Quote from Davo :

Yup, they're slow everywhere for me.

Same here (especially slow on rallyx and the faster cars on oval) .










(seriously, though: the AI are just like they are, and that is sloooow, but sooner or later, Scawen will improve them).

I'm glad you finally sorted it out .

Just downloaded the sounds and sure like them. Thx for the work, DaveWS .

I do get some clipping even with the car sound set to 4, though, but as it's not audible as far as I can tell, it's okay, I guess. I haven't tested them with a bigger field of cars, yet, so I'll have to see if that causes noticable clipping.

Thx again!

Please, guys, don't make this a LFS vs. rFactor thread!

Quote from Aquilifer :

Hmmm...right Ok, maybe I need to clarify... Everybody must know what 666 means, but 42... it is from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy book by Douglas Adams.

from Wikipedia...
"... Through archival recordings, he relates the story of a race of hyper-intelligent pan-dimensional beings who built a computer named Deep Thought to calculate the answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything. When the answer was revealed as 42, they were forced to build a more powerful computer to work out what the Ultimate Question actually was, but their plans never come to fruition ..."

Maybe it needs to be a bit neard to know that

:doh:

I did a little test, which probably says a lot or nothing at all, depending on your point of view. Personnally, I'm not trying to make a statement here, just wanted to find out, how good/bad the race_s-setup might be.

I took the XFG out on bl1 (a combo which I have not driven in a very long time. PB is 1:34.10 but that was in may 2006) and dled Duck's current wr-setup (a setup I'd never used before). I messed around for a few laps and then did 10 consecutive laps. My laptimes kept getting better with the very best being 1:34.40 on lap 7. All the laps afterwards were in the 1:34.xx range.

Then I took the race_s setup, messed around a little and did 15 consecutive laps. The very best was 1:35.79 on lap 9. From lap 5 to lap 15 I managed to get all sort of times from high 1:35s to high 1:37s -- consistency was non-existant.

So, whatever that means .

Note: I never do my own setups, because I have no idea what to do, but I can get within 103% of the wr-time within around 20 laps in the easier cars, which could point to the conclusion that I'm okay at adjusting to setups.

Quote from Aquilifer :

Yep.. that's how I chose mine. Those who have numbers like 42 or 666 might have had different reasons.

Actually, no. My birthday is September 4th, which is why I chose 49 .

49

I do find it pretty expensive, though. I mean, the adapter and the cheapest wheel they have amounts to almost 240 €. Add the button box and you're looking at 286 €. That's a lot of money for a little extra usability.

As I'm a little bored here at work today, I'd like to take the opportunity to bump this thread: *bump*

So, let me just say:

Develops fire, Provides Feel, Dire Eves Flop, Devils Pee For (other sims?), Fled Pee Visor or Solved Pee Fir.

I'd also like to point out that I will probably have to change my user name, as the only two sensible things it returns are Linens and Lens in (although I'm wearing glasses). My real name is not much more yielding, so I might want to change that also -- I really don't see myself as a Hiked Kilo, a Do Hike Ilk and certainly not as Kid Like Ho (Dike Ho Ilk is no better).

Quote from mrodgers :

If you think that, they you will find out soon enough how delusional that statement is.


I never thought of this. This should be added to the top 100 reasons why you should use LFS over other racing sims. Indeed, I've yet to find another forum, sim or other, that had such a collection of smileys!
:heartbeat :lfs::heartbeat

:yel: :bath::ices_rofl at these ones.

Hm, I don't really like those. For me a smiley has to be simple. This is by far my favourite:

And this one is kind of cute also: :Kick_Can_

Quote from Nathan_French_14 :

i think the second cd you said came with it is called rFactor, not a bad game, but not a brilliant one either

I believe t1ger was joking .

(correct me, if I'm wrong, t1ger)

Quote from Jakg :

connectors are the same - if you want i could try my old Momo wheels pedals on it

Sure, that would be great .

(Momo and DFP pedals should be basically the same, right?)

Reading this, I'm getting the impression, that people who are having problems with their shifter, are getting a complete new G25 (new wheel, new shifter, new pedals). If that's the case, is any of you guys thinking about just selling the wheel? And would it be possible to hook up DFP pedals to a G25-wheel? Just curious ...

Quote from Zyber :

hehe thats exacly what i meen.. AA AF doesnt have any impact on fps unless ur alone on track.. anyways.. your cpu is ALOT faster than mine.. and u get 48 fps.. im around 40

my cpu is a old amd 64.. no x2 or dual core just plain old x64.. accually so old it isnt sold anymore.. its a 2 ghz..

i still think something is wrong here.. do u have a G15 keyboard? if so how much is your cpu load running lfs? mine is 75% wich tells me that my cpu isnt even being used 100 %

I thought the 3200+ ran at 2.2 GHz, which would sort of explain the small difference, as there's really not much of an advantage when using a dual core processor, since LFS (like almost all other games) does not support it. So my E6300 should be fairly comparable to a single core cpu running at 2.4 GHz.

@Davo: Wouldn't the physics to be calculated be the same no matter what gfx-settings you use? It's always 20 cars, I thought. Or does LFS change physics calculation with lower (ingame) gfx-settings?

Edit: No, I'm not using a G15, just a simple MS keyborard. As for CPU-load, I don't know, I'd have to check when I'm at home.

Not that I'm against single seaters with H-shifter (although I don't have one), but it actually doesn't really matter, what we think, the FOX could be based on, as the devs created this car and they decide whether it's sequential or not.

And btw, the Formula Campus I found via google (never heard of it before) at least now uses sequential gear boxes and is at 118 hp also less powerful than the FOX with it's 190 hp. And in fact the Formula Renault specs match the FOX-specs quite well.

Quote from StewartFisher :

Interestingly, I tried the 'max' CFG file with 16xAF, 8xS AA, all settings maxed in the nVidia control panel and I got exactly the same frame rates.

Yeah, as I said, it's the same for me and logically that would point to the conclusion that with max-settings the CPU would be the limiting factor, which seems a little odd, as I would expect the gfx-card to be stressed more when gfx-settings ingame are set to full. Maybe someone with more insight to these things could explain?

nvm. got something mixed up.

Here are the results (min and max cfg-files are in the wrong folders btw):

min-settings 8xAA and 16xAF: ca. 140 fps
min-settings no AA and no AF: ca. 180 fps

max-settings 8xAA and 16xAF: ca. 48 fps
max-settings no AA and no AF: ca. 48 (maybe 49) fps

System:
[email protected]
XFX 7600GT XXX
2 GB CL 5 RAM 5-5-5-15 @ 343 MHz

Hope that helps .

Edit: btw, the conclusion would be that with max-settings the CPU is the limiting factor as AA and AF settings hardly make any difference. Correct?

Quote from jtr99 :

Just to get this straight, Linsen, are you saying you think the guys on Top Gear are funny?

I know it's a popular show, and so presumably some people think they're funny, but personally I've always found it to be a really sloppy, undisciplined, self-indulgent and incredibly un-funny show, in terms of the writing anyway. Some good cars I guess.

Well, it's all relative, I guess, and I bet you'd find it funny too if you knew what german car programmes are like (was there a vomiting smiley somewhere? Too lazy to look now :tilt.

Anybody remember "The Need For Speed"? That was my first racing game. I had the PlayStation-version and remember that I felt it sucked quite badly, because I couldn't drive the cars. Looking back at it now, I think it just might have been the most realistic racing game ever for PS1 as far as physics go -- but I might be wrong, maybe it was just bad and I'm now thinking because the cars were hard to handle, it must have something to do with realism. Anyway, I soon resorted to the more arcadish games like GT, GT2 and wipEout (which had incredibly great physics, I'd imagine, but can't really prove it, as it played sometime in the future and featured very quick antigravitation jetlike "cars").

Quote from kurent :

I hope this comparison will be more professional then of those three comedians at Top Gear.

I hope this comparison will be even funnier than of those three comedians at top Gear . I doubt it, though (no offense).

Atm, it's actually more likey that the US of A will claim GB as a colony than the other way around -- But if you brits can avoid that until Hillary is elected, you should be safe, I guess .

Quote from Zyber :

Done file is included

...

I'll have a go when I get home tonight and let you know my results.

Edit: My fps should be higher than yours, I guess, as I have a E6300 oc'ed to 2.4 GHz and also a 7600 GT (but the overclocked XFX 7600GT XXX), so it will be interesting to see what results I get.

Quote from pantherd90 :

with the wheel the force feedback whips me away from the skid (as opposed to turning into the skid and then correcting the line)

Very strange indeed, as the wheel should actually straighten itself out when you let go of it. Sounds like it's doing the opposite. Maybe you have to invert the steering axes? That's not very likely, though, as you would probably have noticed that the wheel is sort of "falling" into the turn instead of increasing resistance the further you turn in ...