Quote from Nissan_Lover :

"In case of a water landing..."

No, no, that was "Crashing into the Hudson river"

Thank god everybody knew how to use the belt buckles!

P.S. Budget is written the same in french

Quote from Bladerunner :

I came 289th in the Marseilles-Cassis demi-marathon in the late 80's

My new hero!

Personally, I came 3rd at a skiing race when I was a kid (along with about 20 other kids - there were 20 for silver and gold too)

Quote from Macfox :

Why hypothesise? Development has stagnated, your not getting 1 or 2 ATM.

Well, not instantly, but Scawen has fixed objectives for S2 to end beta phase, and that implies physics changes yes (and other functionality changes), but also includes VW Sirocco, which is after all completely optional and is just there to get some marketing done. We're kind of getting a bit of both (cars and functionality), the only problem is timing. I believe Scawen has very good ideas, that has never been in question, the main thing I question is how fast all of this is being made. Therefore, I'm not sure the Sirocco comes at a very good moment.

Last edited by boosterfire, Tue 25 Nov 2008, 01:56.

Quote from Macfox :

Or just let the community and interest in the game dwindle into oblivion?

That's more or less the same thing. Some people quit games they lose interest in, others just play it less frequently, whatever. At all rates, it would be negative.

Quote from Hyperactive :

New tracks is something LFS needs dearly, new cars not so much. But the idea of going into 2010 without new tracks is what makes people sick. To say that people would get sick and leave if LFS got what it needs the most is just an indicator that you don't have no idea what you are talking about when you speak for others.

The expectations surely seem to be high but if you look what has happened since the last physics patch in 2006 there is not much to be optimistic about.

Well, ask yourself this. What would you prefer between:

1. A fully functional LFS (with all the assumed S3 additions) that has no other cars or tracks than what we currently have;
2. An LFS with a lot of other cars and tracks, but no other functionality than what we currently have (which means that is currently flawed isn't fixed).

Personally, I much prefer #1, but I can't, indeed, speak for everybody. I, however, feel like I speak for some.

I personally don't think cars and tracks can be considered development. They are indeed new content, but they're more like expansions rather than actual implementation of new features or upgrade of current flawed ones. There's a reason for this: people would get bored of new cars and tracks. Let's imagine that Scavier release nothing but new cars and tracks until 2010: after a while, people would just get sick of it and quit.

Now, the things can will really make LFS move on are those new features and upgrades of current flawed ones. And Scavier know it, only they don't spend all of their time on that, probably for marketing purposes (VW Sirocco).

I hope that a lot of other things will come in the patch which will bring the Sirocco. The expectations are running high, and hopefully it will not have been in vain.

Quote from Mp3 Astra :

That's fascinating. I wish I knew more about psychology.

Is it just me or anything that sounds to be said too seriously on the internet feels incredibly sarcastic?

I'm quite amused to the Trois-Rivieres in there, and everybody just saying Three-Rivers in the end because they can't pronounce it right

Quote from Nathan_French_14 :

Excuse my french (no pun intended ) but it pisses me off the way game makers sometime put rendered video on there advert to pass it off as actual gameplay. NFS:Undercover is a good example of this. Fair enough, i know they sometimes put "not representative of actual gameplay" somewhere on the screen, but i doubt alot of the younger generation notice this, so they then buy the game, just to be dissapointed?

Same with screenys....its damn annoying!

*cough* I see no french in there o.O

More on topic, there's no way those are screenshots, simply no way. It would probably indeed require a NASA computer to run something this good looking with anything more than 0.01 fps.

p.s. oh hai, jj!

I knew that I had read somewhere that there was a new Windows coming. So I searched for it a bit this morning, and it seems it'll be called Windows 7.

This is what they had to say about the naming:

Quote :

The decision to use the name Windows 7 is about simplicity. Simply put, this is the seventh release of Windows, so therefore Windows 7 just makes sense.

Whereas Vista should have been 6? Well, it seems not. In the original plan of Microsoft, there was no Vista, it went directly from XP to 7 (codenamed Blackcomb, from Whistler-Blackcomb ski station in British Columbia - it seems Microsoft developers have a lot of spare time, incidentally XP was codenamed Whistler). However, at some point they decided to develop an interim to 7, Vista, which eventually became a full windows in itself. This is what I didn't know, that Vista was basically a Windows 5.5 at some point, from which they decided to make a full release (which doesn't sound like a good idea).

We all know what happened, Vista got out, and it has a very hard time dethroning its predecesor, XP. Which is where Windows 7 comes in for a mid-2009 release. They have also indicated that 7 will be an improved version of Vista. The question one might ask is, why the eff bother releasing Vista, this flawed and hated thing, in the first place?

Anyway, they say everything we hate about Vista will be fixed in 7. The annoying digital rights management, the annoying incompatibility problems and hopefully the most annoying injustified hardware requirements.

I just can't wait for 7.

Quote from SamH :

I agree entirely. It won't change buying patterns overnight, but it will shift impetus. The difference between a $25bn bail-out and a $25bn buy-out is that of public interest. The historic problem with these companies has, as you say, been the way they've been run. They need restructuring from the top down. As with the UK government's decision to buy banks instead of just give them free money, what will ultimately be served is the public interest.

One of the most offensive issues with these 3 manufacturers is their deliberate disregard for road safety. They all have a shameful legacy on that front. I, for one, will never buy another Ford while it's still under its present ownership/management. I owned a Ford Explorer. Our US members will remember the tyre recall in 2001 (or thereabouts) after Ford got caught once again deliberately choosing customer risk of death over defect recall. I even had to buy the tyres first and claim back afterwards. Lucky for me I could afford to do that.

I disagree with duke_toaster about manufacturing abroad. The US car manufacturing industry is incredibly important to the midwest. Michigan and Ohio particularly.. these companies are huge employers. Whatever solution they find must include job security in domestic manufacturing or there is nothing to rescue except the brand names, and they're not worth $25bn.

From what I heard, if GM only goes bankrupt, it's somewhere around 3 million jobs directly and indirectly lost. That's not counting the impact on the American economy.

Also, here's a quote from Fight Club. It might not be true, but the fact that it is in a movie is still interesting:

Quote :

A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.

Quote from duke_toaster :

They have those under their noses (OK, the second only moderately), which is the silly thing. They're called the European models with sensible sized engines, plenty of space and decent fuel economy. And they look better.

You know, I could go out there and buy a Saturn Astra! Isn't that magnificent? A wonderful, 100% American car, full of American goodness, and Amer - wait, what, it's an Opel? Oh, ya, that's true...

It's a good concept, but at some point the NA people will realize that they're being bullshitted in buying believing that what they're buying is really made by the big three. And when they realize that, they still won't trust the big three, because they'll know what they sell really is European or Asian cars.

Quote from swisscosmo :

I think GM and Ford and Chrysler should get rid of some of there car companys that they own for example i think GM should get rid of Saturn and other companys that just arn't bringing in anof money but keep Cadillac cause Top Gear likes them and ask Top Gear they will tell GM what to do. And if GM, Ford, and Crysler go bankrubt and quit alow some european cars into america becuase there much better quility and we don't need those 0.5MPG GMC Denalis, Escaleds and stuff because there complaining about gas being so expensive but there making it so expensive driving those gas gossling trucks. end of rant or what ever yoou call it.

They already have sold parts they own in other car builders to get some cash on hand. I think Ford got rid of a third of their actions in Mazda, and GM sold something too, but I can't remember what

I'm really having trouble deciding whether I would vote for a bail-out or no. The effects of a bankruptcy of any of the big three would be tremendous, and we're not only talking about economic effects, but also millions of jobs lost, along with double digits unemployment rates. Keep in mind that's only if one of the three goes (GM probably, but Chrysler isn't far behind).

Ford's CEO said they don't need money, but they still came to the hill to nod at GM's and Chrysler's bail-out plan, for the effect on Ford if any of these two went would be tremendous.

On the other hand, why give a bail-out to them? Do they deserve them? Haven't they been making crap cars for, what now, the last 20 years (or more)? Haven't they had no Insight (!) whatsoever to stop producing gas-guzzling SUV's and begin the production of what the people want, small cars?

Let's assume they get a bail-out, how much will it give them? Maybe, 30G$? That's not so much considering GM is spending at least 3G$ every month. Besides, will they be able to fix everything they need to in order to get some profits? Let's see the list, they need:

- Small, more fuel efficient and Eco-friendly car (the latter of the two the Prius isn't);
- A better product quality;
- No more SUV's

Besides, even if they achieve all these things, they still have to account in the story that they have the Union on their backs, fat checks to give to their CEO's, CFO's and what-not, and that it will takes years, if not decades before people trust them and their products again. Just look at Ford. It is said that Ford's product are now almost on match with Asian products on the matter of quality, and they have the only good small american car (the Focus), but does that really help them?

Something else that bugs me, there's so many products these corporations sell abroad that they should have been selling in NA for at least 5 years, and that they will never sell here, or wait until 2010 to do so. For instance, the european focus, which is much better than the american one (better looks, better chassis, better quality, etc) will be sold here in 2010, but why haven't they sold it in NA the moment they designed it? Because "it didn't fit the NA regulations"? or because "it wasn't what NA people wanted"? That's bull-shit. Something else that should have been sold in NA for ten years, the KA. Although I agree it is rather a woman's car, Ford still doesn't have something smaller than the Focus to offer in the US.

Quote from pk500 :

One positive of the limited number of LFS cars and tracks, from this rFactor veteran: A much less splintered online community. It's easier for me to find a quality LFS public race with the demo cars than it is for me with almost any rFactor mod.

rFactor has so many mods and tracks -- and most of the new ones often gain "flavor of the month" status before fading -- that the online community is splintered. Unless you're in a private league, it's pretty tough to find quality races in most mods during evening hours in the U.S.

And again, if you place a paramount on physics and tire models, LFS blows away rFactor.

Take care,
PK

Up to a certain extent, having trouble finding good players means that there are also good players somewhere. Let's assume that in any gaming community, there's a certain percentage of people with whom it is fun to play. The rest are noobs. Considering that this percentage must be around the same for every gaming community, the more player base you have, the more good players you have (the same rule applies for idiots in a country, the more population you have, the more idiots :tilt.

The problem with racing sims is that they're not incredibly popular, which will somehow limit your ability to find a good racers.

That said, we're fortunate that it's easy to judge someone performances in a racing game. There's a timer that tells you if someone is quite, and a chat log to tell you if they're stupid. In other online games, notably mmorpgs and fps's, it can be more troublesome to tell if somebody really has a clue about what he's doing (although thankfully there's still a chat log to give you an idea).

Something else we can be thankful for is that LFS and other racing sims don't really attract a part of the population which we don't want driving a car (IRL or here). This cannot be said about mmorpgs or fps's, both of which are usually type of games MUCH easier to play and master than LFS.

As to know if it's easier to find a good match in here than in rFactor, I couldn't tell, but what I can say is that LFS has unfortunately a very European based community (no offense, there, of course), which makes it hard for NA players (and I guess people from other parts of the world) to find a good racing server in their peak hours.

Yes, you must be. Honestly, this is just awful; do you realize that the first thing people will do when they first see it is either puke or burst out laughing? It's supposed to be a F1, for peace sake! It supposed to be impressive, the best the technology has to offer, or AT LEAST serious-looking. This is just silly, and I guarantee you for the whole of the 2009 season people will mock it. F1 dies in 2009.

Wow. Okay, I think my optimism was wrong, this is just incredibly ugly! :faint2:

It looks like it's the wrong way around, the big wing should be on the back and the small one on the front.

Well, that's now official, the negotiations have failed and the Canadian GP will not be back in 2009. Quebec's PM confirmed it, and there will be a press conference at 3pm EST.

I'm disgusted and loathe Bernie more than ever.

Oh, I don't think Scavier give a crap if their product is competitive or not. Even if everybody left and they had to do something else to live, they would probably want to keep working on it part-time or something. Eventually, I believe a final version of LFS will exist. The question is when, and what other stuff will be on the market at that point.

Currently, LFS 'survives' because there's nothing quite the same. Although iRacing has probably taken quite a lot of racers from LFS, the price of it and its 'this ain't a game folks' philosophy that's much harder than LFS's are drawbacks that make a lot of people want to stick to LFS. Besides, there are just people that love LFS and won't let it go (fanboiz :shy.

So you could say that the sole reason why LFS is still profitable is because it's a racing simulator, and that there's not a lot of competition out there. Again, I've said this a lot, but if a well known game maker decide to do a racing sim with the goal of beating LFS, it would be incredibly easy to do so.

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

They look like something Batman would race, which means they look cool.

They also do seem to have as much camber as the Aussie Supercars. Almost seems like it's too much, though

I'm not sure I'd prefer to watch that series rather than F1, though. It does seem a little bit over the top.

Quote from Mustafur :

This is just stupid, at the start of 08 the Renault was crap, it was basically Redbull whooping the midfield, then after france Renault and Toyota kicked in.

The Renault this year had soo much capability but at the start of the season it wasn't reached.Although It gave a early indiciton of the cars potential in spain.

We'll just have to see what it will cost them next season, though. It wouldn't be surprising that they spent so much time developing this 2008 car that they will have missed the change boat for the 2009 one. BMW, on the other hand, won in Canada, and basically stopped developing the 2008 car, so to get a head start on the 2009 one. We'll see how it goes in 2009, but I wouldn't be surprised that the same thing happens again, where BMW will begin stronger than Renault, but the latter might catch up again.

The problem with all that is that they have to comply with so much regulation. Every single part of the car is ruled by very precise rules that do limit the way a car can possibly look to a certain extent.

Personally, I do feel weird about that back wing, but I guess we'll just get used to it. As for the racing, I'm optimistic they wouldn't do this for no reason and it should be an improvement in the 2009 season. People say: "Ya, well, they'll brake later and there will not be as many passes". It's not entirely true. The racing should closer, so all the cars should be more bunched up together than they are right now. Passing will probably be indeed harder, but since they will be more bunched up as a whole, the number of passes will probably remain the same, although the result will be more fun to watch.

I think someone needs to post less and go meditate a bit?

Quote from wheel4hummer :

Not true.
http://www.africanaonline.com/slavery_canada.htm

There was slavery in Canada. Slavery in Canada only stopped 30yrs prior to when it was abolished in the United States.

Ah, yes, although they seemed to have been much less numerous and somehow better treated. I'm not calling it right, though.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

It's not really that I think it's not wrong or that I don't understand why it isn't wrong. I just don't care. Yes, people are racist, yes it's wrong, but who cares? I can't change the way people think so why should I care that people are racist? I personally could not imagine being racist and discriminating against someone because of their race. But who am I to call the way someone else thinks wrong?

I agree that it's almost impossible to change the way people think, but I don't see any reason to stop yourself from judging what they think. It's not because you can't change something that you shouldn't be bothered.

For instance, you can't influence on the war (assuming you're not a solider or a politician), but that doesn't stop you from thinking it's right or wrong, and expressing these thoughts.

Personally, if I believe somebody is wrong, generally no matter how taboo the subject may be, I'll say it. Then, I know that racism is wrong, and I wouldn't think of being racist, but unlike you, I have no problem in calling racists complete idiots. And yes, there are inferior people. Probably not inferior races, but stupid, idiotic people everywhere, in every country.

Well, I for one would rather play 1.6 than Source, but I don't get why I would buy the package just to have Source and 1.6, while I probably wouldn't play both.

Personally, I always prefered DoD anyway, Avalanche was a funnah map

I kind of see the point to get old games such as HL, because they're so epic, but what's the point for counter, DoD and the other original HL derivations? I mean, I know a lot of people still play them online, because they're purists, but it's hard to choose one of those while you can play Source in the same pack.

Besides, who really has ever played stuff like Team Fortress anyway? It sucks!