Interesting choice. Looking forward to seeing the completed project. Please keep us posted with updates; good luck!

Quote from rane_nbg :

Would be good if there is a place to store all of the created track assets. Track makers could then use those and keep filling up the archive.

What does this mean? Do you mean something like a repository for the objects for the environment? Trackside stuff, guardrails, trees, streetlamps etc.? If so, yeah, that would be ideal! Just like the auto-x objects, there would be user-made objects that can be shared across any track/environment.

Quote from Eclipsed :

Same with car mods - legal issues, every track will be needed to check for licensed content

Hi Rony, I appreciate the input - thank you. As per the current approval system, it is possible for a car mod to be rejected after all the work is done. As the track mod/environment mod will take quite a lot of time, this needs to be avoided at all costs. Therefore, I think it would be better if there is transparency from the SCAVIER/track creators right from the start.

For that to happen, the minimum requirements for a track to be accepted for online use need to be defined. This would include licensing, quality, realism - some of of control over things. It could easily turn into Minecraft type sandbox (and that's a whole new topic).

Would something like the following make sense? Several approval stages before the creator spends considerable time working on modelling.

Type of track/environment:

1. Fictitious race track (i.e. Blackwood without open configurations)
2. Fictitious race track/surrounding environment (i.e. Blackwood with open configurations).
3. Replication of existing race track/surround environment (i.e. Rockingham)
4. Replication of existing environment
5. Fictitious environment (towns, cities, highways, touge - anything really)

Just imagine all the possibilities!

A1 - EOI

An expression of interest in the type of environment that a creator is planning. If its fictitious (i.e. without any replication of existing tracks) it is rather straightforward to obtain a pre-approval of some sort.

If it is a replication - the creator must seek and obtain approval from a relevant party. If no such approval is needed - that too need to be proved. This is to ensure that they do the work - not the reviewers. It would be best to sort out licensing requirements (if any) at this stage itself, before any work is started. Once everything is cleared - they would get the pre-approval to proceed.

There is no guarantee of the quality of initial creation. However, sorting out the above licensing issue would open the opportunity for others to re-create tracks (hopefully with much higher quality) at a later date. There are bound to be duplication of tracks - which is not necessarily a bad thing.

A2 - WIP

The Work In Progress approvals would be timely/completion stages (25%, 50%, 75%, 95% etc.) to ensure that the requirements are met. This would help the creators to see what they need to do to ensure that it will get approved - or to stop (without wasting more time) if they don't have what it takes.

A3 - Testing and review (LFS Community)

The track/environment would be open to custom access/LFS community to test and review, provide feedback to the creator - just like the current system for car mods.

A4 - Testing and review (SCAVIER-appointed review team)

The track/environment would officially reviewed by the appointed team (I'm not too sure how that part with the current car mods - but I would think it would be something along the lines).

A5 - Testing and review (SCAVIER)

Unlike a car mod, as a track mod would have a huge impact on LFS - I would think that SCAVIER should have the final say. But they could choose to get involved in the process or leave it in the hands of their review team.

I understand that when (if?) the track/environment editor is released, everyone and their mother will be making stuff and requesting approvals. Obviously there will be both positive and negative aspects with this. Positives - just like some car mods, there are going to be some absolutely amazing creations come out. Negatives - just like some car mods, there will be delays in approvals, people ripping stuff and trying to trick the requirements and generally wasting everyone's time.

There are some options around this:

1. Limited release of the track/environment editor. People who have proved themselves at making high quality car mods can request access to the editor - SCAVIER has the discretion).
2. No one said the track editor was going to be free - set a price for it (at least for the initial release until). That will stop everyone and their mother making stuff.
3. This is going to be LFS' cash cow. Linked to 1 & 2, SCAVIER can offer remuneration depending on track/environment/quality/size etc. created. They might consider the possibility of paying their reviewers considering the amount of time/effort required for the task.

This is just me rambling on a Sunday evening. I'm sure all of you who have been at this continually for the better part of two decades have more to add.

Quote from TheStigUSA :

I see so much potential for this to extend the community and there is attractive business potential for LFS as well.

From a business perspective, what the ways you guys think the release of a track editor can backfire?

Sarcasm?

Quote from gu3st :

With tracks I think less is the risk of track copyright for branding and more for IP theft from other games.

I'm curious to know how other simulators deal with this. Surely they're in the same situation as LFS if custom tracks are allowed?

Try and figure out if its a LFS issue or something broken with the shifter itself? Does it work perfectly in other games, or in the OS settings for the controller?

Quote from joaopaulopt :

I don't know if this is possible. Publishing a circuit to download online on a server is not the same as unloading a car.

Oh, absolutely agree with that. I don't know this, but if Scawen didn't anticipate a downloadable car-mod system when he was developing LFS S1, S2 etc. he's outdone himself in the implementation of the whole project. Admittedly, I was not around when it was released few years ago so I don't know how it was on the onset but right now its pretty hassle-free for the end-user. On the plus side, there are always developments.

Of course, track development and integration in to LFS is a whole big deal. But I'm sure eventually he'll come up with a way to seamlessly do that. Hopefully only a matter of time.

Quote from joaopaulopt :

It would be easier to add objects to the layout, such as benches with an audience, skin on advertising barriers, things like that.

Yes, agreed. Layouts will always have room for improvement to help build up different driving environment. But then again the question arises, should Scawen spend his time on developing layouts (again) pausing updates on tyre physics and other key areas that he's working on for years?

Quote from joaopaulopt :

I prefer to have more tracks created by the LFS after a new LFS update, have more circuits in the LFS and be added to the S3 license and who knows, maybe an S4 with new circuits may come.

I think most of us will agree on this point. At the same time I believe (correct me if I'm wrong), one of the biggest issues that caused LFS to loose the height of popularity was the lack of content. Yeah, tyre physics could use improvements, graphics could use improvements and yada yada yada. BUT all of those were good enough and would keep existing drivers continually engaged and drivers continually attracted if there was a steady stream of new content (cars and tracks). Unfortunately that didn't happen until they decided to open up the whole car-modification scene. If you go back a decade, even talking about "vob" mobs might gotten you banned.

Look, I don't what happened with Scavier/Eric's input towards LFS content, but given the timeline of LFS S1/S2 cars and tracks, a whole lot of cars and tracks could have been released before S3 release (December 2015?) as S2 content, or after as S3 content. Yes, I agree that the open configs and updates are great, but why stop there? Is it the difference between the quality of existing cars/tracks vs anything new they would release? Were many cars and tracks made, but are on hold until tyre physics are finished (to be released as a big update)? Or was development on hold until physics were finalized (that's unlikely, I know). Hopefully one day we'll hear their thoughts on this.

Quote from three_jump :

I think Scawens priorities are getting the physics and all the other stuff (e.g. graphics) released so he can finally stop switching between the "old" public LFS and his "development" version. I think he mentioned that a few times by now

Yes. This is key. But by the look of things he's looking after the server side too (I haven't seen Victor posting lately, so I'm not sure what's going on there). Its questionable if Scawen is likely to have the uninterrupted time that he needs for the tyre physics development. And what does that mean for the future of LFS? Should LFS content stay on hold until that time? If Scawen had an end in sight, he would push and get it done. I would assume there's still a long way to go, that may take few more years? That brings us back to my original question - should they consider a release of the track/environment editor in some shape or form for the sake of content release.

Quote from three_jump :

Scawen also doesn't seem to do anything half-arsed, so any work on a public track editor will probably take quite some time/resources combined with steady community feedback-loops.

This is what I love. Its their baby. I was just going through the LFS development over the years on the LFS Wiki >here<. How amazing is that? How far have they come for such a niche team?

That said, as I understand LFS is the main source of income for Scawen. I'm not sure about Victor and Eric. But I remember reading that they had to consider alternative jobs since LFS license sales were so low. Where does that end up? Striving for perfection (tyre physics), holding of release of content (or no new content being created?) which sadly drives drivers (ha!) away and keeps LFS out of the mainstream sims.

I think right now they have a good thing going with the car mod system - amazing cars are coming up. If no new LFS tracks/environment releases are planned in the near future - I strongly believe they definitely should be seriously looking at opening up track/environment editing too.

Scawen/Victor/Eric - I love you guys. LFS has brought so much joy in to my life (not just driving, but all the hours spend on the forums, all the people we've driven with, made friends with over the years). I think many people do share the same sentiment. I wish you guys all the best in how-ever you wish to proceed with LFS.

Hello! Please attach images to the forum/post. 20 years from now those imgur links may not work and this thread would not make much sense...

1. Cap your frame rate at 100 to see if it has any effect (related thread: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/107882)

2. Disable your antivirus as a test step and see if it has any impact on your issue. If that doesn't do anything,

3. Check if you are on the current version (E12).

4. If you are, revert back to a previous version (i.e. E7, E8) and see if the issue is present or not (just to confirm that it occurs only in E12).

5. Make a post on the LFS Test Patch E12 thread (https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/106967) with as much as detail as possible.

Just to shake things up, and to introduce some more excitement and innovation for LFS, how about considering a limited release of the track editor that Eric currently uses? SCAVIER could invite select community members, especially those with demonstrated skills in car modeling and layout creation, to participate first. This would allow them to gauge how well it works and then decide how to proceed with the integration (if at all).

The development of environments and tracks could be shared publicly, fostering a collaborative and transparent process. While immediate integration into LFS wouldn't be necessary, this approach would keep the community engaged and inspired.

To ensure Scawen can continue focusing on his current development tasks, perhaps Eric could take the lead in assisting users with the current version of the track editor. That would ensure that Scawen can focus on his current development without having to focus on a mild release of an updated layout editor/track editor.

At this stage, I believe their priority is in releasing the updated (development) version with the new tyre physics (imagine the time Scawen can save by avoiding maintaining two separate versions of LFS?).

If the timeline for the above step is uncertain, SCAVIER might consider temporarily pausing other developments to concentrate on developing a public version of the environment/track editor for release in a grand-scale. This focused effort could bring significant long-term benefits to LFS in my opinion.

This is so endearing. Thank you!

Quote from MicroSpecV :

The radio silence to the track editor/layout editor suggestions is unreal :lol:

One could hope that there is some serious thought given to it and that there are discussions behind the scenes on how they wish to proceed. What we can do is to share our collective resources to discuss options, brainstorm ideas, practice patience, and keep ourself entertained in the meantime.

Quote from Silverracer :

[...]try disabling (or making an exception to LFS.exe) your antivirus software and try again to see if it has any effect.

No difference relating to the above?

Does it work as expected in other sims? Or is it LFS-only issue.

Isn't a wild life crossing track a safe path for animals to cross (without being run over by cars/trains etc.)?

+1 for a seemingly original idea! There are plenty of kangaroos at Bathurst.

Also: https://youtu.be/m4DTy2-kTHw.

Quote from Lucas McFly :

I also had a problem with sound in Windows 11 - perhaps it is caused by the KB5037853 update that was released on May 29, 2024

Quote from loopingz :

I recently fired up a old pc with fresh windows 10 and I am having sound going...

In both cases was it limited to LFS's sound not working or did it affect the operating system sound output (which was resolved after a restart)? Mine was the latter.

Quote from matze54564 :

Can you tell us which antivirus software you are using?

Norton.

Hi Scawen!

I installed E12 via the auto-update thingy (when trying to connect to a host). On the first start up after the update, my antivirus was blocking LFS. LFS showed a sound error (with some numbers). Surprisingly, my Windows 11 sounds stopped after that as well. No sound from Windows and even YouTube showed an error when attempted to play something.

At the time I did not think it was related to LFS, so I didn't bother taking any screenshots etc. OS sound worked after a restart.

It was repeated when I launched LFS again and antivirus blocked again.

The issue was resolved after adding an exception to LFS.exe in the antivirus software and it stopped blocking.

I thought it was an isolated incident; but a similar issue was reported here: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/108164-No-Sound
They say the error was: 'Sound Error (play:b-2147221164)"


Elsewhere, there was another report on the error: "DI : DirectInput8Create - DIERR_GENERIC"
https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/108146-Unplayable-Error-0-7E12

This is linked to the error reported earlier in this thread: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/108146-Unplayable-Error-0-7E12

Just a heads up. Please disregard if its a known issue with new patches causing all the antivirus software to throw hissy fits.

Hi, was the issue sorted out?

Did it happen after the recent upgrade to LFS E12?

If so, try disabling (or making an exception to LFS.exe) your antivirus software and try again to see if it has any effect.

Hi again! I checked with michal 1279 and they advised that the vehicles on the car park appear in BL1/BL2 etc. You just have to drive behind the pits to see them.

Ah, understood! Thanks for the clarification, but unfortunately I'm not sure how to get them. I wonder if it was in a different LFS version or if they are objects added as layout.

Hopefully its something simple and someone would be able to answer.

Quote from zeru aim :

i see on yt that there are cars and trailers parked in the blackwood parking lot behind the pit box.

Hello and welcome to LFS.

I am not entirely sure of what you mean. I wonder if the "track" you are using is restricting entry to the area you mention. Have you tried the "open configuration"?

When you select Blackwood you will see several options. GP Track, Historic, Rallycross etc. Click on the "X" next to it to open up whole map. Try and see if that works for you to get access?

Quote from KeschaxD :

I've even made an account for the forum

Hi! As far as I'm aware, you don't need to make a separate account for the forum; your LFS license is your forum username. If you have another LFS account that you race with - it should have it's own forum account (linked to your online race stats etc.).

Hey, what were the areas that you found most difficult? In terms of support for modding - is the required help already available(just needing to be looked up)?

This looks pretty cool. All the best with the project!

Quote from Flame CZE :

Mods in bold are officially licensed by the manufacturer.

That's awesome. Thank you for all the hard work!