Quote from Gunn :

The setup flexibility allows us to also address shortcomings in the physics.

I'd guess that most people aren't intending to be physics testers while they're racing. I'd say leave that job to the devs and their testers rather than people who are racing each other.

Quote from Gunn :

People who suck at racing will still suck at racing, no matter how uniform the setup options are.

The benefits are more about eliminating some of the more unrealistic setups from the road cars (and eliminating the need to use them) rather than helping sucky racers. Many people who suck at racing will still download the quick sets anyway.

Last edited by farcar, Wed, 17 Dec 2008 04:34.

I'd definitely like to see more restrictions on setups.
Anything to level the playing field and make things more like real life is a good thing IMO.

Of course, the real reason that the patch has been delayed is because of THIS threat.

Thanks you Scawen for letting me keep my schlong safely in my pants (publicly at least).

Quote from danowat :

What I want to know is, how people are privvy to internal going on's from the development process

I'm not, that's why I said 'I'm guessing'.
Read the whole post.

Edit - Scawen has said that the the Scirocco has delayed other developments. I was just guessing by how much.

Quote from chaa :

I think the Scirocco won't help us. We need other new content, like tracks or bugfixes! But the Devs don't want any help in developing so LfS gets more and more boring! I guess the next patch will be released in a half year with things added, which no one needs!

That's a little harsh, but I know what you're getting at. I hope the devs will now prioritise improvements on the games weaknesses like collisions, damage, tracks, game structure etc. The range of cars was good prior to the FBM and VWS (and even BF1), and the development of these cars has delayed development of needed improvements significantly. By more than a year I'm guessing.

It's kinda like constantly being given new socks when what you need is shoes.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Easy. I prefer so many Mac programs to windows programs, it's not even funny how horrible windows is for usability after you become accustomed to OSX. Windows feels like trying to use a condom with barbs on the inside, compared to OSX being an ultra-thin condom. The feelings are totally full-circle opposite.

Each to their own I guess in terms of buying shiny expensive hardware, and I'm not going to try to change your opinion. Anyone who uses a condom analogy is probably not going to listen anyway.
Anyway, I'll make the point that these days software is either available on both operating systems (Adobe stuff, i-tunes etc) or there's a perfectly good alternative. Don't forget Linux either, if Windows is too tricky.

Believe me I'm not going to champion Microsoft's cause either. I just think that Apple are in some ways worse in terms of what they're trying to do to the market. Microsoft tried to make everyone need their OS but if Apple have their way, not only would everyone need to buys their OS, they would need buy their exclusive hardware to run it. A far from ideal situation IMO which is why they will never see the inside of my wallet.

Bye!

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Meh, I'll take rebooting into Windows. The FPS being 4 times higher on the same machine is worth the 30 seconds of rebooting.

Which makes me wonder why people don't just save a bundle of money and by non-Apple hardware.

Surely people don't fall for the shiny white facade and silly marketing?

You think that the future of the top echelons of motor sport are waning?
Simple answer, get back in to the grassroots amateur stuff.

In Australia there is the Shannon's Nationals series which is ten odd different categories ranging from sports sedans to production based cars and open wheelers. More interesting than most professional categories.

Quote from JohnUK89 :

All these people saying that it's being run in an emulator - no, it's not. It's being run inside virtualisation software.

At the end of the day, you're still running an OS on top of another OS albeit in a more efficient way than old methods.

It's still an inefficient way to run an app, and I still don't know what the point is.

Quote from Whiskey :

Since the LFS.exe was compiled for Windows it only can be executed under Windows architecture.

I know!

Quote from Whiskey :

But the important thing is: G. Dierckx executed LFS booting his computer under Mac

It's not really important IMO (absolutely nothing personal towards the OP). I really don't know why people go bananas about running Windows apps on a Mac OS? It's still just emulation, and what's the point?

Your Mac's OS isn't actually running LFS at all.
It's running an emulator which is running Windows which is running LFS.

So, your Mac has an emulator...


It's a very inefficient way to run LFS but good luck to you.

Quote from Bean0 :

There's bound to be other improvements

Yep, and really looking forward to to this:

Quote from Scawen :

More information next week!

Yay! A new patch before Xmas!

Quote from Mazz4200 :

Although X-Plane does have a few drawbacks, I'm loving it too.

Agree with your post. X-Plane' major lackings are:
1/Air traffic - It is featured, but it's clunky as hell and a framerate killer due to the way it's been implemented. Online is the way to go, but I don't know enough about procedures et al to do that yet.
2/ Lack of airport buildings - Most airports have runways and taxiways, but nothing else. Watch this space though because there is a very strong community of scenery developers working away at things, and apparently an update to the scenery builder is imminent.

Anyway, I generally just play around with light aircraft, so the flight model's where it's at for me and it's the beez neez.

btw - got a link to that Piper? I might get myself an early Xmas present.

BUMP

I have a couple of months of flying under my belt now.
Great sim.

I made a quick movie of a circuit around Chicago's CBD. The plane and the scenery are both freeware.

Youtube:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=YR4K-86S_NM

High Def:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=I5P1X6AA
Size - 211 MB
Resolution - 840*524 @ 9712 KBPS
Compression - XVID

Quote from Kalev EST :

George Lucas´s short student movie featuring Peter Brock driving a Lotus 23... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsBZEYqBW5o

I'm thinking this is Pete Brock as opposed to Peter Brock.
Had me confused there for a while...

Quote from blackbird04217 :

If they miss the XRT or BL1R that much, a very small amount of money is needed to buy this game.

That was the problem really. Many dr1fT0r5 had absolutely no intention of buying the game, so they have now gone or are stuck using an old version offline.

So, now the main focus in the demo is racing!

As I said, a very smart move by the devs.

Replacing the XRT with an open wheeler and removing Blackwood reverse from the demo I believe were both ploys to discourage dr1ft0rs and promote the game for what it is: a racing simulator.

A great move by the devs!

Quote from jayhawk :

According to Lauren Hill, you can be killed softly, also.

You mean Roberta Flack.

Quote from Vinnylegends :

There are alot of bugs...
Also I dont like the skies too much and the scenery is also low-res...
And some moving hands while shifting would'nt be too bad either...

There are a few things that you could say to suggest LFS is incomplete, but 'a lot of bugs'? It's one of the most stable and bug free pieces of software I've seen.

Re sky: Download the highres skies.
Re moving hands while shifting: The difficulty as I understand is that the software would need to anticipate a shift. In real life, the driver's arm moves before the shift. This, being impossible, has contributed to this feature being absent. It would be a nice touch during replays though.

OT

Quote from TypeRCivic :

Are you happy with the way LFS in leaning towards??

Absolutely! I just wish it would lean faster.

Quote from Gunn :

People complain that they know nothing about the development cycle and in almost the same breath say the development cycle has stagnated. I'm curious to know exactly how that sort of logic works, I suppose.

And I'm curious to know where I complained that I know nothing about the development cycle?

I've also never suggested that my thoughts on the state of development are the cold, hard truth. They are observations, opinions and speculation as are yours (unless the your harboring secret information :really. This, being the game's forum I figure is an appropriate place to vent such things.

In regards to the rest of your post, there's not much point in continuing to debate the differences between 'stagnation' from a developer's point of view versus an end-user's point of view, but I've not been over-reactive or dramatic in my posts. I guess emotion and tone can be difficult to pick up in forums. For example your phrase "..dramatic words and statements won't change the truth, though they may contribute greatly to poor morale and propagate nay saying..." might well sound over-reactive or dramatic depending on how you read it. Read it aloud in a Winston Churchill voice and you'll know what I mean.

Quote from wien :

This all seems to resemble a bad breakup where one side is refusing to let go and keeps wanting back to the good times when the love was fiery and intense, and everything was new and exciting. That time has passed. LFS is already screwing around with all your friends and having a jolly good time doing it. It's over. Time to let go.

Cute analogy, but nowhere near correct.
To respond with another analogy, if you were trying to hit the nail on the head all you've done is smack yourself in the eye with the back swing.
LFS as game and as a project I have never become bored of. Bored of the current state? Yes. Concerned about the future? Yes. Bored of LFS as a game/project? No.
Anyway, you seem to struggle to comprehend these things. Not sure why.

Quote from ColeusRattus :

For all we know, Scawen could hack more lines of code per minute than ever before........etc

You must have missed the first bit of my post where I said I was speaking from an end user's point of view. Scavier might have a shedload of stuff ready to roll. Your speculation might be right or it might be wrong.
I'll reiterate by saying that not much has happened in the last year for the users.

Quote from ColeusRattus :

The only problem I see is that you are bored with LfS as it is

Yes, that is a problem. I bet the bit where I said 'I'm a fan concerned at stagnant development' helped you come to this conclusion.

Quote from richo :

Scavier make us all look like fools for berating your tardiness by rolling out some amazing patch/content goodness..

I'm always willing to look like a fool for more LFS content. In fact, it a patch is released before Christmas, I'll get the words "Thanks very, very very much to Scawen, Eric and Victor for the new patch. " tatooed on my schlong, and I'll post pics in this very thread!

Quote from Gunn :

Development has not stagnated, that is just your incorrect hypothesis.

It has from this end user's point of view.
In the last year, the only changes I've noticed are:
- Minor physics updates to a few cars
- New interiors for a few cars
- Replay controls

I'm sure there is more somewhere in the future (and I really look forward to it), but it is stagnant at the moment.

Let me also answer the predictable responses.
- Yes, I know the next patch will be released when it's ready.
- I know the devs don't like to rush things.
- I agree that I have already got my moneys worth, that I knew what to expect when I bought S2 and the developers owe me nothing.

I'm just a fan who's concerned at the slowing (currently stagnant) development cycle.