Is there a solution for demo baning??!!

[Boris Lozac]

I am sick and tired of this no life idiots, who come to demo servers, and wreck people, ban them without reason, and so on..!! This game is really geting some bad publicity among sim lovers, sim magazines, etc.. because of this! And partially devs, it's your fault. You should make that who ever wants to play the game online, that he must be registred on the liveforspeed.net or lfs world! That everyone has unique registred name like in licensed version. So when you ban him, he can't return with different name, and continue his pathetic mision!
I like to return once in a while to our demo server, because mostly there are people from my country, but because of idiots, i disconnect 2 minutes later.
So please, tell me if there is a solution for this?

[jmkz]

no there is no solution, the demo should be easy to play, requiring the demo users to register will lead to less racers on the demo servers, less people who might buy S2 license.

ps: its banning :-)

[deggis]

no there is no solution, the demo should be easy to play, requiring the demo users to register will lead to less racers on the demo servers, less people who might buy S2 license.

ps: its banning :-)
Indeed.

[tristancliffe]

We all had the same problem when we only had S2 Demo. I still think that requiring a registered username (and any email address can only be used once) would make demo life much more pleasant.

It could also lead to INCREASED sales, as Reviews (which only seem to use the demo) and word of mouth would spread news of a polite, clean, fair demo.

It's in Scawen's hands I guess...

[Hyperactive]

I am sick and tired of this no life idiots, who come to demo servers, and wreck people, ban them without reason, and so on..!! This game is really geting some bad publicity among sim lovers, sim magazines, etc.. because of this! And partially devs, it's your fault. You should make that who ever wants to play the game online, that he must be registred on the liveforspeed.net or lfs world! That everyone has unique registred name like in licensed version. So when you ban him, he can't return with different name, and continue his pathetic mision!
I like to return once in a while to our demo server, because mostly there are people from my country, but because of idiots, i disconnect 2 minutes later.
So please, tell me if there is a solution for this?

If the demo users had to register in LFSW and needed an email address for that it wouldn't stop them. Getting a new email is just too easy. It would slow 'em down though. And it would just put more burden to the moderators of the LFSW (the devs?). And the extra coding needed for this... Though we need some kind of solution for this. LFS is getting some bad reputation because of this.

As some want to use team tags etc. in their names and sometimes you want to use your real name - how do you organize the name policy for that? Of course we could have a tag text field in lfs in which you can put short tags. And the option to choose from "LFSW name" and "real name" inside lfs but do you make sure the real name is real? (stop it hyper, this isn't improvements forum :smash3d: )

[Boris Lozac]

We all had the same problem when we only had S2 Demo. I still think that requiring a registered username (and any email address can only be used once) would make demo life much more pleasant.

It could also lead to INCREASED sales, as Reviews (which only seem to use the demo) and word of mouth would spread news of a polite, clean, fair demo.

It's in Scawen's hands I guess...

Exactly... BUT.. know that i had some thinking about this, and this thread of mine.. it's kinda good to have this wreckers on demo servers, because it would only make LFS sales INCREASE :) because people would get sick and tired of that, and they would like to enjoy the game in it's full glory.

[Fonnybone]

Reading all this i got an idea, how about :

To play demo online (LFSWorld ):
1- You must register the demo and get a username (activate/confirm via e-mail)
2- Any new Username must complete some basic training before getting 'online license'

Basic training would be a specific group of tests with relevance to online
racing. These could be on anything like overtaking, taking turns stuck
between 2 cars, a start with a full grid would also be appropriate and let's
not forget the infamous Start-to-Turn1 sprint, be first out of the turn and
through the gate 100 feet away. I'm just brainstorming at this point.

Although there is no solution to the online rebels, LFS isn't gonna solve
any society problems anyday soon, there ARE ways to minimize it.

[AndroidXP]

Yeah, I think registering and some training before being able to race online would greatly improve the situation :thumbsup:

People who race fair and never get banned only have to do this once, so the amount of work for the good racers is minimal, while wreckers would have to re-register and run through the training again after being banned to "quickly" enter the wrecking carnage again. Additionally, an account that has been banned three times should also be removed, forcing someone who gets banned multiple times to do that training again. I chose three bans because sometimes the wreckers manage to ban someone innocent and the victim shouldn't be punished even more (by having to complete the training again)

So:
Register at LFS.net to get a Demo account (with e-mail "handshake" to activate)
Complete some training missions to unlock multiplayer (that's the thing that takes some time, maybe 5 to 10 mins?)
When you get banned
- once: nothing happens (besides being temp. banned from that server)
- three times: your account gets removed, forcing you to go back to step #1As an additional safety you could restrict an e-mail address to one account only. So not only would a wrecker have to register again and repeat the training, he'd also have to get a new mail address.

I think this would practically eliminate all wrecking whatsoever.

[xaotik]

I think that a unique checksum identifier per client could possibly solve this problem.

A "demo key" that is generated by the demo client based on some standard system parameters (thus not requiring any registration annoyance from the end user) and identifies the specific client.

[Vykos69]

@all: [_]Understood basic ideas of marketing/advertising/demostuff...

think about it: Any regulation to the demo will decrease the use of it, and the sales.

[xaotik]

@Vykos69: Understand basic ideas of customer support, end-user experience and a marketing/demo strategy which offers these transparently (without active registration of the product).

think about it: The more people are happy playing the demo the more people will buy LFS.

:)

[AndroidXP]

I really fail to see how that would decrease sales. And anyone who thinks that that is too much of a hassle to play this great game is probably only wrecking the demo servers anyways.

I think far more people have been turned off by the demo behaviour than we would've lost with a registering system. Also all the reviews contain the demo carnage aspect, which simply sucks.
The registering itself should be very quick and easy, even easier than the forum registration because you wouldn't even have to enter some other information, just e-mail and maybe a name and that's it. Receive the confirm mail, click link in mail, play the game. Done. The physics can be experienced, the general look and feel also. You want to try multiplayer? Ok, just complete this bit of training (maybe with some general "noob"-rules attatched to it) and go online.

Besides that, the features of S2 should be the reason to buy it, not because the demo servers are unplayable and full of idiots.

[Blackout]

I agree with Vykos. When I downloaded the S1 demo early 2004 if it had said to me that "You must register to play our demo", I would have thought: "WTF no I dont want to register to your spam list and get my email address to some unknow game makers". That would have been before I knew what kind LFS team is. If people are so blind that they dont buy LFS just because demo-drivers I dont know do I even want that kind of people have it. There is a big waring before you enter the demo. And rewievs, they are for general mass people, do we want them wih their NFSU2s?

[AndroidXP]

No, you must register to play online, not to unlock the demo itself.

[xaotik]

No, you must register to play online, not to unlock the demo itself.

That would turn off alot of people though - the whole trouble of registration, etc. However (*assumes caresalesman voice*) with a unique client identifier key generated automatically for each client which is based on system parameters you don't have to register and bans would be persistant, it is also not a violation of privacy and requires no user intervention (and if you are still not sure, we'll throw in the deal a free microwave).

[AndroidXP]

Ah well ok, then go on and live with the demo carnage/wrecking/general unpleasantness. I don't care, I have S2 anyways - it's the devs choice what to do.

Also I think alot more people would be scared of that "omg it uses info from my computer to generate a key" thing (that would surely somehow get through to the users) than a simple registration would... where THEY have the control to give out the info. And even if you don't like giving out your mail, use spamgourmet or something like this. Sure this would circumvent the one-account-per-mail thing I mentioned earlier, but the training "mission" would still be in place.

[xaotik]

I too only use S2 hosts, but took an interest in this subject as it seems to come up pretty often.

Also I think alot more people would be scared of that "omg it uses info from my computer to generate a key" thing

Well, that's called a GUID (Global Unique IDentifier) and it's something that is common practice (esp. in Windows apps). The only thing the user would see is, for example, "Demo GUID" like it now says "S2 License" and to ease conspiracy freaks it could show them the GUID being used, simple as that. :)

In fact, even this forum right this minute uses a sort of GUID to track your session (check the bbsessionhash cookie)...

[Blackout]

Well that would be ok I think

[AndroidXP]

That's not 100% the same. The session is just a md5 key, not using your system info but just something random to be unique. Whereas the GUID would have to use system info because it has to be the same for the user all the time. Also, as soon as he changes some hardware components the demo liscense would be borked. I can understand such a behaviour for S1/S2 liscenses, but not for demo.

[xaotik]

Also, as soon as he changes some hardware components the demo liscense would be borked. I can understand such a behaviour for S1/S2 liscenses, but not for demo.

Nah, it wouldn't be invalidated and thus ending the functionality of the demo - it would just be regenerated. :)

Sure that would "lift bans" but how many people would want to change system components just to get rid of a ban? This ID obviously is of no other use but this and helping with the previous problem stated of people using the same name as someone else.

(I am not sure about the current forum's session key but some server-side scripting platforms use the incoming host's IP addy to generate the key. But that is irrelevant.)

EDIT:
And to clear up what I mean - this GUID would not be stored anywhere else but on the host the player connects to. Thus if he gets banned there it will be a persistant ban for him for the duration set, no changing of username/playername/whatever will circumvent the ban. There is no point in tracking the GUID with lfsworld or any of the lfs servers.

Anyhow, I shan't go on any longer about this idea, I believe it's been analysed enough (and it's probably nothing new to the devs anyhow).

Bring on more ideas! :)

[AndroidXP]

Sure that would "lift bans" but how many people would want to change system components just to get rid of a ban?Wreckers would ;) :D
(I am not sure about the current forum's session key but some server-side scripting platforms use the incoming host's IP addy to generate the key. But that is irrelevant.)(I really couldn't care less for my IP.

AOL: Yeah hi lolz, wazzup
Dude: Shutup or I'll steal your IP
AOL: OMG PANIC HACKER ALERT

:D)

[xaotik]

Wreckers would ;) :D

Well, then together with the demo warning there should be a phonenumber for a psychiatric hotline. :)

[Simon Savage]

How long does a ban last for?? me and my fellow sim racer AJ were on there and this person randomly asked for a vote to ban and they voted to ban him off the air attack server! he hadnt even done anything wrong people for some reason choose to press one even if they dont know what the other player has done wrong.


Will he be let back in or will he have to ask on the airattack forum before he can be alloud back in??

[AndroidXP]

Votebans are only temporary, so he'll be able to join again later on (dunno how long, though)

[Vykos69]

No, you must register to play online, not to unlock the demo itself.
That's exactly the point. LFS Demo wins, cause u just click Multiplayer and can play online. If I would have had to register to play online, I dunno, if I would have tried it at first back in the days...

From my point of view of Racing-Challenge admin, I would like to see registration for demoplayers, but then again a Registration always frightens people, and it's better a LOT of people see that great online code, than less ;)

[Hyperactive]

Actually it's pretty much the same thing with the simbins demos which include the starforce system. Even if the majority has no problems with it, some people will just not tolerate the sf "infected" games.

And if you hear about some guys talking about some relatively good racing game and you haven't heard from it before sure you get interested. But what happens when you hear you must register to play it online? Why do I need to register? Why should I give my personal information to someone I don't know? I just recently tried the VRC demo and you need to register to be able to play it. (Although the registeration is a breeze you still need to give some personal info about yourself). I just sat long time there thinking whould I give my name there...after while decide not to. Why? Just seems overly stupid that you need to tell the dev team who you are to just try the game. So not this to LFS, but a player name registration to be able to play it online, why not?

Just don't ask too much personal questions and it's fine? And to make it smooth you should be able to register your copy inside LFS!

[RAYfighter]

I also like to race on demo servers quite often, because I have friends there, just like someone already mentioned here. From my experience the most annoying problem is the wrecker getting your nick (exactly with all the colors etc), which makes it impossible to pick him for ban. So the most important thing would be the unique nickname.
While all previous suggestions (and I liked some of them alot!) ask devs for adding functions, this one actually needs to take one feature out: change the nickname in demo licence.
Dude downloads the demo, starts it, game asks him to choose his nickname, explaining he will not be able to change it without reinstalling the demo, and suggesting to be creative since there is no existing nick check to avoid getting ANY of your dear very important user information. :D

What do you think?

[al heeley]

I think thats a very good idea. :up:

[AndroidXP]

Heh, actually good and pretty simple :)

Although I guess dedicated wreckers would also find a way to rejoin quickly after being banned, but it would bring some improvment already. And is quick to implement. I like.

[Gunn]

I also agree, a unique nick for each demo installation would act as some deterrent. And although an email address is easy to supply these days, it might act as a further deterrent.

As for suggestions of compulsory training before being allowed to play online, no amount of training will prevent an idiot from acting like an idiot. The problem with these guys isn't that they can't handle their car, they're having trouble handling puberty.

No matter how restrictive the demo is, the devs can not prevent people from being disruptive. The anonymous stature of players leaves the door open for disruptive play and this occurs in many online games. Without paying for a license (and by doing so, making an investment) some demo players may feel that they have nothing to lose by being disruptive.

[AndroidXP]

No Gunn, see it this way: the training would be a well disguised method of delaying the access to online play.

Sure the training wouldn't help much for those unwilling to learn, but that's not even the intention. It would make it much more of a hassle to wreck because you'd have to 1) reregister, and 2) go through that "long" training again just to wreck someone else and get banned again. Right now it's "wreck, get banned, change nick, join again, wreck, ...". Now if "change nick" is replaced with the process of registering again and doing those training laps, it would be a HUGE deterrent.

Also, if this training is something similar to the "overtake AI without contact" thingy (which would need some improved AI though, otherwise it would suck and get good players frustrated) the wreckers would have a very hard time because they don't even have the skill to complete these laps quickly.

[Fonnybone]

Ahhh AndroidXp, thanks for understanding everything perfectly ;) The idea
here is to find solutions to the bad image of online racing. This is what i
understood the whole thread was about.

Vykos, when you say " think about it: Any regulation to the demo will
decrease the use of it, and the sales." Well, precisely, i HAVE thought
about it and that very sentence seems to contradict itself. The USE of
the demo IS the problem, some people USE the demo INSTEAD of buying
the full game, this is where it is NOT increasing the sales. I read more
and more about how demo is not helping LFS by giving it a bad name.
So, is it the very fact that sales are affected by this that you contest,
or is it because you are not a demo user and haven't witnessed this?

We have to separate popularity and sales here. I can tell you first hand
that people will love you if you give 'em stuff for free, that's obvious. Take
LFSTweak for example, many people like the app, but i don't get any more
respect from some and make no sales. LFSTweak wasn't more usefull for
LFS sales than the demo but in a way both are good at showcasing the
potential of LFS. LFSTweak was a popular download that reached the 1000s
in the first weeks it was posted, yet, it generated no 'sales' per say, and
the impact on LFS sales is hard to calculate. How many of those do you
think decided to buy S1-S2 knowing they could also tweak those cars ?

I'm curious, would you guys make LFSTweak work for demo or not ?
(i'm not asking if you like LFSTweak btw, just imagine you have no other
choices). Anyone here think it might be partly responsible for a certain
crowd sometimes causing problems ?

The demo does a great job of showcasing LFS, the question is is it
fullfilling it's primary goal which is to promote sales ? We need graphs !! lol

AndroidXP understood exactly my intentions and i'm happy to see he
noticed how i tried to tie everything together as simply as i could. Yes, i
said it, it's not perfect, nothing ever will be so let's settle that from the start.
Now the whole reason there IS this thread is because some people believe
there IS a problem. Now is it the very existence of this problem we should be
questioning or is this one of those "things are like they are, nothing you can
do about it" ?!

[P5YcHoM4N]

IMHO, the best way to stop wreckers is to force the training to "unlock" multiplayer mode. I've spent ages trying to do the race without crashing level on keyboard, and failed, I also tried again with my mouse, and found it hard, yet possable. That'd be probably one of the best ways to stop wreckers, but also might stop some people using MP and might prevent sales. But then how many might it generate.
Some guys I talk to in IRC noticed that my xfire has been showing me in LFS for the last few days, so they decied to try it. But then I noticed that they found a crack for the game and decied to use that over buying a copy. So just there there have been 20 sales that wont happen, unless one of them decieds they like the game so much they have to buy it. Chances of that are slim to none though =/

But if the person playing the demo (knowing it's a sim and not an arcade game) would know what to expect if they was serious about getting the game, and in most cases would have the skill, or hardware (wheel) to complete it, try out MP, and buy the game (or just run a few races on SP). I never played MP all the time I had the demo (s1 and s2), and I only decied to try MP a few days ago, and found it kicked so much ass. I was more then happy just with the AI, which is part of what sold me the game (the other part being I wanted the locked goodies).

And just another idea (not sure how well it'd work). Because the game gets so many bad reviews, how about a reviewers account, which is avilable by reviewing sites, if they e-mail (sign up or something) requesting a reviewers account, which will last x ammount of time, and after that time will expire, so they can't pass on the details. That'd help win the review battle (if it'd work, I have no clue how well, or how open to abuse it'd be, maybe make it manually operated or something).

Just another random idea, but would it be possable to prevent anyone but licence holders from getting the full version, and put in some sort of value in each licence holders download so it is unique to them, so if they hand it out, you know which account to delete. Gah, random crap. I should be sleeping right now. Got lectures at 9am.

[Fonnybone]

I was thinking, why not have both ?!

1- Open-Demo servers, with no restrictions or stats.
and
2- Registered-Demo servers, with license and registration requirements.

Surely, no2 could also give a better idea of full version registered servers.
Also, like this, both are happy since wreckers still have a playground once
they get banned a few times from registered servers...where they'll meet
up with other wreckers who just got banned and they can wreck together.
Then they'll have children and live happy ever after, see how it all works out ?

Many games use similar ideas and do just fiiiine. America's Army being the first
that comes to mind when it comes to rigorous pre-online testing, but it's full
version and free. Punkbuster is also found on most games and there you
can select between 'checked' and open servers.

I'm just trying to find ways to please all, i should know better :p

[ysu]

...
The demo does a great job of showcasing LFS, the question is is it
fullfilling it's primary goal which is to promote sales ? We need graphs !! lol
...
You can't get any graphs without changing something first. Nothing in the structure of demo registration/usage has changed whatsoever. Nothing to show on the graphs only the same old thing. :shrug:

As for the subject: I completely agree with the need of restrictions. Even tho I bought S1 and then S2 as well, I got a glimpse of the mayhem in the pre-S2 times. I simply did not play.

If my first meeting with LFS would have been on a server full of idiots, I'd have simply gone away: NOT BUYING IT because of the wreckers.
So I don't believe it's increasing sales, I think it does exactly the opposite.
(the demo itself is a must, I agree to that, but the things going on on those demo servers...bah it's criminal)

So I think the one nick (one account) per demo thing is very good, especially coupled with the need of unique email and the need to re-install (or buy) to get a new nick!

This would probably slow down the wreckers. May not eliminate them, but that's probably impossible without personal intervention and a nice big gun.... :D

Altho a wrecker can still go from server to server, have his fun for the day and start again the next day: vote bans are 24hrs long only afaik

[Gunn]

No Gunn, see it this way: the training would be a well disguised method of delaying the access to online play.Why do you want to delay access to online play? A person who has just discovered LFS will want to see if it lives up to it's reputation as a great online sim. But you would have them train first? Say goodbye to a large portion of potential players who will never complete the training and therefore never find out about LFS.

[Fonnybone]

Troublemakers are are like electricity, they will go to the path with least
resistance. If LFS creates enough resistance, they might look for easier
ways elsewhere.

Gunn what do you suggest, i mean, you are good are taking things apart,
but we are looking for solutions. Why is it so important the difference in
seconds it takes to try the demo? I'm just not sold on the idea that it
automatically translates to sales. In fact, a few of us here disagree.
Read my previous post, it might not had been up when you posted.
There are ways to make both sides 'work'.

"Say goodbye to a large portion of potential players who will never
complete the training and therefore never find out about LFS."

Are there facts to support this ?

[Gunn]

Facts? Tell me what percentage of demo players have been guilty of deliberate disruption?

There is no complete solution. A few bad reviews written by ignorant amateurs will not bring LFS to its knees. Should decent people suffer a delay in trying the demo because of a handful of idiots? People are confusing two issues here. One is deliberate disruption (wrecking etc) and the other is inexperienced driving (innocent mistakes that cause accidents). These two issues are unlikely to share a common solution.

On demo you can fully expect your fellow racer to be unskilled and unknowing of racecraft. Most of these people only know online gaming from FPS and role-playing games, some have played arcade racers like the GT series but LFS is their first simulator. So some chaos is par for the course, but this is not wrecking, it is the reality of the rookie racing world. Since ALL demo users must accept that they race in this environment, and new players will keep on arriving, attitudes aren't likely to change any time soon and perhaps that is how it should be.

We all have been frustrated or annoyed at disruptive behaviour and we all feel like some action will appease us so we welcome changes that seem to address the issues. But do they? We can not stop disruptive people from wanting to be disruptive but we can identify some things that allow this activity to flourish. One of the things I would urge people not to identify as disruptive behaviour is inexperienced driving. One of the things that we can be fairly sure of is that the anonymous stature of a demo racer breeds mischief. The fact that they have not made an investment is another detractor from their commitment to being civil online. Well we can't make them pay for the demo (even though it trumps many fully working titles in its own right), but we can perhaps take steps to make them less anonymous, as stated in some previous posts, and make them easier to ban.

Training naughty boys and girls to drive better will probably not erase their mean streak towards others if that is their nature. If any measures are taken to reduce disruptive behaviour they should not detract from the normal function or the appeal of LFS. They should not stop decent people from trying the software right away. A demo should demonstrate major features, graphics, sound and playability etc. When I try a game demo I am looking to make a decision on that game right then and there. I won't be playing a demo for several weeks or months, the reason I downloaded a demo was to try the game. A poor demo does not allow you to try all of the main features and these are frustrating as I'm sure most of us will attest. A real demo like LFS has gives you the chance to see how this sim really is. You can jump in right away and sample the physics, the online playability and test most things right away. Now that's a comprehensive demo and in my opinion will attract sim racers regardless of demo server antics.

[ColeusRattus]

The wrecking in Demo servers is really annoying, as I happen to run i nto at least one every time I jon a public emo server nowadays.

I agree that registering (especially with a valid e-mail adress) will stop many people from playing.

I agree too that wreckers leave many possible customers quite frustrated and not in the mood tobuy LfS.

So, what if we had a rudimentary registration for demo users? Like when you click on multiplayer, you get a dialog which asks you to chose a name, a password (and a confirmation field) with no need to give away any personal info. If this would then be stored in the registry, simply unzipping the game folder again would not give you the opportunity to rechose a name and password.

Another aproach: server admins can set certain training lessons to be completed to be able to join. If you try to join one of these servers, you will be automatically redirected to the particular training. That way, we could have slightly protected public servers and the "run'n'gun" ones.

[Vykos69]

Vykos, when you say " think about it: Any regulation to the demo will
decrease the use of it, and the sales." Well, precisely, i HAVE thought
about it and that very sentence seems to contradict itself. The USE of
the demo IS the problem, some people USE the demo INSTEAD of buying
the full game, this is where it is NOT increasing the sales. I read more
and more about how demo is not helping LFS by giving it a bad name.
So, is it the very fact that sales are affected by this that you contest,
or is it because you are not a demo user and haven't witnessed this?

See, yourself are just putting it up: registration will make the demo more useful for registered user, why should he buy S2 then? And you even decrease the number of possible players. I also wonder where you read bad infos about LFS Demo etc. The only place I read about it, is here, and then people get the good answer: "Go, buy S2, no wreckers there!". Besides the fact, that the sales going on well (germany increased from 19.8 to 20.5% in the license pie over last 2 months :D ). If people start thinking, how they can get better and cleaner races in the demo, they can even put up private servers or go and buy S2. Dont change the current system, instead of killing your brain with thoughts about it, you all should go visit demo servers from time to time and tell them how great S2 is ;)

[tailing]

I gotta agree with Vykos, this subject comes up regularly and there just isn't any real solution to this problem.

[Lola Popeye]

Besides the fact, that the sales going on well (germany increased from 19.8 to 20.5% in the license pie over last 2 months :D ).

That doesnt actually mean LFS sales are going well, just that you guys are taking over :)

[ColeusRattus]

That doesnt actually mean LFS sales are going well, just that you guys are taking over :)

Yeah, always ze germans wanting to take everything over... I bet we austrians will be the first victims... as always :D

[B2B@300]

I like to return once in a while to our demo server, because mostly there are people from my country, but because of idiots, i disconnect 2 minutes later.
So please, tell me if there is a solution for this?

Setup a private server for you and your friends on demo.. then you will have no problems.. if you want others to come and join also, post the password on the forum or pm to intersted individuals. Thought that's what CRC was doing though but doesn't seem to have happened :shrug:

Demo servers are full most times Im online anyway (and I'm mostly online when LFS is at its lowest activity), so dont think it will have any impact on sales by running 1 or 2 private servers on demo for those who want clean races.. and besides there will always be some of us that just enjoy going onto demo to meet new people and encourage them in this great world of virtual racing :) even though at times it seems like the demo servers are full of wreckers I still often find newbie's that want to learn..

[RAYfighter]

So I think the one nick (one account) per demo thing is very good, especially coupled with the need of unique email and the need to re-install (or buy) to get a new nick!

Altho a wrecker can still go from server to server, have his fun for the day and start again the next day: vote bans are 24hrs long only afaik

The wrecker wandering across servers is a trouble, but not so annoying. Once we will have them scattered across random servers, we have won the war - occassional wrecker connects, attacks 1st racer, 2nd, (misses both :D ), then finally manage to hit 3rd racer going around, this racer votes for ban, 1st 2 racers tap 1, other few needed to complete the ban simply respect the decision and confirm with their votes. And the wrecker is out. I could live with this.

But look at demo servers today. Mr.Idiot not only tries to wreck people (and mostly get specced for a wrong way) but also sits in spec spamming crap, copying players' nicks to fool newbies and make them vote for a ban.... you wouldn't believe how creative and patient they are! Not to mention iDi-ots team. :pillepall
And if you magically manage to ban him, you must keep a close eye on any new connecting player, because it is probably him again. And be prepared for him acting like an innocent newbie for 1st few minutes, of course... sigh.


These are my demo experiences which inspired me to suggest the unique nickname - removing the possibility to change it once you enter it.

[B2B@300]

These are my demo experiences which inspired me to suggest the unique nickname - removing the possibility to change it once you enter it.

A unique nickname is a good idea :thumb: atleast it will stop innocent peeps getting bad reps because of deliberate copying.. they have had registered nicks in chat progams and TS forever..

[Pootie]

in the early demo days,I got so irritated with the idiots,that I would log ip's,Then when a dumb*** came in,and I baned him/kicked w/e,I would take his ip,do a whois on it,and block his whole ip's ip range from my firewall,Just incase he didnt have a dynamic ip,Guess that meant that his whole city coldnt connect to my server,but it sure as hell cut down on idiots,and the server would still fill up... Dont just ban,block ip blocks :D

[Fonnybone]

Facts? Tell me what percentage of demo players have been
guilty of deliberate disruption?

Exactly my point, there are no facts either way !! Sigh. I can't 'prove' my
point anymore than you guys can, so we can't be sure. I just don't settle
for 'it's like that, why change it'. The fact that it's not a huge failure doesn't
make it successfull automatically. I think it could be more, but again, that's
just me, and a few others apparently.

Training naughty boys and girls to drive better will probably not erase their mean streak towards others if that is their nature. If any measures are taken to reduce disruptive behaviour they should not detract from the normal function or the appeal of LFS. .

Now this is where i'm dissapointed. No one said anything about training them,
the online 'license' i was suggesting was simply a way to 'waste' time so
people don't feel like registering 2-3 times a night to go wrecking. Others
simply do it once then it's done. I don't see the big deal. As long as there are
tests, might as well be on-topic, so obviously, these would be tests of online
situations. As long as they are there, might as well make them usefull.
I'm not asking for you guys to agree, but it seems you've missed the point
there. No one ever said they will magically make a wreckers behave ...
Seriously, do i come off as just a simple and naive person ?!!

On one side you don't limit anything and hope for the best, on the other
hand there could be some restrictions making it less interesting for the exact
crowd LFS DOESN'T want to attract. I don't think ANY person is good. Don't
you guys want patient people who appreciate a sim ? I mean, aren't people
who get annoyed by a simple registration already not understanding what LFS
is all about ?! I'm exageratting here, but the point is that by wanting to
attract people at all costs we risk attracting the wrong crowd also.
Popularity has a cost. Should LFS catter to it's devoted fans, or should it give
up and try to make as much money as possible ?! Again, i'm exagerating...


They should not stop decent people from trying the software right away. A demo should demonstrate major features, graphics, sound and playability etc.


As much as i understand this, i think it's over-simplified. One thing for
example, i don't consider people who NEED to try software right away, or
else they threaten to go, a 'decent' person, but that's something else...

It's only a matter of time before someone find's a way to say i hate babies or
something, lol. I'm not gonna reply since this is draining me and i have a real
life outside of LFS. I stated my opinion and suggestions, that's the important
part for me. I tried to make it as clear as possible what my intentions were so
you guys can think what you want at this point.

[RAYfighter]

i don't consider people who NEED to try software right away, or
else they threaten to go, a 'decent' person, but that's something else...

and you are not alone Fonnybone. :thumb:

[Gunn]

i don't consider people who NEED to try software right away, or
else they threaten to go, a 'decent' person, but that's something else.Hmmmm? Where are these people?

I stated my opinion and suggestions, that's the important
part for me. I tried to make it as clear as possible what my intentions were so
you guys can think what you want at this point.Everyone else here has done exactly the same thing, so where's the problem? People have varied opinions and here they are discussing them. Everyone will "think what they want at this point", that's what discussions do to a person, make them think. I don't see why you are getting all wound-up, people are just expressing their views.

[RAYfighter]

LOL???

I just really hate unpatient kids who can keep their damaged concentration on a certain toy just few minutes, not any longer. There are tons of psychiatrist debates how TV and its idiotic commercial scheme of working combined with """busy""" parents totally ignoring their own kids, can influence personal qualities of children.

I have read that this game was meant to be the serious simulator, not an instant arcade fun. Those 15 minutes of an introductory training might sweetly separate neurotics from nice guys.

(offtopic, Gunn, talking about inexperienced driving is not needed I guess. From many posts here it was clear to me that this is not a problem. Problem are wreckers, spammers, abortive voting for restart when the race is in progress, or for a ban when someone voted to stop their malice...)