some of the dashboard textures are mirrored.
for example the text on the switches and the red "E" of emergency shutoff.
(I only tested in lefthand drive.)

When you accelerate to 70 km/h and let off the throttle then the kart will continue to roll for over 4 minutes. Seems a bit strange, does it have not air drag? Also when topside down the wheels seem to spin forever.

It usually feels better to have release something finished rather than having dozen of almost-finished projects hidden on your HDD.

I would not worry about duplicate mods, neither of them is finished yet.

clicking "quote" on posts by user https://www.lfs.net/profile/246262 breaks formating like this:

Quote from Dmitry[RUS :

;1979055"]Reworked suspension.
All-wheel drive 4x4
Changed motor, sound.
Added configuration No license plate (Select configuration)

I guess it could be the [ ]

does it happen with all mods or just these two?

Should the rearbrakes be drums?
Or was there a race version with discs?
Nice little shi-err shoebox eitherway.
Looking forward to more details.

Quote from Doctor_Blender :

You yourself wrote that retopology is essentially a re-creation of the model, respectively, it cannot relate in any way to the original model of the car

It is unclear what you mean by "relate in any way to the original model of the car".
Do you mean:
A) a real-world car, the one made made of metal and plastic?
Of course you can make 3D-models or paintings or whatever that look like real life cars/objects, except for logos.
B) a 3D-file extracted from a video game?

Quote :

drawings can also not be used, because they were used to create models for games

Again, that is too vague. What "drawings" exactly do you mean?
For example in this thread https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/95848-T16-RX someone made a free hands pencil-drawing on paper. Then he made a 3d-model based on that. In this example, he made a phantasy car of his own design. But if you make similar drawings of real-world cars then that would also be ok.
On the other hand, sometimes concept-art of commercial video games is released as promotion. For example: https://tcrf.net/Category:Need_for_Speed:_Most_Wanted_(2005)_concept_art
I feel using such drawings would likely not be ok.

Quote from pärtan :

Is it allowed to use a short video snippet from youtube (not from a game, but real video from a private uploader) and use a series of screenshots from this video to produce a photogrammetry point cloud? In this day and age such things are possible, and quite handy for modellers. I would also like to point out that the geometry information is quite crude and unrefined from this method. This could potentially also fall under fair use since you use only a few seconds of said video, but I'm not sure.

What youtube writes on fair use:
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6396261?hl=en#zippy=%2Cwhat-constitutes-fair-use
To me, it reads as if it leans towards 3D models from videos are okay.
For example there is this key word "transformative”.
The original 2D video gets transformed into a 3D model, already this change of medium is very transformative.
Similiar, taking measurements seems also okay.
(A retopo of a ripped 3D-file is still a 3D-file, it is only barely transformative. Also the "heart" of a 3D-file is its shape, which gets copied and weighs against fair use.)
Then there is this part:
"Using material from primarily factual works is more likely to be fair than using purely fictional works."
I understand it like this:
A car filmed in a museum or parking lot would be okay as source material.
A scene from the "Mad Max" movie would be less okay.

It is a topic where it is difficult to make concrete rules.
For example taking a screenshot of a video game and using it as reference could be okay. But if the video game has a free camera (like LFS or LFS viewer mode) and you use that to film a car from all angles and then use that video for automatic photogrammetry, then that would just be illegal ripping with extra steps.

I think this buggy mod has the correct rear suspension: https://www.lfs.net/files/vehmods/6DF024
(it has been a few days since I tried that mod, so maybe I remember wrong or it was just cleverly faked)

Quote from Quored :

... people with their own hands from scratch to make mods by taking something ready-made,

I like how you used the radio as gear indicator

nice little buggy. A bit higher resolution for the textures on the engine would be good.
It looks like the real vehicle has a solid axle and the suspension is just a swing, so both wheels move up/down together. (Like the rear swing-arm of a motorcycle but with two wheels) Your mod looks as if the wheels have independent suspension?

nice work, i am always surprised and impressed how people can create 3d models from 'nothing.' (especially with Blender's GUI)

Try https://www.lfs.net/mailus to get your accountname changed.
I think the name was only a secondary reason, your mods were questionable because their 3D models came from other games/credits were wrong. Also every mod had the same description "Edown Family Private Drift Car"

I do not know about Xbox gamepad but with every wheel or gamepad I have ever used, it worked in LFS like this:
Options -> Controlls
select "wheel / joystick" at top.
Then change throttle/brake axis from "combined" to "seperate"

The green part is the axle?
The point where it attachs to the chasis looks too high. I think it needs to be more like the red line.

Quote from Benzinass :

I have noticed it glides much further when the throttle is pinned, perhaps someone can comment on why that is?

I am not good enough lfs-pilot to notice an effect in flight distance.
But it might be related to engine "torque tilt" centrifugal forces? For example it is noticable in LX6 (light car, big engine) if you are in "N" and rev the engine, then the car tilts to the side.

Quote from pärtan :

I'd like some feedback this early in fact from a reviewer. I don't wanna spend time on something if it turns out I don't have enough evidence for my ownership of my mesh.
...

I am not "a reviewer", just normal forum, but here is my opinion:
It would indeed be nice to have better evidence.
The matching blueprint and details about modeling technique seem believeable to me, even though it would be possible to fake that. But it would not be as trivial as as some of the "just delete parts of the model" fakes done by others.
Also important, and I realize this is not based on technical facts but subjective:
In the beginning I used to believe everyone who said they had made an original model. Over time, some people lost that trust and I became more sceptical in general. In your case, you did seem like a honest person in the threads about downloaded/retopo'ed models.
So far, I find it all plausible.

Not sure what exactly you mean.
In options you can change "Clocks mode" (I think that is what it is called) and switch between having the "real" cluster on the wheel or a "virtual" display on the screen. Or both together. But you can not move either.

There are some tools (example: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/99048-%22Monitor%22----your-time-engineer--%28-%C2%A9-KingOfIce-app-%29) that can show a virtual display on the screen. I think those can be moved around.

You are now online on a server, so does it work now?
At https://www.lfs.net/account/details you can enter a new GAME password (for playing) or a new WEB password. (for forum/website)

Quote from Snoop.DriftEra :

What yall gonna do then? Review every single mod manually.
I mean all these legal issues must be somehow optimized so everyone: LFS devs, Modders, OtherGameDevs can be ok with that.

Reviewing a mod is done very quick if modders upload some good WIP pictures or video.

Quote :

So, hypothetical, someone can create model with very similar mesh orientation, just because it represents the same car

Yes, hypothetical. I have not seen that so far. What I have seen is models 1:1 copied or with slightly edited meshes to hide the fact.
Can you show one such model that is proven original work and almost 100% matches a mesh from another source?

Quote from pärtan :

This means that when you use the methods of large game studios which is to do a very detailed laser scan process, your mesh don't deviate from the real geometry. Thus it's no longer unique to that game studio. Anyone with access to decent photogrammetry or laser scanning would be able to reproduce a mesh that is indistinguishible from a retopology of the other games laser scanned mesh. Because they share the fact that they are both essentially just measured data from a real mass produced object.

Debatable, for example different scan resolution will give a different shape and different topology. Then the laser-scans might have absurd high polygon count that has to be reduced, making the models different etc.
But let's not get sidetracked. What matters in my opinion is that one can not say: "Oh yes, my model looks exactly like this one from that game. They laser-scanned the same vehicle as I did."
When someone has created a laser-scanned model then they can still post pictures of their work progress. eg The setup with the real-world vehicle and scanner hardware, the raw data, pictures of the clean-up process.

Quote :

For example if you have an old, blueprint made model that you're sitting on and want to turn into an LFS mod. This model could lack the "documentation" and you're back to taking someones word for it.

Yes, that is a problem and sadly some problems do not have a solution.
In a perfect world it would be possible to just take someone's word for it but we saw how that got abused.
Maybe in the future instead of "I found it on the internet for free" it will be "I found it on my old computer."
There should hopefully be any traces of the creation process. Old file versions, reference pictures, matching orthographic reference pictures included in the file etc. If there is literally nothing then... well, honestly sorry but bad luck.

yes, the template generator only works if the mod has been skin-mapped.

Quote from Snoop.DriftEra :

But what I disagree is this:
I can rip a CUBE model out of LFS, GTA:SA, and model ONE myself. I can scale them all to the same shape and you'll never get an idea which is which. (...)

I am not sure what you are trying to say.
We are not talking about primitive cubes but about models with several thousand polygons. It feels more like a philosophical question to discuss cubes or how maybe two models are similar in certain places. I do not see how this contributes much to the discussion.
It is virtually impossible that by chance two people create the exact same mesh.

Quote :

But if he lied about the way he modeled it it should be ok since noone would proof his mesh mach any other. He just used a 3D model as a 3D blueprint.

Why should lying be ok?
But let's leave morals aside.
Let us assume somebody lies to the forum: "Hey, I modeled this all by myself, from scratch." The mod system works because every forum member can review the quality and legality of a mod.
That means people will ask for some kind of proof, because they can only review something if there is something to review.
If the uploader does not provide anything then nothing can be checked, nobody can vote, and the mod stays forever in review.

It is not the reviewers job to search through hundreds of video games and compare meshes. Sometimes people have done that, to proof a point.
But if the reviewers do that then it means the uploader failed at convincing them.

---

Quote from pärtan :

Now, before I start on my next mod. I would like to know a few things which seems to have been indicated already:
What sort of blueprints are banned / allowed? If I find a blueprint that have been rendered from an unlicensed game model, does that fall under the same legal category as a retopo?

That is actually a good question. What if a game has a viewer-mode like LFS and you take screenshots from all sides? What if you enable wire-mode and trace the mesh from the screnshots?
I have no idea but it might be better to stay away from such grey areas.

Quote :

Do I have to video the whole modelling process to prove that I have not made a retopo in the future?

My opinion:
You have to somehow convince people that you actually created the model.

A video can work, nowadays it is easy to screencapture so it can never hurt.
WIP screenshots work, if they are the right kind.
You should show something that only the original modeler can show, not something that everybody can fake in a few seconds.
If the screenshots look like you just deleted parts of a ripped model and now you are posting them in reverse order, it will not convince people.
If you post a partly finished mesh in editor but there are no reference-sideview-photos then it might look as if you are just doing a retopo and have hidden the original mesh.

On other hand, look at these WIP pictures:
https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/1971286
We can follow how the model gets made: from a pencil drawing to a basic 2D-ish outline to a 3D model.
similiar:
https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/96594-DH-Chorus-Avante---%2794-%2798-Mira---Cuore-Replica-%5BRenamed%5D
The first pictures are a very blocky model (wheel arches are like 5 polygons) and then everything gets progressively smoother.

Quote from Snoop.DriftEra :

-Isn't it the source model's author initiative to claim his model is ripped (if it is)?

You mean the publishers like Ubisoft, EA Games, Kunos etc? I imagine if their lawyers get active it will not be nice for LFS or the uploader. So that situation should be avoided as early as possible.
Beside that, apparently LFS devs do not want pirated content in the mod system whether it gets noticed by other companies or not.

Quote :

-Isn't there a presumption of innocence before that fact is proven?

No, that would make the whole review system unusable.
Modder: "Here is a finished model. I made this model."
Reviewer: "Ok, I will just assume he is telling the truth."
The whole idea is that reviewers check the legal status. If the modder does not provide any information about the model then nothing can be checked.
However, I believe in the beginning there often was benefit of the doubt in unclear cases but then it got abused.

Quote :

-Isn't it a crime for reviewers to open RIPPED models for comparison with mod models?

I am not 100% sure. They are not distributing the models beside screenshots. Uploading files is another matter. (Like up/downloading a whole to a filesharing site will get you in trouble but posting a few single screenshots will generally be ok.)

Quote :

-Isn't the ripped model must be 100% match the mod's mesh by overlay to say it's ripped?(wich requires reviewers to steal a suspected source model for a comparison)

No, a 100% match of the mesh is not required to identify a ripped model. It is trivial to move some polygons around, either by hand or by tools.
On the difference between publishing a ripped file and opening a file but not sharing it: See above.

Quote :

Isn't there is a law (which i know from my IRL FRP bodykit production practice) that if there's more that 10% is changed - then copyright laws does not apply to this item?

It depends on the licenses. There is also the case that any work based on the original is still under the same license. That means even if your new file is 99% different the original licenses and ownership rights would still apply just because it was based on something else.
Often ripped mods are so close to the original that it is hard to argue that they are a new work. (Even the retopo mods are often copying the polygons 1:1)

Quote :

P.S.
XRT has some Mitsubishi's intellectual property in it BTW. What we gonna do with it?
Should I ask NISSAN for permission to take pictures of their headlights at my local drift event to make texture out of it later?

I feel such questions are just trying to derail the discussion.
Is it really required to explain the difference between "Copying files from a copyrighted game" and "taking photo of a car headlight"?
Obviously the later is okay, as shown by hundreds of games that feature real-world vehicles with fake names.

Quote from Foch_sho :

Then what's the point of doing retopology if you want to know that the original layout has permission for copyright use?

There is no point in doing retopology or similiar edits, from legal point of view. It changes nothing about the legal status.
It only makes it harder to compare 3D meshes.
It is like uploading a copyrighted movie or music to youtube:
Sometimes people make edits (mirroring it, changing playback speed, adding black bars at top&bottom)
If you mirror a movie then also "every pixel is different" from the original. But good luck explaining to Hollywood that you created a new original movie instead of editing their work.

However, retopology itself is just a modeling technic and sometimes it can be legal.
For example you sculpt a car out of clay or wood and make a 3D-scan of it.
Or you make a 3D-scan of a real car. Or use software that creates 3D-files from video.
These 3D-scans are usually very rough and need to be cleaned up. Sometimes the scans are so bad, that they can not be cleaned up and are only used as reference pictures.
example:

There is nothing wrong with such retopology because they are based on 3D-files that the modders created themself. No on 3D-files taken from other games.