I think there is more to this that just adjusting the FOV and adding Spherical aspects to the display. You are all forgetting one important aspect of human vision which is not currently being exploited by games intending to represent a 3d world. While I do agree that adding a very slight spherical distortion to the display would help, it needs to be done in conjunction to one other distortion.
Spherical Variable Resolution. Human vision has a smooth resolution degridation from the center of our vision out to the edges of our peripheral vision. Its the combination of the slight spherical nature of our vision and the reduction of visual aquity as objects move out of the center of out vision that allow us to precieve our sence of speed and motion. The only way to really do this is to add a blurring or fuzzy effect which is perportional to the spherical distortion. Adding these togeather has the combined effect of causing objects to accelerate away from the center of our vision and to become less visualy acute as they stray from our visual focal point.
But then there is also one more aspect that need to be adressed. Variable focal length, which is represented in game by FoV. Now implenting this in game is not going to be easy to do. Almost certenly it would require the game to be able to track your eyes so it knows what objects you are looking at as that would be the only way to realisticly adjust the FoV in real time like our eyes to naturaly.
The more simple compromise would be to have the FOV increase as your speed increases and decress as your speed decreases and to also reduce FoV as your view strays from the direction of travel. In this way looking in to a corner would result in decreasing FoV as would glancing to the left and right. It might also be warrented to add a glance up and down so as to allow one to look up at the rear view mirror and down at the gages as these would slip from view as speeds climb. It would also cause a reduction in FoV due to moving your view away from direction of travel, mimicing the need to focus on a closer object. Implimenting it in this way also mean that the use of head tracking would not require special programing to support as any movent away from center of travel reduces FoV seamlessly and smoothly.
I thing to truely give any game a more realistic sence of imersion, which includes a sence of speed all these things need to be used. Any of them taken individualy help but will feel a bit off, but when they are all combined it closely mimics the way we see the world.
Spherical Variable Resolution. Human vision has a smooth resolution degridation from the center of our vision out to the edges of our peripheral vision. Its the combination of the slight spherical nature of our vision and the reduction of visual aquity as objects move out of the center of out vision that allow us to precieve our sence of speed and motion. The only way to really do this is to add a blurring or fuzzy effect which is perportional to the spherical distortion. Adding these togeather has the combined effect of causing objects to accelerate away from the center of our vision and to become less visualy acute as they stray from our visual focal point.
But then there is also one more aspect that need to be adressed. Variable focal length, which is represented in game by FoV. Now implenting this in game is not going to be easy to do. Almost certenly it would require the game to be able to track your eyes so it knows what objects you are looking at as that would be the only way to realisticly adjust the FoV in real time like our eyes to naturaly.
The more simple compromise would be to have the FOV increase as your speed increases and decress as your speed decreases and to also reduce FoV as your view strays from the direction of travel. In this way looking in to a corner would result in decreasing FoV as would glancing to the left and right. It might also be warrented to add a glance up and down so as to allow one to look up at the rear view mirror and down at the gages as these would slip from view as speeds climb. It would also cause a reduction in FoV due to moving your view away from direction of travel, mimicing the need to focus on a closer object. Implimenting it in this way also mean that the use of head tracking would not require special programing to support as any movent away from center of travel reduces FoV seamlessly and smoothly.
I thing to truely give any game a more realistic sence of imersion, which includes a sence of speed all these things need to be used. Any of them taken individualy help but will feel a bit off, but when they are all combined it closely mimics the way we see the world.
Last edited by Gimpster, .
V.I.R is a very nice track for sure, it even looks like a LFS track. It reminds me abit of Westhill but with more interesting corner combinations and more agressive elevation changes.
Trying to race around the track with people running backwards and dragracing down the back straight.
Or playing race car pinball in the chicane off the walls.
LFS's first release plan was for a 4 part release not 3.
Yes I have been here for a long time...
Or playing race car pinball in the chicane off the walls.
LFS's first release plan was for a 4 part release not 3.
Yes I have been here for a long time...
The patch is a step in the right direction but it is still far from what it needs to become, but I am sure it will get there. I was hoping that the clutch/gearbox simulation in this patch would have been at least as good as nKPro is but I guess we still need to wait for some time to get there.
The clutch needs to be adjustable at the very least for button clutchers. Let us decide how fast the clutch is depressed and released accuratly and as seperate settings. Let us decide how hard or easy we want to be on the clutch and suffer the concequences. Shifting now is just wrong and feels nothing like any of my real cars. It feels like the shifter is shrouded in tar.
The clutch needs to be adjustable at the very least for button clutchers. Let us decide how fast the clutch is depressed and released accuratly and as seperate settings. Let us decide how hard or easy we want to be on the clutch and suffer the concequences. Shifting now is just wrong and feels nothing like any of my real cars. It feels like the shifter is shrouded in tar.
Personally most of my sets are nearly the same and are all based on the same base set. I do make small changes to tailor it to a specific track but its not unnecessary until you start to chase 1/10th of a second improvements in lap times.
Riders,
My best advice is this. Don't try and be fast, don't try to set up the car to be fast. You should strive for smooth consistency lapping. Once you can consistently make smooth laps you will find that your are getting faster.
After that start to lean how to drive through the corners off the ideal line, because you never know when you will find yourself having to drive there. Also don't be afraid of trying different lines and speeds in corners. Slow in fast out is not always the best way through a corner, what precedes it and what follows it all have a implications on what is the best line and there is never a single best line.
My best advice is this. Don't try and be fast, don't try to set up the car to be fast. You should strive for smooth consistency lapping. Once you can consistently make smooth laps you will find that your are getting faster.
After that start to lean how to drive through the corners off the ideal line, because you never know when you will find yourself having to drive there. Also don't be afraid of trying different lines and speeds in corners. Slow in fast out is not always the best way through a corner, what precedes it and what follows it all have a implications on what is the best line and there is never a single best line.
I never look at other people stats, whats the point. How they drive and their attitude are the only things I care about when it comes to the people I want to race with. How long some one has been driving, how fast they are, what leagues they are in, or what type of driving they like to do has absolutely no bearing on the things I consider imperative.
LFS tracks do feel like that were just paved, with glass like surfaces. nkPro is better in this regard as when I drive in that sim I feel like I am driving a car on a real road surface. Its a combination of sound, visuals, sound and physics feedback. LFS for all that is great about it just feels way to smooth and tame. The grainy texture of tarmak and all its little imperfections are missing. That may also be why it some times feels like we are driving on wet pavement as when we do slide its nice and smooth not gritty and full of character.
Damit,
You had to go and bring this back up. No I have to feel sad we can't have it all over again.
Dam you all, Dam you.
Ok I feel better now.
Nite.
You had to go and bring this back up. No I have to feel sad we can't have it all over again.
Dam you all, Dam you.
Ok I feel better now.
Nite.
Bob,
I remember the days of S1 where the track and suspension could be adjusted to move them outside the wheel wells or to poke through the body. It looked like crap. With the ocurrent physics having the tires mounted outside the body has other problems. The tires and suspension would now be more exposed to damage, drivers would have to be much more careful about contact and close racing/rubbing would become very dangerous.
It may be in the best interest from a handling point of view to allow the track and wheelbase to mismatch the model but I would rather see that not happen. It looks wrong, it will make close racing less of an option and I think much of the community would agree. There is much that can be done while still preserving the base models stock wheelbase and track width.
I remember the days of S1 where the track and suspension could be adjusted to move them outside the wheel wells or to poke through the body. It looked like crap. With the ocurrent physics having the tires mounted outside the body has other problems. The tires and suspension would now be more exposed to damage, drivers would have to be much more careful about contact and close racing/rubbing would become very dangerous.
It may be in the best interest from a handling point of view to allow the track and wheelbase to mismatch the model but I would rather see that not happen. It looks wrong, it will make close racing less of an option and I think much of the community would agree. There is much that can be done while still preserving the base models stock wheelbase and track width.
The other course you can take bob is to also look at the car lover groups out there. Many of them know their preferred car inside and out and can likely come up with any "Data" you need. One area I have always found to be lacking is a RWD and AWD car in the same class as the XFR/UFR. The speed and feel of that class is great but it could really use something other then a FWD.
In the end gathering the data for any vehicle may take some time but then again just like most of the cars in LFS there is no reason why it has to be modeled on a real car. Just designing one to be close or have a physics profile that is possible would also work just as well.
Having three cars to modify also means we can extend existing classes for a more varied field. Or release several different mod packs to allow different servers to run different "cars".
I think anything more then altering the suspension design, engine, transmission, tire, aero and weight would be weird though. It would be better to leave things like track and wheelbase the same as the source model.
In the end gathering the data for any vehicle may take some time but then again just like most of the cars in LFS there is no reason why it has to be modeled on a real car. Just designing one to be close or have a physics profile that is possible would also work just as well.
Having three cars to modify also means we can extend existing classes for a more varied field. Or release several different mod packs to allow different servers to run different "cars".
I think anything more then altering the suspension design, engine, transmission, tire, aero and weight would be weird though. It would be better to leave things like track and wheelbase the same as the source model.
BBT,
I completely get what you are saying but I think you miss the basic point in your argument. For the restrictor plate to work as it would in the real world, by limiting the overall ability of the engine to induct Air and thus burn fuel, you first need to have engines modeled like in the real world where engine power is the result of Air/Fuel induction, compression ratio and displacement, among other things like the power losses from intake flow restriction, exhaust restriction, and engine/drive friction.
Basically before you can have properly modeled intake restriction you need properly modeled engine power generation. Simple as that.
I completely get what you are saying but I think you miss the basic point in your argument. For the restrictor plate to work as it would in the real world, by limiting the overall ability of the engine to induct Air and thus burn fuel, you first need to have engines modeled like in the real world where engine power is the result of Air/Fuel induction, compression ratio and displacement, among other things like the power losses from intake flow restriction, exhaust restriction, and engine/drive friction.
Basically before you can have properly modeled intake restriction you need properly modeled engine power generation. Simple as that.
A race version of the LX4 would fit well with the UFR/XFR, I verified this the slick mod.
A race version of the LX6 would fit well with a race version of the RAC. Allow only ground-effects for down force and it would be a great middle ground between the UFR/XFR and the GTR class.
The RBR needs to be in a class of its own or grouped some new cars that serve as both Rally and Tarmac racers, more of a Saloon class at about the same performance level as the race versions as the LX6/RAR.
The DP1 is in a class by itself. More akin to a small prototype then anything else.
Running them all on the same track at the same time would make for some great multi class action. This of course is a request for the Dev's so code a multi class race functionality akin to what the CTRA has done. Hint Hint.
As for yet another version of the XR, please for the love of all that is great about LFS do not build yet one more version of a car that is already overused. I would rather see a new base car with a race variant like a small RF roadster with perfect weight balance and double wishbone suspension perhaps with a S/C?
A race version of the LX6 would fit well with a race version of the RAC. Allow only ground-effects for down force and it would be a great middle ground between the UFR/XFR and the GTR class.
The RBR needs to be in a class of its own or grouped some new cars that serve as both Rally and Tarmac racers, more of a Saloon class at about the same performance level as the race versions as the LX6/RAR.
The DP1 is in a class by itself. More akin to a small prototype then anything else.
Running them all on the same track at the same time would make for some great multi class action. This of course is a request for the Dev's so code a multi class race functionality akin to what the CTRA has done. Hint Hint.
As for yet another version of the XR, please for the love of all that is great about LFS do not build yet one more version of a car that is already overused. I would rather see a new base car with a race variant like a small RF roadster with perfect weight balance and double wishbone suspension perhaps with a S/C?
Last edited by Gimpster, .
1994 Mazda Miata with a Fast Forward Cold Side SC, for 190-RWHP.
I will forever be your friend.
I will forever be your friend.
Borat,
The only thing you are paying for with this game is the content (Tracks and Cars). Everything else you get for free in the demo. Opening up the sim to user tracks and cars means the devs now don't need to make them and will be in compitition with free content. That will spell the end of development on the core functionality and physics engine.
Is that what you really want?
The only thing you are paying for with this game is the content (Tracks and Cars). Everything else you get for free in the demo. Opening up the sim to user tracks and cars means the devs now don't need to make them and will be in compitition with free content. That will spell the end of development on the core functionality and physics engine.
Is that what you really want?
I have to say I have been having alot of fun on the new improved Race 2 server. The GT2 class is a blast with the restricted GTRs. Alot of fun.
Ball Bearing Turbo,
That was buried somewhere back in time in I believe the test patch forum, if I had a link to the quote I would post it. It was long enough ago now that it may no longer be representitive of the current direction of development. In any event the basic understanding I gained from that was that the devolpment and feature sets for S2 would include those that directly impacted the cars them selves, like physics, aero and the like, while S3 woudl introduce more changes to the enviernments we race in, such as changing weather and track conditions.
One example of this seperation of car (S2) and enviernment (S3) features is that currently dirt and grass stick to the car tires, but in S3 we are likely to also have that dirt and grass come off the tires and stick to the track. I have no definitive proof or facts, its just what I have gathered from reading this forum, outside publications and interviews. LFS is an evolving creation that has already taken many unexpected turns thus far and I am sure there will be many more to follow. Thats the best part about evolution and the way LFS is being developed, you never know when one small snipit of incite will give birth to some as yet unconcived new feature or optimization.
legoflamb,
There is one important difference though, since LFS is a self-contained virtual comunity, there is always the posibility for one group to step away from the crowd and desgnate a private version of that comunity if the overall comunity becomes over crowded with those they do not which to associate or be bothered with. Thus unlike the real world in which once Azusa had been discovered and is now a place for the masses, we can always make a place where Azusa (LFS) still feels like our private little known secret.
That was buried somewhere back in time in I believe the test patch forum, if I had a link to the quote I would post it. It was long enough ago now that it may no longer be representitive of the current direction of development. In any event the basic understanding I gained from that was that the devolpment and feature sets for S2 would include those that directly impacted the cars them selves, like physics, aero and the like, while S3 woudl introduce more changes to the enviernments we race in, such as changing weather and track conditions.
One example of this seperation of car (S2) and enviernment (S3) features is that currently dirt and grass stick to the car tires, but in S3 we are likely to also have that dirt and grass come off the tires and stick to the track. I have no definitive proof or facts, its just what I have gathered from reading this forum, outside publications and interviews. LFS is an evolving creation that has already taken many unexpected turns thus far and I am sure there will be many more to follow. Thats the best part about evolution and the way LFS is being developed, you never know when one small snipit of incite will give birth to some as yet unconcived new feature or optimization.
legoflamb,
There is one important difference though, since LFS is a self-contained virtual comunity, there is always the posibility for one group to step away from the crowd and desgnate a private version of that comunity if the overall comunity becomes over crowded with those they do not which to associate or be bothered with. Thus unlike the real world in which once Azusa had been discovered and is now a place for the masses, we can always make a place where Azusa (LFS) still feels like our private little known secret.
Last edited by Gimpster, .
I use to have a Blue Flag and Sorry message bound a long time ago. I will never have them bound again. The Blue Flag is just redundant annoyance and the Sorry is just disrespectfull. If I was truly at fault and sorry for my actions I will show it appropratly. If I am lapping you I know its my responcibility to effect a clean pass when the time is right. Simple as that.
It's not just Driving Simulations that are developing at a slower rate these days. Flight and Combat simulation is as well. FPS, MMO's and other game types are the hot area of development right now and are the games that are in demand. They are however paving the way for much better Simulation Software down the road as they push graphics, physics and rendering tech forward at a fast pace.
As far as LFS development is concerned, my impression was that LFS will go Beta and then Final when all included features are implimented. I think in addition to the physics updates, AI improvments, as improvments to the GTR interiors and track envirenments we will see a more completed Aero model and physical damage model, but the graphic componant of these will not likely come until the S3 Graphcs engine update. Unless Scawen has changed greatly in the last few years, which I think unlikely based on what has happened to S2 so far i the development cycle, he is not the type of person to like leaving things unfinished.
In the past he has stated that S2 is about the cars and S3 would be about the envirnment. To me that means that S2 will not be final until the cars are modeled as realisticly as they can be within a realistic time frame. By this I mean things that affect the cars directly and from a physics and functionality point of view not a graphics one. Place-holder damage and incomplete aero are as high on the list as physics optimizations and the AI, in my opinion. I firmly believe that S2 would have been final a while back if in his development he had not stumbled on to as many interesting posibilities and feature requests, all of which have improved the sim greatly and extend its posibilities, even if they were not originaly planed.
The future is still bright for LFS, more so now then it might have a few years ago, but it will take time and time is somthing we all have plenty of.
As far as LFS development is concerned, my impression was that LFS will go Beta and then Final when all included features are implimented. I think in addition to the physics updates, AI improvments, as improvments to the GTR interiors and track envirenments we will see a more completed Aero model and physical damage model, but the graphic componant of these will not likely come until the S3 Graphcs engine update. Unless Scawen has changed greatly in the last few years, which I think unlikely based on what has happened to S2 so far i the development cycle, he is not the type of person to like leaving things unfinished.
In the past he has stated that S2 is about the cars and S3 would be about the envirnment. To me that means that S2 will not be final until the cars are modeled as realisticly as they can be within a realistic time frame. By this I mean things that affect the cars directly and from a physics and functionality point of view not a graphics one. Place-holder damage and incomplete aero are as high on the list as physics optimizations and the AI, in my opinion. I firmly believe that S2 would have been final a while back if in his development he had not stumbled on to as many interesting posibilities and feature requests, all of which have improved the sim greatly and extend its posibilities, even if they were not originaly planed.
The future is still bright for LFS, more so now then it might have a few years ago, but it will take time and time is somthing we all have plenty of.
Wow I really typed that... Dam I was really tired and in a bad mood that night. Opps...
Let me se if I can rephrase this in a more constructive way.
Chicanes are challangening corners, and the inclusion of then in racing circuits is for several reasons, one is to lower speeds before dangerous corners or sections of track, like near pit enterances and exits, or before a sharp corner at the end of a high sped section where there is no room for run of, like at Spa. In LFS there are few true chicanes, most are just jinks in the track designed to force single file flow as DWB pointed out and these are indead poor in their design and I woudl also not mind seeing them go away or redisigned so that they are true chicanes.
I see there being two types of chicanes, one is the jink which describes most of them in LFS. These are best described as a track offset or lane change type of path, they often have only two apexes and there is a straight line through them. The issue in LFS is that they should either be more offset and thus force a real slow down or less offset so that they can still be taken two wide without too much issue. The few good examples of the right way to do these in LFS are Kyoto GP's first corner and the second to last corner.
The other type of chicane in my opinion is a 3 apex corner, these require a reduction of speed, will not have a straight path through them and will take care to drive through two wide. This is what you see at Sps, before at the pit entrance and at Portland international when the optional chicane is employed. There are few of these in LFS. Westhill has a fast one down at the bottom of the hill after the sweepers which also has and elevation change included. The last turn of AS Historic/National is also of this type. These are nice.
The "Chicane" jinks on the Fernbay tracks are just BAD and ill placed. The blackwood one is challanging. The others are OK but might do with some looking at.
The heart of this issue is not so much the design of the tracks but the mindset of the drivers in your average LFS pickup race. Most just don't have the maturity or patience to back off when entering these corners, Nore do they leave much room for error in their driving. It may just be a simulation with little to no concequences for mistakes and bad decisions but causing an incident because of a bad decision does affect other people in a negitive way and we all know how tempers can flair when we feel we have been wronged. We are all guilty of this from time to time and I am no exception to this.
DWB thanks for calling me out for the piss poor post, I deserved it for sure. Thanks Mate.
Chicanes seperate the Racers from the Drivers and Wan-a-bees. When was the last time you saw a pair of cars stay side by side through a chicane and not connect or back off. Not often because many of you people, and I am talking to those the want to have the tracks made easier, do not have the skill, patience or insite to pick a propper place to pass, wait for a good passing oppertunity and think the you have some god given right to lap slower cars and they should jusp out of your way instantly.
Ok, sorry for ranting but if you want easy go play NFS.
Ok, sorry for ranting but if you want easy go play NFS.
Adding wings to the LX woudl destroy its charm and style in my opinion. Nor do I feel we need a v8 powered LX unless is got a 2.6L Radical V8. I would much rather see a race prepped version of the LX6 with slicks and a full rollcage in the same class as a race prepped RAC and other roadsters, none with downforce. Some where between the XFR/UFR and the GTRs.
That original screen shot which got you started on this thread is of the track Lime Rock Park. The game in now Driver's Republic and that track is rather fun and feels very remote. I love it. It reminds me of my local track. Some of the tracks we have now feel too comercial if you know what I mean.
The old blackwood had this same feel, Fern Bay to some degree feels the same as does Westhill and parts of Aston but in the end that all feel too much like international racetracks and less like the local club track that I feel would fit better with how I see LFS.
I always felt that for S2 the Fastest cars should have been the non-downforce GT cars and the FOX single seater. The GTRs, FOX, FO8 and BF1 could have been left for S3 along with an LPM and other high end cars.
I hope for S3 we get some tracks that feel like the local haunts that see less profesional racing an more drivers training and club events.
The old blackwood had this same feel, Fern Bay to some degree feels the same as does Westhill and parts of Aston but in the end that all feel too much like international racetracks and less like the local club track that I feel would fit better with how I see LFS.
I always felt that for S2 the Fastest cars should have been the non-downforce GT cars and the FOX single seater. The GTRs, FOX, FO8 and BF1 could have been left for S3 along with an LPM and other high end cars.
I hope for S3 we get some tracks that feel like the local haunts that see less profesional racing an more drivers training and club events.
Simbin was looking at the engine for their first real game but when it was not avalable they went with ISI to build GTR.
Hotlapping just like drifting teach skills that do allow one to be a better driver. Either when used too much CAN begin to make other areas of your racecraft suffer. Notice I say Can not Will.
In the past and to a lesser extent today some drivers have put so much effort in to just one of the disiplines that they loos some skill in other areas. A classic example is the dedicated Hotlapper that find it dffacult to deal with traffic or drive a line that deviates from their hones and practiced perfict line. Or the drifter that finds it diffacult to keep the car planted and is thus slow or can't make the tires last.
They are dissaperaing for the most part and people are taking a more ballanced approach to LFS and working eaualy on all the different aspects of what this sim has to offer and in turn the conumity is growing in to a very mature and competitive group. Last night on a TBO server I had some great races on a public server with people I did not know. Everyone showed each other great respect and there was plenty of door to door racing and position swapping to be had.
In the past and to a lesser extent today some drivers have put so much effort in to just one of the disiplines that they loos some skill in other areas. A classic example is the dedicated Hotlapper that find it dffacult to deal with traffic or drive a line that deviates from their hones and practiced perfict line. Or the drifter that finds it diffacult to keep the car planted and is thus slow or can't make the tires last.
They are dissaperaing for the most part and people are taking a more ballanced approach to LFS and working eaualy on all the different aspects of what this sim has to offer and in turn the conumity is growing in to a very mature and competitive group. Last night on a TBO server I had some great races on a public server with people I did not know. Everyone showed each other great respect and there was plenty of door to door racing and position swapping to be had.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG