i voted i perffered the older sounds. i really didn't feel it was a step in the right direction.

lfs sound has always been generated on the fly from in game numbers.
lfs it seemed to use:

RPM
Engine size (liter)
engine type
Throttle position
cynlinders
amount of power gernerated

am sure he used a filter to generate the mufler sound.

with that sound engine the way sounds sound is fantastic but how the sound sounds is not so good compared to some sampled sounds... actually quite a few.


1.3d sound

2.use of EAX extensions
thease extensions would work wonders on lfs, if u have a good understandment of how sound works you know the improvements that can be made. Eg when something moves further away from you the higher frequencies get drowned out; frequecies get drowned out moving through air yadaydda all this can be simmulated on sound cards today

3. i see a substancial improvement if lfs used a little more varaibles

RPM
Engine size (liter)
stroke
bore
engine type
Throttle position
cynlinders
compresion
valves
number of valves per cylinder
camshafts
exhaust diameter
turbo size

also it could be just me but lfs seems to lack dynamic range when it comes to loadness cars just don't seem alive at 9000rpm(xrt)

Quote from SamH :

The perpetual "I might buy [insert product] one day..." is familiar to me. I understand that you say it.. but it's the life-experienced cynic in me that looks at all the other stuff that you say.. stuff like...

and concludes "No, I really don't think you will".

So.. the reason I don't think you'll buy LFS is because everything you say, says that you won't buy LFS

i'll probally buy it in next 2 months or so out of pure respect for the developers, every time i boot up the game i think damn only 3 people. Being a computer Science major i understand somewhat the amount of work that that was needed for the game.

Quote from SamH :

That's up to the developers. It's a business decision. If the devs wanted a larger userbase, there are mainstream methods and means to explore, to achieve it. If/when they choose that route, you'll be able to say "oh, the devs decided to get a larger userbase".

You're a demo user, lala. For all intents and purposes, you're an outsider looking in. I say that because you've made no investment in the product at all, and as far as I can tell, contributed nothing but a whole load of trolling and neysaying.. at least in as long as I can remember.

You're not forced to purchase the product, but I just feel you need to know that I, as a member of the community, am having a REALLY hard time regarding you as a credible point-carrier.

In my years in many aspects of business, there has been a small collection of people - non-customers - I remember very well, whose money I wouldn't ever have taken - just simply because it wouldn't have been worth the crap I'd have got, if I'd accepted them as customers. You remind me of that collection of people in so many ways. Some people you just don't want to be close to, because of the miserable inherent raincloud that comes with them.

I don't feel i ever trolled on here before, ive been reading these forums long before my join data, and never felt like a part of the community. being an outsider iam still a potencial customer so to speak, and have only suggested what I felt was wrong with LFS From my point of view. Now please don't say. "well your have no idea about LFS because your an "outsider" " ive been reading these forums for over a year now and from my outside point of view certain aspects don't look good.
If your Fine with the way LFS is now and how it progresses, then i guess we can't see eye to eye on certain things.
I like LFS just as much as the next guy, but they are certain things that i feel would stop me from enjoying the game. I don't see why i can't bring my potencial $24 opinion here.

Quote from sgt.flippy :

Depends on social security

lol

Quote from sgt.flippy :

I mean that it doesn't have a very wide public. Most people that like to play "games", want to have stuff like you see in NFS. You can see the proof of that in a lot of threads.

I like a small community, where everyone knows eachother and you can race friends. It's personal taste really, and although it's a cliché that guys like racing, I came to realise it's actually really hard to find young men that like racing in general, and then I'm not even talking about racing online, with realistic physics. The guys I tell I like racing, instantly tell me: I like racing too, what cars do you have in NFS? That's not the type of people I really want and need online to race against.

I hope you understand my point here, it's hard to explain.

Kinda opposite from me, i kinda like to race against different people and see different styles. I mean sure i like to race against my friends and there periods where thats all i rather do. but randomly connecting to a server and racing and see different styles & techniques i just can't do with out.

But on a different Note. Can the developers survive on such a small community?

Quote from George Kuyumji :

The level of ignorance is amazing. If LFS is dead, than what about rFactor, NR2003 or GPL ? They are deader-than-dead, and what about netkarPro, the deathiest Sim ever?

If you start to get annoyed from LFS because of "only" 800 Players online at the same time, please go check for yourself another Simulation and than come back here and say how many drivers you met.

I see your from Britain, if you can stay a night awake and race NASCAR Racing 2003 you will see 400 players MAXIMUM even on the Weekends. That Game sold several hundred thousand times. And is still rated the best NASCAR Simulation in the US. And NASCAR has a huge Fanbase.

Thats half of the driver Pool that LFS has. On to GPL VROC and IGOR, your lucky if you see 100 people Racing online during any time.

You will find around 300 - 400 People racing rFactor Online, far behind LFS in Online Racing Popularity, even if you switch to GTR2 you will maybe find between 400 - 600 People online, and that is a Game that every Joe Average can buy at his local Game Store.

What else is there in the Sim Racing World? netKar Pro... you will have a hard time finding any People Racing Online outside of the GPC League.



erm... because its for free? And what does that has to do with anything?



What are you tryieng to suggest with these numbers? That there should be alot more people Online? As you try to find a answer to this question please also try to discover why there has been 50.000 copies of GPL been sold, but there has never been more than 200 drivers online at the same time? Thats just how it is

What are you tryieng to imply with that question, that LFS is not popular?

Do you think 800 Players online every day is a to low number for a Racing Simulation? Please, you must have played LFS to much if you think that. Start up another Sim and go Online, you will see that the Racing Simulation Genre is a very small one, and that 800 Players Online every night is a huge Number for this Genre.



Perhaps playing something else for a change? If you would have played something else you would have known how much 800 Players online is for a Racing Simulation.

I am actually in NewYork Usa. 800 people is alot and i would be happy if of that 800, 500 were not on the demo

Quote from sgt.flippy :

I mean, my experience on the demo servers wasn't too great, and I bought the license because I like the game. If you want to have a game that attracts people, you should go EA style, and that's not the point of LFS.

I just think LFS NEEDS a small community, because it is and always will be a game for a minority group. And the people that don't buy the license, don't know what they're missing out on, they don't really support the sim in any way, and the worst thing is: they have the nerve to complain about it.

And if the number of players on LFS full is the problem, buy the license and there is one person more playing...

mmm interesting, i particulaly don't understand why you want a small community. i don't see the benefits. I rather be able to have a wide selection of races to choose from. i would imagine if it got big (community)there would be smaller communites inside LFS.IE Drag, Drifters,Forumula,street cars,GTR...

Quote from sgt.flippy :

And I have a feeling we can miss 60% of those demo players.

how so?

Quote from axus :

1. Because people are cheapskates.
2. Everyone with an LFS account is automatically registered on the forum.
3. Say that around 33% of the community is still active (ie. people buy it and ditch it, others can't play at certain times of the year for whatever reason) in any given week. Say 60% of the community bought it for online play. that brings us down to ~6000 different people playing per week. Say you play a game 1-2 hours a week. That's about 1% of the time. That brings you down to an approximate 600 racers at any give time. You'll find my estimates aren't that far off because around the time of S2 being released the devs said something about 3000 unique racers online every week. That's probably doubled since.

Happy? Kthxbye.

Valid answers.
now what do u think its gonna take to get Demo users to Move to FullGame. For me personally its gonna be more people playing or more variety in whats played( Irony)

Right Now There around 800 people playing thats a Great Number only 576 are on demo and 280 on Full. I see this a LFS major problem and should be one of the things that should be looked at. No ever says anything about this on the forums except for the one or 2 threads that pop up saying the demo should be limited.

Personalyl i think it shows that LFS is a great game but...it lacks that something that makes people say; damn i need this game.

So funny too see everyone emotional. I think if u want to prove a point you should list hard facts though.

If you feel LFS has been giving content for the past year, you should list it instead of saying stuff like you won't be missed and all that.

what some of you have to understand is we all play LFS for different reasons; and we all would like to see LFs go in different ways.

I Dream of the day that LFS has a maximum of 10,000 people a day and there is a wide variety of combos used. I mean thats my main problem with LFS not enough playing(dead). and there must be a reason?

1.Why are there more Demo people playing than licensed?
2.Why are they 13,000 Members of the forum but only 800 playing online at a time
3.I often seen post that that LFS (s1+s2) sold 20k~30k where are those other 19k people

can someone answer those questions?

Quote from George Kuyumji :

You're a Nazi !

Can we lock this Thread now?

Quote :

how is vista compatibility and a new sound system trivial ?

and even in its current underdeveloped state lfs is the most complete sim with the most bang for each of those 24 bucks (which really isnt much compared to other sims)
and dont forget those 24 quid not only buy you lfs in its current state your also will get tons of fixes weather updated graphics etc further down the line

personally id start worrying about lfs if its starting to fall behind .... but currently its the clear leader of the pack and constantly pulling away

you guys mistook me. i was simply stating that i see were others are coming from. those were not really my personal beliefs or anything. its just that to someone who dosent comb the forums looking for info, LFS looks slow.

Quote :

how is vista compatibility and a new sound system trivial ?

i never said it was, i said it "seems" and i personally don't think they are.

I guess some don't realise that fixing issues and changing minute stuff may still take alot of time.

personally, after reading that test patch thread i still feel the devs should atleast say what there working on. Not everyweek, but atleast say hey where working on an auto updater on the main site atleast.

I can see where others are coming from. Playing LFS for a year now and i thought it would of been alot further along than it is. yea they where 30 test patches but most of them seem to correct bugs and trivial stuff. the fact that the devs don't really say what there working on there site dosent help. I guess most are just fustrated because they know LFS has alot of potencial and it dosent seem to be fulfilling it.

Quote from herki :

As metioned before (a few times): You can't really compare LFS and GT4, they are meant for different clients. One is for hardcore physics-freaks, and the other is for more normal people.
You can learn to handle GT4 rather quick, but it takes a while to get into LFS.
If you want to compare, compare GT4 to Forza/Race Driver/..., another game, which isn't purely sim, but sim-ish (i.e. you can spin cars, they kinda handle like you expect them to). And compare LFS to a pure sim, like netKar Pro.

The only thing the GT4-defendants should learn: GT4 was never meant to be a real sim. Just more sim than NFS/Ridge Racer/[insert console game], and IMHO they've done a good job balancing sim-elements and arcade elements in this game. I have fun playing it once in a while, and you can take nice screenshots

that sorta of sums of what i was trying to convey. i only joined this thread because of the one sided aspect of it.
Everyone here was saying GT4 was bascially shit without really taking into considerations the many distinct differences between the games.
you can compare apples and oranges but in the end remember your dealing with two different fruits.

Quote from Tweaker :

??? Explain what is inconsistent, and why the engine simulation is horrible. If you think GT4 is any better, take a closer look.


Again. Realize this game is a "garage game" produced out of 3 developer's own homes. That is 3 people and with the help of its community/userbase that pay for the game knowing they will do better and better each and every "slow" update they have. As oppossed to a video game you go buy on a CD and are STUCK with that game for the rest of your Playstation's life, and really cannot have anything new for years to come. While we get more feedback and more "goods" in return from the game's own developers with just a few months of wait each time... sometimes weeks.


It's too bad you resort to judging the game mainly based on your demo time of play, when playing with S2 is an entirely different experience. Hell you are over in NY, when I am in California, and I haven't really had any complaints about the number of people playing online. Surely there aren't as many servers filled up as in earlier hours when people in Europe are playing, but there are users playing on the servers and you at least have a choice between 8 or so servers at the least. And coming online to play in the late afternoon and evening shouldn't be a problem for you actually, less people play online when I am online at around this time I post this reply. But I still go play, and have been doing it for almost 3 years now.


Coming up with your own track ideas is no walk in the park. Eric has done a great job with what he has done so far, and he has gone through so many other track ideas that never make it to the game, because he tries to get something that is quality work. I like making tracks myself personally, and wish I could make some of my own ideas for LFS, but we have to settle with what Eric makes for us, and we have enough to choose from to keep us busy until his next big update. Something that just keeps adding on to the game, and increasing its options.

Having a bundle of real cars and real tracks can be great in GT4, but it wont make much of a difference since these are objects in which make up the game's platform, and the driving is what really matters to call something a "simulation". One could argue on and on why GT4 has real cars/tracks, a nice photo mode, licensed music, car upgrades, a driving license system... etc --- while LFS has none of that. But that is all completely irrelevant to the whole debate here: "Which is a better driving simulation?". We are talking physics here, not why Game A is better than Game B because of its development plan or something. Yet if there are many other constructed comments against LFS or GT4, it all just seems too easy to make a point, or change someone's opinion (or not).


If you have more of your "I can beat down LFS" snacks in your lunch box, feel free to share, but there is nothing you could do to compare LFS's physics with GT4, their's is "subpar".

But I guess you wouldn't realize why we respect the unique little game called LFS when you haven't paid for it Keep spinning that hot little GT4 cd, just be sure and insert your memory card when you need to save your garage!

I don't think Gt4s [Engine Sim]is any better, but it dosent raise the bar so to speak. i would consider them on the same level.
@sam yea i my self rather see better tire than engine but the incosistency at times annoys me


Yes i know its 3 people making the game which still amazes me. but from a potencial customer stand point, its slow, am sure if i actually saw what there were doing or if they had updates on the lfs site on what there working on i would think otherwise. but i started playing LFS over a year ago(on and off) and i saw one major update that brought few things. granted the value of these few things were great i was somewhat disappointed.

Keeping in mind i havent driven the tracks, but watched ive seen coutless videos over which is where i am drawing my conclutions. Am i saying the tracks suck no, am saying they don't pop out as being something i havent seen before.
If the tracks are so good why does it seem that every drives Aston or the oval?

Ive already stated that Gt4 Physics arent as good as LFS, what am saying is GT4 is a sim but not as high of precision(meaning the amount of stuff simulated)

Quote from Taavi(EST) :

Ok, it's 4 pm here, there are 476 players online...42 populated S2 servers, wich is by average 11 people per server

I'll update this post at 1 am my local time

Right now its 10:30Am here and there 530 people online and only 112 of them are on s2 418 are on the demo there about 40 servers as u said.

I guess if you guys focus on those areas of why GT4 or Gt is bad then yea. For me i have had Great fun racing with friends Seriusly Online using DFP and right next to them. Yea when am driving i realize that the outcome could of been alot different had certain other things been.

Damage in Gt4 prob isnt really possible on ps2 and won't be half way near realism.

The same way you guys beat on GT4 i could beat on LFS

1.LFS has Inconsistent levels of Simulation Excellent Tire simulation but Horrible Engine simulation and such.

2.LFS Slow developement

3.While LFs does have online, There arer't alot of people online For me living in New york whenever i get a chance to play i always check LFS world and see what S2 servers are doing. and it isnt alot. Most of the time is a few servers and more people playing the demo than the game it self. Right now There 13 servers on S2. There are 116 People playing the game and there more people playing the demo.

Problem with LFs is it dosent apeal to alot of people its enough for
people to play the demo but isnt enough to get them to buy it. Now that dosent mean it dosent appeal because its Super realistic. probally has to do With actually Gameplay. Drag Racing and Rally are subpar.

4. The tracks are just reiteration of what we have seen times before. There is no aspect of the tracks we i havent seen before.

I could prob go on for a while with the areas of problem I see with LFS and say stuff like LFS seem more like a tech Demo than a game. But that dosent make it a bad game i take it for what it worth.

Quote :

You mean there is HD resolution option in GT4 in PS2? I've always thought HD was only possible with the new genaration consoles, sooo what can you do with PS3 if PS2 is that powerfull?

Yes there is an option for it, although it didn't turn it into a huge difference. 1080i is only has good as your textures i would assume.

Quote :

How do you back this statement up? Why you couln't calculate things in real time, I have a feeling you have been here fighting about GT realism before. It's not a simulator, you can call it simulation of driving and even that is a lie because the cars don't behave as they should.

What i meant is if u took into consideration Everything and simmulate it with xtreame precision, like what F1 teams do with CFD-wind tunnels. Then your gonna need a super computer that can't even do it in real time. obviusly that type of precision isnt neccesary for a game and LFS level works just fine.

Sometimes it seems people take these games as training sims, but for me there both fun in different ways. I defend Gt4 because i felt it was a great demontration of Programming skills and such.

Quote :

No I did not look into the source code, but most Racing Games, a few Simulations excluded indeed move the track around the car + the car dont follow the front wheels, it turns by the center height axis of itself. Racing Games are programmed that way since the 80s. There are only few Software Simulations (like LFS) where the car is moving in a comprehensible way.

I can't imagine any game/simmulation moving the track instead of the car. how did u draw that conclution. dosent it create a paradox if you have more than one car on the same track. Its far more beneficial to update the car positions(resource) wise than updating the whole track.
are you talking about those 80s games that where 2d were u basically doged the cars

Quote from Blackout :

Are you kidding, ahahahahhahahaha 1080i from PS2? wtf are you talking about

Go searching around because its in there, am not sure how they did it but they did

Quote :

No, it's obvious from 5mph upwards that GT4 and Forza are not simulations but games. Sure, they try to recreate the basics of cars, and in that respect you could call them 'simulations', in the same way that Sonic the Hedgehog is a hedgehog simulator.

The low precision isn't just low, but it's been rammed repeatedly into the ground!

I guess its ok to have higher standards of what a sim is. because i could say that LFS is not a sim. it[LFS] runs in real time. No True Simmulator; If you simmulate Everything Possible to the highest precision. can possible Run in real time. Am playing devil advocate in that case.

Quote from wsinda :

Sounds a lot like the AI in LFS...
This is completely equivalent. It doesn't matter what point you take as origin for your physics calculations (unless the car is approaching the speed of light ). What does matter is how you simplify the real world physics in your calculations.

Problem i had with his statement is it seems like a waste of resources. you can't have multiple cars in his example.

Quote from George Kuyumji :

GT4 is indeed a very nice Racing Game. When you have a wheel, switch off the driving Aids and use Normal Road Tyres in the Setup the movements of the car seem quite authentic and would have been called a Simulation if it would have been released for the PC in the mid-90s.

But the driving physics and the whole environment are years behind any modern PC Simulation. And its not only driving physics, its Multiplayer, its Sound, its accurate Graphics, AI, its Replay Mode...

Try to drive a Race in GT4 from the 6th Place and work your way to the front. Doing that realisticly without contacts with the AI cars is impossible. They will ram you. It's annoying racing the AI when they do not see you at all.

In LFS, netkarPro or NR2003 you drive a simulated dynamic vehicle around a static track.

In Gran Turismo you steer the track around the car. This Simulation method from the 80s is still used on console type Race Games. You do not really steer the car, you drive the track around the car. The car is static.

Also, the cars in console games like Forza or Gran Turismo do turn around not by the direction of the front wheels, but by the middle height axis of the car.

There is no tyre on the road simulation, after you have steered the corner to the car, the car turns around the corner by the Axes of its height, not by the direction of the front wheels. This is specially seeable in the Replays were cars turn around sharp corners in a very odd way, they turn by there height-axes, not because of the direction there front tyres are looking.

This 80s Racing Game style programming is still beeing used thats why Hardcore Simulator Fans and Racing Schools cannot be bothered to buy several 1000 Dollars worth of Steering Wheel, Pedals or H-Shifter for a Game like Gran Turismo 4. The car simulation is so basic and simplified that it wouldnt make much sense, so they run there Simulator on complex car Simulations.

Comparing that with Simulations like LFS where even tyre flexing gets simulated, or NR2003 where the developers had inside information from Goodyear about the behaviour of Race tyres and track accuracy where even the real drivers practise with it, is pointless.

GT4 is a very good Racing Game, perhaps the best on consoles. LFS is the most popular Online Racing Simulation in the World.

They are both awesome in there own way.

Where are you getting this infomation from, Have u looked at the source code? for [GT4]; regardless, its dumb to think that the developers would rather Move the whole Track Data And all Sprites instead Of the 6 or so cars.

GT4 Is a sim as is forza, Problem is they are what i call low precision sims. They may not simmulate certain parts [Tire Temprerature] which affects the whole sim as a whole, but its only when u really push the sim the short commings arise.

Considering the the hardware Gt4 is on, its a Excelent job of a sim.[Remember ps2 was designed in late 90es] And they somehow got 1080i our of it

To the original poster i suppose u can use this statemeant from the creator

"To be honest, I can't really say the [original PlayStation] or the PlayStation 2 were able to sufficiently represent the realistically modeled physical world we wanted [in previous Gran Turismo games]," Yamauchi said. "With the PS3, we will be able to perform true physical modeling for the first time."

Quote from Razvan :

I cant wait till we have 'All day driving' especially for the MOE, and the 25h LAN leagues, which have an all day race(24 hours), it should be interesting, and also different track temperatures, based on the time of day. Adding to this: a nice particle system using pixel shader 2.0, to create nice headlights, and tail lights(brakes, turn signals etc) but thats deviating from the subject.
Its good to know that so far, it doesnt affect the physics of the car, meaning the next MOE race shouldnt be a prob.

Am i the only one who thinks using Shaders on Stuff like lights is a waste of resources. To me those features don't add anything to gameplay(Eye Candy). Personally for wet conditions i hope the developers step it up and do something that hasnt been done before.

Eg. Procedural Rain. Be nice to start Driving on a Dry track, have it start raining(maybe a slight drizzile or Full downpour). or have the track Dry as a race goes on. With the ability to have different parts of the track Dry at different rates, Or have maybe water collect in certain areas creating puddles.

That would deffinetly be fun and would really sepperate the good drivers from the people who just Drive same Combo over and over again.

Lfs def has the potencial to do this, but it prob turn into same wet track seen 100s times before.

Quote from TiJay :

The PS3's a generation premature imo. At this time, most people don't have an HDTV or care about Blu-Ray. Next generation they will as HDTVs will be cheap and the BD/HD-DVD war will be over. The Wii has hit the right market at the right time- innovative gaming that's still a step up from the previous gen.

I think alot people miss the point with Blu-Ray. i don't think they want everyone to drop dvds and run out and get a HDTV. Fact is if you have a HDTV, they really isnt a good source to actually use it. So if u have a HDTV and really want see what it can do your prob gonna like it. Having blu ray sorta takes a little stress off developers, having so much space, i guess the sorta can think of a way to use it all.

Quote from mrodgers :

Bunch of morons.... The same thing happened with the xBox. People were going crazy buying them on ebay for ridiculous prices. If the idiots would just wait a week, they will be collecting dust on the store shelves just like the xBoxes are .

I paid less for my entire PC system with monitor and printer than the PS3 is. IMO, consoles aren't worth $10. You can't race LFS on a console .

I looked it up on ebay just after I posted this. Seems the norm is about $1500-2500 (usd). Sheesh, imagine the PC you can build for that! Sock $2500 into a PC and there is no console out there that could touch it. You could even do just the $1500 PC and add a Plasma now that I'm seeing them for under $1000. That would stomp all over any crap console game.

Yea Consoles have there advantages though. When i see screen shots of a game i know when i get it home its gonna look like that. i know when i get home am not gonna have any conflicts; guranteed to run. i don't have to worry it being outdated for a while. Pluss they offer a wider variety of games.

So i guess it really depends on what your playing me personally i can't live without BOTH

Quote :

If the main devs really, really wanted to create a true simulator, why they are still sticking with GT series & Sony? I bet they have earned so much money that some main developers could just quit, even change platform to a better one and do a real sim... if they wanted to do that. Of course PS3 will give them more technical possibilities but the technical requirements haven't been the biggest problem - not even back in PS1 era. It's just the mentality, "let's make a arcade-semi-sim and call it ultimate driving simulator".

when creating a game like GT4, above all the game has to sell. "Real" Sims are going to harder to sell and develope. the strategy i think GT4 team took was good. I doubt there any developers are unhappy with GT4 in terms of its realism. the more calculations u through into the sim the more Testing is needed. and remember there on a Console so when they launch the game its launched, they can't release a quick patch to fix any issues. i think the did a decent job Balancing game (developement wise)

Quote :

Is there such a real life tweak for turbo's IRL and would it be used in any race car?

Engines with turbo's are normally crap when the turbo is not spooled because the engine is tuned for the boost the turbo provides. When the turbo is not working the power drop can be massive.

Yup, don't know if it is in circuit racing , but alot of drag cars use it

Quote from Forbin :

Generally engine tuning is not quite like suspension tuning. It is much simpler in terms of the result and not as heavily dependent on personal preference. There will be a specific curve that is the best and that is the one everyone will use

I would have to disagree with that, although technically there could be a specific setting that is deemed optimal dosent neccesarilly mean it is truly the best. I don't think there is anything that can be considered the best in a racing enviroment.

Example is you could have someone who makes a setup with a smaller turbo as a result hes especially faster in certain areas (Corner exit maybe). That same car would prob suffer on the straights. (vague example) Also have to consider what effect this has on the tires and Fuel consumption.