Game Of The Year! [Archive]

KiDCoDEa

2nd February 2006, 23:38

BEST MULTIPLAYER http://www.bhmotorsports.com/awards/4/winners/335

no real comments here, its so obvious that even non-sim world would love to have such a polished code. its polished to the bone, heavily feedbacked under dev and public testing thru wip project development approach. of course it started as revolutionary idea, so a very strong base to work upon was already released on first multiplayer code generation.

BEST PHYSICS http://www.bhmotorsports.com/awards/4/winners/342

theres more math in one lfs wheel tyre, than in a 20 car isi sim race. this aint a ride-the-slo-motion-interpolated-excel-table-of-values as in all reashes of the dinossaurical isi physics engine. the only real sim that could fight it off with lfs is n2003, mostly due to the feel it translates via FF and due to the more polished aero (something lfs is still developing). Still lfs is newgen, and in future, with a more complete code for the physical model, most of what gets output now as erroneous, will output more and more closer to reality due to a more complete model. the rare physical oddities are related to the incompleteness of developement due to wip dev nature of the project.
a net is always incomplete until its done. its full strenght can only be seen then, 100%. those lucky enuff to see and understand the strong foundations that lfs has layed upon for 5 years can see that the future looks bright indeed for full S2 and S3 stages.

Gunn

2nd February 2006, 23:46

Blowtus

2nd February 2006, 23:51

the lfs multiplayer still has the fairly large problem of random, violent collisions, upon very soft contact between players... still needs a bit more polishing imho :)

Hankstar

2nd February 2006, 23:52

^:nod:

Well deserved awards, congrats devs :thumbsup:

Tweaker

3rd February 2006, 00:51

Hands down, one of the most pleazing things to hear from BHM.... especially the physics award :up: :up:

KiDCoDEa

3rd February 2006, 01:23

BHM definately know their stuff. Well deserved awards.

Hopefully these accolades will make people notice the game who have never tried it before, should be a boost to the community too.

its not bhms, its the sim community who votes.
where its hosted, is irrelevant for the outcome.

Shotglass

3rd February 2006, 01:59

What have these BHMS people been smoking?

maybe they mean the race1 setups which are rather nice

Blowtus

3rd February 2006, 02:18

That's going to be really hard to eradicate though.

Don't see why. I'm no programmer, but working out a vaguely accurate, non elastic collision is not difficult.

Vendetta

3rd February 2006, 02:40

Yes! LFS fully deserves this award, awsome job devs :D

Gunn

3rd February 2006, 02:41

Don't see why. I'm no programmer, but working out a vaguely accurate, non elastic collision is not difficult.The distance between two cars is calculated after receiving packets of data from a client. A slight delay in receipt of a packet of data may cause slight inaccuracies. Prediction can only be accurate to a certain degree. A longer delay, or some other network anomoly (even congestion) may contribute slight inaccuracies of car distances especially when network latency (ping) is high. This is not a limitation of the software this is a limitation of the world-wide network of servers and cables that we call The Internet.
Watch a MP replay of yourself after racing on a server with a very high ping. Compare it to a MP replay from a server close by your location (low ping). You may notice that occasionally on the high ping replay that some cars seem to jump around a bit more than on the low ping replay. With a very high ping some cars may even appear to careen of the road for a second before straightening up.

I'm sure some improvements are possible but it will be probably impossible to eliminate the problem unless or until the entire world-wide network is very high speed broadband. Even then, some racers are routing through more than a dozen Internet servers before their packet of data reaches the destination. This is the imperfect nature of real-time online multiplayer gaming. I think where some network slow-down or severe lag spikes occur there will always be a chance of collisions in online racing sims.

Having said all of that, LFS has continued to improve in this area from the beginning. It is certainly a situation that effects many real time multiplayer games. As the world develops faster broadband technologies I think such things will be less apparent in future. Fingers crossed. ;)

xapexcivicx

3rd February 2006, 02:43

theres more math in one lfs wheel tyre, than in a 20 car isi sim race.
Wonderfully put, and insanely true :thumb:

J.B.

3rd February 2006, 02:51

theres more math in one lfs wheel tyre, than in a 20 car isi sim race.

Signature stuff. :up:

Blowtus

3rd February 2006, 02:54

The distance between two cars is calculated after receiving packets of data from a client. A slight delay in receipt of a packet of data may cause slight inaccuracies. Prediction can only be accurate to a certain degree. A longer delay, or some other network anomoly (even congestion) may contribute slight inaccuracies of car distances especially when network latency (ping) is high. This is not a limitation of the software this is a limitation of the world-wide network of servers and cables that we call The Internet.

Do other games experience this level of collison randomness? I understand roughly how collision detection works, it just seems to me that it needs an extra layer of calculation. At the point of collision, calculate the vectors of each car over the last 5 packets or something. It's only an internet limitation if you view the current collision system as unchangeable...

PLAYLIFE

3rd February 2006, 02:57

How about so that if the server has not received a packet for a long time, and then receives it, it will not create a violent crash. Basically, if both cars speeds were very similar before normal packet transmitting stopped, then the maximum force would be lmited between the two cars after normal packet transmitting continues.

Basically, if normal packet transfer not true and car speeds similar,
then if when normal packet transfer continues and distance between both cars <0,
then max crash force 2 G-s

What do you think?:scratchch

deggis

3rd February 2006, 03:03

This thread sucks. :shrug:

--> http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=69048#post69048

Hankstar

3rd February 2006, 03:09

I suppose as humans we have a luxury. We have an inherent and intuitive knowledge of physics from early childhood, e.g. you throw a rock, it eventually hits the ground. When it hits the ground, it either bounces or stops depending how hard the ground is. We don't need to be told the rock's exact weight, speed, dimensions, wind resistance, rotational data or density, neither do we need to be told the density of the ground or its grip levels to have an accurate idea of what the rock will do when it hits the ground. In sports, we can even become very good at predicting what will happen when we kick or hit or throw something in all sorts of conditions. Look at maestros like Shane Warne, Tiger Woods or David Beckham. They all know precisely what they can expect when they do something a certain way but to be able to precisely explain what happens to a computer in simple, step-by-step terms would fry their brains! Especially Beckham's :D

Poor old computers need all this basic information input in great, mind-numbing detail, and a car collision contains many thousands of variables even when modelled simply. Add to this the inevitable lag in processing such data over internet connections of variable speed from all over the world and it suddenly seems a whole lot more complex than "car1 hits car2, car2 gets dented on the side, car1 gets dented on the front, car1 doesn't work very well anymore"...and when you include the fact that Scawen designed the LFS physics literally from the ground up, it all seems quite inconceivable that anyone could actually be bothered doing it at all :D But I'm sure we all appreciate it :thumbsup:

Blowtus

3rd February 2006, 03:21

Poor old computers need all this basic information input in great, mind-numbing detail, and a car collision contains many thousands of variables even when modelled simply.

thousands of variables for a non elastic car collision? come off it :)
2 vectors and relevant masses would do a decent job of providing a framework for the collision.

Tweaker

3rd February 2006, 03:25

I think a lot of it has to do with the new damage model. Just a matter of time that it all gets better. And I think when it comes to racing simulations and this 'physics award' in general, it all is focused on the driving physics... and I think people realize that LFS is very advanced in that department, regardless of collision issues or whatnot.

Blowtus

3rd February 2006, 03:27

Imagine you're doing 100mph (or approx. 47m/s), and you've got around 50ms latency. You could travel two metres between each snapshot the server sees. The car next to you is doing the same, there's still potential for you two to get entangled by about a metre before the server will be aware of it, and that's under pretty good network conditions.

How do you resolve that situation? You'll have to backtrack, work out the point of collision, then determine the result of that collision and skip back to the present to teleport the cars to where they ought to be. This is going to be a jarring experience for the players.

your example is an easy to understand one, but fairly pointless, as the result of a 100mph collision is always going to be rather jarring for both parties. If you have both cars doing 100mph *next to each other*, and they slowly drift into each other, (ie, perhaps a 5mph collision) there is no potential for penetration of that depth (assuming 50ms latency)

And what's more jarring... being launched skyward 100 metres, flipping end for end, taking out the field... or having the car skip a little unexpectedly?

Boris Lozac

3rd February 2006, 03:37

Blowtus

3rd February 2006, 03:50

Surely if suggestions on how to improve the game were to result only in 'go and make a new game yourself' we wouldn't have a suggestions forum? :) :)
(not that we're in it of course... yes, go ahead, blame me for dragging this off topic :))

Hankstar

3rd February 2006, 03:51

edit: pointless post removed :)

My big long thing was more about trying to explain it to myself and you guys were all casualties :D

MagicFr

3rd February 2006, 07:08

Don't see why. I'm no programmer, but working out a vaguely accurate, non elastic collision is not difficult.

muhahah. joke of the year ( as math/physics programer )...

ORION

3rd February 2006, 07:17

I'm no programmerYou said it m8 ;)
Baisically, you have absolutely NO CLUE :D

Physics in a game are simply not the same as in real life. Just think about how freakin awesome and complicated LFS is. This shows clearly that Scawen can program as hell. Do you really think he can't understand m1*v1 = m2*v2 ?
Are you serious? :razz:

@kidcodea:
excellent post there! - Im still laughing :)

Shotglass

3rd February 2006, 07:18

lag doesnt matter as much when it comes to the collisions ... the collision engine acts up in singlepayer too

Eldanor

3rd February 2006, 07:30

...One other element stands out in the physics department for LFS is that almost every default setups that comes with each car are very good. There no need to spend hours trying to make the cars drive-able...

What?? race_1 sucks, default sucks more. Default setups should be reworked for the final version.

I agree with the rest :) Congratulations for the award!!!! :thumb:

EDIT: Ooops, seems everyone noticed the setup thing LOL

Blowtus

3rd February 2006, 07:39

You said it m8 ;)
Baisically, you have absolutely NO CLUE :D

Physics in a game are simply not the same as in real life. Just think about how freakin awesome and complicated LFS is. This shows clearly that Scawen can program as hell. Do you really think he can't understand m1*v1 = m2*v2 ?
Are you serious? :razz:

Wasn't trying to suggest that he wasn't a very good programmer, I just don't believe the current programming has reached the limits of the internets capability...

ORION

3rd February 2006, 08:03

IMO, the problem is that there will never actually be an impact, because the cars are either not touching, yet, or are hanging inside each other.
So it would make sense to say: The more they hang inside each other, the higher the impact speed must have been. This works only if the impact is elastic, which (however) means, that the objects don't change their shape (= the cars don`t get damaged).
The problems are:
1. the energy that is used for the deformation of the cars is not calculated, thus the cars behave like Billard balls.
2. if you have lag and your car moves into another, the engine thinks you crashed into it with like 700kmh :]
3. When you are very fast, you can drive through small objects and your car will be accellerated extremely, because the engine thinks at some point, that you crashed into the wall from the opposite direction, with very high speed.

Yes, it does sound weird, but that's my theory :D

Eldanor

3rd February 2006, 08:17

I think your theory is right :thumb: At least makes sense with the strange things LFS does. If you are fast enough, you can even go through some thigs (the starting lights in the drag field) without even noticing or getting damage.

Do you think this would ve solved by adding more Hz to the physics engine? AFAIK LFS works at 100Hz, right?

ORION

3rd February 2006, 09:44

Yea maybe, but for online play you will also need more packets/second, and this will require a high bandwidth. Sadly, only a few people have like 10mbit or more...
Im happy with my 1024 dsl :)

traxxion

3rd February 2006, 09:53

And another well deserved award for the devs.... this is fantastic! I sincerely hope this will be a boost to our community as well!
Anyway, big up for the devs!! Awesome!

:thumb: :D

Blowtus

3rd February 2006, 10:00

The problems are:
1. the energy that is used for the deformation of the cars is not calculated, thus the cars behave like Billard balls.
2. if you have lag and your car moves into another, the engine thinks you crashed into it with like 700kmh :]
3. When you are very fast, you can drive through small objects and your car will be accellerated extremely, because the engine thinks at some point, that you crashed into the wall from the opposite direction, with very high speed.

That's my understanding of how seemingly 'standard' collision detection systems work... it seems in this case it needs to be a little more involved than 'standard' though. Don't see why some basic vector calculation using a bunch of previous packets, acting at least as a sort of 'check value' is such a laughable concept, but like I said, I'm not a programmer :shrug:

Shotglass

3rd February 2006, 10:39

i believe its a deeper more generals problem ... the proof for this is that is also occurs in solo play and in practically the same way and strenght

its hard to tell at which rate the collision detection works atm but most probably its neither the 2 khz nor the 100 hz the inner and outer physics loop run at (see for yourself by drinving through the fence at the bl carpark from the outside slowly) and the problem certainly gets worse if you add lag to the equation ... but either way i assume the basic problem is lacking synchronisation between the different levels of calculation lfs does

ORION

3rd February 2006, 10:43

I guess the only ways to fix this are:
1. increase the operations / second (-> slow)
2. verify somehow, if the collision is "valid" - if the relative speed of the objects to each other is high enough for the distance they are hanging into each other. This would at least kill all the "lag-explosions", where the cars are flying through the air and are all over the place.

A higher amount of packets could help either, but anyhow S2 limits the online packets to 3. In S1 it was possible to use 4-6 not only in LAN, but for people with slower connections this was really bad.

I would suggest to allow those higher values again, and add a small function that warns you before you join a server, if there are too many people online, which will result in lag because of your bandwidth.
Maybe it's even possible to use only every second packet from slow connection members, and the other racers put this packet twice into their mp replay file so they wont get out of sync.

Another (probably good) idea would be removing the collision from a car if it has much lag, so it will have no clipping and will no longer be able to crash other cars...

[EDIT]
about the singleplayer "bugs":
when you are driving at 100kmh and have 100 operations/s, you already move 27.8 cm each calculation, this is quite a lot when you look at those barriers which have approx. this width.
with 1000 ops/s, we would have only 8.3 cm at 300kmh - much better :)

XRRoy

3rd February 2006, 11:14

2 of the best awards to get:thumbsup:

goodjob devs and everyone involved:D

AndroidXP

3rd February 2006, 11:45

...
The problem is, that collision detection itself is awfully slow already, so letting it run at 10x the frequency would kill performance.

What we basically need is a "sanity check" that looks at the relative speed a car had a few frames before the collision. Now if we collide and we calculate a collision force that would send you flying to the other side of the track, even if we just clipped into each other due to lag, we could look at the previous speeds and see, that both cars were driving at each other with 2km/h and can thus use a much lower force.

PS: Tyre physics run at 2000Hz already, just FYI ;)

axus

3rd February 2006, 12:29

Congrats to LFS for this spectacular achievement! Both awards are weell-deserved and I'm sure that over the coming year, LFS will consolidate its position as the simulation with best physics and best multiplayer as well as reaching new frontiers in some of the other sections :thumb: Where is Deleure now so we can shove this in his face?

jtr99

4th February 2006, 18:16

Another win for the Scavier corporation. Nice one.

AlfaLover

4th February 2006, 22:09

This two awards let the other sims like a university degree final project,
congratulations devs, i sense lfs have the best physics engine since i drive first time S1, and S2 change is impresive..

uff i cant wait for aerodynamic patch :schwitz:

Hyperactive

4th February 2006, 23:34

It's great that LFS won in those 2 (most important) categories. But let's not forget that it was vote based system and in the end these are usually won by the title that has most active users.

Still, great achievement by scavier (and LFS forums ;))

Mogar

4th February 2006, 23:42

Very deserved prices in both categories!!
Congratulations once again LFS devs, for making this state of the art game, i can't even imagine how hard is to code these extraordinary physics, and this excellent multiplayer! Thank you once again for your work and your time, and for sharing it with us for this small amount of money.. :) :thumb:

As I said on another thread, LFS has a very realistic physics IF you don't use bug exploiting sets. BUT to be competitive these days, you almost NEED to use buggy sets.

Probably the guys at BHM don't know that (well, they say that the default sets are great, so I'm sure that they don't know that), or didn't tried to be on par with WR laps.

OK, Simbin physics system is not marvelous, but depending on the way that you look, today it is better than LFS physics. At least you don't get extra speed if you put the nose of the car all the way up.

I'm afraid that those awards will delay the release of a new patch, since Scawen will probably feel on a more confortable situation, but what I see is that the non hardcore fans from LFS are starting to leave LFS, and as I said before, LFS won't survive only from the hardcore fans (Scawen, Eric and Victor won't be able to afford the developing and living costs with only the money from the hardcore fans, they will have to find a job, what would make the LFS development even slower, or leave the LFS development)

Hyperactive

5th February 2006, 00:23

I'm afraid that those awards will delay the release of a new patch, since Scawen will probably feel on a more confortable situation, but what I see is that the non hardcore fans from LFS are starting to leave LFS, and as I said before, LFS won't survive only from the hardcore fans (Scawen, Eric and Victor won't be able to afford the developing and living costs with only the money from the hardcore fans, they will have to find a job, what would make the LFS development even slower, or leave the LFS development)

The hi-nose bug, tire grip abnormalities and locked diff issues... all heard million times already. They need to be fixed, when they will be fixed is up to scavier and posting here changes nothing.

The bhms didn't decide to who to give the awards. The whole system was based on voting and LFS community knows how to vote.

There are still 2 categories left. One of them is the Flat tyre award. You can bet all your money to the "Flat tyre & LFS" combo.

deggis

5th February 2006, 00:41

OK, Simbin physics system is not marvelous, but depending on the way that you look, today it is better than LFS physics. At least you don't get extra speed if you put the nose of the car all the way up.
So what? Those are just bugs. Those can be fixed more easily than creating the whole driving feel from scratch to Simbin/ISI engine which it lacks.

(Scawen, Eric and Victor won't be able to afford the developing and living costs with only the money from the hardcore fans, they will have to find a job
As far as I know Scawen is the only one who quit his dayjob for LFS. Am I right?

Mogar

5th February 2006, 01:29

The bhms didn't decide to who to give the awards. The whole system was based on voting

I didn't know that.

So what? Those are just bugs. Those can be fixed more easily than creating the whole driving feel from scratch to Simbin/ISI engine which it lacks.

Yes, but this is taking so long to be fixed, and Simbin didn't stop developing their engine. They can even do that before Scawen finish fixing those bugs (if he is working on that, what at this point, I don't know if he is doing that or doing research for other features), since they have more people and more money involved, and I bet that Simbin has good programmers.

The hi-nose bug, tire grip abnormalities and locked diff issues... all heard million times already. They need to be fixed, when they will be fixed is up to scavier and posting here changes nothing.

And I believe that going against who complains about it here in the forum changes even less.

Ok, some months ago, I agree that it was pointless to be complaining, but c'mon, those bugs are since S2 L, that I even don't remember when it was released (before August 2005 for sure, because patch P was released on August, that is 7 months ago, and after patch P it was only minor bug fixes and language packs). We don't have even a single progress report (apart from the Scawen's kitchen progress report).

deggis

5th February 2006, 02:25

Yes, but this is taking so long to be fixed, and Simbin didn't stop developing their engine. They can even do that before Scawen finish fixing those bugs (if he is working on that, what at this point, I don't know if he is doing that or doing research for other features), since they have more people and more money involved, and I bet that Simbin has good programmers.
And how long you think it takes to develope ISI-based engine to something different than it has been since F1C? Already three games based on same engine: GTR, rFactor and GT Legends and it still has the same flaws.

And by the way GTR 2 by Simbin (or "Blimey Games" because of the recent hullaballoo) estimated release is summer 2006. I hope we see LFS physics patch before that. :shrug:

But don't get me wrong. I agree that we need a progress report. I would be happy if it was just one line saying "The physics issues are under work".

axus

5th February 2006, 06:06

Mogar

5th February 2006, 11:10

I'm sure we will get a comprehensive physics update soon (next few months). Scawen said that is what he will be working away on from January and he said that patient people will see progress when the time comes. :thumb:

And I hope that I'm still alive when it happens...... There is even patient people waiting for Jesus to come again to Earth, and they strongly believe that it will happen.

I would be happy if it was just one line saying "The physics issues are under work".

Me either, and if possible, a estimate date for the next patch release (even if he says 5 months or so)

axus

5th February 2006, 11:48

And I hope that I'm still alive when it happens...... There is even patient people waiting for Jesus to come again to Earth, and they strongly believe that it will happen.

But they don't know that what they are waiting for is actually being worked on at the moment. Why is it that whenever someone that is complaining about the nature of development of LFS and they are told to be patient they come out with the arguement "but what if I die before an LFS patch comes out?". Don't be thick, you won't be dying anytime soon through natural causes so unless you get run over by a car, there is still pleny of time. And even if you do die because you got run over by a car it is not like you died because LFS wasn't released. You can be sure that a patch will be out sooner rather than later (my educated-ish guess is for the middle/end of March) and it will be comprehensive and will make LFS' physics light years better than anything else out there today - its already the best as the award shows, now it just needs to be improved. And if you think Scawen would just stop working on physics because LFS got an award for it, then you are completely wrong and haven't read any of his posts on the forum - he works on what he feels inspired to work on and this has brought LFS so far. Not a money-hungry approach but rather enjoying your work and making a living at the same time. This is why the physics are so comprehensive even if they are not perfectly accurate - they weren't rushed but rather, everything is calculated in real time and no short-cuts were taken to save time/money. Nagging Scawen like you are will not help. Seing as this IS Scawen's "job" and his only source of income and not just a hobby, LFS is being worked on. Scawen said he'd be working on physics between January and the release of the patch and he said he would go quite for 3 or so months because physics takes a long time. The physics patch will come when it is ready. Seing as it is February and there is no physics patch out, you can be pretty sure it is being worked on. So just be patient or find another hobby.

ajp71

5th February 2006, 12:59

Mogar

5th February 2006, 14:10

Scawen said he'd be working on physics between January and the release of the patch and he said he would go quite for 3 or so months because physics takes a long time

Well, if he said that, why not on a progress report but underneath in this forum ? This is kind of a progress report, and this I believe that would calm down the people that is unsatisfied with LFS physics (or better, the way that ppl have been exploiting bugs) today.

I didn't see all Scawen's posts on this forum, so now we can expect by April or May a new physics patch. If it just fixes the aero bug and makes a workaround for the differentials, I will be happy. For now, I think that we don't need more than that.

Flotch

5th February 2006, 14:28

the tires are a big problem too.
BTW, it begins to be very boring to read the same things everywhere...:shrug:

axus

5th February 2006, 14:32

Scawen mentioned the making of tyre testing rigs so I believe that there will be a tyre model update too - low speed tyre physics and the regaining of grip are the two areas where LFS' model isn't quite up to scratch (as far as I know GTR's is worse in those areas none the less). Apart from the fixes that are necessary - tyres, differentials and especially aerodynamics - I also hope for extra grip on the racing line. Anything beyond that would be adding the icing on the cake. :)

added sun, Nov. 27th, 2005 17:00
>Patch Q for Live for Speed S2 released Hello Racers!

We've released a new compatible Patch Q - the first official patch for S2 Alpha.

New international keyboard support allows many more people to type correctly in their own language, and 5 new translations have been added. The new character sets include Cyrillic, Greek and Japanese Katakana! These can be typed naturally using the Windows keyboard support, and when online, can be seen correctly on other players' computers. There are also several other fixes and improvements, which are listed in the Patch Q thread (http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=3299) on the LFS forum. It's a compatible patch, so it connects to old versions and all the hotlaps are still valid - there are no changes to the physics. Now that we have a solid, improved version, physics is next on the list for development.

Have fun! :)

Download now : Patch Q (http://www.liveforspeed.net/file_lfs.php?name=LFS_S2_ALPHA_PATCH_Q.zip) (upgrades version P to version Q)
To Install : download to LFS folder, right click, "extract to here"

Dunno what that means to you. By the way - there is an update on the main site about the awards now.

Breizh

5th February 2006, 14:58

Let's do what's best for us all and for LFS, and rename this Forum the General Braziloviper Forum, and from LFS' next version and on, the game will be renamed Live for Vipers.
We'll all write soporific born-yesterday rhethorical posts, with a shot of sleeze and a pepper of thinly veiled patronizing towards the devs.

Development will happen with nothing but vague anecdotal analysis, no concern for the devs' own wishes.
I'll bring the incense for physics debugging and voodoo dolls to sanctify the devs' machines.

Anyone who even implies they're know-it-all's will of course be insta-banned.

Boris Lozac

5th February 2006, 15:23

What's up with this Brazilian guys??
You know that every master piece takes a long time to be that, a master piece.. I don't want a rushed patch, i want it to be a good patch... And don't ask for progress report, please. He could say, "ok, i think the patch will be sometimes in march.." and everybody goes YEEEEEE!! and then suddenly something unpredictable hapens, and he must delay the patch, in order to fix that, and everybody would go "No, he let us down, he promised in march, i won't play LFS no more". etc, etc, etc.. Let the man work, because you have no idea how hard is to program this kind of stuff..

deggis

5th February 2006, 18:17

LFS deserves what it won :thumbs:

Shame they don't leave the contest open to older sims, GPL/N2003 could have given LFS good competition in the multiplayer and physics departments as well as probably wiping up the sound catagory.
"Annual Sim-Racing Awards 2005"? That would have been as smart as giving Best Movie Oscar for The Godfather every year.

Mogar

5th February 2006, 23:09

A workaround that we could do would be a pact to forbid using locked diffs except for drag races, and using the high nose bug, at least on leagues.

But I really doubt that someone would agree with that, and it would be very hard to verify if anyone is using them..... so it would be pointless. And I will not drive on worse condition than others...

BTW, it begins to be very boring to read the same things everywhere...:shrug:

Yeah, but look the kind of posts that we have here in the forum. We have even some ridiculous and/or prejudiceous posts like the "Are there midgets playing LFS ? ".

I don't believe in the theory that being quiet here in the forum will make the LFS development faster, this is bullsh**. Scawen need to be able to handle pressures. If he gets angry with who don't like that we are using the same physics since several months ago (more than 7 months), what can he do about that ? Ban who is complaining here in the forum or cancel the license ? But if we all shut up and live him without a single complain, I think that he will think that his situation is more confortable than it is today.

Someone need to remember him that WE (and when I say we, I'm not talking about brazillians, but every LFS driver with some experience) are not satisfied with this situation.

And personally, I don't care if other racing sims are not as good as LFS. The point is that LFS is not good enough, don't matter the competition.

Just to remember Ayrton Senna, sometimes he had the pole position, but at the end of the qualifying session, he went to the track to make a better lap. Although the previous lap was good enough to be the pole position, it wasn't the best that he could do, so he went to the track to do the best that he could do, no matter the competition. He did it several times.

Tweaker

5th February 2006, 23:58

Awww come on Mogar, we all know the bugs suck, but LFS has been like that all the time, and they eventually get fixed. Even regardless of the bugs, people still play the game, and in my opinion, the bug issues and all of us complaining about it really just refines/fixes the game over time rather than ruins it.

Sure I agree that the development feels slower than it ever was at the moment (kind of making all the veterans feel like crap about the game currently -- it's just not the same), I don't like that either... but after all the grunts I've made about it, I just realize that I have to sit back and let the devs make their own progress... That way we get what we want fixed and perfected, rather than rushed and pressured. Whether or not you think it is bull to have someone say that, whatever... the topic at hand here is that they still recieved awards in the most important categories, regardless of the partial bugs. If we were so unsatisfied with the game, we'd probably end up playing all the other simulations that we love to hate.

LFS is still good. And for me to say all this while being a diehard fan just as much as you are Mogar, I know that you'll be back on the track with a smile on your face when the devs give us the fixes :)

theblackrabbi

6th February 2006, 00:23

Not surprised one bit....

Mogar

6th February 2006, 00:39

LFS is still good. And for me to say all this while being a diehard fan just as much as you are Mogar, I know that you'll be back on the track with a smile on your face when the devs give us the fixes :)

Not with a smile, but a BIG smile, you can be sure about that, even if the next patch just adress the current issues with aero and differentials, without any new feature.

axus

6th February 2006, 16:39

Scawen has already recognised the problems as issues that need to be fixed as soon as possible and is working on them now. Repeating them to him won't get them fixed faster - that is all we are saying. If you have some new issues to point out, go ahead. As I understand it from your post you should be satisified with the situation even if LFS isn't quite perfect at the moment, so I don't see your porblem. :Looking_a

mosquito25

6th February 2006, 21:38

Not with a smile, but a BIG smile, you can be sure about that, even if the next patch just adress the current issues with aero and differentials, without any new feature.
Scawen also replied there will be NO PARTIAL PATCH FOR THE PHYSIC ENGINE, cause it implies removing all hotlaps, and he wants to do that ONCE

Edit : I was reffering to this post : http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=37788&highlight=physics#post37788

Of course, As tweaker says, there will be an S2 physics update ;)

Tweaker

6th February 2006, 21:40

No, I recall him saying that he will fix the bugs that we currently have, and that is it for S2. There won't be physics features added on is what Scawen said as far as I can remember.

Shotglass

6th February 2006, 21:48

but fixing the bugs means adding new features (like a proper aero model)

Ball Bearing Turbo

6th February 2006, 22:22

No, that's just fixing a flaw in a feature that is already there. Not a new feature.

Shotglass

6th February 2006, 22:31

i guess it depends on the viewport
physicswise scawen will have to come up with a lot of new code and a lot more details in the aero model ... so you could see those as new features ... not big features you could put on a games feature list through

Ball Bearing Turbo

6th February 2006, 22:44

Yeah. Feature list still reads "Aero model" regardless though but I see your point.

ajp71

6th February 2006, 23:15

There's no point in trying to cover the bugs by limiting the setup hopefully by S3 cars with locked diffs will no longer be able to go round corners, cars with high noses will take off and closed top UF1 will be fastest. In the mean time let Scawen have time to work on LFS, we shouldn't be impatient waiting for the physics patch.

Cue-Ball

6th February 2006, 23:48

I don't believe in the theory that being quiet here in the forum will make the LFS development faster, this is bullsh**. Scawen need to be able to handle pressures. If he gets angry with who don't like that we are using the same physics since several months ago (more than 7 months), what can he do about that ?
I'm confused. Are the physics in LFS somehow worse now than they were 7 months ago? Did your copy of S2 suddenly "degrade" and leave you with less of a game than you had when you purchased it?

Everyone here tried the demo and liked it. They liked it so much they bought the full product. The "full product" (S2) has been unchanged as far as physics is concerned since day one. Suddenly, people like you think they deserve more, even though you have the same thing you've always had. Perhaps Scawen should just call S2 final as it is now, then charge extra for the new physics. Maybe that would get all the detractors to shut their collective pie hole.

Constructive criticism is one thing, but bitching and moaning does nobody any good.

BrandoonWa

6th February 2006, 23:59

All I have to say is that the game has made me a better driver in real life, which hasn't been true for any other racing game or sim...

Anyway, congrats on the awards, y'all definitely deserve them.

Shotglass

7th February 2006, 01:28

hopefully by S3 cars with locked diffs will no longer be able to go round corners

im getting tired of you posting this nonsense ... a car with a locked diff can take a corner just as well as one with an open diff the only difference is that the inside wheel slips a little but theres alsmost no weight on that wheel anyway so it hardly matters

Kashopi

7th February 2006, 11:42

Keep up the good work , devs!
Congratulations , you deserved the award!

Gunn

7th February 2006, 12:05

Constructive criticism is one thing, but bitching and moaning does nobody any good.Give this man some cake. No no, not that fairy cheesecake crap, give him a huge chunk of that chocolately-delicious slab of decadence from that plate on table four.

Huru-aito

7th February 2006, 20:19

I don't believe in the theory that being quiet here in the forum will make the LFS development faster, this is bullsh**.

Whining about the same, already mentioned things on and on won't affect the patch schedule (if there'd be one) either. You just make a fool of yourself and make people angry. If you'd have something new to criticize I guess it'd face a more positive audience here.

I agree with your opinions though, the bugs (or lack of refinement) are serious and affect the racing quite a lot. You just won't achieve anything by shouting about the known issues - might as well just calm down and start doing something else?

driving-school

9th February 2006, 00:42

A paper about collisions and deformations:
http://pwp.netcabo.pt/0175938601/omicron/d4md.xml

deggis

12th February 2006, 22:39

\:D/

http://www.bhmotorsports.com/awards/4/winners/370

Check also the Flat Tyre award... which didn't went to LFS (most of the voters probably didn't read what it meant) nor rFactor.

PS. I bet rFactor fans goes crazy at rscnet.org after this... :)

ekze

12th February 2006, 23:15

Woohoo!
Grats LFS Team!
:huepfenic :banana: :smileyrai :balloons: :lovies: :bounce8: :laola:

Stellios

12th February 2006, 23:49

Congratulations devs, well deserved.

the_angry_angel

13th February 2006, 00:25

woot.

deggis

13th February 2006, 03:34

woot.
I can smell the thrill.

Shotglass

13th February 2006, 04:14

grats ... lfs won all the important categories

axus

13th February 2006, 05:33

WOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO :thumb:
YEAH! Nice! Very well deserved! For a true racer, those three are indeed the most important categories. :D

BuddhaBing

13th February 2006, 06:16

Congratulations to the LFS team! There was some stiff competition this year which makes your accomplishment all the more impressive.

For those who missed it, LFS S2 also picked up the AutoSimSport 2005 Readers Awards Best Simulation prize: http://www.autosimsport.com/issues/autosimsport_janfeb_2006.zip

Hyperactive

13th February 2006, 06:26

Very nice achievements for an alpha release :D

woodbine

13th February 2006, 08:33

LFS players knew it before but now everyone knows which sim is the best. Excellent job, devs! :thumb:

windmouse

13th February 2006, 10:10

LFS not only gets best multiplayer and best physics award, but also becomes
GAME OF THE YEAR 2005
at BHMS
congratulations:thumb:

edit: here's the link http://www.bhmotorsports.com/awards/4/winners/370

holycow

13th February 2006, 10:47

What goes around, comes around! :)

well done to the devs, and the community supporting LFS, keep up the great work!

Shotglass

13th February 2006, 12:09

seriously though im getting tired of people stating lfs is alpha ... sure its a wip project/release ... but its still a commercial product and what we all have sitting on our drives is the current iteration of the ever developing lfs ... not some underdeveloped alpha

evans

13th February 2006, 12:34

Fantastic :thumb: :D

DodgeRacer

13th February 2006, 14:24

I had doubts LFS was game of the year, but i figured the rfactor fanboys would outvote us, awsome :D

KiDCoDEa

15th February 2006, 20:51

GAME OF THE YEAR!
http://www.bhmotorsports.com/images/awards/nominees/370_large_best_game.jpg

edited original post title.
(mr mod please edit thread title to exact same)

tristancliffe

15th February 2006, 21:07

Jakg

15th February 2006, 21:33

Game of the Year, and it's only Alpha version of 66% of the game, and a patch will be coming soon (ish) to make it even better AND it'll be developed continuously (kitchen repair breaks aside) for the foreseeable future.

Does any other title have a look in? :phmmm, so when people are crying out for the physics to be "fixed" and we are waiting for a physics patch, we STILL win an award for having the best. God were lucky!