I Wish we could have a track like this

[donrecardo]

I know LFS is all about racing so really the track has to be a circuit , but for just tooling around and generally dicking about it would be great to have a track thats a mass of interconected roads , like in grand theft auto and games of that genre , like a city centre scenery , where you could just blast around the roads shooting out of side streets and hoping no one is coming along the main road you are just about to join . Would make some great cat and mouse type games to provide a little light relief between real track races

Just my opinion

Don

[tristancliffe]

If you'd read the forums a bit you'd discover that LFS can't cope with muliple routes. The rendering engine renders whats ahead and whats behind. If you have a choice, it'll get confused.

So, until we have a new rendering engine, we'll just have to put up with race circuits...

[the_angry_angel]

Or alternatively compile a map of South City which is all unbarriered and not split up - with no routes; i.e. without goals, in a similar fashion to a blank AutoX, or the skidpad.

[axus]

Tristan? Then what is the skidpan with multiple cars on it and no layout? :nod:
I think he just means something like the skidpan, except with buildings and roads instead... which could be fun if it isn't too much modelling.

[tristancliffe]

Hey don't shoot me, this is what Scawen said back on RSC. How the autocross/car park etc work I don't know. They don't have islands though do they, so maybe it's just considered a short bit wide length of track? Maybe you can't but a building or fenced off area in the middle?

I dunno :shrug:

[Bob Smith]

You could make a multi-path circuit with the autocross editor, but it's not quite the same.

But then look at the pitlanes on some tracks, they are essentially an alternate route. I think the key difference is that there is something between the two paths, whereas between the different parts of South City (for example) there is nothing.

[donrecardo]

Or alternatively compile a map of South City which is all unbarriered and not split up - with no routes; i.e. without goals, in a similar fashion to a blank AutoX, or the skidpad.

Yes that would be great just what I was meaning :nod:

[MadCatX]

The rendering engine renders whats ahead and whats behind. If you have a choice, it'll get confused.
I can't see any problem here. Of course that game engine renders what is ahead and behind the car, because you have to see it. I don't know what it has in common with multiple routes. I am not a programmer(more likely REALLLY unskilled programmer) I don't know what Scawen said about it, I just can't see a problem here. Of course that there can be a lot of problems in some other things, but try to imagine MUCH BIGGER Blackwood CarPark with large cubes on it(cubes = buildings:)) Is it so hard?
Yeah, racing on track like this in "NFSU2 outrun style" will need a lot of coding, but for "free roam" you need only track without barriers, don't you?

[L(Oo)ney]

If you'd read the forums a bit you'd discover that LFS can't cope with muliple routes.

This isnt what he's after imo.

To make what he wants, you have a start, a "city" in the middle with multiple routes, and a final finish. No checkpoints.

All you have to do is get to the end first.

I think what scawen meant by what he said, is that you cannot have a track like a figure of 8, that actually loops over itself.

Dunno, maybe we've both mis-understood?

[tristancliffe]

:shrug:

I'll see if I can dig up Scawen's post so I can just quote him - then it's not my/our interpretation in question :p

Edit: there's a bit here - http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=158150. But I can''t find the specific post I want...

[jmkz]

we could just pretend to race an LFS version with all the improvements mentioned in this forum; when I was a kid, I would sit in my chair, turn my imaginary wheel and make car noises.

[ButterTyres]

brooom brooooom beep beep

Thats me LFSing round the Nordschleife hehehe

[DanISTheMan]

are you sure its not possible? i mean look at the demo version, on the map "car park", you can go any way you want to!!! so i dont see how its not possible...:shrug:

[tristancliffe]

Okay, maybe Scawen was wrong about the software he made from scratch!

[nikimere]

Okay, maybe Scawen was wrong about the software he made from scratch!
maybe:pillepall

[Nitemare]

i guess the problem is mainly with performance...

because displaying whole circuit at once is very demanding on hardware, circuit is cut into sections...
if you go round the circuit along the path, sections ahead of you become visible and sections behind you disappear
if you don't have path, engine does not know where you are in the map, and what to display...
so if you make a track like a car park, without path, but with a lot of objects, you must make all parts of track visible at once... and that means a big performance hit..

i believe multiple paths or something like that could be implemented, but it certainly isn't of a high priority right now

edit: now i actually read scawens posts.. it's not about displaying track sections as i thought, but individual objects.. but the rest is right..

[gp4racer]

I know LFS is all about racing so really the track has to be a circuit , but for just tooling around and generally dicking about it would be great to have a track thats a mass of interconected roads , like in grand theft auto and games of that genre , like a city centre scenery , where you could just blast around the roads shooting out of side streets and hoping no one is coming along the main road you are just about to join . Would make some great cat and mouse type games to provide a little light relief between real track races

Just my opinion

Don

I just want to drive a real F1 circuit, Spa or Monza, you know. This can be a real comparison for LFS team development, I mean, seeing the real times of gtr cars against LFS times and try to set up a car with the guide as a game like GTR or any other. This is just for curiosity, maybe in this way the people can see how real y this game and the big amount of fun tha you can get!!!:thumb:

BTW, the lfs traces are really great! Very welll recreated, besides, I don´t know if any guy of the LFS staff has been done this befote or any of the tracks of the game are coming from real circuits.:scratchch

[Blues]

BTW, the lfs traces are really great! Very welll recreated, besides, I don´t know if any guy of the LFS staff has been done this befote or any of the tracks of the game are coming from real circuits

No, real tracks (circuits) cost to much to license, so the tracks in the simulator is just "fantasy tracks", but I read somewhere that they have all been inspired by real tracks.

[gp4racer]

I didn't have any idea about the track license's....this is becuase the a lot of mods on the web..

[Goresh]

With a circuit described above, I'm just guessing, but, could it be an AI line issue that would prevent this? Meaning its not possible for the AI to use multiple paths. With the skid pad it stands to reason no AI line was needed, you can drive basically everywhere. If you however create a layout, with a start, finish, LFS creates an AI line based on this? This is how alot of other sims work, so as I said I'm just guessing here.

[the_angry_angel]

Mods arent too bad for licensing, as they are free, and tracks usually dont care. However, for things like LFS - which are sold - its difficult, as people are making a profit from their track, and they want a cut of this - so they charge a massive amount.

Shame really :(

[Dygear]

Or alternatively compile a map of South City which is all unbarriered and not split up - with no routes; i.e. without goals, in a similar fashion to a blank AutoX, or the skidpad.

I second the idea. I want it soo bad. I mean, things like Aston you could make AS8 or AS8 and just have it out the door. All of the tracks would simply use the main Aston unbarriered setup (and I think it does to tell you the truth) with just solid barrires in the spots needed. But end users like you and me are able to make new tracks by using Shift + U. Scawen, what do ya say. Want to do it, could ya do it?

[Marty502]

No, real tracks (circuits) cost to much to license, so the tracks in the simulator is just "fantasy tracks", but I read somewhere that they have all been inspired by real tracks.

Yeah... the Kyoto GP has some sections that are very very similar and others just identical to the layout of the Suzuka Circuit, which currently hosts the Formula 1 Japanese Grand Prix. Check this video of Ayrton Senna doing a qualy lap in it... can you spot the similarities? :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzrkKl6BaHc

:D

[Concorde Rules]

I was thinking of this!!

One HUGE Autocross map would be fab. Allow editors to have something like the CNR layout :D

10/10 from me :thumb:

[Primoz]

Hm... Just thought about this. Most people get a FPS drop when in AutoX, right? Well this could probably be blamed on the waste open space and the need to render everything. But in AutoX there are only small objects. Add a lot of buildings and you'd need A LOT of CPU power. Theoretically an open SO would work, but with a supercomputer.

[Concorde Rules]

Hm... Just thought about this. Most people get a FPS drop when in AutoX, right? Well this could probably be blamed on the waste open space and the need to render everything. But in AutoX there are only small objects. Add a lot of buildings and you'd need A LOT of CPU power. Theoretically an open SO would work, but with a supercomputer.


I don't have a FPS drop :/

85 constant... :really:

[JTbo]

Hm... Just thought about this. Most people get a FPS drop when in AutoX, right? Well this could probably be blamed on the waste open space and the need to render everything. But in AutoX there are only small objects. Add a lot of buildings and you'd need A LOT of CPU power. Theoretically an open SO would work, but with a supercomputer.

I don't think that object size actually matters as you can have small cone with more polygons than big building and more polygons = slower performance. Of course amount and size of textures is affecting performance too.

[zeugnimod]

Hm... Just thought about this. Most people get a FPS drop when in AutoX, right?

I actually gain FPS there. On the normal race tracks, I get between 20 and 30 FPS. On AutoX, I get constant 35 FPS. :scratchch

Yes, I know, its bad, I have a crap PC. :D

[jtw62074]

we could just pretend to race an LFS version with all the improvements mentioned in this forum; when I was a kid, I would sit in my chair, turn my imaginary wheel and make car noises.

I've been known to do that at 32 years old :D

[JTbo]

I've been known to do that at 32 years old :D
Ahahha, I stopped that when I entered teenage, well almost, in some rare cases I may fall bit too deep to my imagination still :pillepall :D

[jtw62074]

One way to render a track efficiently is to break it into sections along the length of it. I.e., there might be 20 sectors from the start line back to the finish line. When you're in sector 5 you render the stuff in sectors 4 and 6 (ahead and behind you). This is very efficient for a sim like LFS where the circuits are all closed and there's no branching off. If this is how it works, I can see why it might not be possible to take a right on a road on sector 5. You don't ever proceed to sector 6 or 4...

I don't know how it works in LFS, but maybe it's something along those lines, which could make it not really possible.

That being said, I'd have a ball with such a "track" too. Would be fun :)

[Primoz]

Well the more the objects, the less FPS i have on AutoX. In the best cases, it's about the same as on a track. Weird.