Please Accept my apology my blind eyes didn't notice the line between the posts
BTW in that case I also have to tell you that you win debate with forbes on equal terms with style
Please Accept my apology my blind eyes didn't notice the line between the posts
BTW in that case I also have to tell you that you win debate with forbes on equal terms with style
Achievment? Is it something like this?
Maybe some people dislike the idea as well as it would take time to make perfect and stop the main workings of LFS like cars and tracks.
It's like a side task really...it doesn't ad performance to the game but to the game play....
Also most of the suggested improvements remind me of Forza Motorsport 2. I don't think that's the direction we want to go in.
Agree making it required some time.
Well of course it is a sidetask I vote for it because I would like this feature in game.
I realise its not the most important now and i dont demand to take care of it now but in future.
Well correct me if I am wrong but games being evaluated by their gameplay.
Game which is boring, doesn't have anything really interesting to offer in other words with bad gameplay never be a best sealer and never get a good mark by reviewer, for example.
In other words game are about gameplay mainly.
Well Forza 2 also have setups, cars, racing tracks, wheels lets make LFS an motor board racer Only in that way we can be sure that lfs will be different from Forza in any aspect.
Otherwise if something is considered a good idea why not to do this, only because they have it in forza?
First conclusion: Forza should be a good game if all Xbox players show it as an example of a racing game and so much ppl suggested solutions similar to forza's.
Devs can make game but in the end it will be players who decide is it any good or not.
Second conclusion: If there is so much improvement suggestion its mean LFS lack something.
So every suggestion should be reviewed and not rejected cuz its about something which is implemented in some other game you personally don't like.
I can't be bothered trawling through the posts to work out who said what, so here's my general rebuttal.
First of all, the most successful and popular flight sim of all time is JUST flying a plane. No combat, no bombs or guns, no other players, just you and the physics of actually flying a plane.
MMOs are a unique animal in that you can't actually win at them and it's rare that top-end events are quest-related (outside of progressing as a guild rather than an individual). Most end-game content is repeating the same raid instances over and over until you've all got the best gear. Achievements have been added to some to make the concept of farming more interesting. Which I think says a lot about the game content.
If you can't win races or practice very often, then what difference is having a line of text achievement going to make to you? You'll know when you've covered distance or something? As I said before, LFSW will tell you that and you can already chart your personal improvements. It's no use for showing people who don't play LFS, because they don't care. And people in LFS don't care because they would already have them.
It would negatively affect performance, since it would be adding more load to your CPU and the LFSW server. And since there's already a million physics calcs slowing people down, more calcs would be a stupid idea.
And it doesn't add to gameplay because any achievements added would be things you're supposed to be doing anyway. Maybe punishing people for NOT doing these things would be better? You overheat your clutch 10 times and it bans you for 24 hours.
If you find LFS boring as it is, then clearly sim racing is not for you. The clue is in the genre name. "Sim" and in "simulation". And "racing" as in "the desire to finish in a high position by moving quickly". That's it.
Achievements and trophies work in console games because they have been built from the ground up to be far more suited to people playing for shorter periods. They have the networking in place to track everything the player does with the express intention of rewarding them when they accomplish something the developer thinks will keep them playing.
And that's all it is - false replay value. Because it's there and incomplete, you feel obliged to go and fill that bar. 15 or 20 years ago games had replay value because you had a good playing experience, not because the instruction manual said there was a secret and if you repeated the same task 400 times you'd see a secret ending.
The comparisons with Forza are a bit unfair. It's geared as a mainly single player game with a multiplayer aspect, so it needs cups and challenges. LFS is sold as an online racing sim, so everything in there should be player-generated. There are loads of really professionally run leagues and cups running, so just imagine those are a virtual experience.
It's not about liking or disliking an idea, it's about what it brings to LFS and the community. I'm of the opinion (although it sounds slightly snobby) that if you don't want to get online and race as fast as you can, then online racing is probably not for you. It makes sense. I don't go out and play football because I'm not interested; I wouldn't join a club and then try to convince them that by changing the rules and adding some guy to track the distance I run per match, I'd suddenly be interested in playing football.
First of all, the most successful and popular flight sim of all time is JUST flying a plane. No combat, no bombs or guns, no other players, just you and the physics of actually flying a plane.
MMOs are a unique animal in that you can't actually win at them and it's rare that top-end events are quest-related (outside of progressing as a guild rather than an individual). Most end-game content is repeating the same raid instances over and over until you've all got the best gear. Achievements have been added to some to make the concept of farming more interesting. Which I think says a lot about the game content.
If you can't win races or practice very often, then what difference is having a line of text achievement going to make to you? You'll know when you've covered distance or something? As I said before, LFSW will tell you that and you can already chart your personal improvements. It's no use for showing people who don't play LFS, because they don't care. And people in LFS don't care because they would already have them.
It would negatively affect performance, since it would be adding more load to your CPU and the LFSW server. And since there's already a million physics calcs slowing people down, more calcs would be a stupid idea.
And it doesn't add to gameplay because any achievements added would be things you're supposed to be doing anyway. Maybe punishing people for NOT doing these things would be better? You overheat your clutch 10 times and it bans you for 24 hours.
If you find LFS boring as it is, then clearly sim racing is not for you. The clue is in the genre name. "Sim" and in "simulation". And "racing" as in "the desire to finish in a high position by moving quickly". That's it.
Achievements and trophies work in console games because they have been built from the ground up to be far more suited to people playing for shorter periods. They have the networking in place to track everything the player does with the express intention of rewarding them when they accomplish something the developer thinks will keep them playing.
And that's all it is - false replay value. Because it's there and incomplete, you feel obliged to go and fill that bar. 15 or 20 years ago games had replay value because you had a good playing experience, not because the instruction manual said there was a secret and if you repeated the same task 400 times you'd see a secret ending.
The comparisons with Forza are a bit unfair. It's geared as a mainly single player game with a multiplayer aspect, so it needs cups and challenges. LFS is sold as an online racing sim, so everything in there should be player-generated. There are loads of really professionally run leagues and cups running, so just imagine those are a virtual experience.
It's not about liking or disliking an idea, it's about what it brings to LFS and the community. I'm of the opinion (although it sounds slightly snobby) that if you don't want to get online and race as fast as you can, then online racing is probably not for you. It makes sense. I don't go out and play football because I'm not interested; I wouldn't join a club and then try to convince them that by changing the rules and adding some guy to track the distance I run per match, I'd suddenly be interested in playing football.
Hundredths of airports, the whole globe to fly, thousands of mods, even programs that simulate real weather.
And even multiplayer where you have to flight with other ppl and even have ground control provided by other ppl often who work in real airports.
dude I played MSFS there is so much Variety I couldn't write all even if I wanted to...
The same fact that you never get bored by sceneries is worth mentioning.
Since there is all globe to visit and tons of photoscenaries it is rare to flight over same boring landscape.
Even flying over Japan with photorealsitic scenario is cool enough.
But when "Active sky" give report bout major thunderstorm Just taking your mig29 fulcrum and make a suicidal flight in heart of it when nothing can be seen and your instruments is the only way to tell where are you and how close to ground.
This is real killer.
This is the reason why you should read at least what my response to breizh was about.
In any case if you think MSFS its just flying then you didn't play it or didn't notice how much things to do you have there. From stunt flying, online gaming to just sightseeng with photorealistic sceneries and objects.
There even planes with guns and rockets added by some mods (just to show off)
And you never just flight you have a lot to take care of especially if you flight some plane which where added.
Like from mod team "Project Tupolev" you wont even start it like stock msfs Boeing.
There is more than 150 pages to learn and things to monitor during flight...
In any case my post bout what you have do do in different games was about variety of things to do in game and in that case MSFS have just tons of stuff to do.
And if we talking about physics physics in MSFS is rather pure when compared to il-2, Xplane and even lock on.
So sry in terms of physics MSFS not really a sim unless we talking bout plans added by mods.
People this is no xbox game!
No, all of the things in MSFS by default are dedicated to just flying the plane. You might have more to do than in a standard racing car, but it's all course corrections, weather navigation, fuel planning, etc - simply standard jobs that come with flying a plane from one location to another.
And there's no point including mods in your argument, because LFS has no direct comparison.
The fact you have the whole glob to fly is enough so you wont get bored soon.
And with mods is just pure killer.
Why not?
If in LFS where some mods with new tracks or better looking modification of existing ones (new objects/surroundings and textures) or even possibilities to make your own track I would quietly shut up and dl them, but there is no.
And how many times you can drive AS.4 or BL.1 just what kind of patience you have to do this over and over for years.
A track making tool and I am in 7th heaven
A possibilities to make textures and add custom objects for that tracks and I am just happy as dog who just get chzburger
There is already some moders like gils4life and lynce who made great addons.
reflections, sound, new textures they bring something new to lfs and much better than default was.
But with time you get used to it and it is not enough to keep game "fresh"
As I said a few cars and a few tracks it is not enough.
The mods could help a bit at least when it comes to tracks but the only thing you can do is build a layout which hit the fps because of objects and looks just boring, unless you find look of the barriers all over the place refreshing.
LFS has no mods because it's not a complete product yet and as such it can and will be changed at any time.
Take the next change. What if someone had created a Scirocco as a mod? It'd now be pointless. There'd be some things they'd done differently in design and handling, some people would prefer Scawen's, some would prefer the mod. The community would be split and nobody would be happy.
I think we may have veered a little away from the achievements discussion and should probably aim to get back there soon
Achievements. Fine for some things, probably pointless in LFS.
There's only one that I can think may have some value, and that's one that noted your completion of the tutorials and therefor your implied understanding of the basic rules of driving.
Take the next change. What if someone had created a Scirocco as a mod? It'd now be pointless. There'd be some things they'd done differently in design and handling, some people would prefer Scawen's, some would prefer the mod. The community would be split and nobody would be happy.
I think we may have veered a little away from the achievements discussion and should probably aim to get back there soon
Achievements. Fine for some things, probably pointless in LFS.
There's only one that I can think may have some value, and that's one that noted your completion of the tutorials and therefor your implied understanding of the basic rules of driving.
I'd like to comment on that, but, i'm not entirely sure what it is you're saying. Are you saying MSFS has better or worse flight modelling than IL2, Xplane and Lock On ?
And for the record, in my opinion LFS doesn't need achievements, (other than winning of course). But, if Scawen and the boys think the game will be enhanced by them, then i'm sure they'll appear at some stage.
I've been hanging around this place long enough to work out that the Devs have a pretty good handle on what they're doing here, they're smart guys yunno. So if they wanna include such things then it's ok with me. But, just like the drag strip or the oval, i can't see myself ever using or needing it.
I would be glad if They would make a track making tool and release it.
I wouldn't even complain if I would made a 100 tracks which would lost compatibility with some new patch.
Considering the time it takes to amke a new patch i am pretty sure its like 9 months at least of compatibility
First of all Who say that new scirocco have to replace old?
A little effort from the moders with some cooperation from the devs and we have a new car model with its own driving model in a new slot.
I know in practise it doesn't look all that beautiful but you have to agree it would work.
Also there could be servers which allow cars added by mods or have only limited choice, this solution works in some other games.
But TBH the only reason I can see Devs wouldn't make this happens its they afraid that if someone have the possibility to make cars and tracks why he should buy S3.
So its look like till S3 its wont happen and by that time I am afraid I (and not only me) will be very bored by LFS.
Unless immediately after S2 they release S3 and ppl who buy it will get track editor and possibilities to add mods.
But again then some ppl would buy it and some stay at S2 and community would split up
So it have to be released earlier.At least possibility to make tracks.
Yeap
Well I would disagree.
For example beating in a race guy who have world record on track he have that record would be rather interesting as a achievement.
Wining 5 times in a row, 10 race without a single shunt, 10 laps on soft tires and win race without a pitstop
even longest Jump, wheelie, drift anything that you would achieve for your own satisfaction would be good.Of course most of the examples i give here are for self satisfaction or would play the role of the knife(humiliation weapon) in some shooter where you use your knife to kill an enemy it is pure fun when you do this
But it doesn't change the fact that there would be some cool achievements and tough to do but gives a lot of satisfaction when you do them.
But considered the fact that every achievement would mean a dozen lines of code to write i think that achievements would be good as a server side feature or a third party application.
Worse.
Here I agree with you fully.
Even if I want something more from LFS and complain bout stuff that piss me off I just cant deny they made one hell of a good job
To make it clear I think that LFS need a lot but it doesn't mean that it somehow a bad game.
It is a very good game even with all the flaws and even considering the fact its kinda dull and tracks are boring but I am 100% sure it have potential.
What and you call yourself a racer
Come one how will you measure your acceleration when adjusting your gearbox to tell is it better or worse.For diagnostics purposes it is a perfect thing.
You even quoted by original post where I mentioned goldfish and you still didn't get it.
Let me spell it out for you: you are one of the goldfish I was referring to.
Platitudes and truisms. Where's the specifics?
I don't need achievements to do any of this. And like Dajmin said, actually I do fly just to fly. FS caters to this. There were others too. And "just to fight" is maybe 90% of the remaining reason for my playing. Everything else is really negligible (performance tests, etc).
Don't see why achievements are the solution to this. Give some suggestions for good LFS "Achievements". LFS isn't WoW. Different gameplay mechanics. Flight sims are more comparable. A sortie is much like a race.
Sounds like this is your problem.
I don't care. I'm just trying to get the conversation to the critical points. What good achievements LFS could have. I personally don't care about them though. None of the ones you listed would do anything for my fun.. I'm not bitter or jaded or anything. They just don't mean anything. That's my 2c.. Just drive what you like and like what you drive. If you need achievements to "clue you in" to what's fun or not, you frankly have some kind of fun-sense malfunction.
If you need achievements to race clean.. And wouldn't on your own.. I dunno, that's a different issue IMO. The essence of racing that grabs people's passion is probably not there and you're playing the wrong game.
X-Plane is clearly better than MSFS, but IL2 and Lomac ? come on, be serious.
Watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... J27q8&feature=related
then this
(N.B. warning to younger viewers, this is what happens in real life, and it's not nice, someone dies.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gcouFKEHkw
Don't knock the flight modeling in MSFS, yes it's "canned" and it doesn't use "real world" aero modelling, but it gets much closer than most people think.
Why fanny round with all that nonsense when you have Team Inferno
I understand that my English is not the top notch and in fact its limit things I want to say to about 40% and probably there is a lot of mistakes but I am pretty sure there was enough sense in post you quoted.
But If you think it was "nonsensical ranting" and it didn't make sense to you I assume your cognitive skills are kinda limited, aren't they?
When it comes to images as a way of communication I have to say that english is not my native and I think it is natural that I my not understand some kinds of word games. (BTW what gold fish mean when applied to gamers?)
Words are better for interpersonal communication than images so plz try to use them so I don't have to guess what did you mean by posting image.
Unless you are a person with some disorder so you use images instead of words in that case its ok
Well if you want I can post you a link where f15 pilot land with one wing a ... ice he lost the other one.
If listen to explanation how f15 can fly with one wing it is perfectly real for SU-25T to fly with this kind of damage.
Also with that speed wing surface that left for SU-25 was enough to keep plane in the air. Since f15 could land with one wing only because of wide body and speed.
But IL-2 is clearly better when you fly you can feel how your aircraft lose speed, control and breaks up gradually in parts when overspeed.
TBH its not very realistic when all planes have some kind of weird stability during flight or manoeuvres. also ovespeed doesn't effect plane stability.
no vibration no nothing its just overstressed at some point and that's all.
MSFS lose with IL2 when it comes to realism.
Also the things you can do with Boeing are just surreal
In any case from the all ppl I know who played all 3 games you are the only one who saying that MSFS is more realistic than IL2
Downloading setups of other ppl kinda miss the point and take part of pleasure away.
And the real achievements, in this flight MMO, are community made. Not in the game structure itself. Equivalent to LFS' leagues. There's dogfighting, historical, and off the wall stuff equivalent to cruise and drift in LFS. But no achievements other than how many kills you landed in a sortie, which in LFS translates as the race results board.
And I completely disagree with the scenery criticism. The tracks in LFS are excellent variety for how few of them there are. Adding novel tracks or cars like hill climb, B-road courses, mid-engined GTRs and LMPs and V8 road cars, etc, would be what LFS needs.
It simply sounds like achievements are there to keep you playing longer than you should.
And Il2 is also crap. You can get combat performance maneuvering with just two stubs where your vstab used to be. The flight physics feel like various flight regimes all stitched together.
You don't need an enourmously secure grasp on the English language to understand the words "attention span" and "goldfish" and how they relate. Babelfish exists for a reason, too. And if you understand that, the picture is self-explanatory, no translation required.
Forbin - it's off-topic, but has a bike sim come out since GP500 that's worth getting?
Superbike 2001 is an old favorite of mine. I like it better than GP500. The company behind Superbike 2001 (Milestone) has recently been making games for Black Bean (SBK '08) and Capcom (MotoGP '08) and they suck.
GP-Bikes is an LFS-like project that came out last year, I think based on rFactor but I'm not positive. Unfortunately I think the developer has moved on to something else, but what's there right now is still pretty good, even if the content is a bit limited.
On PS2, TT Superbikes is also quite good. It's the Isle of Man TT game, and it's only 1 of 2 games I've found that doesn't limit your lean angle. The physics might actually be the best of all the bike sims, but they're still quirky.
MX Simulator is the other game that doesn't limit your lean angle, although there is a very finely adjustable aid to do so. AFAIK, it's also the only one in which you control the lean angle through the bars, rather than directly. As the name suggests, it's a dirt sim.
GP-Bikes is an LFS-like project that came out last year, I think based on rFactor but I'm not positive. Unfortunately I think the developer has moved on to something else, but what's there right now is still pretty good, even if the content is a bit limited.
On PS2, TT Superbikes is also quite good. It's the Isle of Man TT game, and it's only 1 of 2 games I've found that doesn't limit your lean angle. The physics might actually be the best of all the bike sims, but they're still quirky.
MX Simulator is the other game that doesn't limit your lean angle, although there is a very finely adjustable aid to do so. AFAIK, it's also the only one in which you control the lean angle through the bars, rather than directly. As the name suggests, it's a dirt sim.
Thanks. Looks like netbike is due sometime in late sept too.
http://forum.racesimcentral.co ... .php?t=294289&page=14
A bit further upthread there's a demo link..
http://rs568.rapidshare.com/files/177056247/nb002.zip
Haven't tried it, don't have proper controller (flight sim hotas only) so I can't say if it's worth trying, but here it is anyway.
http://forum.racesimcentral.co ... .php?t=294289&page=14
A bit further upthread there's a demo link..
http://rs568.rapidshare.com/files/177056247/nb002.zip
Haven't tried it, don't have proper controller (flight sim hotas only) so I can't say if it's worth trying, but here it is anyway.
I said there is no game which is fun because the only thing you do is fly, drive or shoot without purpose and everythig gets boring if not varied enough this was the essential...
Well achievments is one thing more to keep the game fresh and
You was the one who pulled it first in discussion as a example of games which does not get boring.
When I said that just killing and killing and killing without quests, treasures and stuff would be boring you say it is not comparable
So why you used it as an example in first place?
Uuum don't really know what are you talking about?
First of all did you played il2 vanila or latest il2-1946.
And the second maybe try with a joystick instead of a keyboard.
I mean i have no idea what was wrong in your game but as for now you are the second person who said that IL2 physics sux (Mazz4200) was first
Also IL2 is considered the most realistic flight sim even by real pilot who flight WW II planes.
So I dont really know what are you talking about?
Also what are this sentence about stabs mean?
And do you flight a real plane so you can say that physics is shit?
Or its shit because you have no comparison but you still cant play the game?
I mean I can say that its a weird situation when doing a roll with Boeing in MSFS an when I stop the joystick movement plan just freeze at the same moment in position like it didn't weight a thing.But i have no idea how stitched together systems would feel ike.
As for me its sounds like someone want to tell me whether I am interested in something or not and now you want to tell me what is my problem?
What are you doing there? a brilliant wannabe psychologist who can tell ppl what are their problem should go help people in need instead wasting his time on some gameing forum
Even longest wheelie or drift can be an interesting achievement if someone like it. Since you admitted yourself that you are not interested in achievements the kind of achievement should be indifferent to you, right?
Thank you for your diagnosis dr. wannabe Freud
Also I think its pretty good Yo Dawg moment
Alright..
1) more truism.
2) SHOW HOW achievements keep the game fresh. Saying something is true because it's true, or because you say so, is nonsense.
3) WOW got pulled into this in a very specific instance where you said there was no reason to keep playing a game after as long as 10 years. To which I replied that there's many of them and while WOW might do so thanks in some part to achievements, WOW's gameplay is nothing like LFS, and thus the equation of achievements' validity in WOW to LFS is invalid. Follows valid note that many games that ARE comparable to LFS which show no need for achievements CAN keep players attention for at least 10 years.
4) See above.
5) You don't know what stabs are and you're telling me I don't know about flight physics? Seriously? Can you show support for "all WWII pilots agreeing Il2 is most realistic"? edit- That's incorrect. So you found one pilot who thinks so. Is this your unbiased sample? A single-data point sample?
6) Your english is unclear. You repeated what I said. Achievements are what're telling you what to like. I believe the opposite. Hence "drive what you like and like what you drive". You might've picked up on this if you weren't out to ridicule others instead of seeking what makes the most sense.
7) I am indifferent to achievements but have yet to see one that's not already available in LFSWorld, or that's not useless like longest drift or wheelie, and that actually conforms to what LFS is meant to be. If you need a clean racing reward to attempt it, you're playing the wrong game.
8) Ad hominem. Others said as much and I don't read these forums much at all, so it's hardly a coincidence or far fetched notion.
1) more truism.
2) SHOW HOW achievements keep the game fresh. Saying something is true because it's true, or because you say so, is nonsense.
3) WOW got pulled into this in a very specific instance where you said there was no reason to keep playing a game after as long as 10 years. To which I replied that there's many of them and while WOW might do so thanks in some part to achievements, WOW's gameplay is nothing like LFS, and thus the equation of achievements' validity in WOW to LFS is invalid. Follows valid note that many games that ARE comparable to LFS which show no need for achievements CAN keep players attention for at least 10 years.
4) See above.
5) You don't know what stabs are and you're telling me I don't know about flight physics? Seriously? Can you show support for "all WWII pilots agreeing Il2 is most realistic"? edit- That's incorrect. So you found one pilot who thinks so. Is this your unbiased sample? A single-data point sample?
6) Your english is unclear. You repeated what I said. Achievements are what're telling you what to like. I believe the opposite. Hence "drive what you like and like what you drive". You might've picked up on this if you weren't out to ridicule others instead of seeking what makes the most sense.
7) I am indifferent to achievements but have yet to see one that's not already available in LFSWorld, or that's not useless like longest drift or wheelie, and that actually conforms to what LFS is meant to be. If you need a clean racing reward to attempt it, you're playing the wrong game.
8) Ad hominem. Others said as much and I don't read these forums much at all, so it's hardly a coincidence or far fetched notion.
In my opinon it would be cool to have but im 100% okay without them lol.
If there would be, i think its also possible to make it thru insim or not?
If there would be, i think its also possible to make it thru insim or not?
Achievments
(108 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG