HI David, really glad to see you here.
I've sent a email to your [email protected] sooner, before read you here.
There I gave these two suggestions.
David, I understand perfectly what you said, and believe, I'm not a begginer in machines development, so I have perfect idea that to achiece the ideal simulator, there is just one way: buy a car and go get a track!
But, I think I can explain better what I'm proposing here, that is just a way to get more immersion, not perfect, but better, and less "mechanical bull" than Stewart plataforms way.
As I said before, I see St. good for flight simulations, but for cars, with realy fast accelerations (longitudinal, lateral, vertical), it does not look the best approach IMHO.
So, my expensive idea is a short trail that permits this movement along with the inclination. The "kick" would be made linear, no more rotational, but the rotation would still be there, to assure the pressure of the inertial forces after the short trail course finishing.
I know that is far way to be perfect, but it looks to be hugely better than just rotation.
I'd like to see a weathy company like yours (how is going within this crisis??? hope the best), leading this idea towards a better sim.
By my side, poor side
, I'll try a simpler system, just thinking in small inclinations, and change of the distance between controls and seat.
Wait you back here soon. bye
ps: sorry my bad english. Some words maybe are wrong, others wrong placed, others I think I just imagine. Sometimes I have time to correct it with google translator, but not always. So execuse many mistakes.
I've sent a email to your [email protected] sooner, before read you here.
There I gave these two suggestions.
David, I understand perfectly what you said, and believe, I'm not a begginer in machines development, so I have perfect idea that to achiece the ideal simulator, there is just one way: buy a car and go get a track!
But, I think I can explain better what I'm proposing here, that is just a way to get more immersion, not perfect, but better, and less "mechanical bull" than Stewart plataforms way.
As I said before, I see St. good for flight simulations, but for cars, with realy fast accelerations (longitudinal, lateral, vertical), it does not look the best approach IMHO.
So, my expensive idea is a short trail that permits this movement along with the inclination. The "kick" would be made linear, no more rotational, but the rotation would still be there, to assure the pressure of the inertial forces after the short trail course finishing.
I know that is far way to be perfect, but it looks to be hugely better than just rotation.
I'd like to see a weathy company like yours (how is going within this crisis??? hope the best), leading this idea towards a better sim.
By my side, poor side
, I'll try a simpler system, just thinking in small inclinations, and change of the distance between controls and seat.Wait you back here soon. bye
ps: sorry my bad english. Some words maybe are wrong, others wrong placed, others I think I just imagine. Sometimes I have time to correct it with google translator, but not always. So execuse many mistakes.
I think LFS World could just managed the dl, not to up load the files.
The files could be located in the same servers LFS is today.
The files could be located in the same servers LFS is today.
Yes, I think everybody here knows that Scawen will not release the game for mods...
We are not asking for it NOW. We are just arguing how it could be IF, but of course we will have to wait.
About GH, lets take the assumption that, whatever reason, some server administrator has the brilliant idea of set a combo with XFG or UF1... well, that would be a looooong turn.
But, can you imagine 32 cars fighting for positions along this road, during all this time, with any equal curve or bump? I think it will be really fun.
But, do you see servers with Kyoto and XFG?
No!
Why?
Because people don't like it. So, I think that, even that crazy admin set a server with such combo, there will be no drivers for race.
I really can't see the problem with that.
GTR Evo come with a great version of GH. Are there servers with this track? Yeap.
People enjoy it? Yeap... but just who want.
There is no one targeting your head with a pistol when you get in the lobby to obligate you to join in the server. You go if you want.
So, what is the big deal? Who want to make a 30 minutes laps, do it!
Do you know? I really dislike DRIFT and CRUISE servers. That is IMO a cancer that is killing LFS scenario. But people are there.
That sucks. By myself I would not give a chance to build a server like this, but there are lots of them, more each day.
A server with Nords and XFG can't be worst.
see u soon
We are not asking for it NOW. We are just arguing how it could be IF, but of course we will have to wait.
About GH, lets take the assumption that, whatever reason, some server administrator has the brilliant idea of set a combo with XFG or UF1... well, that would be a looooong turn.
But, can you imagine 32 cars fighting for positions along this road, during all this time, with any equal curve or bump? I think it will be really fun.
But, do you see servers with Kyoto and XFG?
No!
Why?
Because people don't like it. So, I think that, even that crazy admin set a server with such combo, there will be no drivers for race.
I really can't see the problem with that.
GTR Evo come with a great version of GH. Are there servers with this track? Yeap.
People enjoy it? Yeap... but just who want.
There is no one targeting your head with a pistol when you get in the lobby to obligate you to join in the server. You go if you want.
So, what is the big deal? Who want to make a 30 minutes laps, do it!
Do you know? I really dislike DRIFT and CRUISE servers. That is IMO a cancer that is killing LFS scenario. But people are there.
That sucks. By myself I would not give a chance to build a server like this, but there are lots of them, more each day.
A server with Nords and XFG can't be worst.
see u soon
No?
sorry.5Haz, really. There are hundreds of good tracks that would fit perfect with LFS.
Can you imagine XFG at Monaco? Or LX4 in Zandvoort, GTRs in Monza? Oh dear, that would be really good
I don't understand this Green Hell preocupation. 4 laps at KY is bigger than 1 in GH... that is not so big...
You won't look smart even with a mask of Eisten on your head!
(sorry moderation, I can't let this scape, please recognize that was a funny answer)
Back to the topic, glad to see someone with property to say something about mods.
It is a fact that games like GPL and Nascar2003 just live until today due the community work, the good works of course.
Hope some day people like you have the chance to express your talent with LFS too, and give to us some good tracks (and cars, why not?) so we can enjoy even more of this great simulator.
Edit: just as an example how good can be the mods, even with limited access to the core, this is one of the great guys who will some day make much more for the game: http://www.kegetys.net/lfs/
We have many mods here and people enjoy them. Ok, those are just client side, and affect nothing to the multiplayer, but there are no reasons to think that would be different if tracks were open to some artists too.
Last edited by Speed Soro, .
No Mr. Gil, we are not here TO KNOW what the devs want or not want. We are here talking about the possibilities, it is apool to the community, not an answer to the devs.
You and all of your team of fanboys should stop this bs NOW!
We are not here complaining about NOTHING. We are not trolling NOTHING.
We are just trying to keep a civilized conversation without the ethernal moans "Oh the devs... oh oh oh"...
This is not another thread "Having sex with Scawen". Let this to him and his wife!
It is impossible to discuss anyhthing here without your team.
WE UNDERSTAND PERFECTLY THE DEVS GOALS, WE ARE NOT RETARDED!
WE KNOW THAT GAME IS CLOSED FOR MOD, WE KNOW THAT THE GAME IS THIS, THE GAME IS THAT.
YOU ARE NOT TALKING WITH IDIOTS!
We just want to discuss something without read "Go play NSF", or "Close Topic", or "Your are a TROLL".
This is fu.... ridiculous! No one here is making any critics to the game.
I think one day Scawen will open this game for mods.
When this day come, I hope this mods be controlled by a committee, or by the devs, and YES, I think there are many talents in the internet making great jobs for OTHERS communities, and they could be making this working for THIS community.
I have no doubt that NEW TRACKS made from scratch, based on real life tracks, would be a PHENOMENAL addition to this game.
The future will say who is right who is wrong, but until there, please STOP REPEATING THE SAME ETHERNAL LITANY.
Please LET THE DEVS, OR WHAT THEM THINK (OR YOU SUPPOSE THEM THINK) OUT OF THE DISCUSSION, AT LEAST ONE TIME!!!
You and all of your team of fanboys should stop this bs NOW!
We are not here complaining about NOTHING. We are not trolling NOTHING.
We are just trying to keep a civilized conversation without the ethernal moans "Oh the devs... oh oh oh"...
This is not another thread "Having sex with Scawen". Let this to him and his wife!
It is impossible to discuss anyhthing here without your team.
WE UNDERSTAND PERFECTLY THE DEVS GOALS, WE ARE NOT RETARDED!
WE KNOW THAT GAME IS CLOSED FOR MOD, WE KNOW THAT THE GAME IS THIS, THE GAME IS THAT.
YOU ARE NOT TALKING WITH IDIOTS!
We just want to discuss something without read "Go play NSF", or "Close Topic", or "Your are a TROLL".
This is fu.... ridiculous! No one here is making any critics to the game.
I think one day Scawen will open this game for mods.
When this day come, I hope this mods be controlled by a committee, or by the devs, and YES, I think there are many talents in the internet making great jobs for OTHERS communities, and they could be making this working for THIS community.
I have no doubt that NEW TRACKS made from scratch, based on real life tracks, would be a PHENOMENAL addition to this game.
The future will say who is right who is wrong, but until there, please STOP REPEATING THE SAME ETHERNAL LITANY.
Please LET THE DEVS, OR WHAT THEM THINK (OR YOU SUPPOSE THEM THINK) OUT OF THE DISCUSSION, AT LEAST ONE TIME!!!
Oh come on. I don't want to offend anyone here, but again this bs "the devs choose this, the devs choose that, they know what they are doing, close topic, blablabla"???
What is the problem with you guys? Can't you just say "No, I don't agree because I think the mods will cause this, cause that, etc"?
Is it always this same pray "The devs, the devs, the devs..."
We can't discuss anything here without concern if Scawen has "a plan" or not?
Please, if you don't like the idea of to have mods some day, and even you know the devs don't intend to open it for mods, try just to justify your choice using reasons, not the "devs whishes" or the "devs plans".
They (the devs) are just human like you and me, and they make mistakes. They can be chosing the wrong way, making wrong decisions, rigth now.
Stop this bs of always give to "the devs" the sure that they have take the right, the best, the unique acceptable decision.
Try to think with your brain, not "the devs" one. Sorry.
Thank you Julls for the links.
Stwearts does not does translations, not at the same degree I suggested.
The unique way to achieve what I think would be satisfatory, is mounting a plataform like that on a linear plate with wide movement.
Well let me go to my work.
See u
Stwearts does not does translations, not at the same degree I suggested.
The unique way to achieve what I think would be satisfatory, is mounting a plataform like that on a linear plate with wide movement.
Well let me go to my work.
See u
I just posted and see another post from you all, and go and see the FD video where he explain what they intend to achieve, but I think they are still far from the solution, cause they cant simulate horizontal movements.
I have something that I think is a solution for this, and i'll try to explain without any picture and with my poor English (God help us):
1 - My idea is way to expensive, so I'll just put it here, but I have no intention to develop it, at least not for while.
2 - Imagine you can move your seat horizontally, along the longitudinal axis, because it is set on a base running over trails. These trails can be linear ball bushing, ok? So you have one base running forward and back, and this is moved by a linear actuator, which can be a pneumactic or electric cilinder, or a ratchet gear, or cables, whatever.
3 - This base, and the support that sustain the trails, are all over another base with longitudinal and lateral movement, something like FD or any other motion sim on the market.
4 - Well, the idea is, the big acceleration, the "kick", would be made by moving the first base, horizontaly, while the slow acceleration (the inertial force that remains while the car is under acceleration), would be made by the inclination of the second base.
5 - I don't know If could paint the idea, but I think it would solves the problem that I see with FD. Maybe a trails 1 meter long, 0,5m forward, 0,5m back, would be enough for that.
6 - While the inertial forces are reduced, the actuator pulls the seat back to the centre at same time that inclination decrease. If you play with the pedals, like I said in the post before, tapping the accelerator, the linear actuador would do the biggest part of the job, and the reaction will be much more realistic.
I have something that I think is a solution for this, and i'll try to explain without any picture and with my poor English (God help us):
1 - My idea is way to expensive, so I'll just put it here, but I have no intention to develop it, at least not for while.
2 - Imagine you can move your seat horizontally, along the longitudinal axis, because it is set on a base running over trails. These trails can be linear ball bushing, ok? So you have one base running forward and back, and this is moved by a linear actuator, which can be a pneumactic or electric cilinder, or a ratchet gear, or cables, whatever.
3 - This base, and the support that sustain the trails, are all over another base with longitudinal and lateral movement, something like FD or any other motion sim on the market.
4 - Well, the idea is, the big acceleration, the "kick", would be made by moving the first base, horizontaly, while the slow acceleration (the inertial force that remains while the car is under acceleration), would be made by the inclination of the second base.
5 - I don't know If could paint the idea, but I think it would solves the problem that I see with FD. Maybe a trails 1 meter long, 0,5m forward, 0,5m back, would be enough for that.
6 - While the inertial forces are reduced, the actuator pulls the seat back to the centre at same time that inclination decrease. If you play with the pedals, like I said in the post before, tapping the accelerator, the linear actuador would do the biggest part of the job, and the reaction will be much more realistic.
Well, I think now we are understand each other
I don't know if this idea I have will really work, but as said before, maybe you can train your brain to associate the aproximation to the controls, as braking, and the separation, as accelerating.
Important: the movement should be just some milimeters, maybe 10 or 20 at maximun. When driving you wouldn't have more than that.
I think Frex movement is to extense. Since first time I saw a video years ago I thought that was not realistic, because it try to simulates the inertial force pushing your body forth and back, but it is not connected to the controls, forcing a strange situation where you can cleary see on the videos the big variation of distance between the driver and the wheel.
FD, by its side, has a better approaching, and that is a old and reliable solution (I think that Boeing was the first to make such system, I have no sure), but, under my vision, this system fits better with Flight Simulator than LFS or other racing game, because the transitions of a plane is always slower than a car, and then, that "mechanic bull" behavior is less evidenced.
I know, some of you have said it to me, and I knew you would do that, but believe me, I already knew that I have not much property to say something about FD, without have tested it. But what I can see on the videos, and what I can think about the system, is something with high probability of be wrong, in certain aspects.
The word is transition, as mentioned by Hallen before, is something that I suspect of FD. Suppose that you are in a flat street, like Autocross. You play with the accelerator, making a series of little taps on the pedal. Your car goes forward and stops, goes and stops, goes and stops. This causes inertial forces over your body, relatively big, and you feel it, but you know you are on the flat, not just because your eyes can see it, but because your labyrinth feels too, and send that information to your brain. But in FD you seem spun in the air, you see on the videos that the body rolls, like the mechanical bull, and I can suppose that it is not too right.
Ok, let me explain something, it is important: I have no intention to talk about FD anymore here. The unique reason that I talked about it, and put those videos for comparison, was to let well clear why I intend to try another approaching. So please, before someone think I'm here for bash the FD, I'd like to let very undertood that NO. I have nothing agains this company, I don't know anyone inside there, and me, being a industrial designer, have too much admiration by their products, their engeneering looks to be stupendous. Ok?
I'll back later to discuss more about my concept. What I want here is to make a brain storm with people who know what a simulator is, in the intention of achieve something more consistent, before start the prototype. And I also intend to make a step by step follow up here to share all experience.
See you later.
I don't know if this idea I have will really work, but as said before, maybe you can train your brain to associate the aproximation to the controls, as braking, and the separation, as accelerating.
Important: the movement should be just some milimeters, maybe 10 or 20 at maximun. When driving you wouldn't have more than that.
I think Frex movement is to extense. Since first time I saw a video years ago I thought that was not realistic, because it try to simulates the inertial force pushing your body forth and back, but it is not connected to the controls, forcing a strange situation where you can cleary see on the videos the big variation of distance between the driver and the wheel.
FD, by its side, has a better approaching, and that is a old and reliable solution (I think that Boeing was the first to make such system, I have no sure), but, under my vision, this system fits better with Flight Simulator than LFS or other racing game, because the transitions of a plane is always slower than a car, and then, that "mechanic bull" behavior is less evidenced.
I know, some of you have said it to me, and I knew you would do that, but believe me, I already knew that I have not much property to say something about FD, without have tested it. But what I can see on the videos, and what I can think about the system, is something with high probability of be wrong, in certain aspects.
The word is transition, as mentioned by Hallen before, is something that I suspect of FD. Suppose that you are in a flat street, like Autocross. You play with the accelerator, making a series of little taps on the pedal. Your car goes forward and stops, goes and stops, goes and stops. This causes inertial forces over your body, relatively big, and you feel it, but you know you are on the flat, not just because your eyes can see it, but because your labyrinth feels too, and send that information to your brain. But in FD you seem spun in the air, you see on the videos that the body rolls, like the mechanical bull, and I can suppose that it is not too right.
Ok, let me explain something, it is important: I have no intention to talk about FD anymore here. The unique reason that I talked about it, and put those videos for comparison, was to let well clear why I intend to try another approaching. So please, before someone think I'm here for bash the FD, I'd like to let very undertood that NO. I have nothing agains this company, I don't know anyone inside there, and me, being a industrial designer, have too much admiration by their products, their engeneering looks to be stupendous. Ok?
I'll back later to discuss more about my concept. What I want here is to make a brain storm with people who know what a simulator is, in the intention of achieve something more consistent, before start the prototype. And I also intend to make a step by step follow up here to share all experience.
See you later.
Maggot, I didn't understand when you said:
"You obviously don't understand the forces and the way your brain perceives them."
You are talking about me or what?
If you are talking about me, I'd like to know from where did you figured out that.
But, the fact is, I understand very weel the forces and the way my brain perceives them.
Let me see if I can make YOU understand my point:
1 - I don't like the way FD makes the things, even without tested it, ever. I base my point of view just by the videos. My critics is about to use the gravity force in a way to agressive to simulate inertia forces. Pay atention: going forth or back, is kind different of going up or down. When you brake and sudenly and suddenly accelerate, the simulator does a fast movement down and up, and this movement is just a mechanic bull. We got a kick from the seat, and this is not natural. You, please, look to that video. See how the head of the driver shakes in a unnatural way. I think something like this will tire you soon. That is not what I expect.
2 - I don't want a perfect motion sim. Did you read this? I DON'T WANT A PERFECT MOTION SIM. Hope you got this point. That said, watch the sequence below.
3 - I'm not talking about 20 thousands dollar cockpit. Neither 10K. I'm talking something around 2 or 3k. It is cheap, and that is what I want. It sales.
4 - I want to build something that, more than a static seat, give some add to the game. A small lateral movement (something around 15° each side), and a small longitudinal movement (something around 10°).
Well, lets jump some parts, and go straitgh to an idea that I was thinking about.
When we brake, our body intent to go ahead, and we support some part of the weight using our hands, our arms. The same occurs when we accelerate, and we sustain a part of the weight holding tight the steering wheel.
So, I was thinking, it is just an idea, and I'd like to discuss it. If I have a way to reduce or extend the distance between the steering whel and my seat, I would realize that something is happening. If the wheel goes away, probable I'll think that I'm under acceleration. If the wheel comes to my direction, I'll think that I'm under brake.
But this movement must to be very small. Just some milimeters, enough just to cheat your brain.
This is the beggining of the idea. Thera are more things to be explaned, but I think it is enough to drop something about it.
Think about, please.
"You obviously don't understand the forces and the way your brain perceives them."
You are talking about me or what?
If you are talking about me, I'd like to know from where did you figured out that.
But, the fact is, I understand very weel the forces and the way my brain perceives them.
Let me see if I can make YOU understand my point:
1 - I don't like the way FD makes the things, even without tested it, ever. I base my point of view just by the videos. My critics is about to use the gravity force in a way to agressive to simulate inertia forces. Pay atention: going forth or back, is kind different of going up or down. When you brake and sudenly and suddenly accelerate, the simulator does a fast movement down and up, and this movement is just a mechanic bull. We got a kick from the seat, and this is not natural. You, please, look to that video. See how the head of the driver shakes in a unnatural way. I think something like this will tire you soon. That is not what I expect.
2 - I don't want a perfect motion sim. Did you read this? I DON'T WANT A PERFECT MOTION SIM. Hope you got this point. That said, watch the sequence below.
3 - I'm not talking about 20 thousands dollar cockpit. Neither 10K. I'm talking something around 2 or 3k. It is cheap, and that is what I want. It sales.
4 - I want to build something that, more than a static seat, give some add to the game. A small lateral movement (something around 15° each side), and a small longitudinal movement (something around 10°).
Well, lets jump some parts, and go straitgh to an idea that I was thinking about.
When we brake, our body intent to go ahead, and we support some part of the weight using our hands, our arms. The same occurs when we accelerate, and we sustain a part of the weight holding tight the steering wheel.
So, I was thinking, it is just an idea, and I'd like to discuss it. If I have a way to reduce or extend the distance between the steering whel and my seat, I would realize that something is happening. If the wheel goes away, probable I'll think that I'm under acceleration. If the wheel comes to my direction, I'll think that I'm under brake.
But this movement must to be very small. Just some milimeters, enough just to cheat your brain.
This is the beggining of the idea. Thera are more things to be explaned, but I think it is enough to drop something about it.
Think about, please.
Last edited by Speed Soro, .
What you suspect is exactly what I don't suspect: I have sure
Because that I will start with less.
But one thing is right for me: by the videos, I can't see a real reaction of the driver to what is going on the simulator.
I can't see this up/down thing to simulate back/forth move.
There are lots of motion sims on the market. Rich companies, like car manufacturers, build linear and wide simulators to achieve the same sensation that a real car gives.
6DOF sims are more used by flying companies, and that is another situation.
I think we can reach much better immersion without expent too much, with just feel adds to the cockpit.
That is what I'm looking for. I think you all still don't understand my point.
See you.
Because that I will start with less.
But one thing is right for me: by the videos, I can't see a real reaction of the driver to what is going on the simulator.
I can't see this up/down thing to simulate back/forth move.
There are lots of motion sims on the market. Rich companies, like car manufacturers, build linear and wide simulators to achieve the same sensation that a real car gives.
6DOF sims are more used by flying companies, and that is another situation.
I think we can reach much better immersion without expent too much, with just feel adds to the cockpit.
That is what I'm looking for. I think you all still don't understand my point.
See you.
Idiots? Where did I said something like that? Be careful, dont put words in my mouth.
I'm not looking for complex math. I was saying about what I can see on the video.
You feel the things with your body, with the pressure over caused by the inertial force.
You feel your head going ahead, you feel your chest being compressed by the safe belts, you feel your arms being tensioned when using the steering wheel as a support, and so on.
But the mainly organ in your body that feels the inertia is the labyrinth, and it knows when your are moving up and down or back and forth.
(http://www.lookfordiagnosis.co ... g=1&term=Ear%2C+Inner)
Frex has a different approach, and it deliveres imersion, that is what I read about it.
But Frex is not yet what I'm looking for. I think it could be better.
See you later.
I'm not looking for complex math. I was saying about what I can see on the video.
You feel the things with your body, with the pressure over caused by the inertial force.
You feel your head going ahead, you feel your chest being compressed by the safe belts, you feel your arms being tensioned when using the steering wheel as a support, and so on.
But the mainly organ in your body that feels the inertia is the labyrinth, and it knows when your are moving up and down or back and forth.
(http://www.lookfordiagnosis.co ... g=1&term=Ear%2C+Inner)
Frex has a different approach, and it deliveres imersion, that is what I read about it.
But Frex is not yet what I'm looking for. I think it could be better.
See you later.
What you feel when you move? Inertial force on your body.
The direction of this force (and you feel just one, as a resultant vector of the various), is never sending you to the sky, except when you guide your car to the abyss...
What I see when I watch this FD movies is something like a angry mechanical bull, shooting the driver to the high.
I don't see it as natural movement.
I think the natural would be just horizontal weight, leaving the vertical force to the bump only.
But there is another thing that I'd like you to consider: cost $$$
I can't afford with so expensive machine, and I focalize a market where there is no space for U$20k toys.
So, I'd like to discuss a new concept, while I manage a development of a rustic model for test software and eletronics.
My idea is about what is really necessary to give better immersion to the game.
It has not necessary to be perfect, or to be complete. It just need to be immersive.
We have some gadgets that increases a lot the immersion: Force Feedback Wheel, Buttkicker, TrackIR and 3Head.
These things together are not too expensive today, and increases the immersion to a deep point.
The first two things above are mechanical things.
The big actor is the FFB Wheel. With just this accessory we have many of the contact with the game we wait for.
After a short period of getting used to the system, we find ourselves forgetting the reality and going deep in the game.
My idea is to complement this diving, implementing a motion cockpit that:
- gives good immersion
- be cheap
- doesn't tire the driver (I think FD tires a lot)
- make little noise
- people get interest in buying
See you later
The direction of this force (and you feel just one, as a resultant vector of the various), is never sending you to the sky, except when you guide your car to the abyss...
What I see when I watch this FD movies is something like a angry mechanical bull, shooting the driver to the high.
I don't see it as natural movement.
I think the natural would be just horizontal weight, leaving the vertical force to the bump only.
But there is another thing that I'd like you to consider: cost $$$
I can't afford with so expensive machine, and I focalize a market where there is no space for U$20k toys.
So, I'd like to discuss a new concept, while I manage a development of a rustic model for test software and eletronics.
My idea is about what is really necessary to give better immersion to the game.
It has not necessary to be perfect, or to be complete. It just need to be immersive.
We have some gadgets that increases a lot the immersion: Force Feedback Wheel, Buttkicker, TrackIR and 3Head.
These things together are not too expensive today, and increases the immersion to a deep point.
The first two things above are mechanical things.
The big actor is the FFB Wheel. With just this accessory we have many of the contact with the game we wait for.
After a short period of getting used to the system, we find ourselves forgetting the reality and going deep in the game.
My idea is to complement this diving, implementing a motion cockpit that:
- gives good immersion
- be cheap
- doesn't tire the driver (I think FD tires a lot)
- make little noise
- people get interest in buying
See you later
Last edited by Speed Soro, .
YESOf course it would demand a good committee for approval of the mods.
And I propose the creation of the WWC4RMS - World Wide Committee For Racing Mod Standardization
Serious, I can't see any problem with mods since they are well controled by the DEVs and a small group of serious and experienced simracers.
It would be a great addition to the game, and surely, it will be really good to have new tracks based on real life locations.
To reject the mods, is to send the big talents of the community to other communties.
Countries that don't give the chance to their talents, lose these talents for others countries.
Companies that don't give the chance to their talents, lose these talents to the others companies.
And so on.
Why not? I repeat yes.
Motion Cockpit development
First of all, I'd like to take a comparison between two well known simulators on the market:
Force Dynamics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld6xT5yfbhw
and
Mechanic Bull:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... 7Cc_Q&feature=related
And I'd like to say that I see no much difference between them!
That said, my intention here is to get some support from the community, and discuss some ideas about the ideal low cost motion cockpit simulator.
I have thinking that just 2DOF and 1 bump would be enough for deep immersion.
About the 2DOF, I'd like to divide the situation in two things: longitudinal movement simulating break and acceleration, and lateral movement, simulating curves. Simple as that.
Later I'll back here to take this discussion back, cause now I'm at my work and have not much time to describe my initial ideas.
I'd like just to say that, IMO, Force Dynamics has a wrong aprouch to the simulation. It looks much more like a mechanic bull, but much more expensive. This is not what I feel when driving. I'm not launched to the air, so I intend to get a different way to simulate the both inertial forces (longitudinal and lateral).
See you later, and thanks.
Force Dynamics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld6xT5yfbhw
and
Mechanic Bull:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... 7Cc_Q&feature=related
And I'd like to say that I see no much difference between them!
That said, my intention here is to get some support from the community, and discuss some ideas about the ideal low cost motion cockpit simulator.
I have thinking that just 2DOF and 1 bump would be enough for deep immersion.
About the 2DOF, I'd like to divide the situation in two things: longitudinal movement simulating break and acceleration, and lateral movement, simulating curves. Simple as that.
Later I'll back here to take this discussion back, cause now I'm at my work and have not much time to describe my initial ideas.
I'd like just to say that, IMO, Force Dynamics has a wrong aprouch to the simulation. It looks much more like a mechanic bull, but much more expensive. This is not what I feel when driving. I'm not launched to the air, so I intend to get a different way to simulate the both inertial forces (longitudinal and lateral).
See you later, and thanks.
Not all the games are going by this way. There are many games that has improved graphics, gameplay, sounds, and is bug free. Call of Duty is one example.
But we are talking about simulators, so, what sim looks better? IMO LFS is one of the best today, even with out of date graphics, and it could be too much better, with few touchs of art in some textures (trees and grass mainly).
iRacing has high detailed tracks scanned with laser and etc, and good textures, good interiors, but not too much better than LFS. The real difference between the both is the lighting.
Simbin games has plane textures, too dense colors, I dont like. At least until Blimey age, the cockpits were very detailed, thing that doesn't happen anymore, after them left the team.
NKP has good textures, it is too bright, but I think it is at better level than LFS due few details.
The big step will be NFS Shift, if it really come as a simulator (what I really doubt).
If LFS had dynamics lights, and if there was a night version for South City, we will see an invasion of NFS players and other sims, cause yes, many people give importance to the graphics (I'm one of them).
But we are talking about simulators, so, what sim looks better? IMO LFS is one of the best today, even with out of date graphics, and it could be too much better, with few touchs of art in some textures (trees and grass mainly).
iRacing has high detailed tracks scanned with laser and etc, and good textures, good interiors, but not too much better than LFS. The real difference between the both is the lighting.
Simbin games has plane textures, too dense colors, I dont like. At least until Blimey age, the cockpits were very detailed, thing that doesn't happen anymore, after them left the team.
NKP has good textures, it is too bright, but I think it is at better level than LFS due few details.
The big step will be NFS Shift, if it really come as a simulator (what I really doubt).
If LFS had dynamics lights, and if there was a night version for South City, we will see an invasion of NFS players
and other sims, cause yes, many people give importance to the graphics (I'm one of them).If he can hit the penumbra, it will be a great addition to visual and, therefore, to immersion. That is one thing.
I do not have the slightest idea of how complex and difficult is the introduction of dynamic lighting, but that of course would be a definitive step to put this game in the present. There would be no debts to competitors, like iRacing, and threads like "Aging a Lot" would be reserved for history books.
Come on... You just miss sending me a "get a life" or something... hehehe
Thank you for your concern
In fact, I really told about more cars, but what I would say that we can have just 5, a formula, a FWD, a RWD, and its GTR version, but them should be perfectly made, with high detailed visual, and perfect physics. But tracks would be really better if we have more.
A season with at least 10 tracks would be great. I don't think just reverse and particular layouts give the same add that a complete change of enviroment. It is very diferent you change from BL to WE than just reverse the first one.
The interface of the LFS is the best shot of all. There is no simulator or any other type of game with an interface as good.
You can do almost everything from inside the car and running on the track!
And you can still change the car without leaving the session. Beyond a lot of commands, scripts, real-time information, etc.. It is absolutely fantastic.
But it had a price. The Scawen is setting the interface already for two years. Man, is too long! Last year did he make something else?
The part that really matters, I think the last 2 years, I remember, it was only the FBM, the clutch (which I find very weak, heats too easy) ... I do not know if it has been made more things in physics.
Man, pure emotion from S1 to S2. Today the staff associated with S1 is just less cars, less tracks, but S1, at that time (early 2005) was quite simple.
From S1 to S2 were many changes. The big surprise was the crash system, because until then the car suffered no damage. The old tracks were improved, and new tracks came. New cars, transparent glass. The head turning of the pilot... Man, we was in ghana when launched.
First leaked version of an S2 that few people had access. Then came the official version. That was crazy. It was 24 June ... remember until today. I remember having spent almost the entire month of July in the game.
Before that I have watched the S2 onboard movie tens of times.
I just started to migrate to other simulators more recently, because I was tired of the same tracks, cars, and especially to stay in expectation of improvements that never came.
Man, I do not understand why, after so many years, have no heating of the brakes and engine yet. This is essential for the simulation and make much difference in fact .
But the interface and a lot of things that had not before, are now ready. At least Scawen said once he would make it first to make the game consistent.
If so, the next patch may well bring things more interesting, because now is the time to care for "the rest", since the interface is finished. Or not?
You can do almost everything from inside the car and running on the track!
And you can still change the car without leaving the session. Beyond a lot of commands, scripts, real-time information, etc.. It is absolutely fantastic.
But it had a price. The Scawen is setting the interface already for two years. Man, is too long! Last year did he make something else?
The part that really matters, I think the last 2 years, I remember, it was only the FBM, the clutch (which I find very weak, heats too easy) ... I do not know if it has been made more things in physics.
Man, pure emotion from S1 to S2. Today the staff associated with S1 is just less cars, less tracks, but S1, at that time (early 2005) was quite simple.
From S1 to S2 were many changes. The big surprise was the crash system, because until then the car suffered no damage. The old tracks were improved, and new tracks came. New cars, transparent glass. The head turning of the pilot... Man, we was in ghana when launched.
First leaked version of an S2 that few people had access. Then came the official version. That was crazy. It was 24 June ... remember until today. I remember having spent almost the entire month of July in the game.
Before that I have watched the S2 onboard movie tens of times.
I just started to migrate to other simulators more recently, because I was tired of the same tracks, cars, and especially to stay in expectation of improvements that never came.
Man, I do not understand why, after so many years, have no heating of the brakes and engine yet. This is essential for the simulation and make much difference in fact .
But the interface and a lot of things that had not before, are now ready. At least Scawen said once he would make it first to make the game consistent.
If so, the next patch may well bring things more interesting, because now is the time to care for "the rest", since the interface is finished. Or not?
Ah come on, I use this technique and I ever have notice. Dumb...
illepall
I was playing iRacing and than I realize that I was doing this movement to recover from a oversteer, but I use brakes. And I have made this many times before... duh...
I just use this technique for recover, but it slow down the speed a lot. I've never used for gain lap time.
illepallI was playing iRacing and than I realize that I was doing this movement to recover from a oversteer, but I use brakes. And I have made this many times before... duh...
I just use this technique for recover, but it slow down the speed a lot. I've never used for gain lap time.
Sure. You cant look for simulation just around physics.
What you see, what you hear, what you touch, what you expect is all part of the simulation thing.
You cant separate these things.
One thing that bored me a lot in LFS is the cars shadow under other shadows (bridge, trees, wall). The cars look like floating cause there is no penumbra.
I know that there is a test patch that treat this, but I still see the same situation. It breaks the immersion, and it is just graphics.
What you see, what you hear, what you touch, what you expect is all part of the simulation thing.
You cant separate these things.
One thing that bored me a lot in LFS is the cars shadow under other shadows (bridge, trees, wall). The cars look like floating cause there is no penumbra.
I know that there is a test patch that treat this, but I still see the same situation. It breaks the immersion, and it is just graphics.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG