TBH I've read about an "upgraded" tyre model, not an entirely new one, i.e. I would still expect it to be Pacejka based. Another option is they provide an algorithmically improved model which is backwards compatible. Or, since rFactor Pro has pluggable tyre models, rF2 could have e.g. two different selectable models.
I haven't found anything more substantial so far but I just started gathering info. If you have interesting links to read please post them.
Seems likely, I found this on virtualR:
With "mistakes" I was referring to the deliberate choice of including unrealistic cars and FFB. The current tyre model in LFS has flaws and FFB is not state of art anymore, but they're still leaps and bounds better than the original stuff in rF1.
So it wouldn't be appropriate to say Scawen has learnt from his mistakes. If anything I'd say he's trying to raise the bar.
The original tyre model in rF does not follow a mathematical approach like in LFS. It's based on tables. So that could simply mean that the new cars included in rF2 will have sensible numbers in their tables instead of the unrealistic/weird stuff they used in rF1.
I also read the devs seem to have been providing some sort of 'upgrade path' for old mods to become rF2. Without a thorough comprehension of how those things work, however, it's hard to tell what that actually means, and what are the consequences (i.e. will be the 'converted' content of inferior quality wrt 'native' rF2 mods?)
If Niels Heusinkveld is still reading LFSforum he would probably be the right person to clear things up.
LFSForum Lotto time again?
C'mon Woz you're not the typical 12 yo LFS noob that can't tell a manual transmission from a sequential w/o cut-off. I would expect something more mature from you than just some stale preaching.
Instead of pontificating on the meaning of 'enjoying life' (=playing FPS games?!) and 'burning out' - why don't you check out other racing sims? Scawen himself has suggested that. And figure out the difference between 'bitching' and expressing informed opinions?
I've been reading a bit about rFactor 2. Seems they've learnt from their 'mistakes'. It is supposed to have more realistic FFB (at least RealFeel level) and a better tyre model.
If there were enough good cars and scanned tracks, with a one-time license fee rF2 could make for a low cost alternative to iRacing. And to spice things up dynamic weather will be probably added.
The community has been busy churning out rF2 mods for some time already, guess release date can't be too far off?
http://www.racesimcentral.com/ ... nshots-of-user-interface/
If there were enough good cars and scanned tracks, with a one-time license fee rF2 could make for a low cost alternative to iRacing. And to spice things up dynamic weather will be probably added.
The community has been busy churning out rF2 mods for some time already, guess release date can't be too far off?
http://www.racesimcentral.com/ ... nshots-of-user-interface/
I don't think he only had content in mind. He said "the LFS experience" which is clearly an encompassing term.
BTW I think he has a point although the post is not entirely fair or correct, as there /has/ been talk of other features/changes that may affect the LFS experience (e.g. locked setups).
However there would be no point in expecting it to turn into iRacing overnight
If I was stuck in development hell this is probably the kind of statement I wouldn't like to hear
when they start thinking like that, products get further delayed until they eventually turn into full-fledged vaporware.But yes, Scawen's ca-ching remark sound a bit naive to people who have invested money and time in other sims that also happen to have marked lock-in effects. Oh well unless he meant it like let's give the cash cow one last squeeze...
Last edited by NightShift, .
Reason : fixed typos and stuff
Well I don't think he would spend so much time just to hunt ghosts, so either he's not quite pleased or he doesn't really mean (all?) that he says.
Come on, that would be suicidal! (Yet, iRacing IMO has enough money and smarts behind it to be just as much of a PITA as a major publisher, and iR and nKp appeal to audiences that are not so different)
One of the main ideas behind 1.1 is to make nKp more accessible to a wider audience than before, i.e. going towards the LFS end of the spectrum. That's not a bad thing per se but it also looks like it does not come for free.
Maybe Full Mode is just too much and Kunos is right in turning it into some sort of undocumented feature, that I don't know.
Still, the expectations of the loyal fan base have to be managed, and the guys @ KS don't appear to have quite the knack for communication and expectation management.
From the sound of it I was thinking more of something like the MTV stuff. They often say they have to rake in money doing other things otherwise they should have to charge 200-300€ for each nKp license.
There seems to be a sizeable part of the loyalist community unhappy with the 'dumbing down' that has been going on e.g. old 1.0.x features disappearing from 1.1, not only full mode being "deprecated" but also other smaller, harder to notice things.
And Kunos has been saying that they probably won't be able to support the old nKp model because true simracing is fading while arcade-sim combos are growing and are being pushed by big playes with massive budgets.
As for the track editor I've read about some "qualified" comments about it being almost out, but then again Kunos said that last September already IIRC.
I've not had enough time to sift through all the posts on DI; despite it being a small community there are a couple of long time users who feel entitled to do whatever they like and post a lot of cruft about their (unfounded?) feelings.
Now this wouldn't be too much of a problem if only Kunos didn't waste time replying to make them happy. BTW he says he keeps fudging things yet "the numbers are OK" but maybe he knows there's really something off.
Plus there are lot of silly bug reports that are really features or known bugs or user mistakes etc (this however is the forum guys' fault for not sticky-ing FAQs, the same holds true for LFSforum)
One other big news which I haven't seen much advertised is the addition of a new auto update system which should push small patches to the clients, and which should make things easier for Kunos (it seems uploading big bundles is a problem)
However he seems pretty nervous about it backlashing so I guess that may be another reason for the delay.
I don't know why, either: if I had a penny for every time I've read a sentence like this, I'd be rich already.
So, I decided took a look at DI (damn insomnia) and...
LOL! it seems someone linked my post about temperature on the nKp forum and got this reply from Kunos:
Plus, apparently Kunos's not happy about the perpetual whining on the current tyre model and he's planning to bring back a revised version of the old one from 1.0.3.
Oh the irony. He was the one poking fun at Scawen for having to put on his rocket scientist hat to figure out how to make a lowly Scirocco (not a Lambo, he said) work correctly in LFS.
Another nice one is 1.1 final should have been out within February because in March they had more pressing things to do. Another long wait is in store?
Dunno what to hope, really.
Your correspondant from Italy,
the Nightshift.
PS: looks like there's more yummy stuff - full mode is deprecated since February!
LOL! it seems someone linked my post about temperature on the nKp forum and got this reply from Kunos:
Plus, apparently Kunos's not happy about the perpetual whining on the current tyre model and he's planning to bring back a revised version of the old one from 1.0.3.
Oh the irony. He was the one poking fun at Scawen for having to put on his rocket scientist hat to figure out how to make a lowly Scirocco (not a Lambo, he said) work correctly in LFS.
Another nice one is 1.1 final should have been out within February because in March they had more pressing things to do. Another long wait is in store?
Dunno what to hope, really.
Your correspondant from Italy,
the Nightshift.
PS: looks like there's more yummy stuff - full mode is deprecated since February!
Last edited by NightShift, .
Some time ago I came by this site, it's an interesting read IMO:
http://www.fuelsaving.info/fuel_additives.htm
So what's going these days?
After the delay of Step 3, and the MTV blunder I just gave up and disengaged from the community. I did try Beta 3 but that just a one-off thing.
Guess they should be busy finalizing 1.1, right?
After the delay of Step 3, and the MTV blunder I just gave up and disengaged from the community. I did try Beta 3 but that just a one-off thing.
Guess they should be busy finalizing 1.1, right?
I'm puzzled. I had some laps at Prato with the 500, then went to Crema. In Beta 2, you could drive round the skidpad with your outer front at 220+ °C without breaking a sweat.
In this one, it seems I can't simply bring the tyre temp above 115 °C, no matter how much I push in 3rd on the 50m skidpad, and that was abusing the car with full lock and full throttle.
I repeated the test with the F1600, deliberately steering more than necessary and then keeping it in with the throttle. This time I felt some reaction from the car, but again couldn't push the outer front above 77-79 °C.
In this one, it seems I can't simply bring the tyre temp above 115 °C, no matter how much I push in 3rd on the 50m skidpad, and that was abusing the car with full lock and full throttle.
I repeated the test with the F1600, deliberately steering more than necessary and then keeping it in with the throttle. This time I felt some reaction from the car, but again couldn't push the outer front above 77-79 °C.
The version I got from Franky installed just fine. Great speed too, 1.2-1.5 MB/s (and that's bytes not bits)
Finally!
Yeah I reported that bug a long time ago, I was replied to play with VSync and triple buffering but that doesn't fix anything.
edit:
Thanks to everyone who set up a mirror. I'm getting this from Franky and it's lightning fast... hat off
Last edited by NightShift, .
@ LFSDevs, thanks for listening to the community and providing us a status report 
Please continue doing so in the future!
Yup many say the same thing, you're assuming all of us are bitter envious pricks, and even if there sure are ppl like that, you shouldn't lead or be led into thinking that's the majority.
As of now road cars can't be raced online with realistic sets, unless you're an alien and then maybe you can keep the pace of a midfield guy with a funny set.
We just want to be able to race road cars that feel like the ones we drive every day. Driving some weird contraption which has no relationship whatsoever with reality? there are plenty of racing games just like that out there
Please continue doing so in the future!Yup many say the same thing, you're assuming all of us are bitter envious pricks, and even if there sure are ppl like that, you shouldn't lead or be led into thinking that's the majority.
As of now road cars can't be raced online with realistic sets, unless you're an alien and then maybe you can keep the pace of a midfield guy with a funny set.
We just want to be able to race road cars that feel like the ones we drive every day. Driving some weird contraption which has no relationship whatsoever with reality? there are plenty of racing games just like that out there
Maybe I'm reading too much into the physics update report, but I think it suggests locked diffs will become a thing of the past. With anti-dive/anti-squat, and realistic sets, even open diffs may become more interesting!
BTW if you were referring to hybrids, I think Scawen in the past said that they're supposed to be made of a high grip race compound that offers more grip than road_normal.
However I would expect hybrids to wear out quite fast if used for long stints on tarmac-only tracks, whereas I seem to remember they will easily last more than 100 laps on BL1.
If limited setups will be a solid, viable alternative with widespread server support, it will only help driving LFS back to its stated mission of realistic simulation.
All in all, the update report pushes all the right buttons for me, and ATM the main problem is just /when/ we will be allowed to drive the new version - with all this waiting and delaying (in nKp as well) I'm really very close to the point when I pack and shelf all of my simulation equipment
When Z test patches were still in the single digits, Scawen removed ABS from the XFG citing two reasons.
One was the original car the XFG is based upon never had ABS, and along these lines, it would only be reasonable to expect that the XR received a less sophisticated version of ABS.
OTOH it was retained on the XRG in the hope to improve balancing, as it is less used in racing and harder to master than the XFG.
So while I feel the point you raise is a fair one, by the look of it things are going to stay this way
Tyre physics directly impacts 100% of the existing userbase (including those that cannot be bothered to play anymore but will come back as soon as it is released) + 100% of the potential userbase.
Multiple monitor support? is a very nifty addition but assuming it will sell a lot of LFS licenses in the real world is wishful thinking. Those who had multiple monitors were already using SoftTH probably, so they received a great improvement but it's not like they were stuck using a measly single monitor, poor little darlings.
I'll be very glad if it'll make our dear devs earn some more money, but we've been waiting 15 months already for this delayed patch, and it should not surprise anyone if releasing MMS main consequence is a lot of eyebrows raising.
With Z25 delivered as a transitional update the most reasonable expectation is 0.6A will follow god knows when, it's pretty much clear to anyone (naive people included) they wouldn't have gone through the hassle of releasing it if 0.6A was close.
It almost seems like LFS is stuck in the simracing equivalent of The Groundhog Day, and the only ones who care about producing funny justifications anymore ought to like committing simsuicide day in day out.
The latter is certainly a good thing but to get those 40$ I'd be forced to play regularly and planning my gaming/simracing choices 2 years in advance.
It's still too rigid a structure IMO. As for content, I'm still largely uninterested in their mostly american car lineup.
Yep but they're updating their product at a much higher rate than the competition, so it seems reasonable that they charge more.
Problem is they charge a lot more and with a braindamaged pricing structure, especially in relation with the actual prices. I mean a subscription+extras model may make sense if the extras are cheap compared to the subscription, or viceversa - but they are pricing them too close IMO.
Guess Gnomie's choice of words misled me
I was expecting real money off the purchase, less money flying out my wallet, the real deal.Virtual cash? if it's so valuable... well... they can keep it.
I get that squealing every time I go to the mall, it's just the surface as bbman pointed out.
The same maneuver performed on a paved road just produces a broadband "rumble"-like noise in my experience with normal carts whoops cars on everyday tyres.
Chances are the mod team in their infinite wisdom will keep this open as dumpster for all kinds of new patch related drivel in more or less the same way as the old VWS thread.
Reasoning behind this is if they closed this one then a lot more would pop up and each of them would subsequently need to be closed, leading to a dramatic and unduly increase in the amount of times they have to click on the Lock Thread button.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG