Full list of features of 0.7E is in 1st page of 0.7D54 test patch thread. Release date is next weekend if all goes to plan.
Work on update with new physics, graphics and multithreqding will start durring next year. Since Scawen already did most of stuff, there is still some work left to do on tyre physics and probably a bunch of new stuff that will come up along side it, plus all the requests and bugs. It's gonna take a while, but it's closer than ever. After 0.7E release, Scawen can focus on only 1 LFS version and workflow will be much smother and less painfull.
Work on update with new physics, graphics and multithreqding will start durring next year. Since Scawen already did most of stuff, there is still some work left to do on tyre physics and probably a bunch of new stuff that will come up along side it, plus all the requests and bugs. It's gonna take a while, but it's closer than ever. After 0.7E release, Scawen can focus on only 1 LFS version and workflow will be much smother and less painfull.
I think you can leave only tyres with wheel rims and a steering wheel. If virtual mirror is enabled that should be visible, but normal mirror probably not.
Spinner object can be attached to the engine. One can make a propeler and slap it to the 16 cylinder radial engine
I'm not sure if this already exists, but objects type like hinges and some way to make attachment point or a joint.
Whith this one can start making movable cranes, buldozers, tanks and similair
Tnx Victor for a quick response.
Hi Scawen, tnx for all your hard work. These are very nice ideas, that would give a plethora of new possibilities.
Rotator amount of +-180deg is fine. For a spinner, I'm thinking about some rotary lights for police, ambulance, trucks and so on activated by boolean switch. They have a periodic rotating objects, so would be good to have the option to set a continuous rotation at a certain deg/s or rpm, or a set number of rotations at that speed, to generalize it. Like for example windshield wipers that would do a few sweeps and then stop, untill a boolean is reset.
For sliders, range is +-1000 is also fine, as long as there would be an option to define the size of each step in units of length (mm, cm or m). I think this is better than to limit the range to some fixed length in m or cm.
Hope this helps for future updates.
Rotator amount of +-180deg is fine. For a spinner, I'm thinking about some rotary lights for police, ambulance, trucks and so on activated by boolean switch. They have a periodic rotating objects, so would be good to have the option to set a continuous rotation at a certain deg/s or rpm, or a set number of rotations at that speed, to generalize it. Like for example windshield wipers that would do a few sweeps and then stop, untill a boolean is reset.
For sliders, range is +-1000 is also fine, as long as there would be an option to define the size of each step in units of length (mm, cm or m). I think this is better than to limit the range to some fixed length in m or cm.
Hope this helps for future updates.
LFS will use gfx adapter that is set by default in windows. Have a look in your gfx driver options. With nvidia one can set a prefered gfx adapter for each app. There should be some equivalent setting for amd as well.
It may also be about power saving modes. Make sure you have a DC psu plugged into your laptop, when runing LFS.
It may also be about power saving modes. Make sure you have a DC psu plugged into your laptop, when runing LFS.
Your reasoning was good, there is just one slight modification that needs to be done:
Currently, we have:
A- Physics calculation (float, maybe in Nm)
B- FFB settings in game 0 to 100%, or pre-scaler (float, 0-1)
C- FFB resolution or post-scaler (float, depends on FFB step settings)
D- FFB -10000 to 10000 (16bit signed integer, -32768, 32767)
E- FFB settings wheel driver side
Adding one more slider between B and C would just complicate things so much to the point, that no one would be able to set FFB correctly, so I'm against it.
What I agree with is that there could be some option to automatically scale FFB to max value before clipping for given driving conditions. A driver would drive a few laps in FFB recording mode where a game would evaluate values and from there find the optimal FFB slider setting which ensures max FFB without clipping on a per-car basis. This is equivalent to iRacing's auto FFB strength setting.
Currently, we have:
A- Physics calculation (float, maybe in Nm)
B- FFB settings in game 0 to 100%, or pre-scaler (float, 0-1)
C- FFB resolution or post-scaler (float, depends on FFB step settings)
D- FFB -10000 to 10000 (16bit signed integer, -32768, 32767)
E- FFB settings wheel driver side
Adding one more slider between B and C would just complicate things so much to the point, that no one would be able to set FFB correctly, so I'm against it.
What I agree with is that there could be some option to automatically scale FFB to max value before clipping for given driving conditions. A driver would drive a few laps in FFB recording mode where a game would evaluate values and from there find the optimal FFB slider setting which ensures max FFB without clipping on a per-car basis. This is equivalent to iRacing's auto FFB strength setting.
Last edited by rane_nbg, .
Not quite. What you have to do in this case as I already wrote 2 times, now's the 3rd time - lower LFS ffb slider until you no longer see clipping. In LFS B depends on C, it is a prescaler - this is your volume slider. Game uses a floating point number for physics cals, so it's highly unlikely that it will be so large that it overflows.
I'll test the combo you suggested and give you the LFS FFB slider value optimal for me.
edit. about 11% seems not to be clipping FFB when you push the car to the limit.
example. about 34% goes for XFG+BL1
Last edited by rane_nbg, .
I guess he wanted to show off how lighting of the needles and other lamps on the dashboard works.
You should look into cmdLFS function, this is the part of the code that should execute the spectate command. I don't know where in laper this function is declared, but maybe there is some sintax error..
Thank you. I'm not sure where were you for 20years, but lfs is in constant developement and small improvements are happening all the time, many of our suggestions got realized and saw life in the game. It is slow, yes, but considering that it's all on Scawen alone is quite a remarkable programming achievment.
Last edited by rane_nbg, .
Very nice, but does it have a car stereo?
Yeah, not a bad idea. We need to wait a bit for new lighting update, then with new possibilities ideas can come to life.
I would love you to educate me on the physics of drifting by using elementary school level equations. This truly made me laugh, thank you for that
If you drift into a corner, you may enter the corner more quickly, but then exit will be slower as excess speed that you carried into the corner will make you slide = lose grip = lose time. Driving style on high grip track and rally style gravel driving are very different. What I'm refering applies only to smooth driving on a tarmac track.
If you drift into a corner, you may enter the corner more quickly, but then exit will be slower as excess speed that you carried into the corner will make you slide = lose grip = lose time. Driving style on high grip track and rally style gravel driving are very different. What I'm refering applies only to smooth driving on a tarmac track.
Last edited by rane_nbg, .
Kristoff what are you talking about? I got my S2 licence by playing LFS for 3 months straight every day for several hours.
Francesko, just keep playing and you may also get the licence.
Francesko, just keep playing and you may also get the licence.
Nice try Aleksandr, to switch your debate topic towards something more acceptable to general audience of this forum.
My opinion about this gta6 trailer may or may not follow Your analysis of it is certainly a splendid work, very nice review.
My opinion about this gta6 trailer may or may not follow
Your analysis of it is certainly a splendid work, very nice review.Hi and happy 20th aniversary of your loyalty to lfs.
You first have to understand that Scawen is under a lot of pressure lately as he is busting his ass off to bring all the recent updates into an official patch. Luckily, many of us do recognize and appreciate his efforts and we try to encourage him. Unfortunately, there are also some people who think that Scawen is obligated to fullfil their requests and wishes for improvements, just because they paid some 35eur or so. If there would be some kind of a monthly subscription system like in iRacing, then maybe, but as it's now, it's just ridiculous to expect anything other than what lfs already is.
Second, please do not forget that LFS is just a PC game and it is a master piece of coding, done by 1 guy. What do you expect? Very realistic modeling of all phenomena required for accurate simulation of a racecar is simply not possible yet, so many aproximations (simplifications) have to be done. Maybe with quantum computers in future things could go much closer to reality, who knows.
Now, my humble opinion about your requests. Points that are equivalent to the claim "make lfs better" and which do not explain any issue in particulair or do not add any value to improvement suggestions are: 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8, therefore not even worth disscusing. Point 2 is reasonable, we'll see how that works with new tyre physics model. Point 6 is straight out lie, in lfs any tire slip = loss of traction and that results in loss of time. Point 7 is ok, but needs a major rehaul of lfs game engine and we will probably not see this for a long time even as a possibility that will be considered. Point 9 is reasonable and will probably be realized some time in the future. Point 10, this is entirely on LFS devs to decide, but I do not see why would anyone who makes a living out of this would do such a thing. Even if they workout a way to sell some licences, who's to say that following lfs iterrations would be better or worse than original?
You first have to understand that Scawen is under a lot of pressure lately as he is busting his ass off to bring all the recent updates into an official patch. Luckily, many of us do recognize and appreciate his efforts and we try to encourage him. Unfortunately, there are also some people who think that Scawen is obligated to fullfil their requests and wishes for improvements, just because they paid some 35eur or so. If there would be some kind of a monthly subscription system like in iRacing, then maybe, but as it's now, it's just ridiculous to expect anything other than what lfs already is.
Second, please do not forget that LFS is just a PC game and it is a master piece of coding, done by 1 guy. What do you expect? Very realistic modeling of all phenomena required for accurate simulation of a racecar is simply not possible yet, so many aproximations (simplifications) have to be done. Maybe with quantum computers in future things could go much closer to reality, who knows.
Now, my humble opinion about your requests. Points that are equivalent to the claim "make lfs better" and which do not explain any issue in particulair or do not add any value to improvement suggestions are: 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8, therefore not even worth disscusing. Point 2 is reasonable, we'll see how that works with new tyre physics model. Point 6 is straight out lie, in lfs any tire slip = loss of traction and that results in loss of time. Point 7 is ok, but needs a major rehaul of lfs game engine and we will probably not see this for a long time even as a possibility that will be considered. Point 9 is reasonable and will probably be realized some time in the future. Point 10, this is entirely on LFS devs to decide, but I do not see why would anyone who makes a living out of this would do such a thing. Even if they workout a way to sell some licences, who's to say that following lfs iterrations would be better or worse than original?
I highly doubt that disabling the net bar graph will change anything in linux for multiplayer, but I do agree that there should be a simple option for this in misc, or view section in lfs settings.
Aleksandr, what you seek is completely legit, it's just that your audience is not in this forum. I'm sure you will find much better people to debate with in some of the human sciences forums. Your "greek philosopher" skills are not understood and are pretty much wasted by trying to get some brain food here.
Last edited by rane_nbg, .
He has a good PC, the problem is that he runns LFS in linux which is a big no no and gives him horrible experience both with gfx and with the gameplay, fps, fluidity.
Tnx for these nice layouts and for an awesome driving, was quite fun to watch.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG