Quote from Hallen :

attack from you?

was meant to be taken in ermm jest, if thats the right word, nothing serious don't worry tried to make a point by maybe not done right eh

spoken like a true gamer though? again this is the attitude I talk about, so its ok to have terrible visuals, terrible sounds etc, as long as the physics are half done and they say its meant to be a sim? (this is not thoughts on lfs, just to get a point across)

Visuals in a sim MEAN ALOT, not just graphics but the way the physics engine transfers feeling across to the player, this is why I compared to nr2003, because nr2003 does this extremely well for what it is.

@ Resound, i actually played LFS alot more than you think, and I mean, alot more, infact i spent more than a few weeks with it (I had issues with some of my online experences saving in my profile too, I think I posted about it a month or so ago not sure), of course most of it offline because I did not know too many people with private servers. I found most of the online racing on the open servers to be a complete mess at times, getting past turn 1 was a rare feat like you say, but this is the same of all open servers in any game I've ever played.

I tried every single car out, and every single track combo, some more than others but I made sure i gave everything a try. I also gave the setup stuff a try, and did notice some strange values I could use that really shouldn't of worked, although I'am no techincal expert on real life car setups, but i did find it was made 10x worse in the f08, although this is well known and probally features the least complete physics out of all the cars.

Gun, you might want to open your eyes and close your anus. But seriously, with that post you have just given yourself away as a typical 'nothing can touch what I like, I'am 100% right and the other is 100% wrong' that is so often seen in communities. You also try to distance yourself from the 'rest' at the bottom of your post, which is another typical thing to do, as a bonus you name GTR and rfactor differently

If you think the only thing you can compare to LFS is GPL, you really have not lived, I'd say LFS can learn from even GT4 on the PS2. I'd also say comparing GPL means you are one of the old elite GPL players.

I'm not rating what LFS could be, I'am rating what LFS IS TODAY, that is the whole point of the review and as the development progresses I will keep coming back and doing further articles on the website about it.

I'm not just a sim racer, i play all types of games, and I can see how far sim racing in general lags behind, racing sims are still quake 2 era, while unreal 3 engine is about to give it to everyone in the face, it is that far behind.

Quote from deggis :

I think the review would be better without a score at all. Why did you give a score? Obviously the point you are making here isn't clearly enough made in the review, otherwise you wouldn't be here explaining it.

actually its because people have not read the review and I don't mind discussing it in further detail.

Strobe, I did say it was an alpha both in the intro and the end, and said that I will look back on s2 final when it is released. On the cost, I actually said it might seem exspensive, because you are buying into a wip game, it costs as much as a full release game, most are now £24.99.

I did pay £24 and I didn't feel I got value for money over S1 which is why I included that in the review.

I reviewed LFS as I do all games I review, for what it is trying to be, LFS isn't like other games on the market, so I will review differently, you cannot say compare a score of GTL with LFS, because of the huge difference in the titles.

LFS got an average score, not because its worse than GTR, not because its worse than GTL, or rfactor, or any other sim, it got an average score because in its current state Live For Speed is failing its self, on many levels, and these where stated in the review.

Overall I just don't think LFS is as good as it should/could be, and the score reflects that, if LFS had the more complete physics, sound and some visual improvements the score would be higher, we are talking about a 7 which is where at this stage I feel LFS should be.

Quote from axus :

You have a big one - I hope you don't mind if I point it out in public?
RichardTowler's online stats

are the physics different offline?

Quote from colcob :

Well, its an interesting review. And while I agree with some of the points, if you are going to go to the trouble of writing a proper review and getting it published, it might be an idea to get someone to check the spelling and grammar before you hit the upload button.

while I do try my best and limit the errors I'm sure a few got through, if you can offer any help please let me know via pm

Quote from Hyperactive :

It's even funnier that people buy Alphas.

Also found some odd posts by this "reviewer": http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=1252

Seems he didn't get his money back and wrote then that article (joking)

I never got my money back seriously that post was made at the same time alot of discussion was made about rfactor on this forum, which was what the whole joke was about.

thats the reason for the score, the CORE is very good, its just most of what is around the core isn't finished yet, or just isn't good enough yet, as I said I'd give nr2003 a 7 if i reviewed it now, because that is more rounded and finished to a higher quality in areas that I feel are more important, one of them is the feel of the sim, it has something special in this area where you know what is going on when you are driving and I feel LFS could learn from this, for sure it is not perfect, but its done through many small touches here and there that add up to a great driving experence, even if the physics are flawed in certain areas.

Live for Speed does frustrate me, because I can see perhaps how great it could be only if it was more complete, and some things where maybe done alittle different. I'am not saying Live for Speed is bad, far from it, the score just reflects the current development status.

Quote from AndroidXP :

It's amazing. LFS only has 5/10 points, and yet it provided me with more fun than any other game ever has.

But I guess that's simply a matter of what you find important. Some prefer hardcore simulation, some bling bling. That's mainly directed at the comment that GTR's sound makes up for the lacking physics.

but that probally says more about where sim racing currently is, what do we have now, lfs, rfactor, gtr, gtl, nr2003 to name a few, if you can say any of those games deserve a score (if reviewing now) above 7/8 than you need to up your hopes alittle I think, the highest is probally nr2003 and I'd give that around 7.

5/10 may seem a low score, but as stated it is the alpha version reviewed and when the final version is released, I will take a look at upping the score and adding to the review what has changed, I'd say the potential in this release is 7, but all depends what is included in s2 final.

I'am not one for adding scores for reviews, people should read the review and make up there own mind, but they do add a point to start a debate so it works both ways.

Although I'am a sim racer and have been for a few years now, and the I feel the sim community is often too full of praise for anything that is released, its a very odd community, it would have to give rfactor the amount of praise it has got it needs more thinking 'what can we improve here' rather than 'lets kiss some ass no matter how bad it tastes'

but that said, everything I write is just my opinion, and mine only, it is still up to everyone else to decide what they think.

thanks for this, it peaks out about every 2/3 hours, and was wondering what the hell was wrong

RMachucaA, I actually did some testing in the formula car for abit, just to see what actually needed to be done to go fast in LFS, didn't spend long doing it, but the setup I came up with was wierd to say the least.

Front ride hieght all the way up almost, rear low, stiff, low rebound, running the rear tires as low as possible, lots of rear camber, from what I remember, was a few other little 'extreme' settings used, like caster I think.

But its the same in all sims, I'm no setup expert, but all you do is play with a few values, see what they do, faster/slower, than go to the extreme of that value and that usually is the fastest.

Quote from L(Oo)ney :

All of it was on-topic - It was all about the stecki mobile and drivers emporium and LFS. :thumbsdow

Who had a problem with it? - The ones who are affiliated with dE no doubt.

please don';t get banned L(Oo)ney, last time you got banned from 'RSC,' they banned me too, and thought you where my evil brother, don't want this happening here )

Scawen, I'd be worried, this thread looks the exact same as when a female posts on a forum all the geeks go all funny and start falling over themself, next we'll have a 'most sexy lfs driver' thread

is it possible to get a refund on LFS? because the game I was paying for has come out under a different name, and I don't have enough money to buy it and as it costs almost the same I could buy it with a refund of LFS.

I guess the community will start ranting and moaning that rfactor sucks and it makes all the problems with LFS not important, an excuse if you want to call it that pretty much how the LFS reacts towards any other sim is to say LFS does this well, the other sim sucks, atleast thats what I've read on this forum when any other sim is mentioned

you guys are going to love my review

ummm where LFS stands in comparison, here are some of my thoughts

NR2003

LFS doesn't even come close, papy are still the only developer that have got the 'feel' of a simulation right (compared to others that is), the atmosphere and how it feels in general to play is much better than any other, but thats not to say the physics or the rest of it are the best.

GTR

art work, models, track design, visuals, sound, all walk over LFS, the sound been the biggest difference, at high speed GTR feels fine to drive too (don't all sims ), but completely blows at low speed, oh and it doesn't work online, well it does, but it shortens your life.

GTL

same as GTR, but I think the feel of the game has taken a back step, in terms of simulation, it feels more fake and plastic, than GTR.

rFactor

no idea, we'll find out soon.

iRacing

iRacing, what ever they do, will probally lead the next generation of racing sims, but we'll find out more when they release it, when ever that date is.

On LFS

LFS does some things very well, online code, the physics that have been done, are good, but they are not complete which makes some of the aspects of the sim pretty bad, ie driving any RWD car. What LFs really suffers from though imo, is a complete lack of 'racing' feel, it feels souless, like its just been programmed full of numbers, without any life inserted into it, this comes down to several aspects, visuals, sound, and feel, how the physics/motion what ever you want to call it, are transfered to the player through certain feelings you can generate, this is something papy have done the best, imo, and has not been matched.

Sim racing is sim racing, and therefore you have to fake certain aspects of the sim, to generate the realism, sounds odd, but thats how atleast I feel it has to be done.

There is more detail of course I could go into, but I won't bore you yet

Last edited by RichardTowler, Fri 19 Aug 2005, 00:21.

no, its i like the techincal tracks, not techincal tracks are what I like, its hard to explain, but from my view it means the track is challenging, from a drivers point of view, the way you have to setup the car, to take the corner, and more importantly a combination of corners.

Techincal Tracks =

Suzuka
Spa
Magny

(just so happends these tracks where done for GTP)

just to give examples, LFS has some good sections, like the city long reverse, from the down hill part, that is lots of fun to drive, and Aston has a couple of good corners, but the rest, imo, do not thrill me, they just don't feel like tracks I enjoy driving in other sims, its like driving in empty space, I go through some of the corners and feel, what was that? oh that was meant to be a corner.

the tracks I don't mind, blackwood/city/fernbay, aston isn't too bad on the smaller config, but the larger one and the other two are very boring, the corners are just too open, imo.

but the tracks are not the only problem for me, the handling and atmosphere is lacking, driving isn't thrilling..., there's no excitement on the 'limit' is probally the best way to desribe it.

Quote from Bob Smith :

/me slaps Richard, pointlessly, at a medium-fast pace

ouch! reason I drive sims is for enjoyment, and I enjoy the more techincal tracks in sims, and this is something that LFS lacks, also I dislike it at low speed, because there is a lack of mechincal side in the physics, and it just feels plain wrong at times, its hard to say where it is wrong, maybe tire model, maybe the way the car weight works, or the setups are just turd.

I find the tracks in lfs boring, they are full of pointless medium to fast turns, there's very little techincal sections, the only track I really enjoy is the street track, even though it shows the poor low speed of lfs's unfinished physics, the rest make me yawn.

would be great to have some decent real courses.

what about rule 1.4??????????

seriously, they are awesome renders, just a shame thats a #5

kid is just a lazy sod when it comes to surfing the net, if you didn't need to click, what the hell would you do with your mouse? oh wait, I'd rather you not say

great to see u finally have your own forum, good job!!