That would actually be awesome if the shoe was a working keyboard.
Seen on YT. 
Dude I am 12 and what is this
In S2 every turn is T1
Our life is billiard table, all people are balls :bump:
You must be kidding...
Some time ago when i still played it online the thing happened all the time.
I've gotten banned only a few times because of the blind voting (One person start to vote and the other vote also even though they didnt see the anything)
But T1 masacre followed by insults and voting was a daily thing to see on the servers.
You start to brake at the correct point and someone ram in you from behind calling you a noob and accuse of braking too sudden and violent.
You start to slowing down a bit earlier to give person behind you time to prepare and he will ram into you stating you are noob drive too slow and brake too early.
The only way to avoid it is to look for a good server with admins and more or less civilized players.
But claiming that Demo racers are bunch of savages and S2 racers are full time gentleman is bullshit
ORLY
Just joking thx for explanation.
Well now we have to make a poll in which technology we want LFS to be rebuild.
I mean Dx8/9/10.11 or in this new unlimited point cloud data.
But Jokes aside.
I wonder first if they make a whole road made of those pebbles does that mean that when you take a step you create some pressure on pebbles under your leg they create pressure on the surrounding pebbles and so like in billiard and in result your PC will start smoking
Second how much time will it take to build every pebble from atoms or every tree with leaves and branches and stuff.
The cost of the games will rocket because a lot of people would need to be hired to build this.
And third, even now the better graphics in game the shorter more linear and simple the game is.
I mean to make a modern looking game now it takes ages, devs concentrate on graphics and as a result game is linear and short because they don't work on the game itself but the way game look like.
Enough to compare older games with modern ones.
So if they decide to make games in this new technology i wonder how it work out what would be devs priority, but still it looks like a very distant future.
And just to think about it no need to regularly buy new graphic card I bet Nvidia and ATI already hiring hitmans
Last edited by Chupacabras84, .
When i said "Wider audience" I meant that in that wider audience will be not only technological noobs like me but also people who
know how things work and will point any bullshit at sight so addressing their adverts to this knowledgeable folks is probably a bad step
Here is the catch making a road which is full of bumps and holes or wall with every brick modelled or flag full of polygons it is possible but it would take a lot of polygons and in result would be a system killer so here is where bump mapping and tessellation (According to wiki a staple feature of DirectX 11 and OpenGL)come in handy.
Bump mapping will make holes on the road and bumps also will model bricks on the wall and space between them and small cracks on the survace without raising number of polygons.
In case of flag tessellation will divide it in that way that flag doesn't need to have 30000+ poly it can have less while thanks to tessellation it appear like it have 30000+ and its easier for computer to handle. Not sure if I am right but that what I read somewhere and that how I understand that.
You must be kidding me...
Rendering as a 2D picture and displaying image in real time in 3D its two different things also I never had to work with 3D Studio Max but I am pretty sure that its render things in 2D (Animation Its still 2D)
Also because its rendering this "shockingly good looking scenes" it takes much longer to render stuff than it would take average game with good graphics to display scene in real time in 3D (Crisis for example) and because of this it would be impossible to use it in game (Rendering in real time, what a speed 1fps )
Anyway you cant compare the way 3D max renders scene to the way game displays image because they do it in totally different ways and final effects are two different things...
Last edited by Chupacabras84, .
More likely because a lot of things just arent supported by Dx8 for example higher versions of shaders.
Or I can disable features in Dx9/10/11 why cant I switch to Dx8 and disable some features from there?
According to you version of DirectX clearly have nothing to do with how game look like so why not make games only in Dx8 if its offer such a great performance and still can look like Dx11.
Also what about above mentioned examples in adverts.
Those adverts usually are made by people who knows how game is made.
So if they say that graphics in game is depend on version of DirectX i think its true.
Because those adverts are directed to wider audience if they would made a comparison of great looking water in dx11 with good looking water in dx9 some knowledgeable folks would stand up and say "Hey that total bullshit DirectX have nothing to do how water look like or how many polygons a flag have"
My point is, if an advertisement would be made with false statement it would be pointed out very fast but those adverts somehow functioning for a very long time and no one says its totally bullshit.
Or I can disable features in Dx9/10/11 why cant I switch to Dx8 and disable some features from there?
According to you version of DirectX clearly have nothing to do with how game look like so why not make games only in Dx8 if its offer such a great performance and still can look like Dx11.
Also what about above mentioned examples in adverts.
Those adverts usually are made by people who knows how game is made.
So if they say that graphics in game is depend on version of DirectX i think its true.
Because those adverts are directed to wider audience if they would made a comparison of great looking water in dx11 with good looking water in dx9 some knowledgeable folks would stand up and say "Hey that total bullshit DirectX have nothing to do how water look like or how many polygons a flag have"
My point is, if an advertisement would be made with false statement it would be pointed out very fast but those adverts somehow functioning for a very long time and no one says its totally bullshit.
Last edited by Chupacabras84, .
So if nothing "depends on DirectX version" then why if I turn dx9 to dx8 in any game which uses both modes suddenly graphic looks worse?
No bump mapping, shadows are very simple, volumetric light is a long gone memory.
Also a lot of new games Stalker for example in adverts mention new directX features God Rays, soft water, volumetric fire, dynamic volumetric smoke etc. Or Dirt 2
You could say that in those adverts a statement were made, that all those fancy graphics, cool features things that make game look good, like shadows and count of polygons in 3d objects (example flag in dirt2 )are dependable on directX version.
So if all this have nothing to do with directX version then why it is advertised like that?
Because somehow everything tells us that higher version of DirectX means better graphic and now you saying that directX have nothing to do with shadows, polygons, bumpmaps and how game looks in average.
A lot of things i mentioned must have some connection with version of directX.
Good shading and bump mapping combined with texture makes it look much better and more 3d without it the texture is just a flat texture.
In Stalker for example in Dx8 brick wall is just a flat wall with bricks painted on it while in Dx9 thanks to bump mapping you can tell its no more flat anymore.
Last edited by Chupacabras84, .
You posted two screens which show something totally different and ask us to find differences?
Post the same scene in dx8 and dx9 and i will show you the differences.
Since i played lock on FC and tried DCS i can tell you the most noticeable differences for me.
I played DCS only like 20 minutes because of the weak computer (But I still seen it on max details) it was quite time ago but here is what i noticed and still remember.
In DCS.
Textures were much better (resolution and details).
Shading was more live like it wasn't shiny glare it was more subtle and natural, darker in some places and bright in the other with mid tones and soft edges.
On grounds object were more detailed cars and firetracks for example had transparent glasses and crew inside.
Everything was more detailed as well 3d models and textures.
The environment is not so sterile anymore.
DCS definitely look better but you would have to show screens which presents ground, buildings, trees, clouds etc and not just two pictures which both show something different and incomparable.
And you still cant compare those two game to show us the differences because while yes DCS looks better but its not really much better as devs said themselves they didn't concentrate on better visual, Dx9 suppose to work better on modern PCs and allow for better physics.
To show us the real difference you should take stalker for example and make a quicksave turn to DX8 do prtscr then turn to DX9 load and do another screen and then you will see the difference.
Or any other game which uses both modes GTL for ex.
My two cents to this thread would be.
LFS doesn't need dx9/10/11 at least not now, at present moment i am satisfied with graphics, nice cockpits and shiny cars, Hi Res textures etc.
Compare LFS with GT4 on PS2, LFS surprisingly have much better graphics than GT4 so why doest GT4 looks much better?
Because they made a good use of what they had, life-like and interesting surroundings, colourful and realistic textures, everything is well designed and looks really good.
While in LFS every track looks almost the same (Exception Fern Bay and South City)
As a result LFS just look deserted, dull and boring because of that, I mean how many times can you round Aston or Westhill or blackwood and not get feed up with its green grass and trees and nothing more?
If devs would allow modding i am sure there would be tons of tracks and cars well designed, known and desired but as for now LFS is just boring in longer perspective.
I am still wait and hope politics toward modding will change some day and i will get what I want, good physics and tons of fresh content, but as for now rFactor which handle like a brick on the wheels or GTL which looks kinda outdated but still fun are the only alternatives.
Post the same scene in dx8 and dx9 and i will show you the differences.
Since i played lock on FC and tried DCS i can tell you the most noticeable differences for me.
I played DCS only like 20 minutes because of the weak computer (But I still seen it on max details) it was quite time ago but here is what i noticed and still remember.
In DCS.
Textures were much better (resolution and details).
Shading was more live like it wasn't shiny glare it was more subtle and natural, darker in some places and bright in the other with mid tones and soft edges.
On grounds object were more detailed cars and firetracks for example had transparent glasses and crew inside.
Everything was more detailed as well 3d models and textures.
The environment is not so sterile anymore.
DCS definitely look better but you would have to show screens which presents ground, buildings, trees, clouds etc and not just two pictures which both show something different and incomparable.
And you still cant compare those two game to show us the differences because while yes DCS looks better but its not really much better as devs said themselves they didn't concentrate on better visual, Dx9 suppose to work better on modern PCs and allow for better physics.
To show us the real difference you should take stalker for example and make a quicksave turn to DX8 do prtscr then turn to DX9 load and do another screen and then you will see the difference.
Or any other game which uses both modes GTL for ex.
My two cents to this thread would be.
LFS doesn't need dx9/10/11 at least not now, at present moment i am satisfied with graphics, nice cockpits and shiny cars, Hi Res textures etc.
Compare LFS with GT4 on PS2, LFS surprisingly have much better graphics than GT4 so why doest GT4 looks much better?
Because they made a good use of what they had, life-like and interesting surroundings, colourful and realistic textures, everything is well designed and looks really good.
While in LFS every track looks almost the same (Exception Fern Bay and South City)
As a result LFS just look deserted, dull and boring because of that, I mean how many times can you round Aston or Westhill or blackwood and not get feed up with its green grass and trees and nothing more?
If devs would allow modding i am sure there would be tons of tracks and cars well designed, known and desired but as for now LFS is just boring in longer perspective.
I am still wait and hope politics toward modding will change some day and i will get what I want, good physics and tons of fresh content, but as for now rFactor which handle like a brick on the wheels or GTL which looks kinda outdated but still fun are the only alternatives.
Last edited by Chupacabras84, .
Yeah dem trolls
Lol no!!! I made it clear with my family long time ago that i do not want any presents at birthdays and such, because i prefer something useful and needed as a present than something which make a nice gesture but i dont really need or want it (exceptions are small and not expensive stuff)
So If I would receive a expensive rock
I would be mad someone wasted his money on stuff i dont even want.So I get less presents, barely any
everything is discussed with me beforehand so there is no OMG surprise factor but since then there wasn't a single thing i didn't want.
Actually thats easy.
Time of human reaction is pretty fast something around 0,2 sec i think.
Also average player move his mouse/steering wheel with great speed while playing.
While game plays with relatively small speed if compared with speed of human motion.
So when you move your mouse fast you can see effect on the screen at the same moment only if your fps is good around something around 50 fps so the computer can keep up with the speed of your motion and can reproduce it on the screen, if its lower for example 25 fps you move your hand and you notice that there is big delay because everything is slower on the screen because you moving your controller faster than computer can reproduce its movements to the screen.
Unfortunately my English sux big time, hope you get more or less what i wanted to say.
Last edited by Chupacabras84, .
Protip: Goatse :google:
Note: Dont search 4 the actual pic if you are underage, sane and want to stay that way, browsing with mother or just want to stay on the bright side.
Last edited by Chupacabras84, .
Depend on the game and your rig, experience my vary between users, for me there is no impact in LFS while in some other games there is a big difference.
Also there is curious effect if you set Vsync on in double buffered mode it will cut your fps. for example it will display only 60, 30, 20, 15, 10 means that if your fps is 45 it will be cut to 30 (Dont remember exactly how this thing work but more or less how i explained..I think :razz
Also
Example is pretty good in itself but it wont work like this in LFS unless you use track ir or free track.
This terrible looking result when image look like victim of the butcher split in pieces its noticeable mostly during panning.
Examples shooters, flight sims when you use head tracking device to look around cockpit and i think that's it.
In race games like LFS I think you wont notice it (Unless you use head tracking device but even then Vsync off doesn't automatically mean that image quality goes down, its differs from game to game and your rig)
T1 massacre nothing out of the ordinary
Bond agrees
I think you need to spend some time on /b/ eventually you will be ok with everything, just like Budda
You might even find this zombie thing kinda arousing, who know
Ever heard of this revived trend on 4chan?
Zombie fetish :insane:
So what I want to say is... he ... isnt really necessary...
Click only if you over 18 dont really care about being sane anymore and have nothing to lose.
PS. Or if you are TVE
I still love you TVE
Last edited by Chupacabras84, .
Words "whore" and "slut" in thread.
In b4 TVE
In b4 TVE
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG