Of course I won't talk about the little bugs. There are really big things that need improvment. Seriously these things are kind a shame for a "game" like LFS. It's about realism and graphics.

1.Damage: This is something that I'd never call "simulated". Since the very first time I played LFS I find it so stupid and useless. LFS isn't a simulation in all parts because of that. Now can someone tell me why can't a bumper fall down? It's just and example but LFS has the worst damage model I have ever seen. It's both graphics and realism. Yes it is a shame. What kind of a sim have that? Why's that so unrealistic?

2. Car Graphics: LFS has superb graphics for a game that takes only 300MBs. All except the cars. Actually cars looks like taken from the NFS5 and put down to the NFS: Underground. They look like ages of older than the game. Especally when they get crashed. They need more pollys but most important the texturing and damage model really needs a serious imprevment.

Thank you.

1) The damage is the very first step the developers have taken with their current system. They mentioned it was quite simple at this time, and not very 'stunning'. They know people want parts falling off, windows being broken, etc.... it is all something that is planned for the "Eye Candy" version of LFS, S3.

2) The cars aren't all that bad. But yes I agree, they are rather simple and not detailed at all.

The game still uses only a DirectX 8 graphics engine, so don't expect much from that. For what DX8 offers, they have done a very good job. However, once DX9 or higher is used for LFS, then the detail requirements will be much higher, and the game will look far better. Also to point out, the lighting would be better with DX9... and that is very important aswell.

The damage isn't exactly modelled, it's more of a deterrent against wreckless driving. If you drive like a maniac then the chances are you're gonna clip a wheel on a kerb or sideswipe a wall and mess your car up so the current damage system makes you think a little before doing something a bit crazy.

The cars look ok to me, especially with the new reflection mod. There's something very clean about LFS graphics and I hope they don't change too much or go over the top when the newer DirectX versions are implemented.

Quote from Tweaker :

1) The damage is the very first step the developers have taken with their current system. They mentioned it was quite simple at this time, and not very 'stunning'. They know people want parts falling off, windows being broken, etc.... it is all something that is planned for the "Eye Candy" version of LFS, S3.

2) The cars aren't all that bad. But yes I agree, they are rather simple and not detailed at all.

The game still uses only a DirectX 8 graphics engine, so don't expect much from that. For what DX8 offers, they have done a very good job. However, once DX9 or higher is used for LFS, then the detail requirements will be much higher, and the game will look far better. Also to point out, the lighting would be better with DX9... and that is very important aswell.

Hi Tweak,
I agree with your points...

1)Damage model is now simple but is very dynamic and not like in other games when you have precallculated zones(usually around 30-60) which can be broken.IN LFS every part of the car can be screwed which is more realistic.Sure it does looks now sometimes odd because the lack of the graphics features.I still consider this much better approach then precalculated zones on the cars.I dont like seeing still the same and same destruction results.

2)The mesh of some of the models need like 2x more polygones.And there is also some disbalance between the older models and new models.I still like them thought:-)

However I really dont fully agree about the 3D LFS engine using a lot from DX8 features.There should have been done more alreadz but I understand that Scawen has now interested in more important things and he is the only one.Its also a really shame that LFS 3D engine cant utilize the graphic cards better and more is calculated on CPU rather then shifted to GPU.The effectivity of LFS 3D engine is really,really low in my eyes for what it offer.

Quote from RaceDoctor :

LFS has the worst damage model I have ever seen.

Funny, I was thinking the exact opposite.

I remember NFS5 damage model, just borked the car handling and, from a visual point of view, just changed the car textures from shiny to crumpled looking.

In LFS the effect on handling only comes from wheel alignment damaged, and such is realistic, and having the model deform is very cool IMO. So parts can't fall off? Better than GTA where the front and rear bumpers / doors randomly fell away in slow motion after some less than stellar impact.

S2 models (ie: ignoring the RB4 etc) at least are fairly heavy in poly count already. The shell of the XRT (body, dash and backseats only) is ~9,300 polys. The wheels IMO could do with some more polys, but not the cars themselves.. or at least not most, again IMO.

Personally I'd like to see the grid size double rather than the poly count double but this would need an overhaul of the physics engine I think, at least the way the AI physics are calculated. My FPS drops from ~40 to 12 if I'm lucky already on BL1 T1 after all the AI run through the barriers and miss the chicane and cause untold physics calculations to happen simultaneously. Where are people thinking polys need to be added?



Regards,

Ian

Quote from RaceDoctor :

It's just and example but LFS has the worst damage model I have ever seen

Quite funny how things are always the "worst" or the "best". Don't you guys know something inbetween? Like: "this has an OK damage model, but XY's is far better."? Always taking it to the extreme just make your arguments look less serious.

Just FYI, as you probably don't know LFS' damage model history:
First, the damage model was planned to be included sometime in S3. But after Scawen saw what was happening on South City tracks, namely using the siderails to be faster around the track, he decided that something has to be done. So took the time to code a suspension deformation algorithm, that, if we had unbreakable suspensions in real life, is pretty realistic. More importantly, this not yet completed damage model fixed pretty much all issues with wall riding and other unrealistic track cutting.
But as Scawen is a perfectionist and simply couldn't stand looking at bent suspensions with perfectly unscratched car bodies, he also coded a dynamic mesh deformation.

Both these damage features were not actually planned for S2, so they're not perfectly plausible in all situations, that is correct. But I rather have this unfinished damage model now, then a perfect one in S3 (that we will get anyways).


The only thing that really needs to be fixed is this IMO:

RaceDoctor
Demo Racer

Quote from AndroidXP :

Quite funny how things are always the "worst" or the "best". Don't you guys know something inbetween? Like: "this has an OK damage model, but XY's is far better."? Always taking it to the extreme just make your arguments look less serious.

[ snip ]

LOL you know you can't say that Android! Another game has better [insert feature here]!? That's like walking into one end of a football stadium full of hooligans and starting to chant for the opposing team. Either situation you'll be lucky to come out unscathed if not seriously maimed



Regards,

Ian

Hahah, okay :doh:

I agree with you though, not everything's black and white. Some will say rF's is better because it has detachable parts.. while that's true and it is cool, it still has one fundamental flaw with the vertex deforming routines and the way the cars are constructed.. for headlights to appear glowing etc, I need to make a mesh for that separate to the car body hovering just infront.. take a really heavy hit on the front corner for example and squash the headlight near the centre of the car... the headlight glow still appears in its original position.. quite possibly just hanging there looking like it belongs to nothing, heh.

I think damage is ok in both although detachable parts that affect aero or the likes would be a sweet addition to LFS.. but I think this is one area generally still under development in most car games as I suspect the coding side of it all is really quite complex.

My biggest gripe with LFS's "damage" is the collision detection and rubber cars



Regards,

Ian

Quote from Ian.H :

My biggest gripe with LFS's "damage" is the collision detection and rubber cars

Ohhh yeah. Had a run on my rallye stage yet? Too fast = car in space.

Quite frankly, the damage model in all other games sucks imho. LFS has the best damage model as it truly affects handling.

Other games are all routines. The best looking damage model comes from the Codemasters lineup, although that is all pre-coded. Everytime the rear window smashes it looks the same (varying degrees, but those degrees all look the same) and soforth. And then of course the ISI games... sure they have removable parts, and they do affect handling but only because downforce is gone. Suspension damage affects handling, not realistically like in LFS. Plus, I think the way damage is done in rF is pretty bad.. many cars don't even deform. For instance, the F1 car in rF will lose its front wing in a hard impact, but the nosecone still looks perfect. IMHO,that just looks stupid.

We also need to make it so that if a body piece is too badly damaged, we can remove it in the pits.

Like this:

Quote from wheel4hummer :

We also need to make it so that if a body piece is too badly damaged, we can remove it in the pits.

That's never going to happen with this visual damage system. As the bodies are dynamically deformed and not made as seperate parts. Personally I can live without that little bit of eye candy. I think actually LFS doesn't have a great damage model because it's so toned down, in this respect nK has a far better single seater suspension model, ie. one touch game over. I know it won't be popular with everyone but it is realistic and quite frankly LFS single seater racing has far too much contact atm.

1)have you played Grand Theft Auto? That's a bad damage model. you shoot the left side of a winsheild and the bullethole is in the middle. LFS has good damage considering it was just to stop wrecking.

2) Yea, the cars do look rather simple. But i don't think they need to be perfect.

Maybe if LFS introduced live firearms it would help solve the wrecker problem...?

Quote from al heeley :

Maybe if LFS introduced live firearms it would help solve the wrecker problem...?

I believe the right opposite would be the effect...

Vain

Anyway, the guy who started this thread is a demo racer. Cant really see how he arrived to his conclusions having driven only a few cars in one track...

..thanks for the useless post burnout...

anyways.. like said a billion times, we're LUCKY (very lucky) to have even received visual damage, so i wouldn't complain about the vertex damage just yet

Thanks for deciding what is useful and what is not...

Now please answer me, what kind of accurate idea of what needs to be improved can you get out of a demo that represents like 1/10 of the total content of the sim?

I think the damage is about the best i've seen from almost any other racing games. car graphics are good, but i love the driver's seat view which is the best for the simulation, BUT, they can improve drastically.
yes i probly spelt that wrong. But things can always improve. And dosn't the simulation come from adjusting your car which is why i love this racing game, and is my favorite racing games.

and i give the game a 7/10, Game play lacks, Though this is a racing sim, street racing would be too cool, like NFS Most wanted i just played that game at a friends house.

Quote from BurnOut69 :

Thanks for deciding what is useful and what is not...

Now please answer me, what kind of accurate idea of what needs to be improved can you get out of a demo that represents like 1/10 of the total content of the sim?

in what way does do demo and licenses contrast besides content?

here.. i will answer for you.. absolutely none other than the content..
there i absolutely no difference between demo and licenses between cars and tracks; thats it

My LFS S2 is an alpha version. Even though it is only an alpha it is really well made and I enjoy it very much. I know not all features have been implemented or fully evolved yet, but it sure looks like the devs are on the right track. I simply can't wait to see where Scawen takes this already excellent damage model in the future.
Eric has done a great job on the car modelling. It's great to see such high poly models being used in a race simulator and they all have their own character and appeal. The choice of cars is really quite diverse, there's something to suit all good tastes. I also like the real 3D wheels, much better than some pasted on texture like you see in many games.
I think it is fantastic that I can make my own car textures, it can be fun to customise the look of your car, helmet and racing suit.
I'm so glad that the devs didn't sell out and make lots of useless bling that detracts from the online racing experience. After all, if the racing isn't good what use are fancy visual effects?
Even though (as we all know) an alpha product is an unfinished product LFS never fails to deliver a rewarding online race experience. And you won't need a supercomputer to get in on the action.
Thanks LFS, the future looks bright.

No racing game or sim will ever have realistic damage. i don't think u would even want realistic damage. In any serious crash in racing they don't keep racing around with messed up steering.

I mean have any of u seen a crashtest? those things are brutal and there only going like 30mph

:up: Gunn, that post should be on a plaque on the front page of this site.