Thanks for the info.
I believe it is important for me to update the protocol between LFS and the master server to make it harder to crack.
At the moment I am in the middle of updating the shaders to allow Eric to update the graphics in more ways. He is already doing various updates using some new shaders but asked me to add some more to give him more flexibility. I'm looking forward to getting to the point where we can release the updated tracks, and Eric can then continue with new tracks.
It's not just as simple as "adding a shader". Internal changes must be made to allow selection of the options that use those shaders, and data needs to be added to the vertices of objects and so on. It's actually quite complicated and at times confusing, adding these new things without breaking the old things. Restructuring is required.
So at this point, I can't stop that to work on network security.
Just to explain, so I hope it's clear... I want to work on network security, but it's also important to make sure Eric has the tools he wants to work with, and then I'll be free to work on other important things. There are many important things to work on. One of them is network security. Others include graphical and physical updates.
I'll close this thread because, as people have pointed out, it includes adverts for cracked communities. I might delete the thread in a while but I'll let people read my comments first. If I simply delete the thread now, I will be adding fuel to the fire of people saying things like "LFS devs just delete threads and pretend cracking doesn't exist". Unfortunately certain members find it hard to understand why I don't spend every minute of my working life trying to defeat crackers. I do need to update Live for Speed in many different ways, so that people do continue to use it in the future.
Let's all try to stay positive. I don't really understand the spreading of negativity and repetitive sarcastic comments. This is a game, a form of entertainment. It's supposed to be fun so, some members here, please try to avoid negative comments, specially when you have made the same point many times before.
I believe it is important for me to update the protocol between LFS and the master server to make it harder to crack.
At the moment I am in the middle of updating the shaders to allow Eric to update the graphics in more ways. He is already doing various updates using some new shaders but asked me to add some more to give him more flexibility. I'm looking forward to getting to the point where we can release the updated tracks, and Eric can then continue with new tracks.
It's not just as simple as "adding a shader". Internal changes must be made to allow selection of the options that use those shaders, and data needs to be added to the vertices of objects and so on. It's actually quite complicated and at times confusing, adding these new things without breaking the old things. Restructuring is required.
So at this point, I can't stop that to work on network security.
Just to explain, so I hope it's clear... I want to work on network security, but it's also important to make sure Eric has the tools he wants to work with, and then I'll be free to work on other important things. There are many important things to work on. One of them is network security. Others include graphical and physical updates.
I'll close this thread because, as people have pointed out, it includes adverts for cracked communities. I might delete the thread in a while but I'll let people read my comments first. If I simply delete the thread now, I will be adding fuel to the fire of people saying things like "LFS devs just delete threads and pretend cracking doesn't exist". Unfortunately certain members find it hard to understand why I don't spend every minute of my working life trying to defeat crackers. I do need to update Live for Speed in many different ways, so that people do continue to use it in the future.
Let's all try to stay positive. I don't really understand the spreading of negativity and repetitive sarcastic comments. This is a game, a form of entertainment. It's supposed to be fun so, some members here, please try to avoid negative comments, specially when you have made the same point many times before.
Well, I don't really need advice on prioritisation.
I'd like very much to work on the tyre physics, because of all the possibilities it will open up, but currently I am working on the graphical updates, more shaders for Eric to use.
In fact, LFS does need graphical updates as it gets the most criticism in that area, unfairly at times. Comments along the lines of "LFS is from 2002 and hasn't had a single update since then, therefore it has shit graphics". Typical comment from someone who doesn't even have a look to see how far it has come. But in truth there is quite a lot of modernisation that needs to be done, and I'm doing the things that allow Eric to make some significant improvements.
As I've pointed out before, most people have one thing they think is most important. That may be graphics, physics, autocross objects, changing weather, network security, etc. And it seems many of these people find it totally incredible that I am not devoting all my time to their own favourite issue. In fact, all these things need to be worked on and they are all challenging. Luckily I enjoy working on them so we'll get there eventually.
It's not really good advice to ask me not to prevent a crash issue that is badly affecting someone, when it might only take a day or two to fix. So as I said, I'll have a look into it.
I'd like very much to work on the tyre physics, because of all the possibilities it will open up, but currently I am working on the graphical updates, more shaders for Eric to use.
In fact, LFS does need graphical updates as it gets the most criticism in that area, unfairly at times. Comments along the lines of "LFS is from 2002 and hasn't had a single update since then, therefore it has shit graphics". Typical comment from someone who doesn't even have a look to see how far it has come. But in truth there is quite a lot of modernisation that needs to be done, and I'm doing the things that allow Eric to make some significant improvements.
As I've pointed out before, most people have one thing they think is most important. That may be graphics, physics, autocross objects, changing weather, network security, etc. And it seems many of these people find it totally incredible that I am not devoting all my time to their own favourite issue. In fact, all these things need to be worked on and they are all challenging. Luckily I enjoy working on them so we'll get there eventually.
It's not really good advice to ask me not to prevent a crash issue that is badly affecting someone, when it might only take a day or two to fix. So as I said, I'll have a look into it.
Well... it does need graphical updates to stay vaguely up to date. If you take a look at the really old versions of LFS, you'll see it has come along a great deal over the years and there wouldn't be anyone at all online any more if it looked now how it did back then.
That is important, and it's important for me to try and make sure the 3D system can allow Eric to create the effects he wants to. Or at least some of the effects. I'm always behind what he would really like it to be.
I had a relaxed month in August due to the school holidays and had a nice time here with the family. I'm back on getting some updated shaders finished so that Eric will be able to use them. We'll be able to release a patch with some fixes and graphical updates on Blackwood, Rockingham and Westhill.
Then what I really want to do is get the tyre physics finished so we can release the needed updates and then hopefully get onto supporting some elements of user created content. I can't be any more specific on that as there are no fixed plans.
That is important, and it's important for me to try and make sure the 3D system can allow Eric to create the effects he wants to. Or at least some of the effects. I'm always behind what he would really like it to be.
I had a relaxed month in August due to the school holidays and had a nice time here with the family. I'm back on getting some updated shaders finished so that Eric will be able to use them. We'll be able to release a patch with some fixes and graphical updates on Blackwood, Rockingham and Westhill.
Then what I really want to do is get the tyre physics finished so we can release the needed updates and then hopefully get onto supporting some elements of user created content. I can't be any more specific on that as there are no fixed plans.
Recently I have been working on graphical updates, in the form of some more shaders that Eric can make good use of. There was quite a bit of restructuring to make it more consistent between the different types of objects and easier to add more in future.
So, looking at the list you quoted in the post above, that means number 2 has moved in front of number 1. This is to allow Eric to make some use of the new shaders in the updated Rockingham, Blackwood and Westhill tracks before they are released.
So, looking at the list you quoted in the post above, that means number 2 has moved in front of number 1. This is to allow Eric to make some use of the new shaders in the updated Rockingham, Blackwood and Westhill tracks before they are released.
My preferred hobby is shown in the attached pictures.
I would like to add bikes to LFS. More likely motorbikes.
Thinking forward in the short-medium range I would like to:
1) Release an update with the current physics, with Eric's Blackwood fixes and minor updates on Westhill and Rockingham including 3D kerbs.
2) Finish some graphical updates that will help with new tracks.
3) Get back to tyre physics and release it with the Scirocco.
Note, that is not a list of promises. It is simply a short list of things as I personally see it.
In the future I am still interested in various things that the LFS team and I cannot make any promises about, but I can state an interest in. Such as bikes, karts, trucks, user created content.
There aren't many new effects yet, though there was a lot of restructuring to allow future development to take place more easily.
One of the main benefits is that the shiny windows with an overlay are now done in a single pass using a new shader, so that is good for performance and ease of modelling although visually there is no difference. It was just "wrong" to leave it the way it was done before and it's "right" to update the shaders to do things a better way.
There are also new shaders that allow the alpha channel to specify the shine level at that location on the texture, instead of transparency. Eric is applying these in a few places where it seems like a good idea but there aren't any dramatic new effects yet, for example I have not yet developed something that can be used for specular effect on the road surface.
One of the main benefits is that the shiny windows with an overlay are now done in a single pass using a new shader, so that is good for performance and ease of modelling although visually there is no difference. It was just "wrong" to leave it the way it was done before and it's "right" to update the shaders to do things a better way.
There are also new shaders that allow the alpha channel to specify the shine level at that location on the texture, instead of transparency. Eric is applying these in a few places where it seems like a good idea but there aren't any dramatic new effects yet, for example I have not yet developed something that can be used for specular effect on the road surface.
Hi there, we have been working hard, but the tyre physics have not progressed since the January update.
It's not because I took around a week off rebuilding my road bike. Although I am lucky enough to have been able to deliberately take a career that focusses on allowing me time, rather that maximising my income. So it was really nice that I was able build my own bike up from the component parts.
In fact apart from one month where I did less work than the others, since January I have been working on shader updates and editor functions that help Eric create some of the effects he wants to. In fact there is a lot more to be done, but the current version allows a few more possibilities, and also does existing things in more efficient ways.
So, as usual, good updates but slower than you or I would like!
Eric has been working on one of his new tracks in particular and also done fixes and updates on Blackwood, Westhill and Rockingham which we hope to release in an update in the not too distant future.
It's not because I took around a week off rebuilding my road bike. Although I am lucky enough to have been able to deliberately take a career that focusses on allowing me time, rather that maximising my income. So it was really nice that I was able build my own bike up from the component parts.
In fact apart from one month where I did less work than the others, since January I have been working on shader updates and editor functions that help Eric create some of the effects he wants to. In fact there is a lot more to be done, but the current version allows a few more possibilities, and also does existing things in more efficient ways.
So, as usual, good updates but slower than you or I would like!
Eric has been working on one of his new tracks in particular and also done fixes and updates on Blackwood, Westhill and Rockingham which we hope to release in an update in the not too distant future.
Well, we are happy working this way. I really like doing the different sides of the code - physics, multiplayer, interface, graphics. Eric enjoys being a texture artist, a track designer, 3D modeller and so on. We like working from home and being able to have a day off in the middle of the week and work a Saturday instead, or in my case, go on a bike ride during working hours and work later in the evening. It's a life we have chosen to lead and it works. It is very different from the capitalist ideal of spending your life trying to make as much money as you possibly can, for no apparent reason. It is possible that Live for Speed doesn't reach the potential it could, but it sure does keep going on and on.
Let's say we decided to give up this way of life, restructure as a company and hire an office. At least one of us would need to sell our house and move nearer to the office, then start working 10am to 6pm, 5 days a week, hire people and spend our working days managing a team. We've been in that situation before, in more than one game company, and decided to do things differently. We have no desire to go back to that. But anyway, if we did (which we won't) then sure we could progress faster and then there would be these major setbacks, like the guy who did the physics leaves the company and no-one knows how the hell his code works, and then you need to find a replacement. The same reason why big commercial games are usually done quickly then they make another one.
Also let's say we somehow created a company for the sake of selling it to a corporation. They would require that we worked on for some years under their control. Again, not what we want at all. We don't want to sell it anyway, we just want to keep working on this thing we enjoy doing and which makes us a living. So that's what we are doing!
Let's say we decided to give up this way of life, restructure as a company and hire an office. At least one of us would need to sell our house and move nearer to the office, then start working 10am to 6pm, 5 days a week, hire people and spend our working days managing a team. We've been in that situation before, in more than one game company, and decided to do things differently. We have no desire to go back to that. But anyway, if we did (which we won't) then sure we could progress faster and then there would be these major setbacks, like the guy who did the physics leaves the company and no-one knows how the hell his code works, and then you need to find a replacement. The same reason why big commercial games are usually done quickly then they make another one.
Also let's say we somehow created a company for the sake of selling it to a corporation. They would require that we worked on for some years under their control. Again, not what we want at all. We don't want to sell it anyway, we just want to keep working on this thing we enjoy doing and which makes us a living. So that's what we are doing!
I can reproduce the Z fighting, though it's quite hard to see, trying to do it in SHIFT+U mode.
About pop-in, is that the same as what I usually call pop-up? I have done a few laps and couldn't see anything popping up. Are you talking about invisible objects suddenly appearing, or LOD switching being too close? If you could point out some specific objects that do this, maybe Eric can make that adjustment.
Eric is interested in doing those areas in a future update but he doesn't want to just enable physics, because it is not a proper job and has not been built as driveable areas. So it would be quite a lot of work and it is more important to continue with S3 tracks at this time.
Thanks for the reports. Eric's following the thread and fixing the reported issues.
On the coding side...
Good find, I'll have a look at that.
Thanks, I'll see what's causing this. I guess it's because the kerbs are 3D objects but I suppose they should count as ground rather than objects.
I fixed the LX vob which had some holes in the lower LOD mesh that caused holes in the shadows. Also there was a stray polygon visible, a lower front part of the roof canvas that was still visible from the inside when the roof was down. It was noticeable in VR.
On the coding side...
Good find, I'll have a look at that.
Thanks, I'll see what's causing this. I guess it's because the kerbs are 3D objects but I suppose they should count as ground rather than objects.
I fixed the LX vob which had some holes in the lower LOD mesh that caused holes in the shadows. Also there was a stray polygon visible, a lower front part of the roof canvas that was still visible from the inside when the roof was down. It was noticeable in VR.
I don't know if this can be done without messing up all the hotlaps for those cars. But as it seems so popular, I can look into it. If it would mess up the hotlaps then I won't do it, an increase in steering range would have to wait for the new tyre physics, which I have been working on.
But, to help me, can you tell me exactly which cars need more steering angle to help with drift and how much that extra angle should be? It really must remain within the realms of "realistic" and I guess that means it should not include any cars with front drive.
There is more to come. Explanation below.
At the moment the shadows do not affect transparency, and I didn't do anything to change that. It's a good point and I haven't even thought about that! I think with all the other things I am working on, the shadows on alpha surfaces will not be changed in this update.
The problem with skid marks on concrete is if the concrete object disappears, we could have floating skid marks. I haven't yet worked out a system to solve this. Though I haven't put much time into it. I suppose it's possible by registering every bit of skid on an object, so they can vanish if the object is deleted... again, probably not in this update.
I've been diverted onto some updates on the tyre physics, because I needed to send Eric an update with new editor functions, but the new tyre physics were in an "intermediate" state. Now I've brought them to a driveable state, I can update Eric's dev version and I can get back to some patch things.
But I don't want to try and say what else will be in the patch.
Yeah, normally the test patch threads are more lively and I keep adding more updates. This time, the shadows were tested, no serious bugs exist and then I've been diverted onto other things and there was also two weeks with the kids at home.
I'm back to work now so hopefully there should be more to test soon!
I've been working mainly on the tyre physics.
Eric has been working on tracks.
Sorry but there's not much more to say at this point.
Anyway, here is a new compatible test patch with some small improvements. Most notably the car shadows are no longer cast towards the light. See the attached screenshot in the Test Patch 0.6Q3 thread.
https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/90208
Eric has been working on tracks.
Sorry but there's not much more to say at this point.
Anyway, here is a new compatible test patch with some small improvements. Most notably the car shadows are no longer cast towards the light. See the attached screenshot in the Test Patch 0.6Q3 thread.
https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/90208
Of course it's true that some of the cars need updating. Most of all in my opinion the RB4, such a nice car but with the oldest interior of all. And the FZR and FXR that still have the road car interiors. I can't do that, I hope Eric will find some time to work on them but he has some tracks on the go at the moment. Note that the UF (that also needs updating) is mine, not Eric's.
Hi, sorry about the delay with this. It took me a long time to get going. In fact I didn't do much work in May, it turned out to be a recovery from the last few months (full version releases in February, March and April). I caught up with some cycling and implemented a 'walking around' mode for SHIFT+U mode which is fun, particularly in VR, and useful for Eric as he often uses his Rift for a close-up view on his work.
This week since Wednesday I have finally been working on the controller updates! For a start I cleaned up the DirectInput initialisation code and made it so that the "FF device" automatically uses the same device that contains the steering axis so the FF device no longer needs to be manually selected.
The next step is to allow the list of controllers to be clickable, to select a single device. That will be like clicking the refresh button except that only the selected device will be initialised. That will then naturally use the appropriate configuration (default or saved) for that device. So that should solve your problems with controllers.
Hopefully that should be done on Monday and then I'll look into the selection of the audio device and the automatic recentering of the steering wheel when the car is reset.
This week since Wednesday I have finally been working on the controller updates! For a start I cleaned up the DirectInput initialisation code and made it so that the "FF device" automatically uses the same device that contains the steering axis so the FF device no longer needs to be manually selected.
The next step is to allow the list of controllers to be clickable, to select a single device. That will be like clicking the refresh button except that only the selected device will be initialised. That will then naturally use the appropriate configuration (default or saved) for that device. So that should solve your problems with controllers.
Hopefully that should be done on Monday and then I'll look into the selection of the audio device and the automatic recentering of the steering wheel when the car is reset.
No, I'm just doing a bit more on VR then back to the tyre physics. Meanwhile, Eric is working on a new track. No time estimates for these.
EDIT: but -> bit - thanks loopingz
EDIT: but -> bit - thanks loopingz
Last edited by Scawen, .
Yes, Eric has a DK2 and that has influenced the development of Westhill and Rockingham. He often checks his work out in VR because it's such a good view on things. There is extra incentive to include more 3D geometry in models and so on.
Maybe it's a program that pops up in 3D space and you can control your phone in there, like looking at the actual phone screen, or perhaps just a set of menus accessing various features. So you can be in VR but you don't have to leave behind the comfort and security of your beloved phone in the real world, and you don't have to miss a single facebook post about a cup of coffee one of your friends bought or any inane tweet by a spamming celebrity.
Last edited by Scawen, .
Yes some of them are really back in time.
I know Eric wants to update the car interiors and other things. But we are agreed that another track is the priority at the moment. The S3 license looks so limited in what it offers, that updating S1/S2 stuff is just not the priority at the moment. He likes to focus on one thing at a time.
I don't know what will be the priority when the track is done, or if the tyres will be before or after the track. We're just trying to crack on.
Yes, now that we made the decision to sell S3 licenses, there is no reason to hold back tracks because of tyre physics. The quicker we can get a track out there, the better, as the S3 license upgrade will look like twice as good value. But it will take a while as Eric is working to a high detail level as you can see in Westhill and Rockingham.
Originally the tyre physics delays held up some things, and still holds up the Scirocco. As most people know - and this has never changed - tyre physics was and still is the reason for the delay in the Scirocco.
The tyre physics update is the best thing that can happen to LFS on the code side. On the content side, new tracks are the best thing.
It will also allow us to simulate more different types of vehicles because the tyre model should scale correctly from small tyres to large tyres. There are so many possibilities from having a better tyre model, not only that it feels better and more fun to drive as you put the power on coming out of a bend and so on. A physics model based on real physical principles that produce the mathematical functions that produce the slip curves and the way of combining lateral and longitudinal forces (they aren't 'combined' as such, they just come out of the model naturally).
And no, I'm not going into details now. Right now I'm trying to get this quick update out of the way. And as I said then I'm working on functions for Eric and at last I'll be back on the tyre physics. If there's something interesting to say about it in a few months, then perhaps I will.
And no, I'm not going into details now. Right now I'm trying to get this quick update out of the way. And as I said then I'm working on functions for Eric and at last I'll be back on the tyre physics. If there's something interesting to say about it in a few months, then perhaps I will.
I noticed that my previous post could be misread, so I just want to make it clear there will be no tyre physics updates in the coming patch.
1) Test patch in a few days with crash fix, a few small lesson editor fixes, possibly an MPR smoothing.
2) Not going to get into a massive patching session. I've just come off one. Just release the full version with a few minor updates.
3) Do some editor functions that Eric has asked for.
4) Work on tyre physics.
Disclaimer: That's the plan, but plans change...
1) Test patch in a few days with crash fix, a few small lesson editor fixes, possibly an MPR smoothing.
2) Not going to get into a massive patching session. I've just come off one. Just release the full version with a few minor updates.
3) Do some editor functions that Eric has asked for.
4) Work on tyre physics.
Disclaimer: That's the plan, but plans change...
I didn't want to get into a new full version at this point, but a crash bug is enough to change my plans. We can't leave a crash bug out there in the official version. So I'd like to do a few small fixes and improvements to make it more worthwhile. I won't be getting into any monster graphical updates now, as that has far lower priority than the tyre physics which I must get back onto without delay, after doing some editor functions to help Eric with the track he is working on.
I did manage to get the join request working for Garage exit too (for already joined players who may have changed their car or settings). Not finished yet, partially working but it should be OK.
As all this stuff looks good, and with the programmers and other people here showing a lot of interest and coming up with good suggestions, I've decided not to rush this, and just work to the full release next weekend. We can do some tests between now and then, but I don't have to finish all these things by tomorrow afternoon!
Eric's fine with that as he is working on other things anyway. Victor is around next weekend too so it looks fine.
Tomorrow morning I'll round up where we are with these things and what I plan to do, and start a new thread for us to discuss that in the programmer section.
As all this stuff looks good, and with the programmers and other people here showing a lot of interest and coming up with good suggestions, I've decided not to rush this, and just work to the full release next weekend. We can do some tests between now and then, but I don't have to finish all these things by tomorrow afternoon!
Eric's fine with that as he is working on other things anyway. Victor is around next weekend too so it looks fine.
Tomorrow morning I'll round up where we are with these things and what I plan to do, and start a new thread for us to discuss that in the programmer section.
Guys, did you see my post that there is a sunset config that has been deleted, temporarily, from the public version to allow the version to be online compatible with the official version for this weekend?
There is a maximum of four lightings per track. When the incompatible version comes out., there will be four. Eric has obviously chosen the four that he likes the most.
Last edited by Scawen, .
Reason : didn't need the last sentence ;)
I don't know all the details, because Eric doesn't send me a list.
But holes are fixed, all reported bugs should be fixed and there are various improvements. I guess you could make two comparison screenshots using a saved camera position and flick between them.
One thing you can't see is he has added a sunset lighting. I left that out just for now so the versions are compatible online.
But holes are fixed, all reported bugs should be fixed and there are various improvements. I guess you could make two comparison screenshots using a saved camera position and flick between them.
One thing you can't see is he has added a sunset lighting. I left that out just for now so the versions are compatible online.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG