Seriously mate. I get 150+FPS with everything on full, anti-aliasing and AF with my laptop.
You can't ask for all these updates if you're running the game on an old machine. It sounds like your computer is the problem, not the game.
So exactly what is the problem if something is posted twice, thrice, or even twenty times? Seriously? It's probably actually a good thing, shows that it's a popular issue.
I know there's people that get their knickers in a knot on every Internet forum but I've never understood it at all. I think it's just forum nazi big-noting. Who cares?
Afterall, It's not as if as if these posts are clogging up the forum! this is the only one on the subject on the entire first page! I could understand if there were fifteen posts about the same subject every day, but there simply is not. So that's not a valid argument.
So what is? The thread title is crystal clear, nobody forced you to click on it and read it, let alone respond.
I'm honestly struggling to see the problem. If you see a thread title you've read about multiple times before here's the solution: don't click on the thing and try and chastise another poster. No poster here is better or more senior than any other just because they've been around longer. It's not a competition.
You forum nazis just need to relax and take it easy and ask yourself the question, are you seriously that inconvenienced?
I know there's people that get their knickers in a knot on every Internet forum but I've never understood it at all. I think it's just forum nazi big-noting. Who cares?
Afterall, It's not as if as if these posts are clogging up the forum! this is the only one on the subject on the entire first page! I could understand if there were fifteen posts about the same subject every day, but there simply is not. So that's not a valid argument.
So what is? The thread title is crystal clear, nobody forced you to click on it and read it, let alone respond.
I'm honestly struggling to see the problem. If you see a thread title you've read about multiple times before here's the solution: don't click on the thing and try and chastise another poster. No poster here is better or more senior than any other just because they've been around longer. It's not a competition.
You forum nazis just need to relax and take it easy and ask yourself the question, are you seriously that inconvenienced?
Last edited by Ikaponthus, .
LOL. I think a car would be unrecognisable if you did that in real life too.
Mind you, hopefully in the next damage upgrade, wheels will come off with absurdly extreme damage such as that, so it won't look that funny anyway.
But seriously, I don't see this as a problem at all! Who is going to do that in a race?
My guess is that this is spot on.
I highly, highly doubt that dwindling interest would be due to lack of tracks.
I think the most important thing is damage.
Being able to ram walls/opposition etc. with no consequence is by a million miles the most unrealistic aspect of the simulator so far.
I will also add that I really like the aesthetics of the damage model currently. A few minor improvements to the aesthetics such as scratch marks and ability to "bend" side panels and the roof would be welcome though. Smashed glass I don't care about really. I've never seen a crash in motor-sports where glass has noticeably smashed. My guess is they use special windows that prevent this.
But more important than that is actual physical repercussions from damage. Blown tires & wrecked engines etc.
Being able to ram walls/opposition etc. with no consequence is by a million miles the most unrealistic aspect of the simulator so far.
I will also add that I really like the aesthetics of the damage model currently. A few minor improvements to the aesthetics such as scratch marks and ability to "bend" side panels and the roof would be welcome though. Smashed glass I don't care about really. I've never seen a crash in motor-sports where glass has noticeably smashed. My guess is they use special windows that prevent this.
But more important than that is actual physical repercussions from damage. Blown tires & wrecked engines etc.
Ugh. I give up.
So - I posted something that's been posted before. Who cares? Am I inconveniencing our grizzled, old, all-knowing veterans of the forum that much? I think not.
The thread title was crystal clear, you didn't have to click on it. You certainly didn't have to read it and then post your comment.
Seriously, get a grip. Posting on a forum is not a competition, nor does the occasional newbie blunder inconvenience anyone as much as you're pretending.
A repeated post is good for me and other new members.
If it annoys you so much you have to go out of your way to post something in capitals and bold then I suggest you simply ignore the adequately titled thread, that you could not possibly have stumbled into by accident. Simple, problem solved. Also, get a prescription for Valium or something.
And for your information, I did actually do a search and only found one related thread in the "old threads" section. But seriously, if it's not on the first page then new member shouldn't be forced to search through old threads and the risk of incurring the wrath of the older members who have been so dreadfully inconvenienced by having to have seen the same question asked multiple times.
So - I posted something that's been posted before. Who cares? Am I inconveniencing our grizzled, old, all-knowing veterans of the forum that much? I think not.
The thread title was crystal clear, you didn't have to click on it. You certainly didn't have to read it and then post your comment.
Seriously, get a grip. Posting on a forum is not a competition, nor does the occasional newbie blunder inconvenience anyone as much as you're pretending.
A repeated post is good for me and other new members.
If it annoys you so much you have to go out of your way to post something in capitals and bold then I suggest you simply ignore the adequately titled thread, that you could not possibly have stumbled into by accident. Simple, problem solved. Also, get a prescription for Valium or something.
And for your information, I did actually do a search and only found one related thread in the "old threads" section. But seriously, if it's not on the first page then new member shouldn't be forced to search through old threads and the risk of incurring the wrath of the older members who have been so dreadfully inconvenienced by having to have seen the same question asked multiple times.
Last edited by Ikaponthus, .
I think that's cool. To me it looks like the bodywork is bent around the wheel and axle, not that the wheels has gone "through" the body.
Easy Tiger! It's not an insult to the game!
I love LFS, best racing sim ever.
I'm also aware that it's an alpha version. However, this is an improvements forum, and this is an issue. I also specified why off-line AI racing is important.
Like I said, "pointless" is maybe not the ideal word. You could argue about that forever. What is the point of anything, right?
It's that drifting is an impractical use of a racing car. In racing, you're trying to go as fast as you can and the car is designed and setup to do that within the racing regulations. In drifting you're purposely forcing the car to behave in an inefficient manner.
"I just don't get it"!
Last edited by Ikaponthus, .
Not interested?
Solution: Stop clicking the thread and chipping in your 2c. Problem solved.
Okay yes, you have been here longer than me and have seen something similar before. That's nothing to be condescending about.
I mean, what's the point of that post apart from a little bit of a dick-measuring competition? You must have known exactly what I was going to say after you read the thread title?
Either be helpful or don't respond. Geez I even put a disclaimer in right up the top.
This type of behaviour on an anonymous forum really impresses nobody at all.
I mean, what's the point of that post apart from a little bit of a dick-measuring competition? You must have known exactly what I was going to say after you read the thread title?
Either be helpful or don't respond. Geez I even put a disclaimer in right up the top.
This type of behaviour on an anonymous forum really impresses nobody at all.
The AI are a bunch of beligerent wreckers (and are also too consistent)
Okay so maybe it's been said before. If so, kindly either fill me in on the situation or provide a link. Don't be a forum nazi, posting here is not a competition. (end rant)
Off-line racing is very important for learning tracks. And AI is important for learning tracks in traffic.
Wreckers
The bastards are always ramming me. If the car in front is slow the AI seem to attempt to just barge through them with little regard for anything except keeping themselves on the racing line! They don't ever seem to try and safe and legal over-taking manoeuvre. Even in the pits if you're driving a bit slowly they just try and ram through you!
Maybe this is difficult to program, I don't know. It couldn't be too difficult write an algorithm that determines who has priority on the racing line and for the AI to back off if it's the player (or another AI car). Ideally, different AI driver could have an aggressiveness setting (with it optionally "random").
Too consistent
I also notice that if I do qualifying with a bunch of AI, half the time they all run the exact same qualifying time, or within a hundredth of a second from each other! This also makes the racing very boring. Just a line of cars snaking around the racing line at exactly the same speed the whole race!
LFS is a truly stunning simulation as it stands, but it won't be properly complete until this is fixed.
Off-line racing is very important for learning tracks. And AI is important for learning tracks in traffic.
Wreckers
The bastards are always ramming me. If the car in front is slow the AI seem to attempt to just barge through them with little regard for anything except keeping themselves on the racing line! They don't ever seem to try and safe and legal over-taking manoeuvre. Even in the pits if you're driving a bit slowly they just try and ram through you!
Maybe this is difficult to program, I don't know. It couldn't be too difficult write an algorithm that determines who has priority on the racing line and for the AI to back off if it's the player (or another AI car). Ideally, different AI driver could have an aggressiveness setting (with it optionally "random").
Too consistent
I also notice that if I do qualifying with a bunch of AI, half the time they all run the exact same qualifying time, or within a hundredth of a second from each other! This also makes the racing very boring. Just a line of cars snaking around the racing line at exactly the same speed the whole race!
LFS is a truly stunning simulation as it stands, but it won't be properly complete until this is fixed.
I like the idea of some kind of lasting penalty for crashing often.
What Woz says makes sense.
The only problem is that any feasible method is liable to punish both the driver at fault and the one not at fault too!
What Woz says makes sense.
The only problem is that any feasible method is liable to punish both the driver at fault and the one not at fault too!
I think real cars and tracks are not so important.
LFS simulates the physics of auto-racing astonishingly well. To me it doesn't matter much if the physical statistics of the actual vehicle in the game are identical to one that exists in the real world or not.
Same goes for tracks.
LFS simulates the physics of auto-racing astonishingly well. To me it doesn't matter much if the physical statistics of the actual vehicle in the game are identical to one that exists in the real world or not.
Same goes for tracks.
Fair enough. Thanks for explaining.
I guess it is kind of like other judged sports but there's still something about it that's just ... pointless. That's not quite the right word to express what I mean though.
But each to their own.
Bottom line is I don't care if people do it in LFS as long as it's doesn't impede the proper racing facet of the sim.
I guess it is kind of like other judged sports but there's still something about it that's just ... pointless. That's not quite the right word to express what I mean though.
But each to their own.
Bottom line is I don't care if people do it in LFS as long as it's doesn't impede the proper racing facet of the sim.
I will just add my 2c. and say that firstly, apart from the car interiors that desperately need updating and variety, I quite like the graphics. And secondly, anyone that's going to leave a game like LFS because of the graphics - which aren't even bad - is not the type of person who is going to dedicate much time to a hardcore racing simulation in the long run anyway!
I can't see how people wanting to drift and cruise would negatively effect players numbers. If anything it would increase them, as long as it remains actively controlled and people don't try and drift in races and crash everyone out!
As someone else says, ability to drift is a by product of realistic physics. That doesn't mean the game is not a real race-sim. It actually means it's more real ergo more "pure".
As is blatantly obvious in the other thread, drifting is not my thing at all. But I don't begrudge anyone who wants to do it in LFS, as long as it's kept well separate from the racing.
As for cruising. Well IMO equally as pointless in a racing sim, but if people want to do it and it's not hurting me then why on earth not? All the power to them.
Summary is I don't think either thing effects LFS in a negative way.
As someone else says, ability to drift is a by product of realistic physics. That doesn't mean the game is not a real race-sim. It actually means it's more real ergo more "pure".
As is blatantly obvious in the other thread, drifting is not my thing at all. But I don't begrudge anyone who wants to do it in LFS, as long as it's kept well separate from the racing.
As for cruising. Well IMO equally as pointless in a racing sim, but if people want to do it and it's not hurting me then why on earth not? All the power to them.
Summary is I don't think either thing effects LFS in a negative way.
So, I will reply to your other points in time. And they're good points BTW.
But setting aside my dislike for drifting for a second ... can you explain to me what it is they're doing? As in the goal? Sometimes I see two cars on the track - they're not actually racing are they? Just competing to see who can get more sideways? If it's the latter (which I am guessing is more likely), how do they know who wins? I'm assuming there are judges or something that judge on angle of drift and speed and award a score or something?
But setting aside my dislike for drifting for a second ... can you explain to me what it is they're doing? As in the goal? Sometimes I see two cars on the track - they're not actually racing are they? Just competing to see who can get more sideways? If it's the latter (which I am guessing is more likely), how do they know who wins? I'm assuming there are judges or something that judge on angle of drift and speed and award a score or something?
Last edited by Ikaponthus, .
I've said so already. Part of the reason I don't like drifting is because of the bling culture that goes with it! I've said it a thousand times. But then people say, "but the bling culture goes with circuit racing too" and then we all get way off the topic!
If you want to argue about my personal tastes and why I don't like drifting, I can briefly outline the reasons if you want me to, but then don't get defensive or tell me to shut up. I don't like rap music either, that's not an insult to people that do like rap music. It's just my personal opinion.
I think we're getting off point. Where closed circuit racing originated is irrelevant. Suffice to say it was around the 1900s in very old an relatively slow cars by an aristocratic upper class as nobody else could even afford cars!
While in 1900 (or whenever) it was probably not on a race-track, the origins of modern autosports simply cannot be compared in any way whatsoever to contemporary bling street racer idiocy. My guess (correct me if I'm wrong) is that this very same contemporary bling street racing scene is where "drift racing" originated. In comparison, I think you'll find that the origins of F1 etc. were organised, legal, controlled events relative to their time in history. That they may not have been on closed-circuit race-tracks at the earliest moments of conception is completely besides the point.
Which V8 Supercar race driver is that? With DRIFT plastered down the side of his car? I'd say that's actually a "drift racer" putting his mad skillz on display there.
Very good points.
That might be interesting but my point remains.
Basically, closed circuit street racing, rally, etc. simply do not have the same ties to street racer culture that "drifting racing" does.
Basically, closed circuit street racing, rally, etc. simply do not have the same ties to street racer culture that "drifting racing" does.
nihill: you don't want to hear, so don't read it. Skip to next post. Problem solved.
Nisskid,
You make fair points and I genuinely read and consider your arguments, even if they are a little defensive.
I will say though, I'm not "insulting" anyone or anything (as you suggested). I don't like it for some reasons (which maybe flawed) but that's not an insult. That's my opinion.
Well, yeah I do think it's kind of "moronic" to drift race in public streets (whether you expect there to be traffic or not) and be proud of the damage you've caused your tyres. I guess "moronic" is an insult, but if you don't do those things it doesn't apply to you or other drifters who don't do those things. And yes, I think it's moronic to "race" on public streets too.
Now you do actually make a fair point about the same type of kids racing around the streets in their ricer-cars and that not being representative of circuit racing, however I don't think it's entirely valid. The difference is that "drifting" is primarily a street racing thing that has only recently made the transition to a properly controlled track environment. Correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think it originated on a track, it originated from kids in ricer cars trying to do power-slides.
Closed circuit racing and rally certainly did not originate on the streets. The origins of these types of motor-sports go way back to the invention of the auto-mobile when racing was the pass-time of high society and the aristocratic class that could actually afford cars. A lot of this mentality can still be seen in F1 in particular.
So while those same kids might also be into street racing that holds some similarities to closed circuit racing or rally racing, I think it's extremely disingenuous to pretend that the "proper" (note inverted commas - no offence) motor-racing genres have anywhere comparable a link to the "bling" street-racer culture that "drift racing" does.
Yes, drag racing started on the streets too. But I'm no great fan of drag racing either.
So, is it fair to dislike something because of where it originates from? No, it's not. But because of the origins, it still retains a lot of the mentalities and style of street racing and that is the thing I really don't like. And that's not for any other reason than personal opinion. I don't like ultra-flashy, imported cars or the fashion and culture that goes along with them. Just not my thing.
Lastly, I just don't like the actual act of "drifting". To me it's driving slowly around a corner, sideways and ruining tyres. Doesn't appeal to me on a personal level.
Problem solved.Nisskid,
You make fair points and I genuinely read and consider your arguments, even if they are a little defensive.
I will say though, I'm not "insulting" anyone or anything (as you suggested). I don't like it for some reasons (which maybe flawed) but that's not an insult. That's my opinion.
Well, yeah I do think it's kind of "moronic" to drift race in public streets (whether you expect there to be traffic or not) and be proud of the damage you've caused your tyres. I guess "moronic" is an insult, but if you don't do those things it doesn't apply to you or other drifters who don't do those things. And yes, I think it's moronic to "race" on public streets too.
Now you do actually make a fair point about the same type of kids racing around the streets in their ricer-cars and that not being representative of circuit racing, however I don't think it's entirely valid. The difference is that "drifting" is primarily a street racing thing that has only recently made the transition to a properly controlled track environment. Correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think it originated on a track, it originated from kids in ricer cars trying to do power-slides.
Closed circuit racing and rally certainly did not originate on the streets. The origins of these types of motor-sports go way back to the invention of the auto-mobile when racing was the pass-time of high society and the aristocratic class that could actually afford cars. A lot of this mentality can still be seen in F1 in particular.
So while those same kids might also be into street racing that holds some similarities to closed circuit racing or rally racing, I think it's extremely disingenuous to pretend that the "proper" (note inverted commas - no offence) motor-racing genres have anywhere comparable a link to the "bling" street-racer culture that "drift racing" does.
Yes, drag racing started on the streets too. But I'm no great fan of drag racing either.
So, is it fair to dislike something because of where it originates from? No, it's not. But because of the origins, it still retains a lot of the mentalities and style of street racing and that is the thing I really don't like. And that's not for any other reason than personal opinion. I don't like ultra-flashy, imported cars or the fashion and culture that goes along with them. Just not my thing.
Lastly, I just don't like the actual act of "drifting". To me it's driving slowly around a corner, sideways and ruining tyres. Doesn't appeal to me on a personal level.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG