That's UAC for you. Right pain in the arse.
It is for this reason that 60Hz is a populate rate for console racing games, as it means you either get exactly 1 or 2 steps between frames (depending on the games target framerate), for smoother racing. For console sims, they use a multiple of 60Hz, like Forza which uses 360Hz.
A good question. Sims are difficult to validate for a number of reasons:
a) Vehicle simulation is complicated and detailed, so there are lots of places and ways to get things wrong, or where there is no right, do things differently
b) Most people haven't driven most of the cars available in most sims, in real life, to make for the best comparison
c) Getting all the required data, at sufficient accuracy, to model a vehicle in the simulation, is arguably hardest of all (without having the real car in front of you), so even with a perfect simulation, the numbers fed in can still throw the handling off (GIGO). Working on the assumption that you will never get all the numbers you need, it all depends on how well the rest of the numbers were estimated.
d) Vehicles interact with the terrain, and modelling the terrain accurately for a completely fair comparison is another large headache in itself, one that has been tackled far less.
When you consider that any objective tests you can do (skidpan for outright grip, acceleration and top speed testing, making sure locked wheels don't steer the vehicle, suspension moves in a correct looking manner, throttle has the correct response, and so on), will only ever cover any one basic aspect of physics (at a time), it means you can pass all such tests, and not really have a good idea of whether the sim is accurate or not.
a) Vehicle simulation is complicated and detailed, so there are lots of places and ways to get things wrong, or where there is no right, do things differently
b) Most people haven't driven most of the cars available in most sims, in real life, to make for the best comparison
c) Getting all the required data, at sufficient accuracy, to model a vehicle in the simulation, is arguably hardest of all (without having the real car in front of you), so even with a perfect simulation, the numbers fed in can still throw the handling off (GIGO). Working on the assumption that you will never get all the numbers you need, it all depends on how well the rest of the numbers were estimated.
d) Vehicles interact with the terrain, and modelling the terrain accurately for a completely fair comparison is another large headache in itself, one that has been tackled far less.
When you consider that any objective tests you can do (skidpan for outright grip, acceleration and top speed testing, making sure locked wheels don't steer the vehicle, suspension moves in a correct looking manner, throttle has the correct response, and so on), will only ever cover any one basic aspect of physics (at a time), it means you can pass all such tests, and not really have a good idea of whether the sim is accurate or not.
Is this for a single PC or multiple PCs on a network? If the former, and you don't have a router that supports a whitelist, then you should be able to find some software that does. Or you could set the PC(s) to use your own DNS server, which doesn't update from the net and just contains a few entries you allow (and you hope people aren't knowledgeable enough to go to sites directly by IP, although presumably there's a way to stop that as well, as direct IPs are blocked here at work, but I can go to (almost) any site).
I don't think anyone finds that amusing anymore, Dustin.
Dangerous Dave, I've not upgraded my PC for a few years now, and I can still max out LFS single screen, or run it quite well in triple screen mode (although I don't have enough graphics horsepower to use FSAA at those crazy resolutions). So if a Athlon X2 BE2350 coulped with an X1800XT can do all that, anything modern should find LFS a breeze. Big name modern games are a different story, of course.
For a very brief list of changes, you could check out the patch list of the online LFS manual (which is probably new for you too).
Dangerous Dave, I've not upgraded my PC for a few years now, and I can still max out LFS single screen, or run it quite well in triple screen mode (although I don't have enough graphics horsepower to use FSAA at those crazy resolutions). So if a Athlon X2 BE2350 coulped with an X1800XT can do all that, anything modern should find LFS a breeze. Big name modern games are a different story, of course.
For a very brief list of changes, you could check out the patch list of the online LFS manual (which is probably new for you too).
Sounds like another horrid invention. A good tip to turn it off regardless, IMO. 
And the results from your latest thread:
Female Score: 485
Male Score: 829
The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!
That's an old BIOS limitation, nothing to do with the OS.
Full kinematic modelling one of the last last big things I've yet to add, and it's on my list for v3.2
Why is that?
Where's the car shadow gone?
Google ftw: http://www.cryer.co.uk/brian/w ... l_nt_rgsvrfld8002801c.htm
It looks like you didn't run you command prompt as administrator. What good are instructions if you don't follow them?
It looks like you didn't run you command prompt as administrator. What good are instructions if you don't follow them?
Great pics, thanks for uploading Ben.
Ah, then use the system32 folder instead of the syswow64 folder.
Luckily I was looking for an excuse to try out a floating bar chart.
If I had the data for the RSC days I could extend it back a few more years. Of course it says nothing about how active mods are throughout that period. Scirocco and Fonnybone have been quiet for years, and even Gunn hasn't been about much for around a year.
If I had the data for the RSC days I could extend it back a few more years. Of course it says nothing about how active mods are throughout that period. Scirocco and Fonnybone have been quiet for years, and even Gunn hasn't been about much for around a year.
Ah yes, I noticed this too at work. With v1.1 I managed to switch from using one ocx to another, but I'm still packaging the other ocx in with the zip (which was supposed to be for convenience).
I've repackaged the download with a readme instead that gives a link to the file and installation instructions.
To save you redownloading, here is the relevant part of the instructions for Win7:
I've repackaged the download with a readme instead that gives a link to the file and installation instructions.
To save you redownloading, here is the relevant part of the instructions for Win7:
If they are changing the physics bounds, although this is actually better for a mod, it does mean the vehicle should be multiplayer incompatible. So this should definitely get looked at, even if such mods are against the devs wishes, if it is tarnishing the overall racing experience. Plus it must be so easy to rework the physics mesh to allow ghost car like cheating.
I was being sarcastic about the poor standards with which some people here like to treat others. Everyone is entitled to voice their thoughts and opinions here, of course people don't have to listen but they shouldn't be attacked on such trivial grounds.
Did you not know, some people round here like to ignore demo users opinions and criticisms because of their lack of acess to full content. By extension of this logic, it should also apply to everyone who hasn't driven every single combo (which leaves a number of people in the single figures).
Doesn't Eyefinity trick Windows into think there is only one, larger screen? Whereas the drivers normally tell Windows that this is multiple screens being merged.
I used to have this working OK before I bought my third monitor, I just had to comment out one of the left or right device IDs in the softth.cfg. This was with an eariler version of SoftTH mind, before the device autodetection. You might need to turn that off with the newer versions (I can't start LFS without my sidescreens being on as well, unless I rename the modified dll to stop SoftTH being loaded).
LFS does already check memory for modifications and marks modded servers appropriately, so perhaps the system could be extended to include the memory where the visual data is loaded into.
What is actually the problem with other people's cars looking locally different, that would warrant this in the first place?
What is actually the problem with other people's cars looking locally different, that would warrant this in the first place?
I'd heard of this but I had to look up the trail to see exactly what you have done. Very impressive stuff! That's a serious walk and a long time away from real life. Did you need much in the way of savings to afford to go through with it?
Yes, that is true. I was 23. A simple check of my profile would have confirmed your suspicion. My post was not implying that I consider myself senior, or even wrikly-todger-old, just that I think the former term is more polite.
There's no need for insults here, and even less need for unjustified and irrelevant demo discrimination. Keep it up and you'll find your thread locked.
Having a wrinkly todger?
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG