I'm really looking forward to next week and hearing more info about the laser scanned track in Australia. I thought that iRacing were pretty much the only guys that had this technology, but if this is just some Joe Sixpack that has managed to do the same thing it would be amazing. It could open up all sorts of options for LFS to get some completely accurate real world tracks. Perhaps not "premier" tracks that have expensive licensing requirements or exclusive deals with other companies, but we might at least see lesser known tracks in the game one of these years.
I don't remember Scawen saying that Z would be compatible, and in the test patch forum he even mentions changes to the way wheels are rendered to make them have less overhead. But, I haven't been on the forums in quite a while (prior to last week), so I might have missed that. If it's true, I'm going to be bummed, because I'm really looking forward to the new interiors.
Making any changes to the car/player models affects physics. Changing even a single polygon makes the patch incompatible.
These are great! Thanks a lot for posting them.
We've had 20 test patches in the last couple of months, and Scawen has been pretty quiet for the past week or so. I'd venture to guess that the next big patch is getting quite close to release. The new replay system alone is worth the wait, and supporting Asian languages now will make things easier in the future. It's almost certain that Patch Z will have the new GTR interiors along with all of the test patch changes, so it should be a significant patch. When it comes out there will be more than enough stuff to post on the web site.
Having said that, I would kill for a new track and maybe a car or two.
Having said that, I would kill for a new track and maybe a car or two.
I really love the textures, but the car shine thing is really bugging me. With the car shine value turned down to .3 the dashboards are still very shiny and have a blue tint. If I turn down the car shine any further the cars themselves look like they are painted with matte colors. I'd like to change back whatever limited files cause this behavior.
What files changed that altered the look of the car shine? Is it the sky files that are included with the pack?
Edit: It looks like it was the reflection textures themselves (the SKY_semisun files). I changed those back to the textures I was using before and it seems to be fixed. I think that LFS as a whole looks better with the car shine turned back up to .6-.7 and the other reflections available in this subforum. My $0.02.
What files changed that altered the look of the car shine? Is it the sky files that are included with the pack?
Edit: It looks like it was the reflection textures themselves (the SKY_semisun files). I changed those back to the textures I was using before and it seems to be fixed. I think that LFS as a whole looks better with the car shine turned back up to .6-.7 and the other reflections available in this subforum. My $0.02.
Last edited by Cue-Ball, .
I agree with thisnameistaken. If there was any sort of feel through a game controller's brake pedal I would be all for this. But, since you get no feel at all I think that the max brake force is a concession to reality that must be made for playability.
There is an easy solution to this problem: Server admins.
When I run a server it is made very clear on the intro screen that post-race wrecking will not be tolerated. Do it once and you get a warning. Do it twice and you get booted. Easy peasy.
When I run a server it is made very clear on the intro screen that post-race wrecking will not be tolerated. Do it once and you get a warning. Do it twice and you get booted. Easy peasy.
5% fuel is enough for the AI to run several laps in most any track/car combo. Because they are not human they don't make mistakes or progressively get faster, so there's no reason for them to qualify for hours on end.
I'm not sure I even understand the desire to have them run for longer. Don't you want a clear track for qualification? I think it would be nice if the AI staggered themselves a bit more so that they aren't all on the track at once, but I certainly don't see any reason someone would want them out there for more laps than is necessary.
From your screenshot, it looks like you have Antialiasing enabled. However, from the in-game screenshot it is obvious that it's not enabled (or, at least, not working).
It would be nice if these settings were handled by LFS, but when you turn the settings on in your graphics driver, they should damn well turn on!
You can host your own server as well. Perhaps the other people who have S1 feel the same way. You could host and then you'd all be able to play together. 
Thanks, but this will probably be my last reply to the thread for a while. I want to have some lunch, do some racing, and maybe play some Team Fortress.
We also had a few nutjobs run planes into some buildings, a nutjob blow up a building with a truck full of cow manure, a nutjob who tried to blow up a plane with his shoe, etc. I assume that since none of those things happened in Great Britain, that you must have bans on planes, trucks, cow manure, and shoes?
Just a few posts ago you complained when I compared crime rates in the U.S. and GB when it supported my point. But when it supports your point, you seem to be all for it. The question is whether or not gun bans had any effect on crime. It does no good to say "there have been no mass shootings!" if the people who would have shot 10 others instead blow up 20. Perhaps the 52 people that died in the 7/7 train bombings would have been only 10 people if the guy used a gun. Or perhaps nobody would have died if an upstanding citizen with a gun were around to stop the loonie that did it.
I think that perhaps those shaved gorillas would think twice before picking a fight with someone if they thought that they would get more than a black eye.
Frankly, I find your comment quite offensive and derogatory. Especially since I'm a pretty liberal atheist who has several homosexual friends.
There you go again, comparing the U.S. and UK after you chided me for it. And, there you go again singling out "gunshot wound" deaths. It does not matter how a person was killed, it only matters that they were killed. If 10 people die this month from guns, we outlaw guns, and 10 people die next month from knives...is that really progress?
It doesn't matter what you believe - it only matters what you can prove! The evidence is there, and it supports the fact that guns do not cause crime, and that outlawing them does not lower crime.
If England -an island nation- can't make a gun ban work, what chance does any other country have? Australia, also an island nation, can't get a gun ban to work. Do you think that such a ban has any chance in a nation that has porous borders? No way.
I don't think it really is all that complex. Crackheads might still commit crime to get money for their drugs, but it's possible that people wouldn't become crack heads if they had a legal substitute such as marijuana. Maybe the crackheads would have jobs working at the hemp shop or collecting taxes on the heroin sold by Wal-Mart.
Organized crime is basically involved in drugs, prostitution, and gambling...all things that are outlawed to one degree or another. When things are legal the mob loses their power. Why should anyone deal with the mob to place a bet when they can do it legally down the street? Why risk picking up a shady, diseased hooker when you can get a clean, legal girl down on Broadway? Drug laws, prostitution laws, and gambling laws don't work because they try to prevent people from doing things that most do not have a moral issue with, and when they punish victimless crimes. Laws are only effective when people believe in what they stand for, and most people don't believe that the government has any business meddling in their affairs when it hurts nobody else.
If someone only has a spoon and wants to hurt me, knowing that I have nothing, then he will do so. If someone has a gun and wants to hurt me, knowing that I have nothing, then he will do so. If someone has a gun and wants to hurt me, but he knows that I also have a gun, he will rethink his actions because the risks to him are higher.
Someone who is truly hell bent on killing you is probably going to accomplish it, regardless of what method of defense you have, and regardless of what method of attack they are limited to. There's nothing you can do to safeguard against that. However, firearms are an effective defense against the common criminal and they are the most basic assurance against government tyranny and opression.
I don't want to cause destruction. I am not bent on destruction. I do not live in fear. I'm a normal, white-collar guy leading a normal, productive, peaceful existence. I just happen to carry with me a tool that -while it will probably never be necessary- could just save my life one day.
It has nothing to do with fear. You think I carry a gun because I'm afraid of getting assaulted? Hardly. I'm not afraid of getting into a crash on the way to the grocery store, but I wear a seatbelt. I'm not afraid of my house blowing down, but I have home insurance. My gun is nothing more than insurance against something bad happening. Not only do I not live in fear, but I don't fear situations that others might. When my wife has to walk to her car in the dark after work she's not scared that someone may attack her because she knows she can defend herself. If a stranger (or entire group of them) walks up to me on the street I don't have to be fearful of them because I know that I can protect myself.
If you're playing on Blackwood, you're racing downhill. Not really a fair comparison
So your position is that murders are fine just as long as they are spread out instead of happening all at once? It must be, since the murder rate and violent crime rate are both up following the gun ban.
Interesting. How many guns did Timothy McVeigh use when he killed 168 people in Okahoma City? How many guns did the September 11th hijackers use when they killed over 3,000 people? How many people are murdered each year with everyday objects like knives, bats, golf clubs, etc? If someone wants to kill you (or a bunch of random people), they don't just give up because they don't have a pistol handy.
Yes, it would. Don't you think that people would be a lot less likely to pick a fight with someone they know can defend themselves? An armed society is a polite society.
I've already given statistics in this thread, as well as citing a book which references most all of them.
So, when something good happens it's because of the gun ban, but when something bad happens it's because of other factors? Sorry, you can't have it both ways. Perhaps the decrease in burglaries is because the pirates and ninjas are fighting it out on a remote island somewhere, leaving no ninjas to break and enter?
Look at the reference book that I cited. It accounts for many of these types of factors (though it concentrates on the crime rate in the U.S., and only touches briefly on other nations.
We have the same issue in the U.S., mostly caused from victimless drug crimes. I personally believe that everyone would be safer and happier if drugs were legalized.
You are much more likely to be killed by a swimming pool, a ladder, or your car than you are by a gun. Yet, when people see a those other items they think nothing of it. When people see a gun, even if it is sitting on a bench or safely holstered, they suddenly fear it. That is irrational. Being scared by a gun pointed at you is not. Just as being scared of a parked car would be irrational, but being fearful of a car barreling towards you is not.
Really? Where? I'm sure that the Brady Campaign would love to get ahold of the scientific data that you've got, because they've been trying to convince the American public of the effectiveness of gun bans for about 30 years and have been unable to do so.
Guns are effectively banned for the general public. Obtaining a gun is very difficult and expensive, and only very few models are allowed. And the gun ban has not proven effective at all. Armed assault, rape, and burglary all went up after the ban. In Sydney, handgun crime went up over 400% between 1995 and 2001. Don Weatherburn, the head of the Bureau of Crime Statistics said that there is no convincing evidence that gun laws have had any positive effect on crime.
I think my best time in the XRT is 13.10 or so, but there were guys on the server the other night running in the high 12s.
Refresh my memory...what was it that lead to the 1997 gun ban in Great Britain? How about the similar nationwide gun ban in Australia? And let us not forget how serene and peaceful Northern Ireland was for the past 30 years. There are crazy, pissed off people all over the world. If they can't get a gun and shoot you, they're more than happy to blow you up instead.
Tightened a bit? A total handgun ban was passed. Long guns are virtually outlawed as well. Even Great Britain's Olympic athletes have to practice elsewhere because their weapons aren't allowed in the country. That's more than "tightened a bit". Did the gun cause the scoutmaster to become a nutjob? Is that how it's to blame?
England and Wales topped the U.N. list of first world countries with violent crime (beaten only by Australia, which also has very strict gun control). The United States doesn't even break into the Top 10. "Contact crime" in Great Britain is almost double what it is in the U.S. Burglary, auto theft, assault, etc are all higher in England than in the U.S. Often, by very large margins. Murder rates are higher in the U.S., but as I said earlier, you are very unlikely to be murdered unless you are a gang member or drug dealer. Other contact crimes happen to "normal" people. Were I a gang member, my chances of being murdered would be higher in the U.S. But as a regular citizen, my chances of being a victim of a violent crime are greater in Great Britain.
But, since you don't like being compared to the U.S., how about we compare apples to apples. Violent crime, deaths, and gun deaths have all gone UP in Great Britain following very strict gun control. The number of people injured by gunfire more than doubled from 1997 until now. Prior to the anti-gun legislation, violent crime and murders were both on the decline. Australia's crime rate was in steady decline until a massacre by a crazed gunman. They enacted sweeping anti-gun legislation and the crime rate climbed. Several U.S. cities had declining crime rates. Those cities passed anti-gun legislation in the 70's and the crime rate rose to record levels (and has remained there ever since).
Gun control laws do not work. Period. Taking away guns doesn't make bad people suddenly become good. It always goes the same way...certain guns are outlawed with the promise that crime will drop - but it doesn't. So more guns are outlawed. Instead of dropping, violent crime rises. So all guns are outlawed, yet crime remains the same or goes up. Then other weapons are outlawed, and so it goes. It's always more, more, more. We must have more restriction. We must have harsher penalties. But it doesn't work.
People have an unexplainable fear of firearms. Rather than being viewed as tools and inanimate objects they are vilified and viewed as evil. Until people learn to treat the problem (violent people) rather than blaming the tool, we'll always get what we've always gotten.
Luckily, I don't have to give guns to my grannies. They already have them.
You keep your system, we'll keep ours. I'm perfectly fine with that. Besides, my work day is over so I need to finish up this post and head home.
I just want to know if they actually said "sodding" or if you are substituting for other, less kind words.
The demo cars aren't worthless, but they don't make for very good drag cars. The BMW is about as good for drag as a shopping cart and the XFG is fwd. The XRG is a full-bodied, rwd car, but it's very low powered. The TBO class seems much better. Three different drivetrain layouts all of which are reasonably competitive (the FXO not quite as fast due to fwd). They're fast enough to be fun, but slow enough that you have time to see how close the guy next to you is. And all three are h-shift which is part of what makes drag racing so fun. The FZ5, LX6 and RAC are also fun, being RWD and h-shift, but not too overly-powerful.
When you get your S2 license, stop by the server. I'd love to race you in the XRT.
You may think there is no correlation, but scientific study and statistical analysis shows otherwise.
The crime rate in Great Britain is about as "insignificant" as the crime rate in the U.S. And, as in England, crime in the US is largely due to gang activity and drug prohibition. While many Europeans like to think of the U.S. as the wild west, it's simply not true, and crime rates are comparable between the US and many European countries, despite the gun bans that are so widespread in there.
That is the same thing that anti-gun people constantly say over and over and it simply is not true. This is the same thing that people said about Florida. This is the same thing that people said when right-to-carry was granted in many US states. Right-to-carry states in the U.S. have lower crime across the board (according to the FBI's own crime statistics). The cities that have the most restrictive gun ownership (New York, Washington D.C., Chicago) have the highest crime rates without exception. More guns = less crime. It's really that simple. It may not be what you want to hear, but it's the truth.
Guns were outlawed in Great Britain in 1997. Violent crime in England has risen 69% between then and now. Robbery has risen 45%. Murder has risen over 50%. Violent crime and gun crime (wait, aren't they banned?) both have gone up every single year since the ban was put in place. Guns are still widely available in Great Britain, despite the gun ban. Violent criminals still have access to weapons while law abiding citizens are left defenseless. The criminals that can't get their hands on a gun commit crimes with whatever other weapon they have handy. Now, not only are guns illegal but swords are too. I'm sure kitchen knives, stones, and sharp sticks are next up on the list. When those are all gone, the thugs will simply attack the feeble and elderly with their bare hands.
Getting rid of the tool doesn't get rid of the behavior. It only removes the opportunity for law abiding citizens to defend their own lives.
I think you misunderstand. We DO use the drag strip. However, the way that the LFS drag strip works right now is not like real drag racing. You don't get to warm your tires. You don't get to pre-stage or stage. You don't get reaction time, 60' time, etc numbers. Running this mod on the drag strip is the closest you can get to actual drag racing in LFS because it provides those things while being on completely flat and level ground. To host on the demo would require using the Blackwood straight which is not level and is unacceptable to me. Also, the demo cars are worthless for drag racing, while under S2 we can use the TBO class to keep racing tight (it's fun to watch an FXO narrowly beat an RB4), or we can open it up to the RAC, the FZ5, the LX6, etc. for some quicker passes. Some people enjoy dragging the GTRs, but now that they use sequential shifters I think they're less fun, so they are disabled on my server.
You can save your breath about defending Demo drivers and servers. I've gone down that road and won't bother again. Licensed (S2) servers are much more pleasant to administer because people are not anonymous and can be held liable for their actions. I refuse to deal with the chaos that demo servers entail, and I refuse to reward people who won't buy the game by hosting a server like this and allowing them to extend the content of what is supposed to be a limited trial.
You can save your breath about defending Demo drivers and servers. I've gone down that road and won't bother again. Licensed (S2) servers are much more pleasant to administer because people are not anonymous and can be held liable for their actions. I refuse to deal with the chaos that demo servers entail, and I refuse to reward people who won't buy the game by hosting a server like this and allowing them to extend the content of what is supposed to be a limited trial.
Nobody ever needs a gun until they NEED it. I don't need a seatbelt until someone hits my car. I don't need a smoke detector until my house catches on fire. I don't need a gun until someone tries to assault me. It's cheap insurance, great peace of mind, and a valuable skill to have.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG