Quote from k_badam :

Something like Virtual Le Mans

We want to improve the reputation of LFS, not piledrive it 6 feet deep

Quote from Flame CZE :

It annoys me every time I hear someone saying “LFS is 20 years old”. I haven’t heard people reviewing iRacing saying “wow not bad for a game from 2008” or other popular sim racing titles.

I mean people do always cite iRacing having "NR2003 engine" as a negative, ignoring the fact that it's a real Ship of Theseus as every system from graphics to sound has been replaced (multiple times even with graphics, from DX8 to DX9 to DX11).

Quote from Ped7g :

Degats: yeah, I get per-car-by-designer setting to normalize the ffb strength to be as intended (IIRC LFS does calculate FFB from suspension/tyres/... and there is no power steering mechanism countering that? I'm not sure, but that would be my guess how it works. So I guess you can somewhat tune mod ffb by suspension tuning, but that may go against other intended design. But also some cars/karts are considerably more difficult to drive in real life, real cars are not consistent either ).

My remark was for gu3st, as you can already adjust ffb on the fly with keys, so I'm confused what he's looking for.

Changing the FFB strength is different than changing the strength of power steering. Ideally your FFB strength should stay the same and just never clipping (which LFS doesn't really give the tools to detect FFB clipping). Assuming your FFB is setup properly and a vehicle has power steering, from there you can tune how much/little the power steering is assisting you.

Quote from Dygear :

Wow, this was quite the necromanced thread. 2008 to 2023.

Yeah. It's kinda facinating to see what replies aged like milk and which aged like wine.

Something that modern race cars have is the ability to change the power steering on the fly. So there's a setting from 1 through 6 and you can adjust it so the sterring is heavier or lighter.

Perhaps that's a further feature where mod devs can set a "base" power steering setting but it can be tuned on the fly to meet the drivers needs.

Gggggggg

Probably none of them TBH. Building ARM drivers are the lowest priority for basically all hardware makes.

Quote from rik97 :

Option 2 for me as well. 3% engine damage might be already huge, but we have to test it.

People complain about the very fast mechanics in lfs. But this is a game after all and I like this more than iRacing's 30 minute rapairs when punted off by a backmarker

Having said that, in the future having a choice on the repair time per server might be perfect. As in an endurance race losing 12 seconds is no loss at all. While 30+ seconds engine changing might cost a lap.

30 minutes to replace an engine is already done by an incredibly speedy pit crew.

try /cansiren 1

Very cool video.

Quote from Avraham Vandezwin :

The question of setup is regularly raised. It resurfaces today in the reflection on the modding system (see ivancsx's post in this topic)

https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2028923#post2028923

Since the beginning of LFS, setup management has been a problem.

Everyone understands the importance of having a setup adapted to the race conditions. It is normal that the most experienced drivers appreciate the management of the setup in LFS.

But the almost infinite possibilities of settings offered by LFS are not realistic. Especially for touring cars. And most of the hot laps are not realistic at all. In the real world, no pilot with all his head would drive like that, taking so many risks.

I think a lot more people would come to race on the servers if some of them (not all of them of course) offered single or limited setup cars. Why not have two categories of online racing?

I think this is a real topic that deserves to be thought about.

There's good reason why many of the most popular iRacing series are fixed setup. The sense of equality as everyone's using the same setup and a reduced barrier to entry as you don't need to find (read: pay for) a setup to participate.

I don't think there's a problem with high quality paid DLC cars or tracks.

Use an older version of LFS

Quote from Gutholz :

Hi,
I might remember it wrong but I think when a friend bought S3 via paypal it was instantly.
"A few weeks" is definitely not normal, seems like something went wrong.
You can directly contact the devs here: https://www.lfs.net/mailus

It depends if you have a CC backed PP account. If you have a CC attached but pay with your bank account then Paypal lets it happen immediately becuase it can charge the CC if the bank account NSFs.

If you only have the bank account linked then you pay with an "eCheck" (paypal term) which waits for the money to come from your bank before finalizing the transaction with the merchant. This can take a few days.

I was messing around and thought it would be nice if, in addition to the "follow" view mode that there was a way to have the camera continuously look at a target. I like to spectate AIs with mod cars and the TV cams I find are too "zoomed in" but setting up a high camera (to simulate a "blimp" with a low FOV) provides a nice spectating experience.

I know this is a low priority improvement but I think it would be kind of nice. Further to this is the ability for it to be intelligent so if you're looking at a car that's near other cars, it would do its best to frame "the group" of cars rather than focus just on the one car.

Quote from Daniel564 :

yd7qwyd87dyashcuahugdqw798dy798asyxqwu9cuckmkzxnczxm<,nc

Quote from DeeMoNay :

Hello Skawen!

Dude...you're seriously the bomb dot com! This simple change actually worked!

I'm doing backflips down the street in glee! Thanks for this. It's appreciated! I'm going to give it a go in IL2 and see if that does anything, and I am betting it will. Thanks again for the reply!

The other thing I've noticed (if you start experimenting with Revive/OpenComposite) is that you shouldn't use the OpenXR Preview Runtime (enableable in the OpenXR Tools for Windows Mixed Reality). That can also cause issues.

Quote from bitplane :

Could be, there was a difference between looking to the sides and up/down - one of them looked more weird than the other, which I guess shouldn't happen When I tilted my head, vertical stuff remained vertical instead of rotating, while horizontally things did properly rotate.

Are you an LFS programmer? If I can be of any debugging help let me know.

No I'm just someone with the same headset and I know that it's had some weird behaviours in other sims too.

Quote from bitplane :

https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/1966239

> Go to WMR settings/ Headset display tab / Experience option> put it to "Best visual quality"

This turned out to be the fix for my weird visual problem! Without it, the image is weirdly skewed. All works now! This is great!

I'll have to experiment with this to see what the change is. I know it'll do a lower resolution but I wonder if it's reporting a incorrect distortion matrix or something.

It'd be really nice for OpenXR headsets if LFS natively supported OpenXR. It's the clear future for VR and removes unneeded layers.

Quote from Ped7g :

The existing limits in games are often based on underlying technology, ie. the programmer usually try what largest value still works correctly and then uses something slightly lower as limit.

Maybe it was just some limit which did look right to Scawen and can be easily raised, but with 100Hz physics engine and current tires I wouldn't be completely shocked if the limit is actually near what the engine simulates reasonably and going beyond it would cause some stuff to break.

That said the 1000Hz physics experiment may help a bit with some cumulative integration errors making the physics less prone to "explode", although it will also make many values to operate in smaller values which may lose some precision on bottom instead, causing new issues elsewhere.

But I would guess (with very limited knowledge, I did myself only trivial physics simulations, nowhere near the car-physics) something like very strong engine may be one of those points where 1000Hz is slightly more stable than 100Hz simulation.

EDIT: or maybe this is not related to physics simulation at all and 500kW limit was just nice for the UI/editor.

Which 500kW is a good limit for the aforementioned Porsche while in "Race" mode. It is only insufficent while in quali mode where the power is basically doubled.

Quote from Snoop.DriftEra :

I remember the days of Pereulok crack servers. Pereulok never made money on LFS. And Pereulok's connection quality was way better than LFS in 2022, which surprised me. There was a rumor that Pereulok takes LFS' audience away. But since Pereulok voluntarily shot itself down, i don't see much population online at official servers since then.
Not justifying crack servers, I just want to say that THIS conception seems to be fail either.

Or the crack servers dragged away legitimate users whose "version" stopped working and then they found somethjing else instead.

Yeah like the Porsche Mission R has a rear motor thats about 500kW (600~ HP) and a front that's about 300kW (400HP)

Quote from Gunn :

I just bought an ASUS TUF 3090ti 24GB graphics card and when I got it home it wouldn't fit into my tower

I had to upgrade my case and PSU. I can't believe how big the card is. By 2025 it will make a good boat anchor I suppose.

I had a similar experience when I bought my 970. Needed to upgrade to a full ATX case and have never looked back

Quote from joordy599 :

hello,

I bought a month ago an iMac but windows doesn't supported with a M2 Chip, is there any possibility to play Live For Speed on the iMac for M2 chips?

Best option is Parallels to run a Windows VM. It's not free and is asoftware with an annual subscription and still requires a valid Windows licence but it does work.

In theory Crossover for Mac should work as well but there seems to be some regressions the last time I tried and it crashes on launch. It seemed sound related becuase when I disabled sound it could progress further but it wasn't ideal.