Quote from farcar :

I figured as such.

Of course, my next question is whether anyone has a way to get the LEDs working on a CSL DD Base?

I can't see the dash clocks with my FOV, so they're important to my setup.

It doesn't seem like there is. Fanalabs is the official app for it but doesn't seem to support LFS.

Quote from farcar :

Apologies for the massive bump, but wondering if FanaLEDs is still supported?
I can't get it working with my Fanatec CSL DD.
It seems to detect my Clubsport Pedals but not my wheel or display.

It doesn't seem like it's been updated since 2021 so it might not support the CSL DD (and newer hardware).

No. Forever ago the training AI (which were slow) was replaced with a new AI system. We can see with the mods that it is able to quickly iterate an optimal race path in a short period (30-40 seconds)

For the longest time I basically had a set of scripts to do just that with the F9-F12 menus.

Quote from rane_nbg :

Isn't the following update release with "new lighting + new tire physics" including day and night stuff?

Sorry yeah, it's 1 patch. But at this current point it seems like Scawen's more or less "done" with the day/night stuff and has transitioned his efforts to finishing the physics

Quote from chaitany :

when is the day and night update dropping out?

after the new tyre physics

also probably will require a paid licence too for dynamic day/time

The AI in the game aren't very intelligent and have little awareness of other cars. You'll have to drive considering that fact and take preventative measures from them hitting you.

Quote from davidtaurog :

oh that sux,I wish it has normal transmission.thank you for answer and advice,I will try that.

Interestingly generations of the FBMW that we have does have autocut for upshifts. The one that LFS simulates just has a less technological gearbox in it.

Quote from davidtaurog :

well it is hard to shift gear up or down,very laggy and sometimes it doesnt shift gear at all.all other cars work normal.I got momo wheel...help!

The transmission is a sequential but doesn't have auto cut. You need to lift off the throttle to shift up. One thing you could do is basically hold the upshift paddle and then lift off the throttle to engage the next gear.

Downshifts should be easier as the gearbox will be under less load but you can't downshift too fast either.

Quote from Scawen :

As mentioned in another post, I've had an initial look and made some notes about converting LFS to 64-bit. I don't see any real problems but a lot of lines need to change. Initial thoughts are it might take a week or two, which puts it on a low priority compared with tyre physics. I can't really think of any short-term benefits at the moment other than allegedly it's the only way to connect to OpenXR (which I've barely heard of and obviously would have to code for as well).

Anyway, maybe you could tell me what is the difference or connections between OpenXR and OpenVR and SteamVR?

I thought that the aim of OpenVR was exactly what you seem to be suggesting is the aim of OpenXR. But as far as I know, the only implementation of OpenVR was SteamVR? But thought that didn't have to be the case?

I must say that OpenVR/SteamVR has been really fantastic in providing a way for many games to connect with many headsets. Has its time really come, and why?

I could go reading and researching but thought you might give me a short explanation (if you feel like it).

Things have just kind of evolved with OpenXR being the standard supported by all vendors. It's a standard owned by Kronos Group (OpenGL, Vulkan) rather than an API owned by Valve.

OpenVR was first to market that could be freely implemented and practically every headset does support it (to varying degrees of performance) and Valve has done a decent job of making it freely usable, but it's ultimately an API that is proprietary to Valve and their needs.

As you know, OpenVR/SteamVR does provide a freely implementable VR API and headsets are either native "OpenVR" or vendors like Oculus/WMR have provided plugins to allow their headsets to operate with OpenVR. One downside to OpenVR is that it does require Steam as SteamVR is the defacto standard implementation of OpenVR.

SteamVR also functions as the OpenXR runtime for most OpenVR headsets (although some ship their own OpenXR runtimes).

For Oculus, they've already deprecated their own API in favour of OpenXR and have shipped an OpenXR runtime that performs very well. Using it is as simple as setting it as default in Oculus settings.

For other headset vendors (Windows MR, Varjo), they're also shipping OpenXR runtimes that allow applications targeting OpenXR to function natively with their headsets, not requiring SteamVR to run applications.


Now, because there are so many applications written to OpenVR/Oculus API, 2 projects exist to translate those to OpenXR on the fly. OpenComposite does OpenVR => OpenXR (originally OpenVR => Oculus) and ReVive does Oculus API => OpenXR (Originally Oculus => OpenVR). For many people (myself included), one benefit to OpenXR is the ability to use OpenXR toolkit to further refine things to optimize for comfort or performance.

Now I don't entirely think that targeting OpenVR/Oculus only is bad, but OpenXR is the future and in the few apps I've used that are native OpenXR, there's some valuable performance gains from the reduction of SteamVR/Oculus overhead. But using tools like OpenComposite to give LFS OpenXR support is perfectly fine.

For OPs issue, it seems like their headset doesn't support OpenXR in 32 bit applications as they aren't shipping a 32 bit runtime. For my headset (Reverb G2 running on Windows Mixed Reality), Microsoft ships both a 32 and 64 bit runtime (64 bit in \Windows\System32\MixedRealityRuntime.dll, 32 bit in \Windows\SysWOW64\MixedRealityRuntime.dll) and expectedly OpenComposite works with LFS.

Via SteamVR which adds unneeded overhead.

OpenComposite lets you skip SteamVR and run OpenVR API games in OpenXR directly with improved performance.

OpenXR is the inevitable "stable" API for VR. Oculus has deprecated their own API in favour of it and both SteamVR and WMR offer OpenXR runtimes (great in the latter case as it skips SteamVR).

It's going to be more common on laptops where technology like nVidia Optimus (https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/technologies/optimus/technology/) or AMD Switchable Graphics where an low power GPU (AMD iGPU or Intel iGPU) are paired with a high power dGPU (nVidia or AMD) that gets dynamically enabled when needed.

Unfortunately on Windows, the dynamic switching isn't very intelligent and gets it wrong and often you have to go and tell the GPU to use the dGPU either all the time or just with a specific application via the control panel.

macOS did a much much better job at dynamically switching GPUs but now Apple doesn't even ship any multi-GPU machines.

Quote from PopnLochNessMonster :

I am all for this feature. How would it be decided what setup would be the fixed setup? Some default setups that cars come with are just bad to race with.

Server specified setup.

Quote from Avraham Vandezwin :

Remembrance tends to magnify things. I doubt we find the AIs of yesterday's games very fantastic today.

I remember watching a fairly recent video testing the Iracing AI patch. It wasn't brilliant. Worse than in LFS (I haven't tested myself).
Programming a good AI is certainly very complicated. What's unfortunate with LFS AI is that it doesn't seem to be missing much to it to become acceptable.

Bad AI = disappointing first test of the game = no motivation to practice = no need for demanding driving = humiliating and unpleasant first online experience for others = (also) no competitive bots to complete grids = empty servers online = an offline practice that quickly becomes boring.

Sometimes some of the things that seem inessential are fraught with concrete consequences. Afterwards, it's easy to say (and always ask for more) it's another thing to roll up your sleeves and do it.

iRacing's AI is very very good tbh. It takes a bit of time to find the right pace for yourself, but it's really good at being a competent opponent. Respects your space, makes overtaking moves, doesn't barge you off track. It's actually useful as a training tool for real races.

Yes it'd be nice to have a fixed setup option. Of course some settings would need to be open (like brake bias and some steering config) but having a mostly locked setup would be good.

Quote from FIZ :

They are on a higher level, indeed.
Cannot say for all of them, but even GT5 has a much higher AI intelligence.
AI on LFS have to be enhanced, I remember discussing about it around 2003-2005, because even 2 decades ago that AI was barely acceptable.
Please, everyone, look around more.. it is clear just by looking at some youtube videos.

Then you go and play GT7 AI and realize it's so deficient which is why the game only makes them mobile chicanes while you time trial as every event. Actual racing against them is impossible.

Quote from Flotch :

as a student it was more convenient to play online from time to time ... now, it would require a bit too much time to achieve any capability to drive properly a given combo .
Taking a car with a kind of default setup and doing few laps anywhere is plenty of fun, but usually I have to end quickly for "family life" or so on => short cruise sessions are satisfying (even if I agree regarding the multiplayer aspect : doing short races of GTi in the time around Blackwood was insane )

Honestly this is basically why iRacing "works" for me. I pick a car for a season to practice and run and only run that series. Then I can practice when I can and run a few races whenever and be guaranteed to get a race.

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.