Why because people expect a Xmas surprise. The Dev's made that bed a long time ago.
We shouldn't confuse the two issues community engagement and demands for releases/updates.
Little under two years we have seen;
Already....and you've only been around for what... 3 years?
Seriously though, this is what the thread is about, no one's forcing people to read/comment on this thread if it doesn't match your take on the situation.
It's certainly not a competition to compel others to adopt the same thoughts... That battle was never going to be won given "sympathisers" would rarely visit this forum for the exact reasons we are debating.
- Sound adjustments by third party
- Increased connection limits
- Clutch/Physics improvements/adjustments.
- FB02
- Additional Interiors
- Replay controls
- Car balancing
- Many small fixes and language updates.
Already....and you've only been around for what... 3 years?
Seriously though, this is what the thread is about, no one's forcing people to read/comment on this thread if it doesn't match your take on the situation.
It's certainly not a competition to compel others to adopt the same thoughts... That battle was never going to be won given "sympathisers" would rarely visit this forum for the exact reasons we are debating.
At this point, any bit of news, is better than no news.
No ones holding the dev's to release dates or trying to dictate what should be included or not. I think that pretty clear from the participation in the suggestions and improvement threads.
Is it too much to ask to feed the community with a bit of news once a month or so. Spark a little interest and remind us that things are progressing slowly but surely. The fact this doesn't happen, makes it really easy to conclude there's nothing to report. That may not be the situation, but history tells us a different story.
It's an unpopular view, particularly with the Johnny come lately and optimist club, but it's one worth raising, even if there little chance of the dev's seeing it. :tired:
No ones holding the dev's to release dates or trying to dictate what should be included or not. I think that pretty clear from the participation in the suggestions and improvement threads.
Is it too much to ask to feed the community with a bit of news once a month or so. Spark a little interest and remind us that things are progressing slowly but surely. The fact this doesn't happen, makes it really easy to conclude there's nothing to report. That may not be the situation, but history tells us a different story.
It's an unpopular view, particularly with the Johnny come lately and optimist club, but it's one worth raising, even if there little chance of the dev's seeing it. :tired:
I share your sentiment. It's really a chicken/egg thing. We need players to return to the game to break that trend, but that won't happen until there's something to spark interest back in the game and hopefully it will then get to a critical mass, as in the EU.
That was possibly the case early on, but no so much of recent.
As a AU server provider, I get more players on the private servers than the public ones. Replicating popular EU server configs makes little difference.
Unless you join an AU league (often private), your unlikely to find any reasonable number of players on one server.
As a AU server provider, I get more players on the private servers than the public ones. Replicating popular EU server configs makes little difference.
Unless you join an AU league (often private), your unlikely to find any reasonable number of players on one server.
Why is this relevant to the discussion? FYI... It's a reflection of the lack of competition (servers+players) outside the EU.
Clearly you are the glass-half full type of person. That's fine. The picture isn't as dim for those within the EU time zone.
If it wasn't for the overwhelming sentiment that I share with others, I would probably dismiss it as just me. Clearly that isn't the case from reading this thread.
Not good news
Compared to RSC days, it's very stagnant. Community engagement is non-existent and the future of LFS development is foggy at best. As such, there's very little positives that can be drawn from this situation. All indicators (participation, new players, and releases) are certainly at record lows.
I guess it all depends on individual perspective and how long you've been following LFS, but as a long time player/observer, it's very disappointing.
Not good news
Like so many here... loved the game, but the writing is on the wall. 
I've been following the scene and playing the game since its inception. LFS has only held it's niche, due to lack of better alternatives. While no other game (IMHO) beats LFS in all areas, there are many that do a lot better at individual facets and it will only be a matter of time where we see an LFS killer.
If we've learnt anything over the history of the LFS, it's the correlation between dev's reports and the significance of the update. Sadly this is a case of "No news, is bad news".
Given the major release cycles are around 2 years, even a massive update is unlikely to carry enough community momentum to see the light of S3.
The community has already seen the bulk of prominent long time LFS advocates leave for the lack of progress /declining interests and if it wasn't for these kinds of threads or the plethora of feature requests from noobs, it would be almost dead quiet on these forums.
I hope the dev's see that LFS is running on the smell of an oily rag and something has to change now, be it their approach to community engagement, expanding developer numbers or opening LFS up to third party content.
I've been following the scene and playing the game since its inception. LFS has only held it's niche, due to lack of better alternatives. While no other game (IMHO) beats LFS in all areas, there are many that do a lot better at individual facets and it will only be a matter of time where we see an LFS killer.If we've learnt anything over the history of the LFS, it's the correlation between dev's reports and the significance of the update. Sadly this is a case of "No news, is bad news".
Given the major release cycles are around 2 years, even a massive update is unlikely to carry enough community momentum to see the light of S3.
The community has already seen the bulk of prominent long time LFS advocates leave for the lack of progress /declining interests and if it wasn't for these kinds of threads or the plethora of feature requests from noobs, it would be almost dead quiet on these forums.
I hope the dev's see that LFS is running on the smell of an oily rag and something has to change now, be it their approach to community engagement, expanding developer numbers or opening LFS up to third party content.
Added.
A latency measurement depends on the connection type. Via server or Peer2Peer. Perhaps it could be expressed as an average to all users.
-1
Minor issue and really just a rehash of the whole skin stealing debate.
Far better to implement a local list of favourite servers (by IP) and also add regional masters to reduce the size of lists and possible duplicates.
Minor issue and really just a rehash of the whole skin stealing debate.
Far better to implement a local list of favourite servers (by IP) and also add regional masters to reduce the size of lists and possible duplicates.
I would say this is more of a bug in the Jump start code. Should be possible to address by checking if the jump movement was caused by engine or collision. I would report it in the Bug forum.
Good idea for sure, but this is a client enhancement, so it should go into the other suggestion lists.
Added
- /pitwindow=<laps> /pittyres=<laps> /pitfuel=<laps> where laps configurable range of laps (2,8,12-18)
Added
Added
Yes that would be client side option for sure. But I agree it worth adding to the other wish list.
Scawen, has the behaviour of the dedicated server registration process changed?
I may have just picked up on this behaviour with a recent colo outage, but if the master server is not contactable during the launch, it never retries to register, effectively requiring a restart.
If this has always been the case, I'll just add it to dedi server wish list.
I may have just picked up on this behaviour with a recent colo outage, but if the master server is not contactable during the launch, it never retries to register, effectively requiring a restart.
If this has always been the case, I'll just add it to dedi server wish list.
+1
Definitely not for every server, but generally closer races result with fixed setups...Well so I've found.
We have /fcv which is very similar in many respects, so why we've been waiting for this option for so long is frustrating to say the least.
I guess the asian character sets open up more sales opportunity for less coding time, but a significant time has past since we got a real update with content and as much as I love LFS, this sentiment seems to be growing.
The most frustrating part is, that here in Australia, the only time you get numbers in servers is when a new patch is released and how long that lasts, very much depends on the size of the update. I can't recall the last time I seen a full server (non-league/comp.) in Australasia sadly.
Last edited by Macfox, .
@Scawen
With the exception of a couple of minor InSim and network debug message, how much value is there in running the latest dedicated server version, if the changelog doesn't indicate a change?
I try to keep with the updates on the our servers, but how much value is in it, particularly if the the clients are backward compatible? To your credit I have yet to see a dedicated server problem with the last 35 or so updates, which is great achievement, but it also raises this question.
With the exception of a couple of minor InSim and network debug message, how much value is there in running the latest dedicated server version, if the changelog doesn't indicate a change?
I try to keep with the updates on the our servers, but how much value is in it, particularly if the the clients are backward compatible? To your credit I have yet to see a dedicated server problem with the last 35 or so updates, which is great achievement, but it also raises this question.
<IMHO>
I've seen similar requests in other threads, and from what has been said, the netcode "probably" doesn't favour a simple solution to add such a packet.
The nature of LFS netcode being p2p and UDP based, it's quite feasible the server doesn't see or need to see every position update, which would be needed to fully detect collisions accurately. Several of LFS hacks and weird teleporting inside other cars, seems to back up the fact that the netcode implicitly trusts each client with it's own track position, within certain bounds of realism.
Does that make sense?
I'll added the request to the list, but I wouldn't hold your breath, given the above challenges and despite many people wanting such a feature, including myself.
Reset can already be done with InSim... see InSim.txt with the dedicated server zip.
Added inSim NCN IP address.
Added inSim NCN IP address.
Can you elaborate on these options. Ping has been requested already, but not as a InSim function/packet.
Was thinking more about cars on the track crossing the pit exit?
Is the reverse enforced? I don't every recall it happening?
Added.
Added.
Already in the list.
Not sure about the second request as all inSim messages are sanctioned by the admin anyway, plus would you block inSim menus/buttons?
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG