lost of personality and everything in the game industry going the same directly and we need something fresh...

To say LFS is a bad commerical product...is just stating the obvious in my opinion. As my first reply say, love it or frustrated by it, we are emotionally attached by it, how many game in the world makes you feel that way?
Feel is a very vague thing yes, however it is also very true and no body knows how you can design that.

To talk about how we can progress LFS better, I think we must work within the business model. If that is denied, then any suggestions would be out of context.

JJ72

30th April 2007, 10:10

The thing is, we are powerless in this respect. What can we do other than voice our opinion or give constant suggestions? All we can rely on is that the devs hear us, and quite possibly let them see some reasoning behind what we say. But I'd bet it is just disregarded as the usual banter on forums and it gets no chance or fair view from the devs or others.

If I wanted to see the pace become faster, the only possible idea would be to have more developers on the team. But I think that is highly unlikely to happen. We can't go into saying how the developers should work on their time schedules and ignore their living duties... Though, as we are all customers, I think it is OK to be worried about what goes on behind the curtain, and try shed some light on what needs attention from the devs.

If you look at a lot of improvement suggestions, they are never in the realm of physics updates. Kind of a sign, and I think it holds true that the physics are pretty damn good right now, and perhaps the focus should be directed on other things right now for S2 final (e.g. visual content and gameplay features).

Mate, that is exactly why I say this is not about the development of LFS. WE ARE NOT IN THE POSITION TO CHANGE ANYTHING.

and that's why I say periodical unleash of frustration is a part of being in the LFS community, I in no point, blame them for feeling different.

I don't think it will make you feel better, but my advice will be lay back a bit, and have faith. For things you cannot change, change your mindset, if LFS gets too big it frustrates you, you always can find something else to focus on.

Every relationship is like that.:shy:

Bladerunner

30th April 2007, 10:11

I have to agree with what Madman said about the physics, and also getting the important issues fixed before concentrating on the eye candy...
People on this thread have been screaming for more high textures/more polys...but have they stopped to consider one thing? More polygons = less framerate!!! There are a number of people that are reporting a drastic drop in framerates due to the increased number of cars; increase the polycount now and they will be playing LFS as a slideshow!
When, eventually, the main code has been tweaked to accommodate dual core processors/DX10/etc, THEN is the time to start pushing the eye candy barriers...not before!

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 10:14

Just a side note, quoted from Scawen who posted this just now:

A note about timing, it will definitely not be released fully this week, there is too much to do still. Patch X release should be around Friday 11 May or a week later on Friday 18 May.

Well that's really not good news.. if X is due for May, I don't expect to see patch Y until at least Xmas :(

Well, to Ian. H. It's somehow different to your website case, the devs havent made any promise nor any contracts with us regarding his job.

Of course they have.. they happily took my money. Granted, they're not working _for me_ as such, but they do have an obligation now to produce.. and after 2 years of not producing the product in full, I feel I'm entitled to be a little displeased about this.

What we bought is the contents that is already existed, what other patches or updates that come after your purchasing of license is like an extra.

No, I prepaid for S2 (in it's final form).. of which I don't yet have. I don't pay £2 a week until the updates are complete, I paid the full amount, yet haven't received the full product... this isn't a case of putting down a deposit.

More also, using the same concept, we can't expect anything from the devs for S3, this is simply because we haven't purchased the S3 license. Once it is released, we will buy the S3 license and we will get the contents that come along with the first S3 patch, and well, that's it. No contracts, regulations or whatever promises from the devs to state that they will further update S3, just like we bought S2.

I don't expect anything from S3 and most _definitely_ will not be pre-paying again (once bitten n all that).. I _do_ however, expect S2 and a long time ago. I _have_ paid, in full, for S2, but don't have it in my possession.

I hope I am not sounding offensive to you, I clearly understand your point. And if you feel any offensive from me, I hereby apologize to you.

Nope, not at all. I don't get offended easily and prefer people to say exactly what they feel.. it's how I work and fully expect / accept the same in return.. I'm also open to discussing this sort of thing rather than "I'm right 100% of the time".. so all's good :)

Ya, I am fairly new to this community as you can look at my registration date. Therefore, at this moment, I haven't any complaints yet. However, I do understand your position and concern, and you have stated a strong point that most patches have been done be Scawen. He is doing a good job, but for eye-candies and some high-res graphics that all of us expect from Eric, does somehow do not have any clue about them.

Certainly... I couldn't code what Scawen has, not anything close.. it's not my area of coding, but does seem like he's bored of the main core right now and just faffing about with other, insignificant areas of LFS (insim, scripting, etc).

What Eric is doing is anyone's guess. We've all had the smoke blown up our arses in regards to what he's doing, yet failed to see evidence of any of it. I don't think he's sitting in the corner scratching his nuts, but would be nice to see some proof that what's been said about his area of updates is actually materialising.. afterall, I've already paid for his updates, surely I'm entitled to see the progress? Wouldn't you expect to hear progress from Ferrari say, if you'd paid for a model that was being built for you if you asked? Only difference is LFS is being built for everyone rather than an individual.

Yep, 53 weeks from the last update from Eric is a long time. It is, and DX7 is already out-dated. Maybe they want to keep the older computers on running LFS? Well, that isn't a point. For me, I am also looking forward for Scawen rewriting the code to get advantage of the dual core processor. He has stated that it is on his list, but need to take any a month to do so.

It is good that LFS runs on lower end boxes. I only upgraded my gfx card just after S2 was released when my 64Mb onboard chip couldn't throw out much more than about 10fps. Now I get on average 60+ (I limit my FPS to 66) online and only have a AMD3000+, 1Gb RAM and an FX5900XT card, which as you can see, is hardly top of the range in today's world.. people _do _have to upgrade, it's the way it is.. or are we to expect S3 to still look like a 90s DX7 game because some people will still refuse to upgrade in 10 years time?

Well, last but not least, this is one of the best threads that I've ever seen in this forum. Despite the funny team recruiting threads at the team section, there are still too many pointless threads. Keep this one as a clean and high-quality discussion.

I'm hoping it'll be somewhat productive, but not holding my breath.. but am glad that it hasn't turned into a piss fight (yet?) and that as "heated" as it may be, it seems to be fairly adult so far :)

Regards,

Ian

Electrik Kar

30th April 2007, 10:20

Tweak-

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=19654

Tweaker

30th April 2007, 10:32

That is not a very balanced poll if you think about it.

Basically that is pointing at either Scawen or Eric for who should do what. Saying you want physics changes brings in a WHOLE lot of little things that people are nagging about in that thread... be it proper diffs, better collision detection, etc. That is far too easy to outweigh results on the basis that updated/new cars and/or tracks are really just a singular item and don't fall into a ton of other sub-categories like with physics.

But the other thing that is funny is that physics are done by Scawen, and tracks/cars are done by Eric. So that poll basically says Scawen should work harder on physics updates, and Eric should do nothing (or the least amount is expected of him)? They both can do work at the same time you know, and I think Scawen is putting his fair bit of work into the game as we speak, it is just sad to see results showing they don't want Eric to work on some new goodies, who wouldn't want such content?

SamH

30th April 2007, 10:51

You didn't at any point pay for a final product Ian. You bought a licence to use a game that is in development, while it's in development. Whether you now want to move the goal-posts or not, that's what you bought.

I was going to address individual points you made, but they're mostly just agitative crap for the sake of it. I have had my fill. Based specifically on your responses to my post, I'm firmly of the opinion, now, that you're just being a prat for the sake of it. Surely nobody could be so far off the mark and mean it?

Electrik Kar

30th April 2007, 10:55

I think graphics are a bit of a different story. The way I work is- I make some graphics, zip them up and upload them somewhere. Then people have a choice whether or not they want to download a 20meg file or whatever. There have been times when I've thought- 'I wish I could have changed this or that, or included some more textures'. So, then I do a followup. It's pretty messy and files are being written over all the time. If Eric were to do the same thing, people would have no choice but to download these extra files with every patch, and I imagine some folks would get a bit annoyed at that. Many wouldn't- but if that's the way the dev's have chosen, then who are we to complain?

(Also, any track changes would also break hotlaps).

Bladerunner

30th April 2007, 10:56

Well, last but not least, this is one of the best threads that I've ever seen in this forum. Despite the funny team recruiting threads at the team section, there are still too many pointless threads. Keep this one as a clean and high-quality discussion. I'm hoping it'll be somewhat productive, but not holding my breath.. but am glad that it hasn't turned into a piss fight (yet?) and that as "heated" as it may be, it seems to be fairly adult so far :)

I'm firmly of the opinion, now, that you're just being a prat for the sake of it. Surely nobody could be so far off the mark and mean it?

It is a pity that it was a MODERATOR of all people that dragged this thread into the gutter and started the slanging match :(

thisnameistaken

30th April 2007, 10:57

While I can understand the frustration (to a point), anybody who paid for LFS knew at the time that it wasn't finished and there was no timetable for its completion. Thus, you can grumble all day but the devs have no obligation to finish it just because you're bored of it.

If they sacked if off tomorrow and never finished the thing (which I don't expect will happen, but...) I would still be stoked with the two years of fun I've had with it. Well worth the price of admission IMO.

The argument that other sims with bigger development teams are catching up with or overtaking LFS in terms of quality make me chuckle a bit, to be honest. If they're so good then go use them! For me, LFS still has the most engaging physics, so I can't go anywhere else unless another product betters it - which hasn't happened.

SamH

30th April 2007, 11:09

It is a pity that it was a MODERATOR of all people that dragged this thread into the gutter and started the slanging match :(
It's far from a slanging match. It seems quite obvious to me that Ian is just agitating for the sake of it. There's lots of noise with little substance. If I'd wanted to start a slanging match, I would have said he IS a prat. I'm not saying that. I'm saying he's BEING one for the sake of it.

ebola

30th April 2007, 11:10

SamH

30th April 2007, 11:15

For me this post sums it up superbly!!!

I'm still having so much fun with LFS that didnt realise this much time had slipped by :)
I missed that post initially. Glad you quoted it. JJ72, you're right on the nose. Beautifully put. And it covers every point raised completely. Way to go :)

spankmeyer

30th April 2007, 11:22

It is a pity that it was a MODERATOR of all people that dragged this thread into the gutter and started the slanging match :(

I have to disagree with you. I read through the thread and it's sliding to a gutter by teamwork from both sides.

Ian H. does come up with somewhat deluded points like this:

I've already paid for his updates, surely I'm entitled to see the progress? Wouldn't you expect to hear progress from Ferrari say, if you'd paid for a model that was being built for you if you asked? Only difference is LFS is being built for everyone rather than an individual.
And you honestly thought 24£ would buy you a personal racing sim? Where were you given the promise that on this day, you would have S2 Final on your computer? Go browse Liveforspeed.net, search RSC, you'll come back empty handed. It was made clear no release date could be given and still you chose to support the development.

If you buy a product from Ferrari, you're not entitled to see any of their upcoming products in advance. You're just supporting their business to make cars in the future you might or might not like.

DanneDA

30th April 2007, 11:45

Eric's work comes with the incompatible patches from Scawen, no such version has been released since last april as Scawen decided to do a compatible patch before an incompatible one (patch V).

I'm guessing it took a little longer than expected to complete that patch (about 8 months), after that some fixes and updates where released in patch W. With those patches released Scawen was able to start work on incompatible work - this time a mulitiplayer incompatibe patch before a physics one.

While Eric's work may be ready for release Scawen's work isn't. I remember reading in one of the threads for the U test patches that model updates (such as interior, car and track) isn't compatible updates (if anyone can find that post please post it). As they decided not to do an incompatible post just for Eric's updates they'll have to wait for Scawen to complete his incompatible stuff.

kurent

30th April 2007, 12:26

I am all for progress, but not just for the sake of progress itself. It's better to take baby steps then rush new features that dramatically change the game. This is what I always liked about the LFS development. I know it's not a choice that it is going so slowly, but with slow progress each patch get's tested completely and feedback is given.

I know of another game that has all the resources it needs, money, professional advice, a chance to hire the best developers...and the game is going down hill. Each patch they add alot of things without really thinking them thru. It seems the only thing that matters is that new "stuff" is added which always messes with the existing things. It feels like the game is falling apart (literally).

So I guess my point is that fast progress is very risky.

The current graphics look more then just fine to me. They are not all that important in a game like this, physics > graphics. The game's hardware requirements must be as low as possible! Or you can have everything modeled multiple times and then you choose how complex you want the models to be? I've always wanted to see that in a game.

The sound is lacking a bit, but we have CSR now and you can even make your own sounds.

wien

30th April 2007, 12:55

The game's hardware requirements must be as low as possible!This I think is a very important point for LFS because of the nature of the project. A sim is by default a niche product, and therefore it has to target as wide a range of hardware, or rather hardware owners, as possible. The devs would be stupid to target only people with high end hardware within an already limited user base. The more people that can run it, the more customers they get. Car enthusiasts are not necessarily also computer enthusiasts, so requiring high end hardware might alienate a lot of these potential customers.

You can of course argue they should target both high end and low end hardware and make it a choice, but that would also double the workload. Just not an option for a small dev team in my opinion. This isn't Valve which can afford to have artists in the hundreds churning out content targeting a wide range of hardware.

LFS will most likely never be able to compete graphically with the big ones as that just takes too much effort these days, so it has to focus on the aspects it can compete in, namely physics and the community (which is why insim updates allowing the community to add features to the sim are a good thing, even though the timing arguably could have been better).

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 13:12

You didn't at any point pay for a final product Ian. You bought a licence to use a game that is in development, while it's in development. Whether you now want to move the goal-posts or not, that's what you bought.

I'm well aware LFS itself is a continual WIP, however, I paid for a final version of _S2_, nowhere have I said a final version of LFS, which would S3 final. Stop trynig to put words into my mouth to cover your ignorance.

I was going to address individual points you made, but they're mostly just agitative crap for the sake of it.

Or you don't have the intelligence to converse.. fair enough, I'd sooner you didn't bother either :)

I have had my fill. Based specifically on your responses to my post, I'm firmly of the opinion, now, that you're just being a prat for the sake of it. Surely nobody could be so far off the mark and mean it?

You, sir, are just a fool.. a blind one at that. You want to be careful, noses are hard to remove brown stains from, I've seen a lot of residue from RSC members... and yours is caked!

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 13:16

I have to disagree with you. I read through the thread and it's sliding to a gutter by teamwork from both sides.

Ian H. does come up with somewhat deluded points like this:

And you honestly thought 24£ would buy you a personal racing sim?

Where did I say I want a personal sim? We're _all_ entitled to a full version of S2 now that we paid for it. If I wanted to buy half an arcade game, I'd expect to pay £8 in a bargain bucket, LFS to date has cost me £24, hardly a bargain.

Where were you given the promise that on this day, you would have S2 Final on your computer?

I wasn't, but after 2 years, don't you think that's long enough? Even if not for the absolute completed S2, at least some substantial progress, not dribs and drabs as Scawen's been knocking out recently like a bored kid kicking a can.

Go browse Liveforspeed.net, search RSC, you'll come back empty handed. It was made clear no release date could be given and still you chose to support the development.

Right, and now they're flipping the finger at me.. "thanks for the money lads, we'll eventually get around to giving you the product you bought, but right now, we're having more fun adding pointless scripting engines.

If you buy a product from Ferrari, you're not entitled to see any of their upcoming products in advance. You're just supporting their business to make cars in the future you might or might not like.

No.. if I buy a specific model that's tailored for me, I expect to hear of progress.. so change Ferrar to Caterham or something where they'd build the car for you. As I said, the only difference here is that LFS isn't being coded just for me, but for everyone.

LFS is _not_ a "hobby" for Scawen et al, it's a commercial poroduct that so far is falling waaaaaaaay short of what it should have been sometime ago.

If you want to blindly defend the devs, feel free.. but don't expect me to buy it.

wien

30th April 2007, 13:28

Right, and now they're flipping the finger at me.. "thanks for the money lads, we'll eventually get around to giving you the product you bought, but right now, we're having more fun adding pointless scripting engines.You HAVE the product you bought. You paid to take a part in the development process (beta testing if you will) of S2, with the promise of a copy of the full version whenever it gets released. You got what you paid for the minute the first S2 alpha was released.

The fact that that's not really what you wanted is no-ones fault but your own. Research before you buy.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 13:30

You HAVE the product you bought. You paid to take a part in the development process (beta testing if you will) of S2, with the promise of a copy of the full version whenever it gets released.

No, I have a half-arsed pre-beta that has seen no real progress in 2 years.. that to some would be verging on vapourware.. except we have a shiny new scripting engine to keep us quiet :thumb:

The fact that that's not really what you wanted is no-ones fault but your own. Research before you buy.

I did buy S2 before it was released, granted.. but just how long am I supposed to wait for the software I paid to use? (and no, not a half-cocked beta version of it).

It's really quite cute to see such profuse defence.

deggis

30th April 2007, 13:30

Preferably something that made the cars sound like...... cars, not synthetic echoing spaceships. Sorry to piss on your bonfire, but the LFS sound engine is nothing but a _seriously_ bad joke right now.
Seems like you simply don't care is the engine sound actually produced and simulated instead of the game just playing sample1-sample2-sample3 etc? You know in real life, the engine produces sound. It doesn't have speakers that plays re-recorded samples.

What game you prefer in sounds wise then? GTR2? Why don't you do this:

1) go http://youtube.com and search and watch some nice onboard movies
2) go play GTR2 (?), watch a replay and close your eyes and simply listen the sound, do you really think the engine "note" and "load" is even near that what you just heard in the real onboard movie?
3) now do same thing in LFS and continue doing that as long as you hear the difference, you will sooner... or later.

Look at everything's DaveWS has tried to do with the sounds.. he's not even come close to anything sounding like it should, but has worked his plums off trying.. the sound engine is like ISI's tyres... inherently flawed.. you can't build a stable house on sloppy foundations. Scrap it and start again.. there's no hope for it.
Between Patch V (default sounds) and Patch W (DaveWS's sounds) is already a huge difference. DaveWS is not part of the dev team (unfortunately?), he can't magically get his hands on the source code. You don't seem to understand this.

Fully aware, thank you.. and have in the past said that once developed, the method used would offer the best solution, however, no one's bothered with it.. lets just add new coding interfaces instead of the important stuff.
What method? Samples? Synthetised sound engine is the future. Once other sims hopefully starts to turn to that, LFS already has some advantage in that area. I'm not saying sounds are perfect in LFS, until Patch W I actually used Car Sound Remixer (you familiar with that?) and I pretty much hated how the game sounded but I've always thought generated sounds is the right way to go. Now it starts to show some potential.

What do you think goes through the minds of people who have played the likes of GTR2, rF or damn, even some NFS title when they try LFS for the first time? I can pretty much imagine... "my damn ears!"
I don't think the sound is that big issue anymore, not even for new players, all thanks to DaveWS.

And RBR IIRC, which lets face it, is in a completely different league to what we hear in LFS.
Indeed it's in a completely different league - though not why you thought it to be but because it uses sample system (and does not sound exactly anything special imho, and I'm RBR fan too).

.

JJ72

30th April 2007, 13:33

I guess if you preassume we are going to "blindly" defend the devs then I guess any more talk is meaningless. :)

Not going to change your mind or something, just want to say if you insist on seeing LFS as just another commerical product then you are in for a hard ride.
I don't know what can you go to in UK, but there should be some kind of consumer's right department that you can go and make a complaint.

The devs can at any point declare a version as S2 full, since we have all the contents already, but I would care less about the name.

Glenn67

30th April 2007, 13:33

If you want to blindly defend the devs, feel free.. but don't expect me to buy it.

Oh but you already did :p

I've bought many games, most of which have long since been forgotten :shrug: LFS is not forgotten and I still race online at least once a week since 2004 so 24 pounds is mighty cheap for that amount of use :scratchch

So yes I am a happy customer :smileypul

Every patch is just a bonus to me :tilt:

So am I a fanboy? I personally don't think I am, I just have a different outlook to you.
Does that make me right and you wrong? No we are both right. It's just our expectations differ and I will be more easily content with whatever happens :razz:

wien

30th April 2007, 13:35

No, I have a half-arsed pre-beta that has seen no real progress in 2 years..Which is exactly what you paid for. I don't agree at all that it's half assed, and I also believe it will improve massively before final, but that is essentially what you bought. There were no promises made about when or how S2 would be released, so any notion you might have of things taking too long, or the importance of certain features is entirely your own doing. The devs can't be held responsible for what you thought you would get.

mrodgers

30th April 2007, 13:35

I agree. And what would be the point of adding few fancy DX8/9 effects for as long as we have lo-res textures? I really wonder what's the reason for that, I mean even the default skins are 512x512. It can't be keeping the download size small (not like we're still in 56 kbps modem era) and as some tests seems to prove, using hi-res texture addons doesn't actually make that much difference to fps, so it can't be that either. Seems like someone is obsessed with lo-res textures size.
This is some of the exact reasons that I do stick with LFS apart from the physics. I have still been in that "56k modem era." It wasn't until just a month or so ago when my phone service changed companies that broadband was available. Well, it was available for quite some time, but $50 a month was ridiculous for 256k broadband when everyone else seemed to have MB's for close to what I was paying for dialup. Fortunately now, my DSL modem is arriving on Wednesday and I'll have 1.5 mb including my phone service and extra phone features that I previously didn't have for around the same cost as strictly basic phone was for me. To note on the dialup, two years I have never had problems with 56k. Since the test patches of W were released, I haven't been able to connect to anything in UK/Europe. I've tried them all. Australia with a high ping, I'm just fine. Last night I connected to a 900+ ms ping server and didn't disconnect. I would have lagged, sure, but I didn't time-out. This is one reason I stuck with LFS and soon with finally having broadband, I should be back on the UK/Europe servers.

Graphics are the other reason I stick with LFS, mainly the DX8. I am still in the "onboard graphics" era and don't have much hope of upgrading any time soon. I've tried GTR (the first one), GTL, and rFactor, all the demo versions. The fact that I can stretch LFS to 80 FPS if I wanted to, run normally at 40-50 FPS, and can get a maximum of 10/normally 5 FPS in all other sims with DX9 forces me to stick with LFS. I have no other choice unless someone wants to send me a hundred bucks so I can get a gfx card.

Graphically, there is no problems with FPS from hi-res textures even with onboard gfx chip (mine is an ATI chip). I share 256 mb with the system's 1 gb ram. A friend of mine has no problem with a laptop and an nVidia onboard chip sharing only 32 mb, but he doesn't use unofficial hi-res textures downloaded from here. Texture size doesn't hammer the gfx chip all that much. It only comes down to how much gfx memory you have as I run just fine with the normally super slow onboard I have.

I can understand where everyone is going about the graphics of LFS. Unfortunately, I have to disagree where I DON'T want to see an update graphically. Graphics update would force me off LFS and sim racing in general because LFS is the only one I can run. That of course doesn't mean that because of this LFS should not expand and improve. It is only my hope that LFS doesn't get updated graphically because I will be left at the door. Car model updating and general other 3d model updating would be the end to my sim racing.

All that said and disregarding hardware inefficiencies, the main reason I stick with LFS is simply the physics. I don't have much to compare with because I can't respond on physics of other sims at 5 FPS, but I do know how LFS physics feel. I do like LFS's physics very much.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 13:39

Seems like you simply don't care is the engine sound actually produced and simulated instead of the game just playing sample1-sample2-sample3 etc? You know in real life, the engine produces sound. It doesn't have speakers that plays re-recorded samples.

I don't care how it's put together, it just sounds crap. RBR managed to use the same (kind of) engine, yet that works.. so why doesn't LFS? For the same reason the AI don't know their way around half the tracks, because Scawen couldn't be arsed to do it properly.

What game you prefer in sounds wise then? GTR2? Why don't you do this:

GTR2 sounds infinitely better than LFS does and probably will.

1) go http://youtube.com and search and watch some nice onboard movies

Because I don't view flash files.

2) go play GTR2 (?), watch a replay and close your eyes and simply listen the sound, do you really think the engine "note" and "load" is even near that what you just heard in the real onboard movie?

Yes.. if the samples are good.

3) now do same thing in LFS

LOL please tell me this step is a joke? Nothing in LFS sounds like a car, NOTHING AT ALL! :)

Continue doing that as long as you hear the difference. You will, sooner or later.

That GTR2 sounds far far more like a car than LFS? I can tell you that without doing any of the above 3 steps.

Between Patch V (default sounds) and Patch W (DaveWS's sounds) is alread a huge difference.

Yes, shovelling 10 tonnes of shite from a stack that has 30 tonnes in total also makes quite a difference.

What method? Samples? Synthetised sound engine is the future. Once other sims hopefully starts to turn to that, LFS already has a huge advantage in that area.

And also the past.. look at RBR.

And duh! LFS already uses samples.

I'm not saying sounds are perfect in LFS,

Thank god for that!

until Patch W I actually used Car Sound Remixer (you familiar with that?) and I pretty much hated how the game sounded but I've always thought generated sounds is the right way to go. Now it starts to show some potential.

Never used sound remixer.. I shouldn't have to rely on a 3rd party addon to make the original game content reasonable.. that's what I (and many others) paid Scawen to do.

I don't think the sound is that big issue anymore, not even for new players, all thanks to DaveWS.

Then you need new ears. I've worked in the sound industry, I DJ'd for 10 years.. my ears function pretty well, and LFS sounds like a spaceship in a plastic tube with all it's perfect smoothness and waaaay OTT echo.

Indeed it's in a completely different league - though not why you thought it to be but because it uses sample system (and does not sound exactly anything special imho, and I'm RBR fan too).

So does LFS.. which sounds even less special.. and I'm not an RBR fan in the slightest, just tried it a few times and know it sounds infinitely better than LFS.

Regards,

Ian

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 13:42

Graphics are the other reason I stick with LFS, mainly the DX8. I am still in the "onboard graphics" era and don't have much hope of upgrading any time soon. I've tried GTR (the first one), GTL, and rFactor, all the demo versions. The fact that I can stretch LFS to 80 FPS if I wanted to, run normally at 40-50 FPS, and can get a maximum of 10/normally 5 FPS in all other sims with DX9 forces me to stick with LFS. I have no other choice unless someone wants to send me a hundred bucks so I can get a gfx card.

The screenshot I posted a few pages ago of the Leons on an old WIP track I started is running in DX8 mode too.. I can't run DX9 stuff due to lack of gfx power.. but LFS looks completely 2D and dead compared to what can be achieved with DX8 even if Eric has done a pretty good job within the limitations he's set himself as far as textures go (track mapping / modeling however leave much to be desired).

Regards,

Ian

spankmeyer

30th April 2007, 13:42

LFS to date has cost me £24, hardly a bargain.
You've joined in April 2004. 24£ / 3 years = 8£ per year
28006 km driven = 0,0008£ per km.

Just look at all the money! :wow:

EDIT:
Yes, shovelling 10 tonnes of shite from a stack that has 30 tonnes in total also makes quite a difference.

You're just trolling now. Godspeed!

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 13:47

Dude, you wouldn't know what trolling was if it bit your left nut if you think I'm trolling, but I never expected this thread to be easy as I'm fighting the flow of fanbois.

The actual money involved isn't an issue (I've actually bought 4 licenses.. so yes, I did think LFS was worth something at some point), it's more principle.

Had I known S2 was going to be an alpha product for 2 years, I would never have bought it.. but at the time, I thought people were actively working on the project.. not adding stupid, non-sim related gimmicks.

Regards,

Ian

spankmeyer

30th April 2007, 13:50

Dude, you wouldn't know what trolling was if it bit your left nut if you think I'm trolling, but I never expected this thread to be easy as I'm fighting the flow of fanbois.

Only thing you're fighting against is your inability to understand that you're nothing special and you just have to wait and see just like the rest of us.

Blackout

30th April 2007, 13:53

For a moment, mere moment, I had hopes that Ian H. could contribute in a positive, constructive way to this thread. Didn't happen after all. Sad in a way.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 13:57

Only thing you're fighting against is your inability to understand that you're nothing special and you just have to wait and see just like the rest of us.

Where did I say I think I'm special? I'm certainly not the only one with these feelings.. just maybe one of the few that'll post those feelings here.

Regards,

Ian

SamH

30th April 2007, 14:00

I'm well aware LFS itself is a continual WIP, however, I paid for a final version of _S2_, nowhere have I said a final version of LFS, which would S3 final. Stop trynig to put words into my mouth to cover your ignorance.
No you didn't pay for any final version of LFS. Again.
Or you don't have the intelligence to converse.. fair enough, I'd sooner you didn't bother either :)

You, sir, are just a fool.. a blind one at that. You want to be careful, noses are hard to remove brown stains from, I've seen a lot of residue from RSC members... and yours is caked!
Bahh.. you're just a troll, Ian. It's almost laughable that you question my intelligence and then spew forth such wholly insubstantive nonsense as this. If I am a brown-noser, then you are a troll.

Pathetic. Grow up, Ian.

deggis

30th April 2007, 14:02

RBR managed to use the same (kind of) engine, yet that works.. so why doesn't LFS?
Because it doesn't use same kind of engine.

That GTR2 sounds far far more like a car than LFS? I can tell you that without doing any of the above 3 steps.
Ok, back to square one: do you understand the difference between synthetised and sample based sound engines?

And duh! LFS already uses samples.
You're just being a smart-ass? The samples in LFS are less than 0.1 secs long, and that sample creates all the engine sound for the car. For example GTR2 has total 3-4 files (throttle off, low, med, high) that are all 2-4 secs long.

Then you need new ears. I've worked in the sound industry, I DJ'd for 10 years.. my ears function pretty well, and LFS sounds like a spaceship in a plastic tube with all it's perfect smoothness and waaaay OTT echo.
And yet you don't understand the difference between dynamical and non-dynamical sound engine? Pretty much like progressive rock vs. techno crap.

wien

30th April 2007, 14:06

I'm certainly not the only one with these feelings.. just maybe one of the few that'll post those feelings here.Yeah, you're quite the martyr.

I think if you'd actually stop an read what people are saying here, you'd find that quite a lot of people agree with your major points. The difference though is that most people also are fine with things taking time because they understand that's how the development process of LFS works. As JJ72 so eloquently put it; that's why LFS is the way it is. Change the process and you change the sim. Most people here don't want that.

Glenn67

30th April 2007, 14:06

I'm certainly not the only one with these feelings.. just maybe one of the few that'll post those feelings here.

"You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time."

I don't think anything in this thread is revolutionary or new, it's human nature that with any project or activity that involves a bunch of humans there is going to be an ebb and flow of opinion so that in itself doesn't prove anything :shrug:

mr_x

30th April 2007, 14:07

Ok, back to square one: do you understand the difference between synthetised and sample based sound engines?

to be honest, it doesn't matter if it's sample or synthesized (whatever) sounds. As long as it sounds good.

Fact is LFS doesn't sound good at all, yet games like GTR2 sound very very good.

Yes, it might be a good way that LFS does it, but it sounds (right now) bloody awful! Yes it's a big improvement over earlier sounds, but there's still a long long way to go.

I actually fear that we may never get satisfactory engine sounds.

EDIT: Also RBR does use a similar system to LFS, as it's not samples. and it does sound really good, the cars sound like WRC cars. LFS cars sound like... well crap.

JJ72

30th April 2007, 14:08

Don't think we need a lecture on how LFS sound sucks compare to other sim do we :)

JJ72

30th April 2007, 14:10

Also RBR does use a similar system to LFS, as it's not samples. and it does sound really good, the cars sound like WRC cars. LFS cars sound like... well crap.

can't really agree here....if you put away the sound of debris/ suspension jerking the engine sound is very much like in a tin can.

it's better then LFS but not really that far.

wien

30th April 2007, 14:12

Fact is LFS doesn't sound good at all, yet games like GTR2 sound very very good.But it gives feedback. That's the most important thing for me.

I absolutely adore how I can tell exactly what the engine and drive train is doing just by listening to it. If I shift down too early during braking and lock up the driven wheels, I can hear it in the gear whine. Stuff like that is needed since you can't feel what the car is doing through your arse.

deggis

30th April 2007, 14:16

EDIT: Also RBR does use a similar system to LFS, as it's not samples. and it does sound really good, the cars sound like WRC cars. LFS cars sound like... well crap.
:doh:

How many times I need to say RBR simply does not use similar sound engine than LFS uses? Or give me water-proof proves then.

Do you know where and in what kind of file form the sound files are located in RBR? I know that at least.

Without some nice sound mods, all you hear in RBR with the default sounds is the transmission whine, actual engine sound is very low volume.

mrbogeyman

30th April 2007, 14:17

Hmm I think we will never agree!

So why not agree to disagree!

To be honest I am on the fence on most of the issues being discussed here. Call me indecisive, but I can see the glass, it not half full or empty, its in the middle!

Sure it is taking ages and it would be good to see faster development, but tbh I am happy to keep playing LFS as it is and having alot of fun in the process. I enjoy the small patches when they come along, they keep me interested, and I love the big patches with content and major physics changes. Even the last patch with clutch preload has breathed new life into LFS for me.

I agree with the thoughts that Scawen should focus on more important aspects of the game instead of things like InSim. IMO InSim should be like a SDK and released afterwards, i.e. to breath life into LFS a while after it's full release. I know it is VERY hard for Scawen knowing what exactly his priorities should be, it's just that sometimes (to the average joe) the updates seem pretty meaningless unless they are bundled with a physics or graphical tweak.

I'm in no rush to receive S2/S3 full, but I just hope for the devs sake that they can pull some major progress out of the bag, if only for their own sanity and to possibly see some light at the end of the tunnel.

abz1

30th April 2007, 14:18

I always thought,

s2 = physics updates
s3 = graphics revamp

if that is the case then I don't understand what the big fuss is about. In my opinion, LFS is progressing nicely and every update is a added improvement.

Would you rather wait 2-3 years for a final s2 to come out, or get the alpha and see progress being made?

mrbogeyman

30th April 2007, 14:22

s2 = physics updates
s3 = graphics revamp

That was the idea at one point in time, but I seriously doubt if it will work out like that. To my knowledge I don't think this was ever actually stated by the devs, but even if they did I think things have changed too much for this highly simplistic approach.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 14:22

Sorry JT.. thread's moving quickly and I missed your reply..

Glad you see the point Ian. :)

First, they don't work trapped in a office with a boss watching their back, they are their own boss and we are just customers, and just not the usual customers, we are a group of loyal customers who have more then a fair share of patience, so their motivation is their own quest in creating what is a great online racing simulator - so it's down to them really.

Maybe they do need someone watching over their shoulder to steer priorities into the actual _sim_, not gimmicky add-ons.

Patience wears thin, I've been patient for 2 years.. I even took an entire break from LFS as I was getting bored beforehand, now I come back and very little has changed. I supported the devs by pre-paying for S2, I had hoped LFS would have been "the one and only real sim".. but alas, while it feels quite nice to drive some of the cars.. it doesn't mean it's great.. progress isn't really "down to them".. they have an obligation which they're not meeting within a reasonable time frame.

Money might also be a motivation, but they are bold enough to quit their all time job for this, so I guess their economical needs aren't pressing enough to make them superhuman. :)

I quit my job to do my own thing too. I make less than LFS has.. yet I can still work on projects and keep clients happy because I focus on what _needs_ to be done as priorities.. I can add fancy externals after the core is functioning properly (and LFS isn't.. diffs, aero, damage, collision.. as we've all been told, these are "temporary".. how temporary!? everything about LFS now seems to be "temporary".. it's a cheap excuse).

They might be moody and not very transparent, they keep things in their head and do make huge promise, it's the nature of "artists", however it's the same character that make LFS possible, it's why LFS have gone down a different route, and that's why it is special - special in a sense that with different priorities than usual game developers, they manage to use very little man power to create what is a very respectable sim.

Maybe being different isn't always good.

So to me it is PERFECTLY NORMAL that LFS is lagging behind in other aspect, again just think about the odds.

There are ways to rectify those odds however............

I am a freelance designer as well and I know how it is, doing a website is one thing, it's merely handful of weeks for a project to be completed.

Not always. I've just got back from a meeting with a client where I need to change a fair few things as they've changed their mind on it. I also have until the 5th of May at the absolute latest due to that being the launch party date (a big launch party too.. live PAs, DJs, restaurant etc). What should I say if I don't hit that deadline? that it's still currently WIP? That'll mean I'll be lucky if I get paid.

LFS haven't announced a final release date for S2, but c'mon, there's being WIP and there's being all but stationary, which is what the development cycle appears to be right now.

But making a sim is a matter of years, keeping up the same level of commitment and concentration over such a long time is difficult,

As they say, "can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen" :)

furthermore they ain't nobody who is trying to build their reputation,

Good job, as the reputation would be sliding and already is amongst some.

they are already accomplished individuals in their own field, just trying to do things the way they want to be after years in the industry, so in a sense, this is a hobby project, just a very big and serious hobby project, if a hobby project become the same as a standard practice, then there's no point doing it right?

No. My recent LFS Replay Manager is a hobby project, it's free. Say I released that at a cost of.... £5 that would include free updates until for arguments sake, version 3. If I don't update that for 2 years and it's full of bugs, how many do you think would be pissed off with me for not meeting a certain standard of progress? LFS is severely broken in some areas (others it does ok, others it does well, I'm really not saying everything about LFS is screwed or crap) so has bugs, but these aren't being worked on.. Scawen would sooner add toys like insim and scripting rather than removing the temporary collision detection that launches you to the moon at 5mph as one example.

If scavier set out to do LFS with the same priority as common game developers, we won't get LFS as it is. It could be something more mainstream, more updated, however less unique, and for that genre we have more then enough choice already, and still there's no way they can compete against big companies all on their own.

Why does it have to be unique? Why can't it just be a good sim? LFS is nothing special.. it's a driving game :)

I'm also well away about being the "small guy" in a huge pond.. I was also in the hosting business.. don't think I need to explain how saturated that area is, especially for an individual :)

You think they are slacking, maybe part of it down to the differences in your priority and theirs, take insim/outsim for example, it is a coder's sandbox that does not matter to you,

On the contrary.. I don't really think they're slacking, just misplaced priorities.

I love coding, coding's a major part of my life and has been since I was 8.. I code for the sake of coding sometimes.. but LFS is a race sim, not a coder's toolbox.. or at least it's supposed to be.

however to some people, people who make their own cockpit/controlling device/remote host control it is important, and they do make up of part of sim racer's population, I don't mess with insim myself but I could understand the value of that.

Of course, I'm sure there's a few that do, however, in a massive minority compared to people who just want a race sim. I don't think they should drop insim etc, just that it's hardly more important than aero or collision / damage physics, surely?

All in all, the problem is the same as the solution.

the problem of LFS is that.... it is just what it is. the business model is the problem, however without this business model...LFS will never happen, it might have been sold to some publishers, revamped and dumbed down for a BTCC game.

Why does it have to go that way? Scawen could still be the head honcho, just employ a couple of more people to help speed up progress. If he's decided that isn't going to happen, then that's his issue, but also our problem.

So fact is, the root of the problem, is the root of everything. change it, there's no LFS to complain about. and I wouldn't bother if it becomes GTR3 or TOCA4, people will complain about the lost of personality and everything in the game industry going the same directly and we need something fresh...

What's fresh about LFS? it's a driving game. I'm not saying either of the titles you mention would be worth buying (TOCA in particular), but there's only so much "being different" within a driving environment.

To say LFS is a bad commerical product...is just stating the obvious in my opinion. As my first reply say, love it or frustrated by it, we are emotionally attached by it, how many game in the world makes you feel that way?

Very few. LFS was actually the first game I really played.. I've always been a coder / system person / geek. Everyone's just trying to say I'm an idiot pretty much and should STFU about their beloved sim, but maybe there's a reason? As you say, maybe I really do like LFS a lot. I do, at least in theory, else I wouldn't be wasting my time with these posts. I do want to see LFS succeed, but if it doesn't pull its finger out of its rear end, success will be hard to achieve as many will just move on as one day, something will appear that will rival LFS' physics, but at the same time, will also be years ahead in other departments due to LFS' ultraslow progress.. don't need to paint a picture on where that could lead.

Feel is a very vague thing yes, however it is also very true and no body knows how you can design that.

To talk about how we can progress LFS better, I think we must work within the business model. If that is denied, then any suggestions would be out of context.

I don't think the business model will change and I think many will ultimately leave and find something else to do. I'm still hoping, but have been hoping for 2 years.. I can only hope for so long before I cut my losses.

Regards,

Ian

JJ72

30th April 2007, 14:34

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 14:35

No you didn't pay for any final version of LFS. Again.

And again, I didn't claim to. At least attempt to read the posts before typing, Sam.

I paid for "S2".. that didn't say S2 alpha, S2 beta, it said an S2 license. I'm still using a beta version of the software.. £24 is not the price of beta software.

Bahh.. you're just a troll, Ian. It's almost laughable that you question my intelligence and then spew forth such wholly insubstantive nonsense as this. If I am a brown-noser, then you are a troll.

Pathetic. Grow up, Ian.

Awww come on Sam, I expected more from you :)

Regards,

Ian

SamH

30th April 2007, 14:36

As you say, maybe I really do like LFS a lot. I do, at least in theory, else I wouldn't be wasting my time with these posts. I do want to see LFS succeed, but if it doesn't pull its finger out of its rear end, success will be hard to achieve as many will just move on as one day, something will appear that will rival LFS' physics, but at the same time, will also be years ahead in other departments due to LFS' ultraslow progress.. don't need to paint a picture on where that could lead.

[..]I'm still hoping, but have been hoping for 2 years.. I can only hope for so long before I cut my losses.
You just talked yourself around a complete circle. When I proposed that, deep down you weren't a troll and were actually a frustrated LFS fan, you took complete issue with it.

I think you need to sort yourself out, Ian, because if all this thread is about is blatant attention whoring, then it really is bloody pathetic.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 14:40

You just talked yourself around a complete circle. When I proposed that, deep down you weren't a troll and were actually a frustrated LFS fan, you took complete issue with it.

There's a difference between liking something and being a "fan" of something.

I moved on for 2 years and hoped that now I tried again, it'd be different.. I wasn't sitting there everyday thinking about it.

I think you need to sort yourself out, Ian, because if all this thread is about is blatant attention whoring, then it really is bloody pathetic.

Oh boy, is that really your best effort? You think I need to come to an online forum to get attention? You don't "know me" in the slightest :)

Regards,

Ian

SamH

30th April 2007, 14:40

Awww come on Sam, I expected more from you :)
More from me than what? I'm calling it as I see it, Ian. I don't shudder at being called names. I'm not one of the world's reactionaries.. I'm a fanboy. I don't see anything negative in the term. I'm a fanboy because I like the sim and everything about its development. I'm not a fanboy so THEREFORE I like[..]. It works the other way around, for me.

I'm also wholly disinterested by the whole debate, which JJ72 has totally bagged. For me, the answer is there. All of it.

thisnameistaken

30th April 2007, 14:43

There's a difference between liking something and being a "fan" of something.

You did say you'd bought four licenses. I consider myself something of an LFS evangelist (at least judging by the other night in the pub when I bumped into a motorsport fan / gamer who hadn't heard of LFS before), but I've only bought one license. You've certainly got more invested - financially - in the product than I have, so I would imagine you've got more emotional investment in it too.

-wes-

30th April 2007, 14:48

Anyone expecting s2 final to be significantly different from s2 as it is now will be very disappointed.

Enjoy s2 for what it is.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 14:48

There's no why Ian, it's just how they want it to be. Not every business works in perfect economical sense, indeed most of it are sidetracked by personal reference, why? well maybe there's something called personal goal and ambition, and also flaws in character. The smaller a company is, the more humanic it becomes - both good and bad, you get soul but you also get inconsistency.

I know that feeling too. Too many occasions I became "friendly" with clients.. to my own cost in the end.

just like I said, you, as a customer, in case you have any complaint to a commericial product, you should go to some sort of consumer's right whatever department. if there's actually any prove that they fail to provide what they promised in the end user agreement.

That's far too OTT for me. I'm not a "legal person".. I'd far sooner discuss it.. whetever it is and resolve it without going to 3rd parties. This isn't just related to LFS.

We are not their boss,not a share holder, then any criticism on their work ethics are going to be....just a criticism really, there are thousands of opinions, it is very unlikely that none of us has a expectation higher then what they are delivering, in fact it's more the opposite.

We're not shareholders etc, true.. but they happily took our money and are now sitting on it doing practically nothing as far as progress goes.

actually, why do you like the sim Ian? why do you want it to succeed?

That "why" is the same "why" you are asking about, I guess.

*i am off to race, see you in a bit*

I'll answer anyway.. as I've said, some things in LFS are good, the feeling of driving a car does feel like driving a car, compared to some others available. That's one reason I like it.

The general online community also seems pretty friendly. The few races I had online with rF for example I felt very much like being in an Inet Café.. an individual in a cubicle. LFS online has always felt more like an open-plan office.

Having been the small guy for the past 5 or so years, I know what it's like to do well and achieve something. It took balls for Scawen and Eric to walk out of their jobs and start LFS. Scawen now has a family too to support.. family life is very high on my list of priorities.. these points alone are reasons as to why I'd like to see it succeed. I'm all for the small guy.. but I'm also all for having some progress.

Regards,

Ian

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 14:52

You did say you'd bought four licenses. I consider myself something of an LFS evangelist (at least judging by the other night in the pub when I bumped into a motorsport fan / gamer who hadn't heard of LFS before), but I've only bought one license. You've certainly got more invested - financially - in the product than I have, so I would imagine you've got more emotional investment in it too.

Money isn't a matter really here. I bought my own S1 license back in April '04 and then bought a voucher for a close friend. I pre-paid for S2 for myself and also bought another voucher for the same friend.

I've mentioned money in a few posts here mainly related to business rather than I feel hard done by financially. I used to spend £300 a weekend in a nightclub when I was 16 / 17, £48 on licenses here isn't really a concern, just that normally when people pay you money for a product / service, they do expect something decent in return. By decent here I don't mean LFS is pure crap, it isn't.. but I do expect something more within 2 years of development.

Regards,

Ian

Glenn67

30th April 2007, 14:57

We're not shareholders etc, true.. but they happily took our money and are now sitting on it doing practically nothing as far as progress goes.

Our values must be quite different :shrug: from where I sit they are not doing it because they are earning alot of money, they are doing it because they enjoy it. The best estimations I've seen for their income once expenses etc have been taken out and then devided by time spent on the project is not that great.

I'm sure they would have made a similar amount or more by staying with their old jobs, but they wouldn't have got the same level of satisfaction or freedom as they do now.

And while each has their own views on what should have priority in the development process, there is equally just as many that have different views to you about what the priorities should be.

Case in point is the insim features that people are siting frequently in this thread, I've seen numerous threads over the last year bemoning the fact that insim needed more features to help out the community enabling them to have richer public server environments and better league managing tools. This is being currently addressed and will make alot of people very happy. But not all.

I do recall similar threads questioning the development process at other points, even the tyre physics update if irc. So it is simply just not possible to please everyone or even the overwhelming majority all of the time with LFS's choosen development path.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 15:01

Our values must be quite different :shrug: from where I sit they are not doing it because they are earning alot of money, they are doing it because they enjoy it. The best estimations I've seen for their income once expenses etc have been taken out and then devided by time spent on the project is not that great.

Enjoying your work is important.. when you sell something, it becomes more than just doing it for the love of doing it, there are obligations to meet.

I love my work, I don't earn a great deal.. sometimes not enough (if work isn't there, I don't get paid, simple as that).. I also took a big loss for 2 years while trying to build a business / reputation.. it's something you have to grin and bear when you start out on your own.. that doesn't give me an excuse / right to give a little here and little there to my customers, they expect 100% all of the time, which by my standards, is fair play.. afterall, they've paid for my 100% by being my customer.

Regards,

Ian

boosterfire

30th April 2007, 15:04

Well, I think it will actually be an odd thing to see a post that supports Ian, but I do. I support the mild fanboys too. I've been playing LFS since version 0.something of the demo version. I'm playing it less now than I used to, but I'm still playing it. I've posted a pretty high number of posts where I complain about the development of LFS, and I still think that it's flawed, but as today, I don't think I'll just stop playing.

I'm still playing other old games too. The kind of games that were once considered top notch and that are now... well just old games that you play once in a while because, after all, they're still good.

The problem is that I shouldn't really feel that way about LFS. I don't feel like there has been much change over the years. It's still the same thing. I'm enjoying it, yes, but I'm not enjoying it than I did, while I believe I should if there was constant new content.

About the graphic issue, I tend to agree with Tweak and Ian. I just can't conceive how you fanboys don't actually feel bad when you see that Erik didn't give us anything for a year now. While we've not paid for the final product, we've paid for the progress, and it would be nice to see something done about the graphics. I mean, the patch with the new astons and the BF1 was nice, it had numerous graphical upgrades. What would be good is to have those kind of upgrades in every patch. I'm not asking for a whole new graphical engine, just upgrades in every patch. I'll be greatly dissapointed if patch Y doesn't bring more than new interiors and a new south city. These are obviously needed, but do we have to believe that Erik did nothing else in a year?

I know! My post is useless. The devs are untouchable, and with their army of fanboys, there's just no way we come to the agreement that Erik is a schlow poke. Face the thruth, come on. Another thing: people saying that the graphics are fine as is. Same thing applies to the people who say that physics » graphics. When you're driving a car, you don't only feel the road. You see it, graphics and physics are one, they're the impression of reality. You could give near-reality physics to a game like NFS 2 and you'd have the same problem that LFS has, it would just be extreme. The current LFS graphics are crap. The current LFS physics, even if they're the best currently available on the market, are FAR from something close to perfection. It doesn't mean that it's not fun, tho.

stevewhite

30th April 2007, 15:11

IMO sound is one of the most important things in lfs. Try to race a 3 lap race with any car, on any track with no sound. You feel no immersion into the game, its extremely hard. I cant do it.

boosterfire

30th April 2007, 15:13

IMO sound is one of the most important things in lfs. Try to race a 3 lap race with any car, on any track with no sound. You feel no immersion into the game, its extremely hard. I cant do it.

Try the same thing with no image? :shrug:

SamH

30th April 2007, 15:13

I just can't conceive how you fanboys don't actually feel bad when you see that Erik didn't give us anything for a year now.
I wanted to know the answer to this too, and I'm (very reliably) informed by another programmer and game developer friend of mine, that the work Eric has been doing HAS to wait until Scawen (the core of the product, as the programmer) is ready for it. It's as simple as that.. and absolutely nothing to do with ANY lack of effort on Eric's part.

boosterfire

30th April 2007, 15:17

I wanted to know the answer to this too, and I'm (very reliably) informed by another programmer and game developer friend of mine, that the work Eric has been doing HAS to wait until Scawen (the core of the product, as the programmer) is ready for it. It's as simple as that.. and absolutely nothing to do with ANY lack of effort on Eric's part.

If you can confirm it, and especially if patch Y can confirm this, I'll be the first to go out there and enjoy that new content. I understand that Erik has to wait for an incompatible patch. I hope, and somehow believe that he did work, but you have to admit that leaving us clueless isn't actually the best thing to do.

Again, I might seem to contradict myself, but I believe that he's been working. There's just a part of me that tends to believe only what I see, and this part is telling me that I've seen nothing for a year.

stevewhite

30th April 2007, 15:20

Try the same thing with no image? :shrug:

The people who play lfs always bash the sounds, but i think they are great. The sounds are so responsive, they let you know every little thing you car is doing. Sound is just as important to this game as the graphics or physics. And we have seen MAJOR updates to the sounds in lfs. Be thankful! If the devs stopped development right now, the game would be worth the money you pay for it. Know of any onther games (not just racing) with a community like lfs? The devs are so close with the players, we actully get what we want in the games.

SamH

30th April 2007, 15:25

If you can confirm it, and especially if patch Y can confirm this, I'll be the first to go out there and enjoy that new content. I understand that Erik has to wait for an incompatible patch. I hope, and somehow believe that he did work, but you have to admit that leaving us clueless isn't actually the best thing to do.
I can't confirm a thing. I know that some people (probably not many, but some) think that moderators have an inside track. We don't, and know no more than anyone else on the forum. Perhaps a little more, in that we're moderators because we're here on the forum a lot, hanging out in threads we're not necessarily *specifically* carrying an interest in (nature of the job) and therefore probably pick up more of an overall feel.. but I can confirm that I know exactly diddly that Scawen hasn't posted himself, here on the forum.

However, I can confirm that the nature of game development DOES mean that content is introduced according to the timeframe that is led by the programmer, not the content developer. This could be verified by anyone else who also knows a game developer, elsewhere in the world.

stevewhite

30th April 2007, 15:38

Erik does have to wait for an incompatible patch to release anything. And if he did release anything every 3 months or so, the whole community would be pissed! All the hotlaps and everything getting erased EVERYTIME he released something? Once a year is fine, Thanks.

Shotglass

30th April 2007, 15:49

tweak heres the thing i dont get
you more than anyone else here have the ability to adress the devs personally and have some levaerage in the development process yet you choose to ramble about these things in public
when kid and vykos (which from my understanding in turn have more leverage than you) did the same thing last year scawen seemed to have been hit on a personal level

Jakg

30th April 2007, 15:49

I'm well aware LFS itself is a continual WIP, however, I paid for a final version of _S2_, nowhere have I said a final version of LFS, which would S3 final. Stop trynig to put words into my mouth to cover your ignorance.you've pre-ordered S2 Final, and the devs are letting you try S2 Alpha IF YOU WANT (!!!!!!!!)

Most games like GTR2 etc don't take as long (because face it, their not making there own engine), and as such people still pre-order them a few months early - S2 is made by 3 guys with no day jobs, they need a little amount of money to keep them going until S2 is out (properly), and people like me are more than happy to pay - ive had more enjoyment out of LFS than every other driving game i've played combined, and i consider it well worth the £24 it costs, and more than the £48 i've paid so farI shouldn't have to rely on a 3rd party addon to make the original game content reasonable.. that's what I (and many others) paid Scawen to do.and yet you'll quite happily buy rFactor with very little content...?

IMO Eric should get in contact with Elektric Kar and get his textures (or at least some of them) for a "official hi-res pack" - i understand that chucking coders at Scawen doesn't get us the S3 we want ant faster, but its less work for Erik to do.

JJ72

30th April 2007, 16:00

We're not shareholders etc, true.. but they happily took our money and are now sitting on it doing practically nothing as far as progress goes.

That in my opinion can only be a subject feeling cos there's no comparison...I certainly wouldn't say it's fast, but I also don't feel that much time has passed since patch U.

(maybe that's because I got my flight simulator):scratchch

Glenn67

30th April 2007, 16:04

Enjoying your work is important.. when you sell something, it becomes more than just doing it for the love of doing it, there are obligations to meet.

I can honestly say that I believe that Scawen does listen to his customers and does give 100% to the project.

But if he does or doesn't, really isn't a concern for us :shrug: It's his concern only and depends on how he wants to balance family life with future aspiriations of income/opportunities etc.

You in your business also are the soul determinator of how sucsessful you will be based on how you choose to progress your business. And how you balance family life over business can have long term impacts on what you feel sucess really is, which incidently can change dramatically over a lifetime. Your customers pay for the product you have now not the potential future products you may develop. And although you might have customers that would like to see you achieve better standards or a more diverse product range etc. it is really not something for them to determine for you.

The same is true for LFS it's a product that I have choosen to pay for on the basis of what it is now. If in the future it develops two fold, one hundred fold or not at all, that is not for me to decided. I've already got value for money. If you think you haven't got value for money then put it aside with the knowledge that you may still get value for your money at some later stage. It doesn't matter what the product is, it want make everyone happy, thats life.

joen

30th April 2007, 16:11

Erik does have to wait for an incompatible patch to release anything. And if he did release anything every 3 months or so, the whole community would be pissed!
I seriously doubt that.

All the hotlaps and everything getting erased EVERYTIME he released something? Once a year is fine, Thanks.
Big deal about the hotlaps. The last thing that should slow down LFS development are hotlaps. LFS is not finished, so hotlaps will be reset plenty of times to come. That's something people have to deal with when playing a game in development. It certainly shouldn't slow down development or release frequency.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 16:13

you've pre-ordered S2 Final, and the devs are letting you try S2 Alpha IF YOU WANT (!!!!!!!!)

Granted.. how damn long to I have to wait until I'm no longer a paying beta tester with no beta testing privs? 2 years is _more_ than enough, thank you very much.

Most games like GTR2 etc don't take as long (because face it, their not making there own engine), and as such people still pre-order them a few months early - S2 is made by 3 guys with no day jobs, they need a little amount of money to keep them going until S2 is out (properly), and people like me are more than happy to pay - ive had more enjoyment out of LFS than every other driving game i've played combined, and i consider it well worth the £24 it costs, and more than the £48 i've paid so farand yet you'll quite happily buy rFactor with very little content...?

I bought rfactor as an "SDK" of sorts. I knew what content it it came with and what it didn't.. I wasn't interested in it for what it shipped with, I was interested it in as the whole theory of modding sparked an interest when I started playing F1C after getting bored of LFS.

If LFS opened its doors the same, you wouldn't hear a peep from me unless there was something that was out of my hands (using rF as a comparison, the AI.. I spent way too many hours working on things for that, but ultimately the flaws lie with ISI's AI logic, no tweaking files will fix it) as I could then create my own tracks, map them properly, use high-res textures, etc etc.. LFS is closed source, there's sweet FA I can do to enhance the game separate to the devs so the only avenue is to comment. I'd far far sooner be fixing this stuff I'm complaining about myself rather than have to criticise the slow development here. Contrary to what some people may think, I'm not just trying to create a storm here, if I was, I wouldn't have continually replied and would have worded my first posts very differently. I'm _hoping_ the devs may see some posts here (not just mine, even ignoring mine completely) and step back and take a look at themselves and LFS... would they really be happy if they were in the same shoes?

The only people here defending the slow progress are fanbois / LFS fanatics.. anyone with a passing interest or who just thinks that currently LFS has one of the best feelings in regards to car handling can see the flaws... bugs / temporary solutions that have been in for way too long.. but hey, as I said, we can now write stupid lil scripts rather than click the buttons manually in the interface... LFS must now be complete! YAY :rolleyes:

IMO Eric should get in contact with Elektric Kar and get his textures (or at least some of them) for a "official hi-res pack" - i understand that chucking coders at Scawen doesn't get us the S3 we want ant faster, but its less work for Erik to do.

IMO, Eric needs to scrap the tracks and start again and map them properly and fix those broken vertices causing those pathetic random shadows. Elektric Kar has done a great job with his texture updates, I have them all installed here.. but some are seriously limited.. not by his lack of skill / effort, but due to the way Eric's managed to screw up the mapping on the tracks so royally.. and I know this is screwed as I've tried updating the textures myself and gave up as it just creates an abortion when you try and use textures that have some realistic detail to them unless it's the likes plain tarmac.

Regards,

Ian

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 16:21

I can honestly say that I believe that Scawen does listen to his customers and does give 100% to the project.

But if he does or doesn't, really isn't a concern for us :shrug: It's his concern only and depends on how he wants to balance family life with future aspiriations of income/opportunities etc.

So now's the time to consider adding people to the army. If Scawen can no longer perform to a full potential due to other commitments, then someone else needs to bridge the void and "allow" him that freedom.. you can't just down tools because you feel like it when you're a commercial business.

You in your business also are the soul determinator of how sucsessful you will be based on how you choose to progress your business. And how you balance family life over business can have long term impacts on what you feel sucess really is, which incidently can change dramatically over a lifetime. Your customers pay for the product you have now not the potential future products you may develop. And although you might have customers that would like to see you achieve better standards or a more diverse product range etc. it is really not something for them to determine for you.

I agree.. I'm not saying how LFS in general should be (thinking LFS == S3 too).. just that I expect, as a paying customer (damn I hate using that phrase) that some progress be made to the product I paid for.. not to expoect to be having to wait years on end for minimal progress. LFS is a game, not an investment.

The same is true for LFS it's a product that I have choosen to pay for on the basis of what it is now. If in the future it develops two fold, one hundred fold or not at all, that is not for me to decided. I've already got value for money. If you think you haven't got value for money then put it aside with the knowledge that you may still get value for your money at some later stage. It doesn't matter what the product is, it want make everyone happy, thats life.

I bought it with visions of having a final product. At the time I paid, there was no version of S2 available.. I pre-ordered as I had enjoyed S1 a great deal.. I didn't pay for it to remain in alpha state for 2+ years.

I have put it aside, I put it aside for 2 years, nothing changed.. how much longer do you think I should keep putting it aside for? 2? 5? 10? 20 years?

Regards,

Ian

srdsprinter

30th April 2007, 16:26

I'm _hoping_ the devs may see some posts here (not just mine, even ignoring mine completely) and step back and take a look at themselves and LFS... would they really be happy if they were in the same shoes?

Ah-ha, in the midst of the muck, there is a purpose. :really:

Ian, your arguments get weaker as your post length/count grows. If you really want to make a point (not just a temporary stir) then just state it concisely.

DeadWolfBones

30th April 2007, 16:32

The only people here defending the slow progress are fanbois / LFS fanatics.

IMO, Eric needs to scrap the tracks and start again and map them properly. Elektric Kar has done a great job with his texture updates, I have them all installed here.. but some are seriously limited.. not by his lack of skill / effort, but due to the way Eric's managed to screw up the mapping on the tracks so royally

See, Ian, this is the kind of posting that gets you called a troll. I know you know this, and I know all of your pre-scripted defenses for it:

-You call it like you see it, with brutal honesty.
-You're not afraid to hurt some feelings to get your point across.
-Anyone who calls you a troll just doesn't know you, maaaan.

But seriously... there's respectfully calling it as you see it, and then there's posting without regard for the feelings and viewpoints of your peers. You fall back on the abovelisted replies too often for them to be anything other than stock talking points, a cover for what you know to be the truth. i.e., that you know exactly what you're doing--stirring the pot, so to speak. I don't mean to say that this is your main goal in posting--I certainly agree with many of your criticisms--but I think it's possible to separate the content of your posts from the style in which you make them. The former is acceptable and the latter is bordering on unacceptable.

Additionally, given the number of times you reference yourself and your personal business in your posts, and given the complete disrespect you seem to have for those with viewpoints differing from your own, I feel like we're probably dealing with a case of severe egomania here.

I hate to further contribute to the downward slide of this thread, but I feel like you need to be respectfully and thoughtfully called out on some of these things.

Jakg

30th April 2007, 16:35

Granted.. how damn long to I have to wait until I'm no longer a paying beta tester with no beta testing privs? 2 years is _more_ than enough, thank you very much.like i said, you could of bought it when it went final, but you bought it now, knowing it was wip

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 16:41

See, Ian, this is the kind of posting that gets you called a troll. I know you know this, and I know all of your pre-scripted defenses for it:

-You call it like you see it, with brutal honesty.
-You're not afraid to hurt some feelings to get your point across.
-Anyone who calls you a troll just doesn't know you, maaaan.

But seriously... there's respectfully calling it as you see it, and then there's posting without regard for the feelings and viewpoints of your peers. You fall back on the abovelisted replies too often for them to be anything other than stock talking points, a cover for what you know to be the truth. i.e., that you know exactly what you're doing--stirring the pot, so to speak. I don't mean to say that this is your main goal in posting--I certainly agree with many of your criticisms--but I think it's possible to separate the content of your posts from the style in which you make them. The former is acceptable and the latter is bordering on unacceptable.

Additionally, given the number of times you reference yourself and your personal business in your posts, and given the complete disrespect you seem to have for those with viewpoints differing from your own, I feel like we're probably dealing with a case of severe egomania here.

I hate to further contribute to the downward slide of this thread, but I feel like you need to be respectfully and thoughtfully called out on some of these things.

Have you seriously looked at the texture mapping of the LFS tracks? Try it.. create some textures (don't even have to be real, just add something that would resemble some tarmac).. add it to Blackwood (one of LFS' newest tracks since the revamp).. now tell me the corners of the shicane look good, the exit of the rally-x track.. everything is all over the place... why? because Eric mapped them badly.

How do you want me to word it? I called a spade a spade, so be it.

There's no ego.. just that I know what it's like being the small guy.. a response to when people try and excuse things with "but there's only 3 of them".. sure there is, things can still get done.

This'll please you.. I had to close half my business down earlier in the year due to lack of business available.. hosting is no longer profitable as an individual. To me, that's failure.. I failed. It worked for 4 years, but that's not good enough.. so there you go, no ego, I tried and I failed and not ashamed to admit it. Now I stick with the coding side of things.

If you think my responses are scripted, fine.. I'm not here to convince you otherwise.. it's just how I am.. you'd get exactly the same response sitting across from me at a bar... take it or leave it.

Regards,

Ian

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 16:42

like i said, you could of bought it when it went final, but you bought it now, knowing it was wip

Had I expected a lifetime for the development cycle, I wouldn't have... but you keep living in your little LFS bubble :)

Regards,

Ian

sinbad

30th April 2007, 16:43

you've pre-ordered S2 Final, and the devs are letting you try S2 Alpha IF YOU WANT (!!!!!!!!)

"O rly?" :)

*Let's take a look at what I would be required to read if I were about to buy a license for the first time:
http://www.liveforspeed.net/?page=shopinfo
No mention of "Alpha" or "unfinished" there.

http://www.liveforspeed.net/?page=contents
Again, no mention there.

http://www.liveforspeed.net/?page=agreement
S2 is not referred to as S2 "Alpha". No mention of "Alpha" or "Unfinished".

https://www.liveforspeed.net/?page=shop
"LFS S2 Full" (Menu attached in pic)

From there I'm a couple of clicks are several credit card digits away from buying my "LFS S2 Full" license.

*Playing Devil's advocate perhaps, but if I'd done all that above, I would be buying and expecting to receive a "finished" product. We can argue all day about what can be considered "finished", how it's better than most "full" products, how "Alpha" is just a label that could be replaced any moment by "Final" since we have received all the content that S2 promised already etc etc. It's a silly argument, but I think I (as a newbie, just bought my "Full" S2 license, not even downloaded LFS yet) could be entitled to complain, because I've bought something and only found out that it is a WIP afterwards.

Edit, before anyone mentions it. Yes, it says Alpha in the news part of the main page, but I'm talking about the things I would be required or obliged to read on my way to buying it.

Blackout

30th April 2007, 16:55

But there is no mention what kind of features should be in S2. Therefore you can't demand anything more than "an online racing simulation".

DeadWolfBones

30th April 2007, 16:58

Have you seriously looked at the texture mapping of the LFS tracks? Try it.. create some textures (don't even have to be real, just add something that would resemble some tarmac).. add it to Blackwood (one of LFS' newest tracks since the revamp).. now tell me the corners of the shicane look good, the exit of the rally-x track.. everything is all over the place... why? because Eric mapped them badly.

How do you want me to word it? I called a spade a spade, so be it.

I haven't, no, as I'm not that technically inclined. However, instead of phrasing it as "Eric's managed to screw up the mapping on the tracks so royally," you could simply say "the mapping of the tracks is badly designed." It's a simple change but it greatly reduces the personal attack element of the comment while at the same time preserving the meaning. Everyone knows who does the mapping, so if you're going to say it's crap there's no need to excessively drag Eric's name through the mud while you're at it.

There's no ego.. just that I know what it's like being the small guy.. a response to when people try and excuse things with "but there's only 3 of them".. sure there is, things can still get done.

This'll please you.. I had to close half my business down earlier in the year due to lack of business available.. hosting is no longer profitable as an individual. To me, that's failure.. I failed. It worked for 4 years, but that's not good enough.. so there you go, no ego, I tried and I failed and not ashamed to admit it. Now I stick with the coding side of things.

I can assure you that it gives me no pleasure that your business failed. I know how hard it is for small business owners--my father has been one for all his life--and I'm sorry that it happened to you. I appreciate that you have a similar perspective to the devs when it comes to running a business. I just feel that repeatedly referencing it isn't really necessary, and only serves to perpetuate an image of you as a self-important gasbag.

Thanks for not flipping out on me for my post. Like I said, I think you've made a lot of constructive criticisms in this thread, and I hope some good comes of them. I just wish you'd express yourself a little differently sometimes.

:)

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 17:00

But there is no mention what kind of features should be in S2. Therefore you can't demand anything more than "an online racing simulation".

OK, that's fine. I'll go with current content, but I want all the bugs ironed out.. no more temporary damage modelling, no more temporary moon launching collision detection, turbo boost modelled correctly, diffs that act like diffs, aero modelled correctly etc etc. These are what make a sim, right? but also things sadly lacking for years in LFS.

Do we have this? no.. it's not all just about additional content.. the above are flaws / bugs. These aren't optional (or shouldn't be :shrug: ).

Regards,

Ian

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 17:16

I haven't, no, as I'm not that technically inclined. However, instead of phrasing it as "Eric's managed to screw up the mapping on the tracks so royally," you could simply say "the mapping of the tracks is badly designed." It's a simple change but it greatly reduces the personal attack element of the comment while at the same time preserving the meaning. Everyone knows who does the mapping, so if you're going to say it's crap there's no need to excessively drag Eric's name through the mud while you're at it.

Fair enough. I didn't mention Eric by name to drag it through the mud.. I'm just one of those people who often use people's names in reference rather than 'him' and 'her' or simply leaving it out.. it wasn't added to be spiteful or to create a personal attack.

I know I've mentioned both Eric's and Scawen's name in some posts. Maybe that was wrong indirectly. Again, I'm not wanting this to be anything of a personal attack, if I'm "attacking" anything, it's LFS as a business, not the individuals per-se (I know that's not always easy, especially when they're just a small group of lads).

After pulling away from rF, I brought my textures with me that I'd made for some of my own tracks I was experimenting with. Most of these were adapted from photos I took or grass / tarmac etc. I tried using them in LFS to update the textures and things didn't work out. I know LFS isn't "moddable" but would be nice to be able to replace the textures more easily, especially seeing as they're loose files (ie: the devs haven't gone out of their way to make it difficult / impossible like.... modifying cars / physics etc).

I can assure you that it gives me no pleasure that your business failed. I know how hard it is for small business owners--my father has been one for all his life--and I'm sorry that it happened to you. I appreciate that you have a similar perspective to the devs when it comes to running a business. I just feel that repeatedly referencing it isn't really necessary, and only serves to perpetuate an image of you as a self-important gasbag.

Thanks for not flipping out on me for my post. Like I said, I think you've made a lot of constructive criticisms in this thread, and I hope some good comes of them. I just wish you'd express yourself a little differently sometimes.

:)

Again fair enough. It was a PITA having to close the hosting side but customers become fewer and fewer as big hosting companies now seem to offer almost complete servers for the price of a pint.. something any small business can't afford to do.

Not all's bad, the coding side is picked up more and more and now outweighs what I may have got from the hosting side.

No probs at all regarding flipping out. I'd far sooner have a very heated discussion (about whatever today's topic maybe) than a flame fest. I fully expect others to be just as blunt to me as I am to them (not that you were, just generally).. I take as good as I give.. something my Mum drummed into me at a very early age :)

Regards,

Ian

BrandonAGr

30th April 2007, 17:30

No, I prepaid for S2 (in it's final form).. of which I don't yet have. I don't pay £2 a week until the updates are complete, I paid the full amount, yet haven't received the full product... this isn't a case of putting down a deposit.

I think there is a difference in terminology here also, alpha/beta/final as applied to most software products is not the same as what Scawen uses to describe LFS. So when you paid for an S2 license you bought access to the current content, I looked at the purchase page and I didn't see anywhere that promised a final(in the terms that you and not the devs judge)version of the game.

There are definetly things that need work in LFS, it is obviously a WIP, but I have faith in Scawen and his choices on what to develop when. Saying things like insim are pointless and a waste of time just seems a bit short sighted.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 17:40

I think there is a difference in terminology here also, alpha/beta/final as applied to most software products is not the same as what Scawen uses to describe LFS.

Read one of my first posts.. you're now using this alpha / beta state to suit your self.. as people also tell others to buy S2 because it's not really alpha. It either is or it isn't.. and with the current flaws / items missing, it most certainly is, but by now, 2+ years down the line since release, it should _at least_ be beta almost ready for final.

So when you paid for an S2 license you bought access to the current content,

Yes, agreed.. had I known I'd have to wait 2 damn years for no progress, I most definitely wouldn't have wasted the cash.

I looked at the purchase page and I didn't see anywhere that promised a final(in the terms that you and not the devs judge)version of the game.

As per their download page: Download Live for Speed S2 ALPHA - FULL VERSION.

It's not a full version at all.. it has no proper turbo modelling, it has no proper collision detection, it has no proper damage modelling, it has no proper aero modelling.. HTF is that ever a "full version"... full of temporaries, full of bugs.. most certainly not a full product with so much missing.

There are definetly things that need work in LFS, it is obviously a WIP, but I have faith in Scawen and his choices on what to develop when. Saying things like insim are pointless and a waste of time just seems a bit short sighted.

No kidding!

I didn't say insim was pointless (although the scripting engine is IMO).. but it should be treated as a _far_ lower priority than the things I list above. Everyone here goes on about physics, how LFS' are great (I'm not denying some are good).. how physics must be put before gfx etc.. yet, insim and some stupid scripting ability get put before everything.. doesn't make sense to me from both my perspective and seemingly what just about everyone else on this forum wants.

Regards,

Ian

Rtsbasic

30th April 2007, 17:43

I think there is a difference in terminology here also, alpha/beta/final as applied to most software products is not the same as what Scawen uses to describe LFS. So when you paid for an S2 license you bought access to the current content, I looked at the purchase page and I didn't see anywhere that promised a final(in the terms that you and not the devs judge)version of the game.

Its alpha because its not feature complete, correct? For example, the GTR's don't have their own dashboards, the damage model/diffs aren't complete, etc.

So how is the terminology being applied differently to LFS? I would expect it to have a very short beta time before going gold.

Edit: Took too long.

The Moose

30th April 2007, 17:51

had I known I'd have to wait 2 damn years for no progress, I most definitely wouldn't have wasted the cash.

So your cash was so wasted that you managed to do nearly 1000 races?

GTR2 bored be rigid within 100 laps....now that's wasted cash

As per their download page: Download Live for Speed S2 ALPHA - FULL VERSION.

It's not a full version at all.

Is it a demo version? i don't think so, therefore it is a full version.

Finished product? No, indeed not, but as has been pointed out to you many times you didn't pay for the finished product.

Cue-Ball

30th April 2007, 17:54

Ian - It doesn't matter if the stuff in LFS meets your lofty requirements or not. You try the demo, decide you like it, then buy the full game. So long as the full game reflects the demo (and it does), that's all that matters.

Now, if the demo played perfectly and the full version didn't, you might have a leg to stand on. But, since the two are essentially the same, other than the extra cars and tracks, they are comparable. So you DID get what you paid for: the demo, with some extra cars and tracks added. If you paid thinking that EVERY one of your desires would be fulfilled by now, that was your mistake.

I actually agree with you about many of the points you've made. I also would like to see many things addressed, and would really enjoy some faster progress. But, complaining that you didn't get what you expected is nobody's fault but your own.

Blackout

30th April 2007, 17:59

Yes, agreed.. had I known I'd have to wait 2 damn years for no progress, I most definitely wouldn't have wasted the cash.

You just said it's not about money?

As per their download page: Download Live for Speed S2 ALPHA - FULL VERSION.
It's full as not demo.

It's not a full version at all.. it has no proper turbo modelling, it has no proper collision detection, it has no proper damage modelling, it has no proper aero modelling.. HTF is that ever a "full version"... full of temporaries, full of bugs.. most certainly not a full product with so much missing.

Where does it say the full product includes these? (well it's not even a full as finished...d'oh)

There are no promises on LFS site, you can not have been mislead to believe that those should be here or the issues fixed. You thought things would go your way, they didn't, you made a mistake purchasing your S2 license too early. It wouldn't even been necessary as S1 license (or even demo) has access to the same LFS content than S2..well of course excluding S2 cars and tracks.

And_wtf_is_up_with_this_thing?

I guess this has no use as you will draw the fanboi card again.

PLAYLIFE

30th April 2007, 18:23

To people who want better graphics:

Sure, graphics are nice, I even bought a new PC to speed up my games and see more eye candy. However, games are loved and cherished for the game play they offer, not good graphics. It is the game play the games are played for if you keep on building on that, you can't go wrong. If Scawen kept the graphics up to date, he wouldn't be getting any work done to improve the gameplay.

I see improving gameplay as a long term investment - smth that is there to stay forever. Improving graphics is just for short term gains - in 1 year people will start to complain again why DX11 isn't supported... Sure, LFS needs a graphics overhaul some time, but I'd take physics update any day over a graphics update.

AndRand

30th April 2007, 18:38

you can _call_ me a fanboi - noprobs.

After reading a while I cant really see any argument more than moaning gimmegimmegimme...
the problem of LFS is that.... it is just what it is. the business model is the problem, however without this business model...LFS will never happen, it might have been sold to some publishers, revamped and dumbed down for a BTCC game.
I'd rather have devs glancing at their cashflow rate on their accounts (btw, updates and so on dependant) than hard on deadline forsaking physics quality and putting eyecandy effects to present "finished product" on time.

And if you check the list:
Tracks in LFS are really not complete in my opinion (of course they will be touched up, but when?), there is still some work to do, or else they will feel like a flat/planar track with no proper fringe, bumps on kerbs (and yes there are bumpy kerbs that can be driven both directions), poorly designed chicanes on pit exits/entrances, texture bugs, lack of crowds (no ambiance), etc. Look around and you'll see. Nothing is complete of course, but then look at the animations. Poor driver modeling for the body and helmet, no decent animations while driving... not even a pit crew in the pitlane. What about lights (and day/night), better smoke, glowing brake discs, exhaust backfire, sparks, real looking dial clusters, sun glare, wet weather, pace car, proper penalty flags, AI that work and can drive fast, built-in telemetry, useful pit strategies, shattering/breakable objects on tracks & cars, damaged body panels (and fall off), dirt visible on the tires, rewind in replays, proper gearbox simulation and stalling, blown engines / mechanical failures, racing line grip levels (marbles), track temps... There is probably a lot more to list.
you can divide into many details I dont mind (I'm in the process of creating a rig - that what I call immersion - and can find LFS exciting still), and features that can come with more environmental simulation (day/night/wet/rain etc.)

That's what keeps me playing LFS--the knowledge that I can log in on any given night, play with guys I know and trust, and have a great, close race without worrying about weird physics inconsistencies or bad multiplayer code ruining things

And I can assure you that I was not at any time busy worrying about the lack of bump mapping or realistic hi-res cracks in the pavement.
:thumb:
I see Ian like a guy coming for track days and moaning for tableflat Tilke's design. You said, Ian, you get bored with lack of modding - but well, I would like to have well done 20-30 tracks than 1000 poor quality efforts.
Nevertheless I must say with new balancing system a new car in a class every couple of months would be neat... :tilt:

All I can say, after several years in LFS I just found out yesterday that when you go near the beach in FE, turn the radio off, you can hear the waves. :nod: You can try and relax there :D

Thats nice, but I won't be coming back to race in LFS for that feature.

Ian.H

30th April 2007, 18:38

I knew I should know better than not explain every sentence clearly when not saying LFS is perfect.

It's not about money, the "wasted cash" comment just means that had I known I'd have been waiting so long for some decent updates, I wouldn't have bothered. I don't sit here thinking it's £24 quid down the drain or that I want a refund or something equally stupid.. I spent the money, it's long gone.. no worry.. at the time however, I would have conserved it as now it seems like a waste, not that I'm sitting here missing it.

I know I bought an alpha version (with the understanding it wouldn't be this way forever).. I'm not denying that. I did buy it as a WIP too, and that it would eventually become an S2 final release. What I didn't expect to be buying is such a delay in progress. Is that really hard to understand? I really don't know how to put it any clearer (I'm not being sarcastic, I'm just explaining.. or trying to).

Ignoring additional content for now, why did it take so long for false starts to be implemented when LFS is supposed to be a sim over arcade game? Why has the collision detection been temporary since S1 days? Why is the damage modelling still as primitive as the day it was implemented? 2 years is a long time. I'm not even looking for S2 final right now, just some substantial update to see that LFS is infact progressing as it was meant to be.. but all we're seeing is gimmicks like this scripting engine being added, when surely, 95% of people here would rather have some half-decent aero modelling? collisions that didn't send you to the moon that in reality, would barely knock a person off their feet. It's this I fail to understand and accept, not really the fact that S2 final isn't here or just around the corner. These are things that should be in the game.. not because I want them, but because it's supposed to be a simulation. Maybe I didn't word some of my posts too clearly, but all I want is progress, substantial progress.. after 2 years I don't think that's being unreasonable.

What I don't expect is for the devs to say "hey, Ian wants X,Y,Z.. stop what ya doing and get on with it!".

Regards,

Ian

PLAYLIFE

30th April 2007, 18:46

OK, that's fine. I'll go with current content, but I want all the bugs ironed out.. no more temporary damage modelling, no more temporary moon launching collision detection, turbo boost modelled correctly, diffs that act like diffs, aero modelled correctly etc etc. These are what make a sim, right? but also things sadly lacking for years in LFS.

Do we have this? no.. it's not all just about additional content.. the above are flaws / bugs. These aren't optional (or shouldn't be :shrug: ).

Regards,

Ian

You have no clue, do you... What bugs? When have you ever seen a simulation that is totally perfect!?!? All these so called bugs are just features that are lacking. Just like all other sims are lacking features. There is no defined criteria for what a sim needs to have. It is reasonable to expect a sim to feel more real than most games. LFS does that - way and beyond. Tell me which games are so much better sims that you need to put LFS down? rFactor? GTR2? Are you kidding me? Which simulation you can go online with and race other than LFS? None! rFactor promised online gameplay and there is 2 racers online! Now that is a disappointment!!!!

tiagolapa

30th April 2007, 18:55

You bought because you wanted it.
LFS as it is now is very playable and has little bugs. Go play GTR2 and see a lot more bugs. You want collision detection? Go see how its modeled in GTR2 and have a laugh.. This is only one example, i can be all day here.. but i have my point.
I don't care if its alpha or whatever, for me it looks like a complete sim and i know it can only become better in future.
Sure i miss some new content, but don't claim devs because you paid something with no guarantee of new content.

Cya

Bob Smith

30th April 2007, 19:50

One point nobody has mentioned: LFS S2 non-alpha/beta, full, final, whatever, is not intended to be complete. It's two thirds of LFS. There is nothing stating what is going to be left out at stage two of a three stage development process, or what will be included. From what is included at this stage, doesn't even necessarily have to work well. The sim is not complete until S3 final (or whatever), so don't expect perfection. LFS models turbo-chargers but they don't spool realisitically... nobody said the modelling had to be perfect. LFS doesn't model superchargers at all. Which is worse?

LFS develops at its own pace, enjoy the ride if you can, if not, take another break and come back in another 2 years. Perhaps you'll be happier then.

Flycantbird

30th April 2007, 20:32

It has been a while since any major graphic upgrades, I'll grant you.
I understand that's huge in some peoples minds, but in others ( mine included) the graphics barely enter into the picture ( no pun intended).

I don't watch the scenery as I'm racing. I don't look at the dash to see
if the 8 track is still playing ( pun intended).

I don't watch replays and think 'look how beautiful my car looks as it passes that tree'.

Compared to most current sims I've seen, LFS graphics are pleasant and non-obtrusive.

I agree with DWB, the reason LFS keeps me coming back after 3 years is
the game play - it's just fun to pop on and race wheel to wheel, and know what the car is going to do in most instances.

It's all moot in the end, just another opinion. I'm just a bit surprised at times that people get so worked up about graphics.

I would like to see more content, specifically more tracks. More cars would be nice, but I don't drive all of the current ones. The amount of tracks are fine up to now, or a least recently, but it would be nice to have about
half a dozen fresh alternatives, as thats what really makes the game interesting, imho.

DanneDA

30th April 2007, 22:13

Spent some time going through Scawens posts, some of these are somewhat interesting, and somewhat related to the topic.

About model updates:

If that's true then can I assume that every surface carries the same weight? If so, this would account for the fact that the hot hatches seem very top heavy. Sometimes after going over an inside curb I swear that the engine must be mounted on the roof!

The meshes aren't used in the mass calculation any more. However, they are used to create a physics collision box and also to determine a radius. So they can affect physics in small ways.

Any tiny change to the car could put replays out of sync. For example, if a driver's position was moved by one millimeter, because of an updated steering wheel or whatever, the replay would be out of sync.

Not all the car interiors are done and Eric wants to release them at once, not having half a car class updated while another car is not. And one thing leads to another, so if the XRR is updated, the XRT is updated, so then the XFG should be updated as well. I expect all the interiors will be released at once, in an incompatible patch.

--
December 29th 2006
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=298604#post298604
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=17074

Criticisms:

Simply, the criticisms of LFS development stated a few posts back are just wrong and displaying a lack of understanding, and failure to see the big picture. Or if you wish, you may interpret that as my failure to explain to you what I'm doing every step of the way. But seriously, my job is not to explain to you every step of LFS development and every plan I have for it, while they run through my head. My job is to get LFS done.

It was actually the two Vista compatibility issues (unlocking and sound) and the arrival of the G25 wheel that got me onto this series of test patches. It's very important, with more and more people getting Vista, and us receiving several technical support emails "I can't unlock on Vista" and so on, for LFS to work on Vista. Also we need that improved controller support to be readily available to new users. Also I've had enough of "How do I install a patch, I've downloaded it and LFS doesn't work any more" so I've been working on and nearly finished the auto updater. And that means, Patch V needs to go on the main site. And guess what - it should not go up there completely bug ridden and full of hundreds of small issues that have been waiting a long time to be fixed. But it should be compatible, I need to do some months of incompatible work, which I have outlined elsewhere and won't go into here. And there's no point delaying the compatible fixes, leaving the much poorer version U up there when we are so close to V.

The compatible fixes and improvements are totally necessary. The irritated commentators on this thread have no idea how much reworking and improving goes on inside the program while I'm on a roll. Also they don't understand how much simply MUST be done, outside the core physics, to keep the program on track. It does actually take more time than the core itself. If a great majority of the time was spent on the core alone, we would have a physically accurate, but totally unusable simulator that attracted no more than the absolute hardcore simmer. And we'd be poor and have to give up LFS and go and get a job!

This work NEEDS to be done. It's nothing different from any time in the past. A lot of compatible fixes, tested thoroughly by the community, followed by an apparently quiet period while we work on incompatible things which cannot be tested by the community because every day's test patch is incompatible, which would causing hotlap and online madness. And in that apparently quiet periiod there will be a new post each week "Where are the devs gone" and "They've taken our money and run" and "The devs owe it to us to write a detailed progress report each week" etc, etc... you know how it goes by now.

Anyway, I'm very happy with these improvements, I'm sort of embarassed now by version U and it's flaws and imcompatibilities, the visible things and the internal messes it contains that I have sorted out. I'm itching to get that version V up there but it needs the auto-updater finished (a couple more days work) and the new (minor) sound updates (a few more days work - still awaiting some longer work in the future). Nearly every one of these test patches has had some VITAL fixes, along with a few irritations fixed and some minor or major features. It really is not a bad thing for LFS, these compatible things that have been done, bringing us so much closer to a final S2 that can be released, when the other craved updates are completed.

It's a little sad the lack of trust displayed in those preceding posts. The belief that something has gone wrong inside our heads, that the developers who once knew how to develop, have changed mentally in some way, are hiding away in a hole, scared to develop anything but just scratching at the surface. It's quite a pathetic belief in fact, when the truth is Eric's there working on things that will improve LFS a lot amd I am working 10 hour days getting so much done, as fast as possible to get a stable version up there ready for the approaching silent period of core development.

It's going so well, and as described elsewhere our lives have been sorted out a lot this year helped by the S2 success, after neglecting ourselves for years, due to LFS development. It would be nice if the off topic commentators could just be happy about it and have some faith in the simple understanding that we developers who got it this far, and have devoted so much of our lives to this, probably want to take it to the next stage as well!

--
November 4th 2006
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=255879#post255879
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=14689

Progress report, October 2006:

Hello to all.

This is just a really quick note as I am starting to see more questions and frustration, from people who want an update. I hope this post will help to explain how things are going.

I first want to remind you how we work here. We don't work to a specified schedule or an exact feature list. We have our lists of things to do and we get on with them. We do allow ourselves to get sidetracked onto related tasks as we go, or even do completely unrelated things which we feel like doing, along the way. It's a good way to work, because we can follow our inspiration and interest, and so get a lot done. This is one reason why Eric and I left the company we used to work for, and set about working on our own. The only disadvantage is that sometimes, a planned thing takes longer to complete, while we finish something that wasn't planned. But that doesn't worry us at all - it just makes some people get impatient, sometimes.

Although progress is good, this year has been the slowest one yet. There are a lot of reasons for that, but none of them are really permanent.

On my side... as you know my first child was born this year, so there have been a lot of home improvements being done, and a lot of old rubbish to clear away, after years of letting things pile up when I only had a motorbike. Another issue has been the neighbours building. We are attached to a house which has had a loft conversion and a large rear extension. I won't describe what a building site is like, if you don't already know, you won't believe my description of the amount of dust and noise! Anyway, that has been on the go for 7 months now and they are really in the final stages, so most days are peaceful now. Of course Leo himself is quite a distraction and something to get used to. But you don't want to miss out on the first months of your first baby's life. He won't be small for long!

On Eric's side... he was finally able to buy his own house, something that was impossible in the earlier years of LFS and he was forced to waste a lot of money renting a house. Now with S2 sales, he got the chance to get his own house again, so of course he took that opportunity. That kept him off his work for a little while. As anyone knows, who buys a second hand house, there is a certain amount of work to be done before you move in.

So, I hope you can now understand the reasons for our slower progress in 2006. This is by no means an apology! We never give estimates of when things will be done - we are very careful about that because we don't want to be in the position of failing to deliver on our promises. We are very happy with the improvements to our homes and our lives, and I am happy to report that our improved environments are helping us to continue working on this project we love so much! You can look forward to many improvements to LFS - graphical, physical and audible. We won't give any estimates though, of when any particular patch or version will be out. But we are progressing towards it day by day.

--
October 16th 2006
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=239869#post239869
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=13882

Read through these threads for more posts by Scawen:
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=14689
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=17074
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=13882