Quote from Nick_ll :

oh and no I won't form any union with him. He's got valid points in terms that LFS can be improved and I indeed don't like fanboys, but I don't like them because they always say everything is marvelous and therefore are not constructive. Delerue isn't constructive either in his criticism, just the other way around. Fanboys say LFS is marvelous and everything is perfect, Delerue says LFS sucks and everything is crap; neither are constructive and will make LFS better by any means.

I never said that. It seems that you made the same mistake that almost every one here: you don't read what I say. See:

Quote from Delerue :

Look, I like the game, and think it has a lot of potential things, but I can't deny there's still a lot to be done. And things that had to be done a long time ago; that's the main problem. [source: http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=38029#post38029]

We're at the same team, man. I agree with you in almost everything that you said. We like the game, but think that there's a lot of things to be done, and must of those things must be done as fast as possible. So, take it easy.

Quote from Honey :

please all calm down there's no reason for all of that, please!

He's taking the pain for the DEVs. I'm relaxed.

Quote from Nick_ll :

Here in Canada, LFS costs 83% of a full game for a 66% finished product: FACT.

[..]

And you can't ask me how many games will be as complete as LFS WILL BE when it reaches S3 because you don't know. There are titles like NetKar Pro and First Racing (maybe even GP Lengends if a miracle happens) that might get released in the meantime, and then you don't know what will happen with LFS.

[...]

The fanboys will say what is released is awesome anyways, no matter what is done. You don't need to gain those customers they are already hooked and don't plan to move. What you want is to get more customers, so on that note, the language patches were a good move.

You are all completely wrong when you think I can't play it or say anything about it just because I don't have the license. I thought you had read what I said about it.

I'm only trying to read this thread, but it's difficult sometimes.

BTW, Victor answered some of my questions, but I think that the most important thing is that he gets my main point (or I hope so).

Quote from Victor :

You say a lot, but I hear nothing. What exactly is it you want out of this conversation? Just complain?

I'm doing what the fans don't do: tell the problems, without fear or something like that. But you simply didn't answer any of my questions and thoughts. Strange...

Look, I like the game, and think it has a lot of potential things, but I can't deny there's still a lot to be done. And things that had to be done a long time ago; that's the main problem. And you (DEVs) thought this is normal, and that you don't have to say anything about it to the consumers. I remember that before you realeased the alpha version, the progress reports were abounding. Strange...

I think you know the most important bugs and problems: sound (where's the multi-channel support? where's the gear sound? doppler? could the crash sounds be at least closer to reality? and so much more...); aero bugs; visual body damage bugs; tyres physics (please, it's impossible that you think a car loses grip at such low rates of speed.); force feedback (how about shaking the joystick-wheel as the engine rotation increases? and how about simulating bumps on the track? there are so many things yet to be done with force feedback...). Well, those are some of the things.

Thanks for you cooperation, and don't lose your mind, man. You have an image to be uphold.

Best regards

Quote from Scawen :

[ALL]

I think it was a mistake to think that every one that plays LFS comes everyday to this forum. How much time would you spend writing a few words about the progress of the LFS in the main page?

I think it was a mistake to promise the final release to december/2004, and not have it done almost one year (!) after that. I think it was a mistake to charge an expensive price to something that was not ready and has a lot of old and critical bugs.

But I understand one thing: since most people love your game, so you thought there was no reason to care about those things. It's sad, just sad.

Quote from tristancliffe :

But it has Starforce, poor physics, fake force feedback, terrible netcode, more expensive, and has mostly rubbish cars that don't feel realistic.

Whatever floats your boat. Perhaps you don't know what a good sim should feel like...

Just to make myself clear: I don't play Starforce (even hating it). Poor physics is your opinion, that can't be proved. Fake force feedback, idem (BTW, have you ever read what you said in another place?). Netcode is worst, you're (finally) right, but I play offline almost all the time. More expensive is in your insane math world. Oh! I forgot to say: GT Legends is a finished game.

Ending here...
Later

Quote from Nick_ll :

[...] The reason I post things like saying I find Eric is slow is because it is how I honestly feel. I'm probably a bit more cold-headed/less fanboy than most people here because I can see things in a way out.

[...]

I am one of the few who think the devs don't need to be protected by an elitist community. They need CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM to move forward, not ass licking being told everything they do is always the best ever and everything is marvellous in a wonderful world. They don't need to be protected by anyone. Just like a racecar driver that is criticised can respond by a strong performance on track, the LFS devs can respond to bad critics (i.e. not constructive) by making improvements to their product (because that's what LFS is: a commercial product).

I don't think people you'll hear what you perfectly said. They think that all people in the world are just fans. So, if you don't like one thing in LFS, you must love GTR or rFactor or... They can't see that all the games have problems (I can list a lot of GTR bugs, per example), but if a game has a problem it must be fixed yesterday. And if a game has too much problems, so the DEVs must work 24 hours, everyday to bring back the consumers money spent. And if a game has a lot of old problems, there's something wrong with the DEVs. AND if a game has all these things associated with a precarious game-play, so we have a really serious problem.

Nevertheless, the point here is that we (you alone and me) talking with blind guys, that will gonna do anything to protect the love of their lives. So, give up. Congratulations to the DEVs, that trick out so much people. I'll play GT Legends: more beautil (dynamic lighting, pixel shaders, high polygon count etc.), more loud (real samples, multi-channel support, doppler), more realistc, more cheaper and it has almost all the great cars I care about. See U.

Quote from Breizh :

Define "bad". Quality is in this case a measure of how ludic the game is.. which is a matter of taste and therefore not everyone can be pleased. There are different games which stroke different people different ways, Scawen & co chose a particular stroke and have stuck to it pretty well.

The DEVs forget about the most old bugs: tyres physics, FFB and sound. And now the aero physics bug. Pretty well, ahn?

Quote from Breizh :

Problem? It doesn't bother me, and I'm a racing purist. In fact, the cost/benefit ratio is more than worth giving up marques and badges, in my opinion. A matter of opinion, see a pattern yet? I see a rear-engined 3.6 liter NA boxer with fat rear tires, which is the same thing I see in a Porsche.. I don't care if it's from Stuttgart, it's a particular design that's among other things very fun to race online.

You must be kidding. One time you said that GTR & co can be better because they have a lot of things that LFS doesn't, like licenses. Now you don't care about licenses. Besides, we all know that real cars are more real than fake cars, just because real cars exists and can be simulated step by step. Fake cars are only physics guess.

Quote from Breizh :

I think a well written symphonic orchestra piece in polyphonic MIDI format appeals to different aesthetic criteria than a studio-mastered and uncompressed Daft Punk dancefloor piece. They're both aesthetic executions in different forms.. they're both music. Which one is good? Which one is more likely to make you feel immersed in it? De gustibus et coloribus non disputandum, not just random latin.

You're not so good with fallacies. You compare different things, but insinuate that they are close enough to be compared. I'll reply only this: what do you preffer (and listen): MIDI or WAV? Now we're talking about the same subject.

Quote from Breizh :

This is all moot, because unless I misread it, LFS will improve the sound by improving the synthetic sound while keeping the engine sound management real-time. Best of both worlds, more real when all's said and done.

"Will improve...". Man, look at that argument. You say it since LFS is on the first alpha stage, more than three years ago. Your arguments tends to be a circle.

Quote from Breizh :

LFS didn't win GTR's awards the same way indie films don't cater to Hollywood's All's well that ends well, big-budget marketing rationale.

Another wrong analogy. And again you want to defend the game because it doesn't have enough money. So...? You play the game, don't you?

Quote from Breizh :

<< (concerning the price) >>
No offense.. that's Brazil's problem, not the LFS devs'.

It's not that simple. Even at S2 stage we have a little more money at the price. But soon you'll say that the problem X, Y and Z will be solved at S3 stage, which cost more $12, a total of EDITED$36. Yeah! The most expensive game ever! And more: the most sold old work in progress game ever. Can you deny it?

Quote from Breizh :

That was my point. It all comes down to a matter of taste, of what's fun. Different flavors for different people. But even that put aside, you're making statements of facts alone, and concluding statements of value from them. There's no statement of value in your premises.

You all don't say that the hole thing is about taste. You all want to 'prove' that the game is good (perfect, ahn?).

Quote from Breizh :

And yeah you're right, I can like LFS if it was Pong.. check out the game Generally.. Is that game "wrong" to pretend being exactly what it is?

LFS wants to be the ultimate online racing sim, come on. It isn't even the ultimate racing sim...

Quote from Breizh :

*your only true point is you, specificaly, will find it easier to not play this game after downplaying it in its official general discussion forum.

Sorry, but I can't understand.

Last edited by Delerue, Mon 7 Nov 2005, 19:50.

Quote from Boris Lozac :

Man, you really belive in the things you say?? Still?? I can tell you right now, what kind of a guy you are.. even if i don't know you. You like Skylines, neon lights, tribal tatoo stickers on the cars, don't you?? You don't see the point in racing, don't understand racing lines, you just like the flashy cars, cool cars, with spinning rims..

You don't know me. You don't even read what I said. I hate tuning stuff. And how can I like it if I don't like NFS, Grand Turismo and Juiced? If I like GTR and GT Legends. Think about it.

Quote from Boris Lozac :

You say, that pro drivers in Brazil play GTR.. Why do you think is that.. ?Because they saw it in the supermarket, on the shelf, with big FIA GT LICENSED cars on the cover, and he thinks that there is nothing better than that, because that was the best offer on that shelf..

You don't know what they said about the games. You're precipitating the things. Ask before say wrong things.

Quote from Boris Lozac :

LFS is very unknown to the poople that doesn't browse forrums, etc.. They don't know how good it is, because they didn't heard of it..

No, wrong. The pilots know LFS, play LFS, but preffer GTR. They say that LFS isn't close enough to the real world. That's it.

Quote from Boris Lozac :

You dismissed LFS because when you started it, the menu was in 3 colors, the car interior is not fancy, so imediately spinning rim said to you, "this is not a sim, look at that interior!"

Games have three real feedbacks: sounds, graphics and force feedback. If one of these things is bad, the game suffers. But LFS doesn't have only one of these things bad. All the three things are wrong (sound is the worst, then force feedback), and much more: the tyres physics and the aero physics are insane. Why you all have to deny these things? Asking the DEVs for these things we'll be a gain of all of us.

Quote from Forbin :

You clearly don't understand what LFS is about if you criticize the sounds, graphics, etc.

LFS wants to be the ultimate online racing sim, but it isn't even the ultimate racing sim... If you have problems at single player, you'll have the same problems (except AI, of course) at multiplayer.

Quote from Forbin :

Why do "real" racers prefer GTR? Maybe because it's a *drumroll* big money game... Nothing to do with realism.

I know what these guys say: GTR is undoubtedly more real than LFS.

Quote from Forbin :

Anyone else get the feeling that the forum has been suddenly invaded by ISI fanboys?

I'm not a fan of anything, except good games (f*** about the DEVs, money, names, entreprise etc). But whats the relevance of this thing?

BTW, I never attack people here, but I'm suffering several attacks. Is there any moderator here? Or they are LFS-fan too?

I don't want to reply this thread anymore. But I have to say to you some things.

And sorry for my really bad english; portuguese is my official language.

Quote from Breizh :

Licenses are part of the game, like I said if you think they're so negligible, you should give Scawen & co a call and persuade them. If you're right you've got things better figured out than him and everyone else.

I've see you're good with fallacy. But you're trying do apply thoughts on wrong places. Think that way. If you don't know the history of a game, you will only want to play it. If the game is bad, is bad, and you'll be desapointed. You don't wanna know how much people, money, licenses or the time invested; you'll care only about the game. If the DEVs can't acquire licenses, so this a problem with their games, and with you, that bought the game. Again: you play the game, not the DEVs. And don't think "I have to refute what he said". Think, only.

Quote from Breizh :

Ad hominem aside, the sounds are real time, a design choice for the long run, for the same reason LFS is made in tiers. So on that point you're right, this game doesn't fit your tastes, remains to be seen if you can prove that it's a bad design choice. Straw man.. the sounds are a bit corny, big deal.

Tell me one thing: do you really think that the sounds of LFS are close to the reality? Listen without hurry. Pay attention to the crash sounds. F*** about 'real time' (...) sounds. We all know that synthetic sounds sucks, and never can't be close to the real world. My Ad hominem goes on a propitious moment. If you ask anyone that never played LFS what is more real: synthetic sounds or sample sounds? You'll undertand. But there's more. Why you think other games spend so much time (money...) recording too many samples if they could make synthetic sounds, more easy, light to the CPU and disk space, and, supposedly, more real? Why you think GTR wins so much awards with the sound stuff? Only think about it.

Quote from Breizh :

Resp. 30-40$,35$,50 bucks on amazon, but let's say 40$, that's at most -10$ difference with LFS, if that much.. big deal? Not going to get into the tiered business model of LFS until you demonstrate what's wrong with it, rather than insinuate your disaproval of it

The user "_rod_" already answered this question.

Quote from Breizh :

Pretty much any game that, intentionaly or not, ships out to then get patches.. Doom, Splinter Cell 3, GTR etc got patches. e.g. Aces High: 3000+ player base, 500 in one arena @ prime-time, despite faults you're pointing out on LFS: WIP graphics and strategic (a core gameplay element) engine at the expense of "lesser" short term graphics overall, no authentic sounds (the community makes them, on par with Il2/FB/PF's for example), but internet gameplay and physics model better than the competition's. Open ended development in close parallel to the players. And it's made by all of 2 programers and 2 artists.

You must be kidding. Patches is only to improve games, not to make them. All the games you told about came ready to be played; and the patches came to improve FPS, multiplayer codes and other little stuffs. If you insist to compare LFS patches with all the other games, you're making a mistake, commiting a fallacy. LFS has more versions and patches then any other game I have seen. And LFS still has the same basic bugs that the first versions. There's something wrong here, and we all must agree, don't you think?

Quote from Breizh :

This is because you admit that quality/quantity/man-hours is irrelevent. It isn't, and if you take price into account i.e. quality/quantity/man-hours/price

You're pushing a wrong argument. Imagine if we all have to know the history of game to be ready to say something about it. Imagine we all searching the time, money, people and other things related to the game, only to be ready to say: is good, or is bad, or is unfair, or is prety right. Doesn't make any sense. You play the game!

Quote from Breizh :

Non sequitur again, the game is made by those people for a certain purpose by a certain design. Spell out the math error please...

The game wants to be the ultimate race sim. Why we never see any award (when compare to other games) or real pilots playing LFS and saying 'wow, pretty amazing real!'? Here, in Brasil, we have online servers for GTR, rFactor, GT Legends and LFS. Why the real pilots never play LFS? Why they ALL prefer GTR?

Quote from Breizh :

1-There's Improvements&Suggestions and Bug reports forums, problems aren't ignored.

You can't prove it. I have a lot of bug reports that are simply ignored, just like here. BTW, where are the DEVs? Why they never reply my comments? Strange...

Quote from Breizh :

2-Naturalistic fallacy.

You know, fallacy is an invalid argument because can be wrong or illogical thought. But you know that some fallacies are true. But, whatever, you can like LFS even if it were a black point moving through the screen.

Quote from Breizh :

3-The forum is pretty PC apparently because it has lots of youngun's, that's insane? Whether it is or not has nothing to do with game development, you're just stirring for the sake of it.. On one end you have Racing Legends and on the other Gran Turismo. LFS is right in the middle.

Yep. LFS is right in the middle. Now we agree. Better than NFS, GrandTurismo, Juiced etc. But worst than GTR, rFactor, GT Legends etc.

But LFS can be one of the greatest games. Fixing some bugs and be more humble, changing some things, like sound, lighting, FFB, tyres physics etc; things that are wrong a long, long, long time ago.

Nice to talk with you, man.
Hugs

Last edited by Delerue, Mon 7 Nov 2005, 17:49.

Quote from Breizh :

Those games have licenses

I don't care about licenses or not; I care about the game itself.

Quote from Breizh :

cost more

No, wrong. All the games I've told about cost less than LFS. And LFS isn't finished yet, and is older than any other game (GTR, rFactor GTL).

Quote from Breizh :

and have more man-hours into them.

Again: I don't care about it. If the game is good, is good. If the game is bad, is bad. F*** about money and people envolved in the production. You said: "the real point is, it's fun". That's the main point. And the LFS must fix a lot of things (and make others) to be funny like the other games.

Quote from Breizh :

LFS development isn't eternal; can you back up what you're saying?

Do you know any other game that have more then three years, sold licenses even in an unfinished stage? When you think that S3 will be finished? LFS will be very soon the most old-work-in-progress-expansive-sold-bug-game in the world.

Quote from Breizh :

Say, give the number of man-hours put into those games, and show a quantity/price ratio on both development and client side?

Again: f*** about the people envolved. You play the game, not the DEVs. And your math is wrong, again.

Quote from Breizh :

Debating it here is in vain, but you surely knew that.

It won't be if people ask for the problems, instead of adulate all the things that DEVs makes. We have here people that spend money with problem things, and they like it. And if you said the real things here, you're crazy. Is insane, isn't?

Last edited by Delerue, Mon 7 Nov 2005, 05:57.

Quote from Breizh :

GTR & co aren't works in progress in public alpha.
LFS is working to be a thoroughly good sim, and only will be in final form comparable to final releases like GTR & co when S3 is done.. This is the backbone of everything to follow.

Ok. The old and fashion fan-argument. What you have to say about the age of these games? I don't care about how many DEVs are envolved, I care about the final product; the game itself. And talking about it, we all have to agree that LFS, with more than three years (since alpha version), have a lot of bugs and unfinished things. On the other hand, we have GTR, rFactor and GT Legends, with better graphics, sounds, force feedback and physics. These games has better things with less time and price. And again: I don't care about how many DEVs are envolved and how much money they have. If we have a expansive game (and LFS, couting all the Stages, are one of the most expansives games ever), with eternal alpha stages, a lot of bugs and never a final product, so we have problems. That's what I think. But you can disagree, of course.

What piss me off is that LFS has great potencial, and there are only a little things to make it a really good game (the things I said before). Other thing is that the fans can't say a impartial thoughts; they all like to protect the problems, like if they were sons. What's wrong with saying that LFS has real problems?

That's all folks.

Quote from sil3ntwar :

IMO there is nothing wrong with the crashing sounds. Could you elaborate more on what you dont like? And although i dont have an FF wheel i hear that the FF in LFS is better than most other games.

I won't say anything. If you can realise that the crash sounds are insane, I'm so sorry. Furthermore, all the sounds are insane, and only a blind fan can't see that.

BTW, tell these people that GTR, rFactor e GT Legends exists, and have force feedback. Just do begin, LFS hasn't bumps simulated on force feedback.

Quote from Tweaker :

Don't listen to XCNuse, his words are not a knowledgeable source.

Thanks for that. I was crying here.

Hugs!

Quote from XCNuse :

nope; working on translation problems now; they probably wont work on those 'bugs' .. not really bugs in most respects, until they begin working on S3

Are you trying to say that the problems that I've said before won't be fix at S2 stage?

Quote from tinyk :

I see under your nick it says S1 license... have you tried S2 yet? I don't know if the new patches released affect S1 or not.

~*~*~*~tinyk~*~*~*~

I won't buy a unfinished game, with so much bugs and things to make and fix. I can only test the demo or the almost-full version at crazy friend's home.

Quote from XCNuse :

:doh: dont look on the website, they dont update that for experimental patches, they release them here first and get feedback then once its all final and whatnot they'll update the main page

Hey, take it easy. Why I have to know this? I'm here only to know WTF happened, and now I know a little more.

I haven't read the fixes of the these patches. They fixed the problems I've said before?

Quote from avih :

actually, during the last month or so there have been at least 4 updates. latest version is p9, while the alpa version was p2 iirc. count for yourself. they don't release the patches as official untill everyone's satisfied with them (scawen and the ppl who test them that is)

You must be kidding, I'm sure. The game isn't released yet. We have a lot of serious problems: tyres physics, force feeback unfinisihed, poor sounds (specially with crashes), aerodynamic bugs and so much more. So, how can we be satisfied with all these problems?

Quote from cannonfodder :

They're working on a new patch. Did you completely miss this thread? http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=2335

Hmmmmm... Thanks. I haven't see it yet. I was waiting for an update in the website. I'll check it.

Is the game still alive? I can't believe that we haven't see any update since August 7; three months! Even a progress report... Any idea?

Quote from tristancliffe :

Prove that it's not!

You must be kidding. Have you ever head something about "Ad Ignorantiam"? You can't invert the onus, dude. You say something, so you must prove it.

BTW, no evidence it's not a evidence of nothing.

[]´s

Quote from tristancliffe :

A simulation attempts to model everything like real life, and is not purely concerned with the end result, but how you got there and the consequences.

GTR/GTL is not like this, and neither is rFactor in many many areas. They are ONLY converend with the end result, which makes them seem more convincing at the moment, but as soon as you ask them to do funny things the model breaks down.

I doubt GTR could simulate the elk test as well as LFS does (see recent thread).

Prove it.

Quote from tristancliffe :

But they're only WRONG below 25km/h. How often do you EVER go that slow in a race? If you do so, then you won't win often. Above 25km/h, bar a few detail issues, the tyre modelling is VERY VERY good, i.e. at speeds that MATTER.

Why people keep trying to rubbish LFS by saying at tiny speed it's rubbish? I can't understand this behaviour.

No. Wrong. I'm talking about 25 km/h because is more easy to see the huge problem with tire physics that LFS has. You can see this problem at all speeds, but it's only more noticeable at med-low speeds. Play a real simulation game, like GTR, GTL, rFactor and you'll see. Better than this: drive a real car. You'll never lose grip too easily.