Keep us posted splunk4u. My graphics card arrives next Monday or Tuesday so I might need this solution by then.

Have you had it running yet Bob? Care to share your LCD config file?

Maxim

Quote from duke_toaster :

And I don't think Becky Rose made LFS Spectate - she'll be credited for writing Smoke on the Water next

Becky wrote "Smoke on the Water" !!

Crickey, see is even more talented than I thought.

Maxim

Only the 2nd and 4th links work for me George.

I vaguely remember that when I ran the widescreen monitor at 1280x1024 it put black bars on the edges and kept it at 4:3. Bit of a waste but I guess I could just put the side screens in front to line up with this virtual edge which would mean only one screen border between them. I guess it would then depend if the vertical measurement of the monitors is the same. Worth it for a test anyway as I can't buy a third 19" of the same type at the moment as it is out of stock.

Maxim

Quote from Shotglass :

im not sure if it alows to use monitors with different resolutions but one thing it afaik definately doesnt allow is using reolutions above 4096 which from my understanding is the largest todays graphics cards can render at
and 1280*2+1680 is well above that limit

Ok, that's a shame though although I am not sure what sort of frame rates I would have been left with anyway.

Quote from Bob Smith :

Different resolutions, yes, different aspect ratios, no. You gotta go all widescreen or not at all. Do you even need widescreen with 3 monitors? You're image would be uber-wide.

Anyway, ordered a X700 as a secondary card, damn those things are cheap now (was only a couple of quid more than an X300 so well worth the extra). Will see how I get on once it turns up.

Not so much that I want or need to but what monitors I have available without buying anymore. Also seems a shame to loose the 1680x1024 widescreen which is only a few months old and bought for my LFS machine.

I was just confused by this bit on kegetys site:

Screen resolution used was 3840x960 32bpp, with 1024x768 16bpp on the left and right monitors

as it seemed to imply the middle monitor was running at 1762x960? After what you say though does this mean that the whole scene is rendered at centre screen resolution i.e. 1280x960 then the side images are further processed to a lower resolution?

I have a 17" screen I could try and my motherboard is crossfire capable so I believe the second slot will be fine. Like you say the X700 is now quite cheap and I would like to give this a try.

One further question you might be able to help me with is my main graphics card is an ATI X1850XTX. the monitor is connected through an analogue lead. Do both slots support this so I will need to buy an extra DVI/analogue port convertor and it will drive two analogue monitors?

Maxim

Does SoftTH allow the centre monitor to run at a different resolution to the side monitors? I have a single 22" 1680x1024 monitor at the moment but I have 2x 1280x1024 19" monitors. Could they be used together ok in LFS?

Maxim

Quote from anttt69 :

Looks good but I hoping to get one with DVI input as it is supposed to be better.

I felt the same but when looking around I was going to have to pay a lot for the DVI connector and I wasn't convinced it would make a lot of difference for lfs as it appeared to be only when looking at text and still images that you would be able to tell a difference. Like I said though I don't have anything else to compare it with so I live in blissful ignorance

Maxim

Recalibrate your pedals? Mine don't work that way. If I press the pedal half way I get half throttle/brake etc.

Sounds like you have them wrongly calibrated.

Maxim

Quote from Glenn67 :

Quite possibly true but it also may mean that the better skilled drivers can put more space between themselves and the T1 regulars and therefore have more chance getting arround unscathed

I like the idea in principle, but in practice I can't see it doing anything but causing problems. Even in league racing I think it would still end up not being used (assuming it was a option on the server).

Watch the amount of lane chopping that goes on now during the start when there is no way they could know that there is nothing alongside them and multiply it due to differing start speeds.

Maxim

Quote from Marc Ainley :

Free starts with a drive through for false starts would be great.

I fear free starts would just add an aditional point of carnage to that at T1.

Maxim

I apologise for spreading misleading info regarding Eric:guilty:. The post I read was this one from May when Scawen said:

Quote from Scawen :

Eric and I are both on holiday at the moment, and I know Eric is very busy right now with non-LFS things.

I remember that in Oct it was mentioned that Eric had bought a house but I hadn't linked the two time frames, but I do accept I have read more into it than was there:dunce:. I am also sorry Scawen has needed to interupt his break to put things straight.

Maxim :ashamed:

Quote from banshee56 :

Personally, I think the graphics are sufficient for what I am doing in the sim. The most I generally see is tarmac, grass, sand, and a few landmarks to judge breaking points by. Why do I care about high-res skies? I mean, I'm not looking for a hidden image of the devil in the cumulus while I'm trying to threshold brake a racing machine into a off-camber, increasing radius turn with 10 other drivers near me.

I would rather see things like balanced car classes, more server admin controls, better collision and tire physics, a couple more tracks/configs, rolling/false starts, etc. I've played this sim for 3+ years now. Give me stuff that keeps me wanting to race, and not gawk at the textures. Graphics can wait until S3, IMHO.

I agree with you but fortunately for us, graphics and game physics are done by different people so we can hope for both I am faily happy with the graphics as they are (except perhaps the GTR interiors) and to a certain extent they probably need DX9.0 lighting applied to them rather than being changed. Unfortunately this is a job for Scawen and not something I would put high on the list to do within S2. As all versions of LFS share graphics engine, physics engine etc we would still get any changes like this even if it was part of the S3 development.

Quote from Cue-Ball :

However; keep in mind that S2 is still in alpha right now. We can assume that it will be quite a while before it's in beta and then another long while before it's final, then a LONG while after that before we see S3.

I believe Scawen has said he doesn't view alpha and beta stages like most software developers. Given that LFS S2alpha has less bugs than most completed software I think we can see the truth in this. I also recall him saying the beta stage will be very short, basically long enough after the last patch is issued to make sure there are no small bugs left.

Maxim

Last edited by MaximUK, Fri 29 Dec 2006, 08:42.

Since making my ealrier post I have seen a thread where Scawen did say that Eric doesn't work full time on LFS. I guess depending on his other commitments at the moment this might suggest there isn't so much unseen work as I thought there might be. As AJP71 stated, Scawen also said Eric would be concentrating on S3 graphics, cars and tracks so I am not so sure we will see much for S2 anymore. The interiors are on the list to be done but as mentioned above, can't be released in a compatible patch so they may be done and ready for W.

Quote from Hyperactive :

Balanced car classes means that XFG and XRG are equal choise when you look at how hard or easy they are to drive compared to the lap times you can get. Same with the big GTRs. FZR hasn't been in same class with the XRR/FXR since the latest patch. XRR needs to be quicker than the FXR because it is lot harder to drive.

I don't quite agree with you here. I think the 3 GTR cars should all be the same speed when driven to their limits otherwise you will still get mis-matches. If you make the XRR faster than the FXR then those people with the time will put in the practice and you won't see an FXR in the race. What you want is that those in the FXR are just seen to be driving an easy car and those in the others to be driving more difficult cars, but everyone still being competitive. TRouble is that they already are closer when driven over longer diatances when the XRR comes back towards the speeds of the others so it is difficult to acheive truely equal cars.

Maxim

Quote from Hyperactive :

Also I don't think we get any new tracks or cars. LX8 and old (historical) Blackwood would be great but...

If we assume Eric works at least 80% of the hours that Scawen does (excluding the period he put in for for the end of U and for V because no-one could maintain that) then there must be a lot of his work we haven't seen. Track and car modeling takes a long time at the quality Eric produces them but it has still been a long while since we have seen the fruits of his labour. I guess he may have been doing texture updates for the current tracks or higher polygon car models, and he has most likely been doing the car interiors, but I would still be very surprised if we don't get a few new cars or a multi layout circuit when S2 goes final.

Maxim

Quote from ajp71 :

I wouldn't be so sure seeing as GPL is still very much alive with loads still to come and no forseable replacement. I think they've both got very long life expectancies still (I think GPL is going to get a major overhall of everything seeing as iRacing cannot stop people doing it).

I am not so sure that is true is it? Were there not some high profile (in the SIM community anyway) legal proceedings taken by iracing against individuals that were modifying the gpl.exe?

In theory as time goes by all serious attempts to model car physics will tend to come together so there should be little between GTR8, rfacter 5, iracing, LFS3 or whatever is about then. Should they choose to model the same cars they should drive almost exactly the same shouldn't they? Eventually someone will mod 1967 F1 cars into one of the other physics engines and the shouts will go up that it isn't as realistic as GPL. The point I was trying to make in my first post is that after a certain level of realism is reached, very few, if any people here can assess the reality of which is the better SIM in terms of the physics. In the end you will drive one or the other or both because of the pleasure they give you, not because one is better than the other.

As it stands there is no overlap between LFS and GPL so a comparison is impossible and preferences to either are not based on which is the better of the two.

As an aside, I apologise the Racedoctor if my post appears to acuse him of trolling. I meant only to warn him of the dangers of these types of threads.

Maxim

Quote from baroche :

Why do people with a bug up their asses try to control what people discuss on forums. The original poster has his own opinion and wants to find out what other people in the community think. Whats wrong with that?????Just ignore the post if you don't like the topic!

Maybe you should re-read both of our posts and decide who tried to answer the question and offered some freindly advice about how certain topics can be viewed and who really has the bug up their ass and wants to supress people expressing their opinions?

Merry Christmas.

Maxim

What does it really matter what anyone else thinks? You have tried both and can make your own mind up.

They both have strengths and weaknesses and there is room for both. You may claim they aren't that different, but if so then you answered your own question already.

At the end of the day, people will play whichever SIM they get the most pleasure from which will depend on the persons preferences and mood at the time.

Posting these sorts of questions will quickly get you a reputation as a troll and result in no-one taking anything you say seriously even when you have a valid point to make. If you seriously want to ask this question then you shouldn't be posting it in a game specific forum.

Maxim

I have one of these and it's fine for LFS.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/ ... duct.php?prodid=MO-006-BE

Best of all though it is only about £220 delivered which for a 22" screen is a bit of a bargain especially for 1680x1050 at 5ms.

I can't say how it compares to much else as my experience is limited. The extra space over the 17" screen it replaced makes the experience much better.

I have an AMD XP3700 and Radeon 1800XTX and can get over 100fps at this sort of resolution even when running everything at quality settings so the increase in resolution had little effect on my fps.


Maxim

Quote from Lotsipxes :

I think the sound is pretty good now. But the sound of other cars are to low, I can hardly hear a BF1 in front of me when driving, or passing me on the track when I'm in the pit lane. When you're watching F1 on TV you can hardly hear the commentators because of the noise when the cars are passing on the track. And when you're watching a race from a stand, you can't even hear when someone is shouting in your ear.

I don't know if it's the sound that decreases to fast over distance or if it's generally too low.

Generally, your own car with drown out other cars unless perhaps you are following close behind a car with a rear exhaust or you are going slowly with no throttle. Your other problems seem to be that you need to turn your volume up.

Maxim

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

Does anyone else have a problem with Calibration Lock going off everytime you exit LFS? I have to do the "Press Pedals, Turn Wheel Left/ Right" drill everytime I start LFS, and Calib Lock is always off when I check - even when I turn it on and exit LFS and restart....

Yes, I have been noticing this. First press of the brake peddal locks it all up if you forget.

Maxim

Last edited by MaximUK, Fri 22 Dec 2006, 07:01.

Don't worry too much about the problem PC. I only want the server temporarily so I can afford to use it on the on ethat almost works.

I haven't changed anything since last night but this morning I can connect ok to the version running on the 2nd PC. Still no joy with the one I hoped to run it on but no great loss.

Thanks for trying to help though.

Maxim

Last edited by MaximUK, Wed 13 Dec 2006, 07:58.

I installed the server on one of the other PC's and it connects to the master server ok. I can connect locally to this one once I switch the port forwarding and I can see the server in LFSWorld, but I can't see it in game using the 3rd PC.

on the one I was originally trying I even rebooted after switching off the firewall and I went through the list of processes switching everything off I could. That pc is dual boot and neither install would let me run the server and find the master server.

Maxim

I believe I have opened up all the required ports in my router and firewall

I am trying to run a dedi server on a pc connected to the internet through a router. There are two other pcs on the router.

I am using your bat file and cfg file.

With use master off everything looks fine but trying to connect from one of the other PCs using the ip address of the server (192.168.1.103) is reports client connect; connect failed.

with use master on I get a could not connect to master server error.

I have tried it with the firewall diabled so I don't think that can be the problem. The most likely cause therefore seems to be th router which is a Linksys BEFSR41. It has a port forwardinf section for both TCP and UPD but I am not sure of the outgoing port (TCP/29339) being opened. Could this be labelled as something else?

Maxim

Could you re-write the loop for testing purposes to use a For Next loop. You could then test how long it takes it to run say 1000 times when going flat out.
Maybe your loop is just too slow in VB6 and by calling it after a set time you are re-calling it before it has finished the last pass. You might then have 100's or 1000's of attempts running concurrently which would effectively stall the process?

Maxim

Quote from kwijibo :

Almost a year later, I figured out what was wrong Having just got a new pc, I figured surely it will work now. It didnt.

Turns out running xfire conflicts with that DLL, so just turned off xfire whilst I ran ghostcar solved the prob!

Might be a few others out there who could give it a try

It was ATI Tools that initially stopped it working for me.

Maxim

Hi Tomylee

You may know this already but as I understand it when you connect to a server the actual route the data takes will probably pass though 10+ nodes on its way to the target. Two different servers may not share any common nodes although there are likely to be at least a couple near to your location that they share in common.. Maybe you could try using an free IP tracker like http://www.freedownloadscenter ... er_Freeware_Download.html
If you can get the ip addresses of the servers you could then test each one and see if there are any problems on the route to any of the servers you can get the ip address for.
I don't have any recommendations on which ip tracker to use, the one above is just a free one I found by quickly googling for one.

I hope you get it sorted.

Maxim