some progress in editor
made differend tail lights cause race car
made differend tail lights cause race car
im from the future and i have this in my editor already
interior creation
interior has taken some time to make, but its finally complete!
into lfs editor we go....
into lfs editor we go....
You can copy wire frame skin texture from garage inside lfs and then just paste into whatecer editor u use for for skins
Engine model made out of original TOTOYA SUPER MKIV mod, intercooler out of my Silly 260RS, cam sprockets are modelled by me in blender, turbo propellers, turbo bodys, exhaust manifold, fuel rail, engine block and intake manifold is modelled by me in editor.
Last edited by AR92, .
This is what crossed my mind as well. But if we take another step, we have the huge layout square and the other large car park I can't remember the name of now, it could be enough to open the objects list in the editor for modders. If people were patient enough to create mountains and mountain passes from concrete blocks, having the option to import 3d objects (or create from scratch) would mean super detailed tracks (keeping the triangle limits, like with the car mods).
Besides some kind of object explorer, "only" the option for custom textures (analoguous to car skins) and terrain types (grass, gravel pit, asphalt etc.) have to be added. To me, who is not educated in game development at all, seems like a way smaller task than creating a full-fledged track editor and a method to load new tracks. These could be handled like AX layouts, like they have been for years. Object count limit has to be increased of course.
There is an issue with long uploads through Cloudflare that is not simple to fix. A possible solution is to reduce the size of the upload and there is an editor option for that.
You can read about here: https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2090164#post2090164
You can read about here: https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2090164#post2090164
1990 Opel Calibra
This is my first car that I have made in Blender and also my first mod. I decided to make a car with a simple design such the Opel Calibra. I have been working on this for the past 5 days I think and I am satisfied with what the mesh looks like right now 
.
The exterior of the car is,I'd say 60% completed.The back bumper is not completed, the windows are not made yet as well as the lights and details(mirrors , antenna etc.).
Propably the model will not be ready for some time since I want to make corrections on the mesh before it enters the editor .
. The exterior of the car is,I'd say 60% completed.The back bumper is not completed, the windows are not made yet as well as the lights and details(mirrors , antenna etc.).
Propably the model will not be ready for some time since I want to make corrections on the mesh before it enters the editor
.
Hi Rony, I appreciate the input - thank you. As per the current approval system, it is possible for a car mod to be rejected after all the work is done. As the track mod/environment mod will take quite a lot of time, this needs to be avoided at all costs. Therefore, I think it would be better if there is transparency from the SCAVIER/track creators right from the start.
For that to happen, the minimum requirements for a track to be accepted for online use need to be defined. This would include licensing, quality, realism - some of of control over things. It could easily turn into Minecraft type sandbox (and that's a whole new topic).
Would something like the following make sense? Several approval stages before the creator spends considerable time working on modelling.
Type of track/environment:
1. Fictitious race track (i.e. Blackwood without open configurations)
2. Fictitious race track/surrounding environment (i.e. Blackwood with open configurations).
3. Replication of existing race track/surround environment (i.e. Rockingham)
4. Replication of existing environment
5. Fictitious environment (towns, cities, highways, touge - anything really)
Just imagine all the possibilities!
A1 - EOI
An expression of interest in the type of environment that a creator is planning. If its fictitious (i.e. without any replication of existing tracks) it is rather straightforward to obtain a pre-approval of some sort.
If it is a replication - the creator must seek and obtain approval from a relevant party. If no such approval is needed - that too need to be proved. This is to ensure that they do the work - not the reviewers. It would be best to sort out licensing requirements (if any) at this stage itself, before any work is started. Once everything is cleared - they would get the pre-approval to proceed.
There is no guarantee of the quality of initial creation. However, sorting out the above licensing issue would open the opportunity for others to re-create tracks (hopefully with much higher quality) at a later date. There are bound to be duplication of tracks - which is not necessarily a bad thing.
A2 - WIP
The Work In Progress approvals would be timely/completion stages (25%, 50%, 75%, 95% etc.) to ensure that the requirements are met. This would help the creators to see what they need to do to ensure that it will get approved - or to stop (without wasting more time) if they don't have what it takes.
A3 - Testing and review (LFS Community)
The track/environment would be open to custom access/LFS community to test and review, provide feedback to the creator - just like the current system for car mods.
A4 - Testing and review (SCAVIER-appointed review team)
The track/environment would officially reviewed by the appointed team (I'm not too sure how that part with the current car mods - but I would think it would be something along the lines).
A5 - Testing and review (SCAVIER)
Unlike a car mod, as a track mod would have a huge impact on LFS - I would think that SCAVIER should have the final say. But they could choose to get involved in the process or leave it in the hands of their review team.
I understand that when (if?) the track/environment editor is released, everyone and their mother will be making stuff and requesting approvals. Obviously there will be both positive and negative aspects with this. Positives - just like some car mods, there are going to be some absolutely amazing creations come out. Negatives - just like some car mods, there will be delays in approvals, people ripping stuff and trying to trick the requirements and generally wasting everyone's time.
There are some options around this:
1. Limited release of the track/environment editor. People who have proved themselves at making high quality car mods can request access to the editor - SCAVIER has the discretion).
2. No one said the track editor was going to be free - set a price for it (at least for the initial release until). That will stop everyone and their mother making stuff.
3. This is going to be LFS' cash cow. Linked to 1 & 2, SCAVIER can offer remuneration depending on track/environment/quality/size etc. created. They might consider the possibility of paying their reviewers considering the amount of time/effort required for the task.
This is just me rambling on a Sunday evening. I'm sure all of you who have been at this continually for the better part of two decades have more to add.
From a business perspective, what the ways you guys think the release of a track editor can backfire?
Thanks for sharing that info versiu. It fills our hearts with hope I'm sure devs have many ideas floating in their head about how to practically execute this, using an optimized and approximative approach. But all in due time, no pressure, no rush.
It's very interesting to think about it, so I'll share my view. This can be done in stages. For example, we don't need full dynamic weather at once. It's enough to have dry-only conditions and implement dynamic track surfaces, where the track temperature/grip and certain parts of it will depend on the air temperature and how much rubber is laid on it by the passing cars. Once that infrastructure exists in the physics engine, then comes different weather conditions including rain. After that, the graphical implementation of water puddles, rain, clouds, fog, and so on.
I didn't mention snow deliberately, as that is on another level of difficulty, which is not really necessary before allowing the creation of rally stages using a track editor.
I'm sure devs have many ideas floating in their head about how to practically execute this, using an optimized and approximative approach. But all in due time, no pressure, no rush.It's very interesting to think about it, so I'll share my view. This can be done in stages. For example, we don't need full dynamic weather at once. It's enough to have dry-only conditions and implement dynamic track surfaces, where the track temperature/grip and certain parts of it will depend on the air temperature and how much rubber is laid on it by the passing cars. Once that infrastructure exists in the physics engine, then comes different weather conditions including rain. After that, the graphical implementation of water puddles, rain, clouds, fog, and so on.
I didn't mention snow deliberately, as that is on another level of difficulty, which is not really necessary before allowing the creation of rally stages using a track editor.
Last edited by rane_nbg, .
*. Track editor releases
*no option to import any OBJ, track editor comes with every objects Eric had ever created with option to build on or manipulate object points and load in custom alps and textures,
*tracks are then submitted and instead of reviewers having to check for copyright or struggle to check all corners of the map, the community can instantly get access to it (like test this mod feature) and vote on if it has any gaps or errors and if no one says ewwwwwww or yo theres a issue at turn 4 then its all good but tracks must be fully polished no errors before its downloadable publicly in game so basically anyone can test it as much as possible for any errors or issues, because once its published theres no "update map" button
Simple, everyone wins
*no option to import any OBJ, track editor comes with every objects Eric had ever created with option to build on or manipulate object points and load in custom alps and textures,
*tracks are then submitted and instead of reviewers having to check for copyright or struggle to check all corners of the map, the community can instantly get access to it (like test this mod feature) and vote on if it has any gaps or errors and if no one says ewwwwwww or yo theres a issue at turn 4 then its all good but tracks must be fully polished no errors before its downloadable publicly in game so basically anyone can test it as much as possible for any errors or issues, because once its published theres no "update map" button
Simple, everyone wins
If there were to be a track editor for the community, that would be useful (road signs). 
Before that, I don't really see the benefit - especially before the physics/graphics update. As long as the developers are working on two versions, in my opinion any feature requests are pointless and a waste of development time.
Let the developers finish the big update first.
Before that, I don't really see the benefit - especially before the physics/graphics update. As long as the developers are working on two versions, in my opinion any feature requests are pointless and a waste of development time.Let the developers finish the big update first.
You must use the latest LFS Editor test patch: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/106792-LFS-Editor-Patch-0-7E8
Imported the model to vehicle editor. Fixed the size, added most of the textures and rims, Built the engine. Next i'll add the gauge textures, fix the physics and suspension.
Fixed the interior's groups and added it to main body. Now i'll import it to vehicle editor.
Geometry-based toon shading
1. Copy the whole outer body (for example in Blender software) and merge it into a one "outline" object.
2. Scale the outline object according to vertex normals (alt + S in Blender edit mode) so it wraps the original body. The scaling will define width of the final outline.
3. Import the outline object into the LFS Editor.
4. Remove the windows from the outline object and attach outline window holes to the original windows
5. Remove unnecessary points by joining them (for example panel gaps) and ensure that the whole outline object has the same smoothing group to optimize number of points.
6. Flip the outline triangles.
7. Set a black color for the outline.
1. Copy the whole outer body (for example in Blender software) and merge it into a one "outline" object.
2. Scale the outline object according to vertex normals (alt + S in Blender edit mode) so it wraps the original body. The scaling will define width of the final outline.
3. Import the outline object into the LFS Editor.
4. Remove the windows from the outline object and attach outline window holes to the original windows
5. Remove unnecessary points by joining them (for example panel gaps) and ensure that the whole outline object has the same smoothing group to optimize number of points.
6. Flip the outline triangles.
7. Set a black color for the outline.
Just chiming in to greatly support the idea. I see so much potential for this to extend the community and there is attractive business potential for LFS as well. Whether or not it's a popular idea, as a content creator, I personally would not mind having to pay a license for such a tool. Going along with a content review process that I feel the community is used to, this may help stave off poor quality content or unauthorized rips.
Another idea is perhaps an 'S4' product which opens users up to being able to play on community maps. Adding financial benefit to the creators incentivizes the creators, and our dedicated community, by and large, would be happy to pay for the access, understanding how much they get out of it.
One feature I hope for is very large map size capability. I like highways and lonng stretches to just cruise and go fast .
I would love to utilize skills I've learned from making BeamNG maps to a game which in many ways, I love more. If LFS would entertain the idea of a limited test run of an existing editor, I wouldnt mind getting an email about that and would love to help contribute
Another idea is perhaps an 'S4' product which opens users up to being able to play on community maps. Adding financial benefit to the creators incentivizes the creators, and our dedicated community, by and large, would be happy to pay for the access, understanding how much they get out of it.
One feature I hope for is very large map size capability. I like highways and lonng stretches to just cruise and go fast .
I would love to utilize skills I've learned from making BeamNG maps to a game which in many ways, I love more. If LFS would entertain the idea of a limited test run of an existing editor, I wouldnt mind getting an email about that and would love to help contribute
Last edited by TheStigUSA, .
Hello again after a long break. The car is completely finished and I will move on to the editor part. I don't plan to share the editor process here. Now you will be able to see it on the forum when the car is completely ready.
Imported to Editor. Remodeled air vents.
Imported the mod to vehicle editor. Resized the model, added the light mappings, built the engine and added the rims. Now i'll add the textures and build the frame.
I think at the end of the day, we must always consider and be reminded that LFS was never meant to be an open source/moddable/editable game for the public to contribute to.
And I'm sure the devs wish to keep it that way, not just for the personal accomplishments of all 3 guys but also to not undermine the efforts and tinfoilery needed way back during LFS incarnation.
Also if we have guys that can produce track environments at better quality and rate than Eric, I don't think that'll look too good on the brand values and operational concepts.
So yeah. We can propose and ideate all we want for a user-accesible track editor but right now is probably not the right time to implement such. Maybe when our devs are aged 80....
And I'm sure the devs wish to keep it that way, not just for the personal accomplishments of all 3 guys but also to not undermine the efforts and tinfoilery needed way back during LFS incarnation.
Also if we have guys that can produce track environments at better quality and rate than Eric, I don't think that'll look too good on the brand values and operational concepts.
So yeah. We can propose and ideate all we want for a user-accesible track editor but right now is probably not the right time to implement such. Maybe when our devs are aged 80....
Last edited by MicroSpecV, .
Made some details to headlights and imported the model to modeller. Fixed all of the groups, added some basic textures. Now i'll import the model to vehicle editor.
Oh, absolutely agree with that. I don't know this, but if Scawen didn't anticipate a downloadable car-mod system when he was developing LFS S1, S2 etc. he's outdone himself in the implementation of the whole project. Admittedly, I was not around when it was released few years ago so I don't know how it was on the onset but right now its pretty hassle-free for the end-user. On the plus side, there are always developments.
Of course, track development and integration in to LFS is a whole big deal. But I'm sure eventually he'll come up with a way to seamlessly do that. Hopefully only a matter of time.
Yes, agreed. Layouts will always have room for improvement to help build up different driving environment. But then again the question arises, should Scawen spend his time on developing layouts (again) pausing updates on tyre physics and other key areas that he's working on for years?
I think most of us will agree on this point. At the same time I believe (correct me if I'm wrong), one of the biggest issues that caused LFS to loose the height of popularity was the lack of content. Yeah, tyre physics could use improvements, graphics could use improvements and yada yada yada. BUT all of those were good enough and would keep existing drivers continually engaged and drivers continually attracted if there was a steady stream of new content (cars and tracks). Unfortunately that didn't happen until they decided to open up the whole car-modification scene. If you go back a decade, even talking about "vob" mobs might gotten you banned.
Look, I don't what happened with Scavier/Eric's input towards LFS content, but given the timeline of LFS S1/S2 cars and tracks, a whole lot of cars and tracks could have been released before S3 release (December 2015?) as S2 content, or after as S3 content. Yes, I agree that the open configs and updates are great, but why stop there? Is it the difference between the quality of existing cars/tracks vs anything new they would release? Were many cars and tracks made, but are on hold until tyre physics are finished (to be released as a big update)? Or was development on hold until physics were finalized (that's unlikely, I know). Hopefully one day we'll hear their thoughts on this.
Yes. This is key. But by the look of things he's looking after the server side too (I haven't seen Victor posting lately, so I'm not sure what's going on there). Its questionable if Scawen is likely to have the uninterrupted time that he needs for the tyre physics development. And what does that mean for the future of LFS? Should LFS content stay on hold until that time? If Scawen had an end in sight, he would push and get it done. I would assume there's still a long way to go, that may take few more years? That brings us back to my original question - should they consider a release of the track/environment editor in some shape or form for the sake of content release.
This is what I love. Its their baby. I was just going through the LFS development over the years on the LFS Wiki >here<. How amazing is that? How far have they come for such a niche team?
That said, as I understand LFS is the main source of income for Scawen. I'm not sure about Victor and Eric. But I remember reading that they had to consider alternative jobs since LFS license sales were so low. Where does that end up? Striving for perfection (tyre physics), holding of release of content (or no new content being created?) which sadly drives drivers (ha!) away and keeps LFS out of the mainstream sims.
I think right now they have a good thing going with the car mod system - amazing cars are coming up. If no new LFS tracks/environment releases are planned in the near future - I strongly believe they definitely should be seriously looking at opening up track/environment editing too.
Scawen/Victor/Eric - I love you guys. LFS has brought so much joy in to my life (not just driving, but all the hours spend on the forums, all the people we've driven with, made friends with over the years). I think many people do share the same sentiment. I wish you guys all the best in how-ever you wish to proceed with LFS.
Obviously there are good reasons to have a track editor at some point in the future.
However, I think Scawens priorities are getting the physics and all the other stuff (e.g. graphics) released so he can finally stop switching between the "old" public LFS and his "development" version. I think he mentioned that a few times by now.
Scawen also doesn't seem to do anything half-arsed, so any work on a public track editor will probably take quite some time/resources combined with steady community feedback-loops. Just take a look at the current mod system and the time he spent working/improving on it.
However, I think Scawens priorities are getting the physics and all the other stuff (e.g. graphics) released so he can finally stop switching between the "old" public LFS and his "development" version. I think he mentioned that a few times by now.
Scawen also doesn't seem to do anything half-arsed, so any work on a public track editor will probably take quite some time/resources combined with steady community feedback-loops. Just take a look at the current mod system and the time he spent working/improving on it.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG