Will this ever be released on any other format?

[stepp]

I was thinking along the lines of the xbox 360 via live. Imagine the graphics on thing, along with online gameplay across xbox live.....would be totally amazing.

Plus every person would have the same spec machine which would be another good thing.

[tristancliffe]

Or we can have nicer graphics and better controllers, all online on a PC. There's a reason why consoles only produce arcade games...

[stepp]

Ok so thats a no then.

Just wondered if the devs have thought about it. I bet they would make some serious money by doing this. Imagine releasing a demo via the xbox marketplace to wet everyones mouth then BAM release it, and let the cash flood in by the bucket load.

Oh an the 360 will have support for wheels and mouse input as it has USB ports, so the controller would not be a problem.

I just think the major and best thing would everyone would have the same specs.

Anyway just a thought.

[v4forlife]

i understand what you mean as far as the specs, as im on very limited machinary, but i dont think it would be good imo. firstly, we would need to wait for the full and totally completed version to be released. then the devs would have to go about transferring it all to a x-box readable source, and the dl's would be confusing...i just dont think it would work

[joeynuggetz]

You know how many kids would be like "this is too hard" and never play it again? For now, the PC is THE platform for simulations. I think catering to arcade junkies and teens is killing the sim/pc scene. They just dumbed down starwars galaxies for this same reason and forced me to cancel after 3 years. Not good.

[Gunn]

Ok so thats a no then.

Just wondered if the devs have thought about it. I bet they would make some serious money by doing this. Imagine releasing a demo via the xbox marketplace to wet everyones mouth then BAM release it, and let the cash flood in by the bucket load.

Oh an the 360 will have support for wheels and mouse input as it has USB ports, so the controller would not be a problem.

I just think the major and best thing would everyone would have the same specs.

Anyway just a thought.The dev's motivation for LFS is not money, thankfully. On a console, imagine how silly the menus would be, trying to change all of your car settings by cycling through values with your game pad. Consoles require compromise and kids who buy console games expect to be able to play and master those games. LFS would have to be dumbed-down quite a bit to suit the console market I think.

[micha1980de]

wrong, gt1 for instance, wasn't that bad bad at car setting up.
motivation or not wats the purpose of developing a sim that noone would play anymore because the needs of the many wern't fed? (talking of tracks, general improvements...)
it's the impression i get when seeing "hyperactive's" huge list of improvements.

[micha1980de]

post was magicaly doubled

[Shotglass]

and dont forget that the 360 is only a low spec ibm power-pc ... it would probably never be able to calculate the physics in their current form ... much less when they evolve further till s3

[micha1980de]

but it's a multicore ibm don't underestimate the power of parallel processing

(wasn't it the processor, that Apple was greedy about, but didn't got it, and now changed to intel because of that?)
i'm sure i read it at the "c't"

[Shotglass]

writing for a multicore environment isnt as easy and fast forward as you might think ... considering games its probably the next great hurdle as both amd and intel seem to have placed their bets in multicore cpus rather than faster single cores forcing game developers to code their games to run multiple threads

if scawen takes too long to release s3 he might eventually have to bite the bullet and pretty much rethink the whole code to suit the pcs well all have at home by then ... but up till now the boldest claims ive heard were somewhere in the 4-5 year range until games really make use of a multicore cpu

and still ... even the 3 cores of the 360 combined can hardly compete with the processing power of a modern x86

[micha1980de]

u-hu well i don't know the specs from the 360, but i doubt that one core would be faster than 3, since the limit of clock must have been reached.
Thats why we go parallel instead of faster.
Anyway, then what you think about the multicore of the ps3 ?

I read that a bunch (10) of ps3 clustered together could match one of the top500 supercomputers...

[Shotglass]

i cant find the numbers anywhere anymore but the actual number of flops the 3 cores could do didnt compare too well to what a x86 single core can do

and if you stip down the ps3 its just one of the xboxes cores grouped with a whole set of other cores which are even harder to use effectively ... dont expect to see anything impressive from the ps3s cpu anytime soon

and do you really think a setup of 10 ps3s which will be in the 3-4.000 dollar range can match a computer thats somewhere in the 100.000 dollar range ? (the real number is probably a lot higher than that)
those calculations are the peak flop performance of all cores and the graphics card combined ... a scenario that will never happen in real life ... pure marketing nonsense

[keiran]

I'm pretty sure the game would never make it to the console market. It would need a publisher and everything. Not even sure how the programming works for consoles either but I would have thought it would require a lot of work.

Keiran

[Shotglass]

ok finally found some numbers ... according to microsoft all the cores of the 360 have a combined processing power of 9 gflops and a 3 ghz p4 reaches about 6 gflops ... so in its current singlethreaded form lfs would run on a processor that has about half the processing power of a p4 3 ghz

[AJS]

After all it was a console with its arcade games which brought us the realistic 900 degree wheel and not a PC ... strange no ?

If people were more open minded they would see the benefits of a consoles but no console = arcade and it will never ever change. If you think so it won´t for sure.

The inputs aren´t a problem and the graphics aren´t either and i´m sure there is also enough CPU power with the next gen consoles.

In fact there are some people who think that it would be nice to have future simulations like FS 10 for consoles. You could play it the way its meant to be played on the release date because its already optimized for the hardware. Shorter development cycles etc.


I don´t think its bad to set a standard for mass production. What would it be like when they would build cars with a billion different not always compatible parts to choose from ? No one would buy them probably.

Maybe in the future there will be and more different hardware designed for games/sims only. Again it can´t be bad to specialize in something. If you work and play with the same machine that´s also a compromise. It´s not really optimized there will always be ressources wasted and not used because of the PC architecture.

[Hallen]

motivation or not wats the purpose of developing a sim that noone would play anymore because the needs of the many wern't fed? (talking of tracks, general improvements...)


That is an invalid assertion. If you focus on taking care of the needs of the many (in this case people that want to play flashy games), then by definition you alienate the needs of the few (in this case pure race simmers). You can succeed very nicely by focusing on a niche market with a product specifically designed for that market. If that is not what you want, then get NFSU on your 360 and have a nice life (might I also suggest the Google toolbar... it has a nice spell checker built in).

I agree that in the future, we will probably see more specialization in computers down to the point that you have a game/sim machine and that is what you use for LFS.

AJS "I don´t think its bad to set a standard for mass production. What would it be like when they would build cars with a billion different not always compatible parts to choose from ? No one would buy them probably." ... Uh, that is what already happens...:D

There already are standards, DX9, Win XP, IBM processors...
The 360 is just another "standard". Recoding for different targets can be a real challenging task. I would prefer the devs keep on with what they are doing for now. Maybe sometime in the future will be the right time to switch.

[Boris Lozac]

motivation or not wats the purpose of developing a sim that noone would play anymore because the needs of the many wern't fed? (talking of tracks, general improvements...)

I really don't understand you man..
If i understood corectly, you think that LFS is gona fail, and noone would play it because our needs are not fed???
WTF? This is the only game that trully listens to the players/customers, and implements what they want, and what is the best.. I myself played a small role in one of the patches back in S1 days(suggested the buton that can skip to the next song playing ;) )...
So, i really don't know what you are talking about..
Other part if again i understood corectly, is that LFS must go to the consoles, in order to suceed...?? :scratchch
I am surprised by your posts really..

[deggis]

"LFS on Xbox" makes me cry.

[Infiniti]

:shrug: As I am a PC fan, and only play console games when I go to friends houses. I would usually say its a bad idea and wouldn't get any business from the arcade frenzies. But with perhaps the first sim ever to find its way on to a popular console, it would increase sales to those consoles because the sim fans would buy the console as an alternative to buying and upgrading their computers. If consoles had a way to get downloads of patches and user mods, then its quite possible where simulation games can aim for. Consoles require television screens, computers don't although you can get connector cables, why hassle and just connect your brand new console into your big screen. :scratchch The latest console that I own is an N64 and I haven't touched it in a year, it goes to show that I am a near neutral bystander, course I do favor PC's a little more, I think consoles have the "potential":thumb:

[JJ72]

The fundamental advantage of console is isit's ease to use - plug and play, unitfied spec etc.

PC is another matter it's all about customization and fine tuning, just simply say you can't recreate the freedom in skinning on a console unless you give it a harddisk and tailor make a version of photoshop which runs on a disc. things like LFS ghost and LFS tweak wouldn't appear either, though these ain't the core of the game however I think it's an important aspect of a sim experience.

Of course there will be ways to implement these but then you are complicating the console -i.e. making it more PC like, probably to a degree where setting up a PC isn't anything more complicated. while extracting/importing/editing files on PC is much easier since there's an universal language, I couldn't see Playstation and X-box having remotely similiar architecture,and I couldn't see either one of those will blow the other away from the market and achieve monopoly.

I ain't saying that sim on console won't work but there's some contradiction in nature between these two.

[Bob Smith]

Do you know what resolutions TVs run at? The text on consoles has to be so big to make it clear. You'd never get all the text on screen that PCs can manage and keep it readable. Just try running LFS at 640x480 with 8xAA (since TVs don't really suffer pixelisation) and just look at the menus and the final positions list.

With so much needing to be changed, license fees for production, and generally targeting the wrong audience, I can't see LFS going onto consoles in the current state of the world.

[the_angry_angel]

Do you know what resolutions TVs run at?Not that you're wrong, but with a lot of people overseas running HDTV, this isnt going to be the case for long :(

But you are right.

[spankmeyer]

LFS on consoles, that could almost be an oxymoron. :D

By the way, isn't it very expensive to develope and publish a game on either Xbox or Playstation2-3 because of the licensing costs (and the MS/Sony takes a big slice from game sale profits too)? And nevermind the fact there has been ZERO good game conversions between PCs and consoles.

[AJS]

Do you know what resolutions TVs run at? The text on consoles has to be so big to make it clear. You'd never get all the text on screen that PCs can manage and keep it readable. Just try running LFS at 640x480 with 8xAA (since TVs don't really suffer pixelisation) and just look at the menus and the final positions list.

With so much needing to be changed, license fees for production, and generally targeting the wrong audience, I can't see LFS going onto consoles in the current state of the world.
640x480 ?

You do have a PC monitor no ? Then it´s up to 1360x768 ...

http://hardware.teamxbox.com/reviews/xbox-360/40/Xbox-360-VGA-HD-AV-Cable/p1/

The result; I don’t want to leave the seat in front of the DELL UltraSharp 2005FPW. The Xbox 360 looks amazing here, from the dashboard to all the games (http://hardware.teamxbox.com/reviews/xbox-360/40/Xbox-360-VGA-HD-AV-Cable/p2/#) played. High resolution videos look as good as when played on the desktop computer (http://hardware.teamxbox.com/reviews/xbox-360/40/Xbox-360-VGA-HD-AV-Cable/p2/#) that is also attached to the monitor as well.

I´m a PC fan and so is a friend of mine but he also owns consoles and the Xbox Live features with PGR3 really are amazing.

You get a rank and are put in race classes so you will compete with racers at the same level. You can also watch the races on xbox live tv with nice features :thumb:

Maybe just now it´s not possible or practicable to port LFS to consoles but there really is no reason why some day there should not be real sims for consoles.

[tehSnaile]

LFS with a handcontrol just makes me sick. I can agree to a XBOX port if the following is true:

* Failure to detect a wheel should erase bios, trash the TV and blow up the XBOX right in the players face.

A bit harsh maybe. :D Maybe I like LFS too much for my own good.

[deggis]

But with perhaps the first sim ever to find its way on to a popular console...
You forgot that consoles already have "first sims" Forza Motorsports and Gran Turismo. And because most of the the players think those are really the most realistic "sims" today (which is really sad) how can you sell them a real sim because their eyes are already blinded by Forza and GT4?

[Bob Smith]

AJS - I'm trying to think of the majority here, which means a TV. So taking a high end widescreen TV running at 1360x768 is going to be quite reasonable. But compared to a similar sized high end widescreen monitor which could be running as high as 2560x1600, the difference is still going to be immense.

Back to my point though, there are still plenty of people out there with 14" £30 tellys running the latest games from consoles, and the menu system can't exclude them, so will still have to be readable on such a display. Basically any console port would have to be markedly inferior.

[wien]

The biggest problem with LFS going console is the fact that the devs would have to buy a devkit and a license to be allowed to publish a Xbox360/PS3 title. And those things don't go cheap, I can tell you that. (The PS2 devkit alone, was about $50,000 US if I remember correctly.)

[spankmeyer]

The biggest problem with LFS going console is the fact that the devs would have to buy a devkit and a license to be allowed to publish a Xbox360/PS3 title. And those things don't go cheap, I can tell you that. (The PS2 devkit alone, was about $50,000 US if I remember correctly.)
Dude... why didin't you quote me? I feel so invisible... :(

By the way, isn't it very expensive to develope and publish a game on either Xbox or Playstation2-3 because of the licensing costs (and the MS/Sony takes a big slice from game sale profits too)?

[wien]

Dude... why didin't you quote me? I feel so invisible... :(:shy: I'll go hide in shame now... Please ignore me.

[spankmeyer]

:shy: I'll go hide in shame now... Please ignore me.

Come back Wien, all is forgiven! Let's cuddle... :shy:

[micha1980de]

Posted by hallen

That is an invalid assertion. If you focus on taking care of the needs of the many (in this case people that want to play flashy games), then by definition you alienate the needs of the few (in this case pure race simmers). You can succeed very nicely by focusing on a niche market with a product specifically designed for that market. If that is not what you want, then get NFSU on your 360 and have a nice life (might I also suggest the Google toolbar... it has a nice spell checker built in).


Maybee i wasn't, in talking about the needs of the manny, i meant the long awaited aero-patch, the thing about this aero bug is that it's hard to implement even with single precision it would use a HUGE amount of cpu power to compute the air fluiding the car(!s!) around.
I apologize for unclear talking, i didn't meant to make lfs "smaller" as it is right now ca.130Mb is really good in comparsion to other "racing" related programms.
Besides how long was the aero "bug" known by now?
Guess quite long.

Hallen
View Public Profile (http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=41922)
Send a private message to Hallen (http://www.lfsforum.net/private.php?do=newpm&u=41922)
Find More Posts by Hallen (http://www.lfsforum.net/search.php?do=finduser&u=41922)
Add Hallen to Your Buddy List (http://www.lfsforum.net/profile.php?do=addlist&userlist=buddy&u=41922)

posted by Boris Lozac
(http://www.lfsforum.net/member.php?u=14694)
vbmenu_register("postmenu_68356", true);

I really don't understand you man...

(you don't have to...)


If i understood corectly, you think that LFS is gona fail, and noone would play it because our needs are not fed???

Yes, in a way that the devs can't answer the urgent bugs and problems because of manpower.
And NO because the devs have a well grown community that won't flee in terror because of "incompleteness"
Anyway the longer you work with a certain programm, then in time you'd have some whishes to be fullfilled, and that will be quite hard if you're a threesome.

WTF? This is the only game that trully listens to the players/customers, and implements what they want, and what is the best.. I myself played a small role in one of the patches back in S1 days(suggested the buton that can skip to the next song playing ;) )...
So, i really don't know what you are talking about..
Other part if again i understood corectly, is that LFS must go to the consoles, in order to suceed...?? :scratchch

NO, but it should open up to more programmers that can help finding solution for problems.
You know the saying that 4 eyes see more than 2, well think of more people working for LFS in order to support the devs in their quest to programm aerodynamic-fluid-computation in real time...
Anyway i don't know from where you got that console thing

I am surprised by your posts really...

Unique people, unique oppinions, if it's possible to discuss them in a normal manner, then the better...

[Hallen]

I am a product manager and I manage multiple, complex software products. Many times, just adding more engineers does NOT improve speed or efficiency. It would take many good engineers months if not half a year to come up to speed on Scawen's code. Then, Scawen would have to spend a portion of his time just managing what the other engineer was doing. It is a bit of a vicious circle. (Not to mention the overhead, admin requirements, and extended legal requirements of having non-principal employees)

Secondly, working faster and putting out patches on random bugs quickly is a sure way to turn a product into a total cluge (hacked together messy code). He typically release a patch that fixes several things, then we go through some quick rounds of revisions putting the finishing touches on those areas. Then he moves on to other areas. It seems very organized and efficient to me.

The aero bug has only been around since the release of S2 Alpha, because that was when aero was introduced. It does detract from play to a degree, but it does not crash the system, and it affects everybody equally. Although it needs to be fixed, it is not as urgent as you seem to think that it is. Plus, I think it only really affects the two formula cars. If it really bothers you, drive the LRF cars.

[micha1980de]

Interessting viewpoint altough i've read about your circle.
But noone except the devs can say if their product is accurate or not, nontheless it's accurate enough to use it...
It doesn't matter if a problem was just found after it's introduction.
For me it looks like as if this aero thing was never really tought-to-the-end and yet to early to be brought to lfs.
Anyway i think the alpha state is still the best excuse/tag for lfs and it's dilema, of "work in progress".
Seriously i wish all the best and brightest ideas for the devs for their life-filling project, but you have to admit that their way of developing isn't the most productive in comparsion to open-source.
Sure i see your mentioned dowsides, but hey man it's just 1! (one) man coding (right?) so even if he would spend more time on the code instead of other important things his progress would still be very slow.

I don't want to paint the devil at the wall (german saying) but i wonder what would happen to Lfs if a serious attempt from another software house was made.

[Hallen]

And I can see what circle you tend towards.
You cannot see all the code like it were a model that you hold in your hands and spin around looking at it from every angle. The world is more monstrously complex than you can ever imagine... trying to code the real world is every bit as complex, if not more in some ways, than the real world. Bugs are going to happen, whether it is some open source project, or a private effort. With technology where we have it today, there is no way to avoid it and no simple and quick way of fixing them (every time, there are exceptions).
You can't have it both ways. It is the point I was trying to make before. If you throw a bunch of people and money at the problem, then you have to have either a very expensive product, or one that appeals to a whole lot of people. Very, very few people are going to pay thousands of dollars for a racing simulator, even if it is 10x as good as LFS. So, bigger companies will make products like NFSU, ones that appeals to more people, but sure misses the mark for race sim enthusiasts like us.

[micha1980de]

sad but true...

[Funnybear]

I think getting strung out about the aero issue is akin to banging your head against the aforementioned devils wall (German into English saying). This is just an Alpha, Scawen has never claimed it to be otherwise. We all paid our money with the understanding that LFS is exactly as it is now, warts 'un all. It is my believe that Scawen is beavering away like a good 'un trying to bring the community a patch that will fix many problems, and hopefully surprise us with some added content. What I don't want him to do is release some half baked code that he has mashed together because he feels under pressure from the community and that he needs to placate us with unsatisfactory content. I think he knows better than to listen to the great unwashed and I wished the great unwashed knew better too.

Scawen and the gang have a dream. They want to produce something that is tangible and top grade. They have chosen to make their living from building this simulator. If that is the case (Coming back on topic now, wait for it . . . .) and with me being a socialistic Capitalist then once a suitable finished version of LFS has been completed and the idea of Porting to a console market is a viable one, then let them do it. It's a large marketplace, one which personally LFS wouldn't have much of a place in but It might recoup it's money, that could do with a dose of realism . . .

But, with the evolutionary nature of PC's (Beware, lack of Console knowledge immenent) with Patches, upgrades and constant users Modige (Ige? Age? Moddige? Moddage? Mod-Idge?) wouldn't an Xbox just be simply left behind as a PC version of LFS devops over time? If thats the case you would have to seperate the servers, would then, depending on the market share, PC users be left behind as the Xbox market shoots through the roof and all efforts are put into devoping LFS2 : Redux - This Time With Guns. The Devs would be bought out by a big development house, the very thing they where trying to get out from. They would then leave with their millions and set up yet another kick arse company producing yet another stupendous Simulator.

What am I going on about . . . Does this make sense to you?

[Gunn]

For me it looks like as if this aero thing was never really tought-to-the-end and yet too early to be brought to lfs. For me it looks like as if your posts were never really thought-to-the-end and yet too early to be brought to this topic. You already know that we are using an alpha version and S2 isn't released yet. You already know you are using an incompleted aero model. You know it is not perfect because it is not yet complete. So why keep harping on about it as if it is some great surprise to you? You know it is being fixed yet you sound like you have been a part of the community for about five seconds.

Nothing has been brought early to LFS, rather we have been given the opportunity to use the alpha version and participate in the testing as a community. The software was at a stage where the devs believed that we would enjoy the new features. A stage where the alpha was a usable, if yet incomplete, S2. At the time of the Alpha release the devs identified where main improvements would be needed and stated:
By "alpha", we mean that everything is in place but not necessarily 100% refined or complete. So nearly all features that will be in the future Final version of S2 are there already, but there will be updates to physics, car models, track scenery, and refinement of features, between the Alpha and Final releases.
For those who have difficulty finding such information, or claim that nobody has told them that physics would be updated, just trot along to the main page of the LFS web site and read a little. Now you know that things like physics, cars, tracks and other features will be refined and that even more features are likely to be included in the final release of S2 where is the logic in asking if these things will be updated? We know the answer is "yes". We know that the devs already have identified issues then and since.

For those who like to complain about the time scale, the devs have always been up front about the changeable nature of the development and the impossibility of setting sure deadlines. I hate seeing people acting like they've been cheated or misled. The devs told us their plans and philosphy for the race sim, I know most people accept that open approach. Even if many people don't like waiting, we have little to complain about. All the "big" patches have blown everyone away simply because they were quality changes that weren't rushed through to please the masses. Where's the logic in complaining about how long it is taking?

If people can't keep their pants on long enough to wait for Scawen and Eric to do their thing then they should perhaps go and enjoy one of their other titles for a while until things are as they like them? I'm sure there are plenty of semi-satisfying rCade games to wile the hours away. Or as a completely novel approach, reading some topics on the forum can kill some time and as a bonus provide information that negates the need to complain about the bloody obvious.

[micha1980de]

actually it does..

sometimes i have a hard time understanding these native "slang" type english talking people.
But it's nothing different then talking to a "nordfriese" as a "bayer" these 2 german-slangs are very different in pronunciation so these 2 people wouldn't understand each other despite the fact they are germans speaking german...

But back to topic:

I don't want to see "hurry-code" too, so i hope someday far in the future when i'm old and grey i'll see a lfs full version...(s2)
:p

<--- can't wait so sue me, blame me for being impacient...