DX9 or DX10 graphics? what about sampled sound?

[Bodhidharmazen]

Are all of these planned upgrades?

[Jakg]

How is "sampled sound" an "upgrade"? I prefer synthesized to sampled, even if it doesn't have the "WOW" factor, it gives more information on the car.

[Bodhidharmazen]

There is nothing like real sound, it should give you even more info about the car (if done right). What makes you think the opposite?

[ColeusRattus]

There is nothing like real sound, it should give you even more info about the car (if done right). What makes you think the opposite?

Not at all. Canned, presampled sound give you way less info, because they are *drumroll* PRESAMPLED. The sounds we have now are generated dynamically, thus really giving info about what the car is doing.

[Jakg]

There is nothing like real sound, it should give you even more info about the car (if done right). What makes you think the opposite?
GTR2 - i always get EXACTLY the same "VROOM" noise. It gives NO feedback at all, it's just "at RPM x play revxxx.wav", LFS gives me more information because the sounds are actually tied to the car itself

[Electrik Kar]

The synthesized sounds are getting fairly close to the quality of sampled sounds anyway. Take DaveWS's latest XFR/UFR sounds- they sound pretty much like something out of CSR. The base engine needs to be worked on at some point (lows are especially lacking) but I'm now pretty convinced that you can get a decent result from the synthesized method.
Are all of these planned upgrades?

Nothing is announced at this time...

[MAGGOT]

There is nothing like real sound, it should give you even more info about the car (if done right). What makes you think the opposite?


What makes me think the opposite? Every single racing sim with sampled sounds. They all sound dead; sure you get a pretty sound, but it's flat. It doesn't tell you what the engine is actually doing. [Edit] However, I think LFS should get samples for things like brake squeals, pebbles hitting the bottom of the car when going through the grass/gravel and all that kind of thing.

As for graphics, I prefer LFS' graphics over any other games' I've ever seen. LFS has a very nice look to it. It doesn't have all the special effects and flashy stuff; but that stuff is not realistic anyways. It all looks like crap as far as I'm concerned. Not to mention the added strain on PCs to produce these needless and ugly special effects. LFS looks best as it is now; the added strain is best reserved for other things; allowing larger fields, more advanced physics calculations, more complex AI, etc etc. These all take processing power, too.

[Slopi]

I think the most I could ask for in the graphics upgrades would be cars with a higher polly count. Nothing extreme really, just better than what it currently is :)

[BruTaLysT]

I think the most I could ask for in the graphics upgrades would be cars with a higher polly count. Nothing extreme really, just better than what it currently is :)

I would suggest Normal Mapping onto the same poly models instead of upping the polycount since they are high enough as it is, or use an extra texturemap as a bumpmap to show relief on the surface area of a car, like u can see in NKpro where the grooves between all the panels on the car are bumpmapped. This gives way more detailed effects and requires no more poly's at all. Good sample is Doom3 engine where extreme low-poly models are being used and made look quite nice with some sort of bumpmapping (almost like the effect of normalmapping) that almost make things look round-shaped when it's actually square. Doom3 let us show what can be done with very low poly models combined with this texturing. Now take any car u see in LFS, it already has loads of poly's, combined with the same texturing method will allow for far more details. This kind of texturing will be perfect for simulating grooves on a tyre surface whithout the need of them to be added in the model. Now we simulate them with basic 2D images. They don't react to the direction of light at all, so they don't give an impression of depth.


Graphical wise, it's okay to me now, but it could be made much more neat and also efficient using more advanced shaders, thus not only to be used for extreme eye-candy but performance is a factor too. We need better multitexturing possibilities. High-res textures as they are being used now is totally ridiculous. We need more layers to work with, not just one. LFS is quite like Quake2, but it should be near to Quake3 graphicswise which is already old too, but allows for much more detailed- and texture effecient behaviour.

[CodieMorgan]

Are all of these planned upgrades?

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=27651

[MAGGOT]

I would suggest Normal Mapping onto the same poly models instead of upping the polycount since they are high enough as it is, or use an extra texturemap as a bumpmap to show relief on the surface area of a car...

These types of maps have to be high res to look any good IMO. I see these in rF constantly, and they look like crap because they make small grooves in the bodywork half an inch wide. Looks stupid, so you'd have to use a high res map to get the grooves to look the proper size.

As for DOOM3 graphics; I Thought they looked pretty bad, to be honest. I'd take a higher poly model over one with all kinda of fancy shaders and maps any day. The different maps make things look fake and plastic-like.

[wheel4hummer]

What's the big fuss about DX10? There have been like 3 suggestions this month of people suggesting DX10.

[CodieMorgan]

These types of maps have to be high res to look any good IMO. I see these in rF constantly, and they look like crap because they make small grooves in the bodywork half an inch wide. Looks stupid, so you'd have to use a high res map to get the grooves to look the proper size.

As for DOOM3 graphics; I Thought they looked pretty bad, to be honest. I'd take a higher poly model over one with all kinda of fancy shaders and maps any day. The different maps make things look fake and plastic-like.


Agreed!

Bumpmapping should be used un track surfaces though, but not cars. But Highres bumpmapping can laaaaaaagggg down a 3d engine!

[Woz]

What's the big fuss about DX10? There have been like 3 suggestions this month of people suggesting DX10.

Its the 3 people that have purchased Windows MEII (Vista by its internal MS code name) once they realised that there is no real DX10 games to shout about. They have realised that MEII runs all their old DX based games at the same speed as their old rig did even though their new rig is twice as fast on paper. At least with all the resources that MEII uses it looks like the PC is doing twice as much :)

[MAGGOT]

Speaking of Vista, what the hell are MS's plans for us gamers? I've heard it says right on the packaging that Vista is not a gaming OS. XP is no longer sold in stores, so are they just selling us up the river or what?

[96 GTS]

Speaking of Vista, what the hell are MS's plans for us gamers? I've heard it says right on the packaging that Vista is not a gaming OS. XP is no longer sold in stores, so are they just selling us up the river or what?
Thankfully here, XP is still sold in stores, not sure how much longer that'll last though..

[Jakg]

Speaking of Vista, what the hell are MS's plans for us gamers? I've heard it says right on the packaging that Vista is not a gaming OS. XP is no longer sold in stores, so are they just selling us up the river or what?XP64 is still for sale iirc...?

M$ NEED Vista to take off, and with all the "Vista hate" on the internet (you buy 2 GB of RAM and then complain when the OS has the nerve to use it!) they need to make stuff like DX10 Vista-only to give you "an extra incentive" to get it.

Every time a new OS comes out people will complain about it being slow, buggy, useless for gamers etc - it happened when XP came out, and here we are, 6 years later, with a VERY nice OS out of it. If we all cared about performance that much we'd be running 2k/98/Server 2003.

[mrodgers]

This is why all the piracy BS, especially with Microsoft, is just that, a bunch of BS. I have a store-bought PC, which came with XP. I paid for XP, I use XP, yet I do not receive an installation disk for XP. If I was to build a new computer, I have to pay for another crappier operating system because I can not transfer XP over to my new machine.

And Microsoft wonders why Windows is pirated so much......

[elbaw]

How is "sampled sound" an "upgrade"? I prefer synthesized to sampled, even if it doesn't have the "WOW" factor, it gives more information on the car.
Hello!
I have 3 years ago LFS S2.But the new patches have a very terrible "singing enginesound by formula 1 (BMW)What can I do that I have a sound like RFACTOR ??
Please help me Georg

[tristancliffe]

Stop playing rFactor - that should cure it :)

[Bodhidharmazen]

I hope no one takes this personal. I see fanboyism here. True, LFS is the best sim, but some of you talk as if any kind of improvement would be wrong.

Sampled sound are A LOT better than syntetic ones. I guess those who oppose dont know about sampler for music? Syntetic sound of instruments, say a violin, are awful. If you want the sound of a violin you need to sample it and then integrate some algoritms to change the form of the wave to resemble a real player. FYI, the music of some movies and games are done this way, even when we hear a full orchestra.

Every sound in LFS should be sampled. End of discussion.

Regarding graphics, the light effects on LFS are really dated and need to change to dynamic. Textures could be improved too.

Note that I recognize the effort of the creators of LFS, they have done an admirable work, but still I do wish they had the resources to improve the game.

[Maelstrom]

I hope no one takes this personal. I see fanboyism here. True, LFS is the best sim, but some of you talk as if any kind of improvement would be wrong.

Sampled sound are A LOT better than syntetic ones. I guess those who oppose dont know about sampler for music? Syntetic sound of instruments, say a violin, are awful. If you want the sound of a violin you need to sample it and then integrate some algoritms to change the form of the wave to resemble a real player. FYI, the music of some movies and games are done this way, even when we hear a full orchestra.

Every sound in LFS should be sampled. End of discussion.

Regarding graphics, the light effects on LFS are really dated and need to change to dynamic. Textures could be improved too.

Note that I recognize the effort of the creators of LFS, they have done an admirable work, but still I do wish they had the resources to improve the game.
It would be true if we could isolate sample sounds from each part of the car. It is possible with some of them but the majority can only be heard with all the other sounds. Thus, for the sake of simulation we are better off with the synthetic ones.

[Jakg]

Every sound in LFS should be sampled. End of discussion....how is you showing YOUR opinion "end of discussion"?

Every sound in LFS should sound exactly like real life, and also sound like the car is actually MAKING the noise (unlike GTR etc). End of discussion.

[geeman1]

Every sound in LFS should be sampled. End of discussion.For sample you need the car to exist, which majority of LFS' cars don't. Also you need a huge amount of resources to do the recording. Which why Scawen went on creating the a synthetic sound engine instead of using samples. Besides fully synthetic sounds seem to do the job quite well.

Also as other people have said you need millions of samples to make even remotely as flexible sound engine and it still will end up being repetitive. Repetitive is the keyword here, sure it may sound good first couple of times while you are not doing anything unusual. But after a while the samples will start to 'shine' through and they will reduce immersion.

[buedi]

The more I play LFS the more I like the Synthetic Sound. Especially since the last Updates and the new Sounds they are really very good. Not because they make you shouting WOW when you hear them first, but because of the Feedback you get.
I played Test Drive Unlimited a few times and i.e. the Sound of the Corvette Z06 made me shouting WOW the first time I heard it. But while driving around with it I realized that I never knew what the Car did, if the Engine was under load or not etc.
If you would have asked me a year ago what I think is better the answer maybe would have been different. But at the current dtate I prefer the Synthesized Sound of LFS because they are really nice now. And I am sure the Sound Engine will get better over time. There are still a few things which should be "modelled" by the Sound Engine and increasing CPU Power and developing of your Devs will lead to much better Sounds, I am sure!

[Bodhidharmazen]

It would be true if we could isolate sample sounds from each part of the car. It is possible with some of them but the majority can only be heard with all the other sounds. Thus, for the sake of simulation we are better off with the synthetic ones.

What do we need to listen? The engine as it revs, tires stressing against the road or other surfaces, wind, maybe the sound of a crash. What else?

[Bodhidharmazen]

...how is you showing YOUR opinion "end of discussion"?

Every sound in LFS should sound exactly like real life, and also sound like the car is actually MAKING the noise (unlike GTR etc). End of discussion.

My bad, sorry about the attitude. Yes sometimes Im arrogant. :shrug: That said, I believe you agree with me then?

[Jakg]

That said, I believe you agree with me then?No, as i dont feel samples can do that - i used to think this "samples sound fake" was a bunch of BS but playing GTR and i believed it - it sounds "WOW" at the start, but you start to realise it's repetitive and you can hear alot about the load on the engine etc through it's noise, which you just don't get with samples.

[Bodhidharmazen]

For sample you need the car to exist, which majority of LFS' cars don't. Also you need a huge amount of resources to do the recording...

... Also as other people have said you need millions of samples to make even remotely as flexible sound engine and it still will end up being repetitive.

Cars do exist, thats not a problem. Or will you argue about that it would matter if the samples are taken from a ford k instead of a opel corsa? As for the resources needed. Thats true, but that is also why I said I wish they had them.

Regarding the flexibility of sound, nope that would be a mistake in programing, not in flexibility of sampled sounds. Again, take a look a the music industry.

[Bodhidharmazen]

No, as i dont feel samples can do that - i used to think this "samples sound fake" was a bunch of BS but playing GTR and i believed it - it sounds "WOW" at the start, but you start to realise it's repetitive and you can hear alot about the load on the engine etc through it's noise, which you just don't get with samples.

Bad programing. Anything that can be synthesized can be sampled (or synthesized above the samples). And it will sound a hole lot better.

Just drive a lap in the F1 of rFactor and then in LFS. Sorry to say it, but it sounds pathetic in comparison.

[geeman1]

Regarding the flexibility of sound, nope that would be a mistake in programing, not in flexibility of sampled sounds. Again, take a look a the music industry.If you mean that a sample can be re-mixed to make it different it doesn't help. The sample will still be the same and it will get repetitive.
Infinite number of samples would be of course better than synthetic sound, but that's hardly a realistic task to do. For example simple thing like listening the sound from two different directions makes a big difference. Basically synthetic sound will need a less complex sound engine when closing in on the realism.

[Bodhidharmazen]

If you mean that a sample can be re-mixed to make it different it doesn't help. The sample will still be the same and it will get repetitive.
Infinite number of samples would be of course better than synthetic sound, but that's hardly a realistic task to do. For example simple thing like listening the sound from two different directions makes a big difference. Basically synthetic sound will need a less complex sound engine when closing in on the realism.

Hmm we are not communicating. The sound of ANY car would be repetitive for your tastes, I guess :D because its always the same!

Again, if you knew something about sampled music you would understand. To replicate the sound of a piano, for example, I would need to sample an incredible amount of individual sounds. Right?

Wrong. I have to know what sounds I need to sample, and then, from them, extrapolate others. Hint, a change in the pitch can be done without having to sample the change in some factual waveform.

[bbman]

Bad programing. Anything that can be synthesized can be sampled (or synthesized above the samples). And it will sound a hole lot better.

Absolutely not... What is better: A music that's being played on the instruments or one where it comes from a box playing the prerecorded notes?

[geeman1]

Hmm we are not communicating. The sound of ANY car would be repetitive for your tastes, I guess :D because its always the same!Actually not. Real cars sound is never repetetitive, every little explosion inside the pistons sound different. Not to mention that everytime the engine load, throttle position, speed, position of the listener, position of the moon, ... the sound changes.
Real life has syntethic sound with infinite amount of variables :tilt: Again, if you knew something about sampled music you would understand. To replicate the sound of a piano, for example, I would need to sample an incredible amount of individual sounds. Right?You could just create a similar sound without samples at all? By synthesizing, you know.
This is the same problem here too. A sample will always sound the same. So to simulate a piano sound accurataly you would indeed need a infinite amount of samplesWrong. I have to know what sounds I need to sample, and then, from them, extrapolate others. Hint, a change in the pitch can be done without having to sample the change in some factual waveform.That's just it. In real life many other things change in the sound, not just pitch or volume.

[Lible]

You've got something wrong with that Piano theory. How come proffesionals use real pianos and klaviers (it's klavier in English, right?). They use them, because a synthenizer is NOT AS GOOD. Piano doesn't only change the pitch, it changes a lot. If you've ever looked inside a piano, you'd know.

[Electrik Kar]

He's right that a sampled piano will always sound better than a synth piano, and of course a REAL piano will sound the best- but we can't use real engines in LFS now can we?

It's probably not a good idea to compare pianos and engines though. There are some very good synths around, I'm thinking especially of the Steam Pipe synth in Reaktor, which simulates air passing through a tube and can turn out some very passable likenesses of real flutes and other instruments.

The more a synth system actually properly models what it's trying to replicate, the better the result I imagine. For now, the LFS engine synth isn't doing too badly, but It's still in the simple early stages. If ever perfected, it would totally leave the sampled route for dead. It would be an incredible innovation and I hope Scawen gets there some day.

[Bodhidharmazen]

He's right that a sampled piano will always sound better than a synth piano, and of course a REAL piano will sound the best- but we can't use real engines in LFS now can we?

It's probably not a good idea to compare pianos and engines though. There are some very good synths around, I'm thinking especially of the Steam Pipe synth in Reaktor, which simulates air passing through a tube and can turn out some very passable likenesses of real flutes and other instruments.

The more a synth system actually properly models what it's trying to replicate, the better the result I imagine. For now, the LFS engine synth isn't doing too badly, but It's still in the simple early stages. If ever perfected, it would totally leave the sampled route for dead. It would be an incredible innovation and I hope Scawen gets there some day.

You are right, for music there are good synths, and there are even synths that are just effects for samples. Thats what I think LFS should have, some sampled sounds with synth effects.

But I dont see how just synth sounds could do it.

In any case, the question would be... when can we expect an improvement on LFS sound system?

[Bodhidharmazen]

You've got something wrong with that Piano theory. How come proffesionals use real pianos and klaviers (it's klavier in English, right?). They use them, because a synthenizer is NOT AS GOOD. Piano doesn't only change the pitch, it changes a lot. If you've ever looked inside a piano, you'd know.

Well, I happen to play the piano...and keyboards, and computers. :razz:

[Bodhidharmazen]

Actually not. Real cars sound is never repetetitive, every little explosion inside the pistons sound different. Not to mention that everytime the engine load, throttle position, speed, position of the listener, position of the moon, ... the sound changes.

Well, my girlfriends used to recognize me by the sound of my car... go figure! :D

[geeman1]

Well, my girlfriends used to recognize me by the sound of my car... go figure! :DYou are not really thinking now. Of course the car sounds similar all the time, but there are still subtle changes. For example try this next time you drive your car: 1st rev it and listen to the sound, then go driving first push throttle fully on 1st and listen to the sound then do the same thing only on half throttle. Now repeat on 3rd gear. Is the sound the exactly the same everytime? No imagine that there are 6 gears in the car,there are in theory infinite amount of different throttle positions and up t 20 000 different rpm amounts. Now that's just the beginning. The sound also changes when load is different for example when you are going uphill or downhill. And that's not even scratching the surface yet.
There are infinite amount of variables that do change the sound (and not just the pitch or volume). As I said with samples you would need infinite amount of them. With a synthetic sound you would need infinitely complex algorithm. In a sim you don't of course need to take all the variables in to account, but still when closing in to the real life sound a complex algorithm is easier to make than record millions of samples of different states of the car.

And just to make my point even clearer here is a even simpler simplification: A simple addition algorithm. A number plus a number equals. With samples you would basically only know that 1 + 2 = 3 and 2 + 3 = 5 (two answers). With a synthetic algorithm you would simply know the algorithm: a + b = c. a and b could be replaced by any two numbers which then the computer would calculate and show the result. With the algorithm you would know the sum of any two numbers.

Simulating a sound is harder because there are variables that aren't really known or making the algorithm needs too much computer power to be realistic. Samples are a shortcut and they only represent the final result. Which is fine if you can record enough samples which turn out to be the downfall of the sampled system because you can never have enough samples.

Also considering that the current system in LFS gives so much more info than the sampled systems in other games proves why synthetic is the better tech. The thing that is wrong with the current system is that there are not enough variables and the sound is not random enough. The sound waves are smooth compared to real life where the waves are not smooth at all. This is what makes the sound sound wrong compared to real life. Samples won't just magically fix the situation, samples only work in the situation where they were recorded. The do sound right on those few situations, but anywhere else they don't.

Phew, a long post. Hope it makes atleast somekind of sense, can't be bothered to edit it anymore :tilt:

[Bodhidharmazen]

You are not really thinking now. Of course the car sounds similar all the time, but there are still subtle changes.

Great, now we are going somewhere. Ok, lets take the sound of your voice and my voice. They are different, yet, people can recognize them all the time, because they are "consistent with themselves".

Why don´t we hear simulations of a particular voice? Because it would be impossible to accomplish it with synthesized sound.

If I really want to emulate the voice of someone I should first SAMPLE his voice, then polish the model with the variables you talk about (the ones we can simulate or replicate of course) and then we could have something resembling the original. Not at rich you will say. Well of course! but RECOGNIZABLE.

Yes, sampled sounds are really different from the real thing, but are closer to it than simulated waves.

[tristancliffe]

Okay, voices. Lets say you have 10 samples of voice. How do you make it speak? The answer, of course, is you can't. If you synthesis the sounds in real time, based on air velocity, mouth shape, larynx tension, then you can make any sound (albeit an approximation). The more variables you add, the richer and more realistic sounds you can produce.

Same with engines. You could have 100 samples, but there is no way you'll ever be able to manipulate those samples well enough to make every sound that car is capable of.

Then throw in engine damage. How do you sample this? Find an engine with the right amount/type of damage? You don't - simple. With synthesised sound you can do what you like, and it'll sound (given decent inputs and algorithms) like real damage.

GTR/GTL/rFactor sound terrible with samples (for engines - they are quite good for other sounds that don't 'vary').

[auto emocion]

Ill add my opinion on sound and graphics, ill start with the sound.

Personally, i prefer sampled sounds.. even when it doesn't give as much info to the driver as synthesized sound would do. I played gtr2 for a (very short) while.. (then i found out about LFS) but i was blown away by the sound of gtr2.. especially the shifting sounds. In my opinion this realistic sound adds alot to the driving experience. So after playing gtr2, i found out about LFS and i was kinda dissapointed with the sound.. but hey everything else is better so the choise was easy. :smileypul

Now for the graphics:

I think LFS actually looks really good. So im happy.. but of course, if i had an expensive superfast pc i probably would be begging for more.

[wheel4hummer]

especially the shifting sounds

But cars don't really make a "shifting sound", do they? I don't hear it in any videos on the internet of race and road cars.

[auto emocion]

But cars don't really make a "shifting sound", do they? I don't hear it in any videos on the internet of race and road cars.

In the cockpit you definitly hear sound from changing gears. (from the gearbox etc) i just thought it sounded lovely in gtr2.. but i also loved the sampled engine sound.

[Bodhidharmazen]

Now for the graphics:

I think LFS actually looks really good. So im happy.. but of course, if i had an expensive superfast pc i probably would be begging for more.

This is a good point. But its relatively easy to keep current graphics for "not that fast" machines, while giving the ones who do have the ultimate gaming PC the proper eye candy.

In fact, its my believe that more people would buy LFS if it was "prettier". Not everybody is spartan, you know ;)

[tristancliffe]

In the cockpit you definitly hear sound from changing gears. (from the gearbox etc) i just thought it sounded lovely in gtr2.. but i also loved the sampled engine sound.

What gearboxes do you drive? Real gearboxes make very little noise when you shift - if they did, something will break/wear very very quickly.

[Electrik Kar]

Most sounds in LFS are sampled, including the gear shift sound, if I'm not mistaken. Even the engine uses samples to do what it does. We just need more appropriate sounds to deal with situations as they arise. Hitting a stack of tires shouldn't sound the same as scraping across a guard-rail, etc. DaveWS created a nice thread of sound improvement ideas- I'll try and find it if someone doesn't beat me to it.

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=23207&highlight=sound+improvement

[tristancliffe]

Yes they are - sort of. Even the engine sound comes down to a sample - the 'combustion noise', which is pretty constant, therefore can be sampled, and modified in real time by the parameters in Shift-A.

[geeman1]

This is a good point. But its relatively easy to keep current graphics for "not that fast" machines, while giving the ones who do have the ultimate gaming PC the proper eye candy.Some things could be added like that like realistic shadows and reflections to some extent. But some things need to work on everyones computer, things like realistic smoke and blinding reflections and weather visuals. Having those disabled would be a serious advantage.

PS. Shifting gears makes a sound, but you really can't hear it when the car is moving. Imho the sound is about right currently in LFS.

[Gunn]

Every sound in LFS should be sampled. End of discussion.Engine sounds should always be dynamically generated. I want to hear what my engine is actually doing and drive accordingly. Sampled sounds give you no feedback at all. For a simulator, samples are not acceptable. End of discussion

[Woz]

Engine sounds should always be dynamically generated. I want to hear what my engine is actually doing and drive accordingly. Sampled sounds give you no feedback at all. For a simulator, samples are not acceptable. End of discussion

Yep, agree 100%

I want to head the engine load up as I shift down and then release the clutch.

With sounds like those LFS produces I can hear if I am asking too much of the engine as I let the clutch out and take action before I lock up or spin etc.

In sims that use sampled sounds I can't.