heheh
28/03/11 Victor left Team 6ª Fondo ([6ªF])
28/03/11 Victor left Team 6ª Fondo ([6ªF])
If you guys really think Eric dont work on other stuff then the 2 Cars and 1 track youre naive.
Compare the S1 Content with S2, and then think about S3.
The Devs dont want to talk about his work, and this is smart.
(devs from Rfaktor2 and IRacing are curious about LFS)
Surprising content sell better than expected.
Think 1 Secound about this. Who cares about the Vw yet compared to an absolutely new Car when it comes out.
Compare the S1 Content with S2, and then think about S3.
The Devs dont want to talk about his work, and this is smart.
(devs from Rfaktor2 and IRacing are curious about LFS)
Surprising content sell better than expected.
Think 1 Secound about this. Who cares about the Vw yet compared to an absolutely new Car when it comes out.
The same could be said for the reverse argument.
If you look back to S1 and S2 release, there was plenty of announcements, videos and screenshots of pending content. Apparently we're approaching S2 final (S3 alpha?) and we're yet to see any evidence that substantiates any unannounced content will be released. As much as everyone hopes there is, I wouldn't hold your breath.
The Scawen has said a few times in the past that they aren't concerned with competition. Besides the two other games you've meantion both have several magnitudes more content.
If you look back to S1 and S2 release, there was plenty of announcements, videos and screenshots of pending content. Apparently we're approaching S2 final (S3 alpha?) and we're yet to see any evidence that substantiates any unannounced content will be released. As much as everyone hopes there is, I wouldn't hold your breath.
The Scawen has said a few times in the past that they aren't concerned with competition. Besides the two other games you've meantion both have several magnitudes more content.
We are at LFS version 0.5Z28, Demo/S1/S2/S3 are just content levels.
I couldn't give a rats ass about S3 content, I'd much prefer the game engine update.
See here we go again, round in circles. It feels more and more like the glorious West Racing each and every day around here...
It is quite funny though, I am informed by a reliable ginger that the My3id guys, who are doing very very well in iRacing, were described as coming originally from a "Sim that has kinda fallen off the map now" A new patch won't bring back the glory days, as the glory drivers have all left the ship and are enjoying something new. Why on earth would they return? Is there life left on planet LFS? Aye... but it's in the final stages of a terminal decline that only the eternal optimist or fan boy (or those who have not been driving much...) can see a way back. It's almost over, just smile and enjoy the end.
It is quite funny though, I am informed by a reliable ginger that the My3id guys, who are doing very very well in iRacing, were described as coming originally from a "Sim that has kinda fallen off the map now" A new patch won't bring back the glory days, as the glory drivers have all left the ship and are enjoying something new. Why on earth would they return? Is there life left on planet LFS? Aye... but it's in the final stages of a terminal decline that only the eternal optimist or fan boy (or those who have not been driving much...) can see a way back. It's almost over, just smile and enjoy the end.
+1
I was about to say the same thing.
JustAsSimFan really thinks he can convince devs to do more..... yet he remains a demo user.
No
That troll is really funny
Justasimfan has no idea what he is talking about whenever he starts talking about polygons....
1: GT is not up to 2 million poly's per car, that is stupid and overkill for any racing sim. NORMAL MAPS ARE GENERATED from high poly models to generate the visual effects for a low poly model - low poly models can appear to be a higher poly while they are in fact NOT.
2: higher polygon means jack shit in terms of graphical quality.
3: GT makes extreme user of shaders, more chaders than poly. GT uses deep parralax mapping.
1: GT is not up to 2 million poly's per car, that is stupid and overkill for any racing sim. NORMAL MAPS ARE GENERATED from high poly models to generate the visual effects for a low poly model - low poly models can appear to be a higher poly while they are in fact NOT.
2: higher polygon means jack shit in terms of graphical quality.
3: GT makes extreme user of shaders, more chaders than poly. GT uses deep parralax mapping.
+1
People here are probably more interested in LFS being able to use all of the CPU cores and a few more major fixes, like the barrier bug so we could have normal layouts and maybe a possibility to damage car's engine...
Engine damage is already written into S2. Rev the nuts out of your engine and then carry on racing - you will not win.
You can drive around with a completely caved in front end with no effect on the engine though.
With the open wheelers, not a problem
LFS isn't really at a stage where it needs to use more than one core though, is it? It would probably need something major to get a lot more complex and CPU intense in order to need it, procedural damage, higher hz for physics engine (maybe), much higher poly environment/track (in terms of the physical mesh, not necessarily the graphical one), or possibly the addition of weather. I see this multithreading suggestion brought up a lot but it in itself wont really do much.
Having played LFS from almost the very beginning, the one thing I find disappointing is the lack of screen shots/videos of future updates. That was something we had a lot of back in 2003, 2004 & 2005.
A thousands threads would then spawn speculating a million different things and stupid conclusions would often be the result. But it was fun nonetheless.
Now the community is more like a mushroom (kept in the dark in retrospect), yet thousands of threads still spawn speculating a million different things. Again with the same results… stupid conclusions. Now it’s just not as much fun (the speculation that is) as it's moslty just bitching and crying.
A thousands threads would then spawn speculating a million different things and stupid conclusions would often be the result. But it was fun nonetheless.
Now the community is more like a mushroom (kept in the dark in retrospect), yet thousands of threads still spawn speculating a million different things. Again with the same results… stupid conclusions. Now it’s just not as much fun (the speculation that is) as it's moslty just bitching and crying.
The physics was the major thing that got me playing this game, so graphics doesn't really matter to me.
If they can just bump the physics up a notch, e.g tyres rubbing in, clean/dirty side of the track, or even wet conditions etc. That would be hugely amazing.
But i agree, a really good track should be the priority. South City is probably the only one i like cos it's kinda similar to monte carlos. They should study tracks like Suzuka, Nurburgring, silverstone etc to make new ones.
I really do appreciate their efforts and how much they've achieved, but as my favourite driving simulator, i hope it never dies out. And to do that, they can't stay still forever...
If they can just bump the physics up a notch, e.g tyres rubbing in, clean/dirty side of the track, or even wet conditions etc. That would be hugely amazing.
But i agree, a really good track should be the priority. South City is probably the only one i like cos it's kinda similar to monte carlos. They should study tracks like Suzuka, Nurburgring, silverstone etc to make new ones.
I really do appreciate their efforts and how much they've achieved, but as my favourite driving simulator, i hope it never dies out. And to do that, they can't stay still forever...
*cough* AMD Ontario 1 GHz dualcore netbook APUs *cough*
And as soon as you give it multithreading any integrated graphics in a netbook will bottleneck just as hard as a 1GHz CPU. Sorry but that setup just wont game with any decent FPS no matter what.
If this is really your computer try something. Run a replay file at native resolution and then again at the lowest resolution you can make it run without changing any other settings. If there's any difference in framerate then it's the integrated graphics holding it back and multithreading wont do jack. If the framerate is 4fps in both tests then multithreading will give you at max 8fps which still looks like a slideshow.
Well, my e6600 dual core (clocked to 3.1ghz) is struggling when I'm running on south city (or pretty much any track with lots of people on) with a full field, so I'm sure even with the current physics engine people with dual cores would profit with proper support for it.
Something isn't right with that because my Q6600 (same on a per-core basis) at the stock 2.4GHz never has any issues. I leave vsync on to reduce tearing and it never deviates from 60fps even with a full grid. Without knowing the rest of your system though it's hard to say what the issue might be.
Maybe your graphic card is...
I don't think that your CPU running at 100%
It is running at 50% which is one core to the max, graphics card is a gtx260 so that isn't the problem. Of course I got nice fps with no people around but starting at the end of a full grid my fps bogs down to 25-50 and when I check my cpu usage one core is at it's max.
Well your single used core is better than mine, your GPU is better than mine (8800 GTS 512), I'll guess your resolution is higher than mine (1440x900)? If that's the case then again, it's a graphics issue, not a CPU issue.
Also I would think adding more cars to be drawn (especially standing on a starting grids when there's not much physics to be calculated) would ask more of the graphics card than the CPU. I could be wrong though.
Edit: Don't get me wrong, multithreading would be welcome, as it would allow more CPU intense stuff to be added to the game, I just don't think it will make much of a difference if nothing else changed.
You have tried south city pikd with Full grid? The start of the race can be most severe most of the cars in close proximity. I see dips below 100FPS with a quad above 3.6ghz at so4r with a large grid.
Your also forgeting the E6600 has just 4mb L2 cache & Vsync also induces controller lag I would NEVER use vsync in any type of game where fast reflex/repsone is needed.
My guess troy would be perhaps if running windows vista or 7 is to check power management, and gpu settings ie forced AA etc? (gpuz is gpu clock running correct when lfs is running) this is of course if its running worse then usual.
LFS needs to spread its load on the systems that are now commonplace.
At the moment its more cache dependant and mhz sensitive then it is to core count, but more cores do help (background proccess etc) Eza did a fantastic analysis of this http://www.lfsforum.net/showth ... t=51635&highlight=cpu
Your also forgeting the E6600 has just 4mb L2 cache & Vsync also induces controller lag I would NEVER use vsync in any type of game where fast reflex/repsone is needed.
My guess troy would be perhaps if running windows vista or 7 is to check power management, and gpu settings ie forced AA etc? (gpuz is gpu clock running correct when lfs is running) this is of course if its running worse then usual.
LFS needs to spread its load on the systems that are now commonplace.
At the moment its more cache dependant and mhz sensitive then it is to core count, but more cores do help (background proccess etc) Eza did a fantastic analysis of this http://www.lfsforum.net/showth ... t=51635&highlight=cpu
Is there life left in lfs ?
(113 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG