I wanted to answer some questions, but as I'm treading onto Scawen's area of work here, I will keep the answers short :

Quote from Bmxtwins :

How about a video of them heating up when they skid or something. or are u not that far yet.

Quote from Chunkiegg :

I think however, one thing that could happen which I think would quieten down the masses is for Scawen to post up a video showing a comparison of how the physics were and how they are at the moment, warts and all.

This is not really possible. It's not like Scawen makes some changes and then goes for a drive to try and feel the changes and then goes back to programming again for some more changes, etc. It isn't so that there are versions from the beginning of the update until now that can be compared on how they drive.
The work is much more theoretical and exists mostly on paper and as data resulting from the high detail tyre rig simulation (see previous news items on lfs.net for pics). I can't go into this more than that though. Physics is not my department and I am pretty bad at it as well, so there's a good chance that I say wrong things if i elaborate more.

Besides that, I did actually do a comparison video once (using an updated LFS which we first thought was good, but found out it wasn't), but physics changes are not so radical that you can actually see the difference. It'll be the feeling of driving the cars in the end that will make the updates apparent.

Quote from Gougoodthing :

Hey Victor, I have a question about S3. You may be asked this lots, if so, I am sorry. So, How much % have you developed of S3? Could you make an estimate please? It might make some people feel better. It might even make more arguments if you say a low number.... Lol.
So, Please answer Victor. (Or any of the other dev's.)

I'm only answering this one to say that we prefer not to elaborate on content development, until the time for announcing these things has arrived.

Quote from MrSam :

You have reasons, but one f1 without KERS ??and without DRS seems obsolete.

It might be time to be topical!

You could call it outdated now, but in 10 years it may be a classic :P
The bf1 is the bf1 and will never change.

Quote from acp___(pl) :

1) will S3 support multiple cores?
2) will support DirectX 9.x?
3) at many universities, people working on the optimization calculation (mainly for use in industrial processes - PLC) - among them might be fans of LFS, who helped to free?

1) probably not (not the way you'd like anyway, evenly spreading all of the workload over all cores). I can't say much sensible about if / when that would change I'm afraid.
2) probably. I think dx9 still allows for graphical improvements in LFS. It should also keep WinXP support easier.
3) I cannot answer that one because I just don't know enough about what would be involved.

Thanks for the update Vic.

plz devs dont make lfs more graphics better.

my little pc cant handle lfs as it is

these open configs was worst thing to happen for me

Thanks for the responses Vic, much appreciated.

Quote from Victor :

You could call it outdated now, but in 10 years it may be a classic :P
The bf1 is the bf1 and will never change.

this car will remain unpopular
maybe popular in 10 years

See there could just be a guy, for instance victor, who just gathers up the most important (to him) questions and just asks scawen and eric the questions and c/p them to the forum. if thats possible. but it probably isnt so nevermind the drunkness.

Quote from Victor :

-Now we want to take LFS to the next level by upgrading the physics. I guarantee you, you have no idea of how difficult this is. Give everyone a giant CPU and GPU and sure it's fairly easy to develop a super accurate racing sim. But you know, it doesn't work like that. LFS needs to run on slower machines as well. So shortcuts to better physics need to be found, without producing weird side effects. You go and try that. I wish you all the luck in the world.

Thanks Victor for posting at all, nice to see!

Though I'd pose the same question here back to you guys - I think it's clear after this amount of time that Scawen didn't and likely still doesn't know the magnitude of difficulty involved. Not to sound pessimistic, but if the time the man (who is clearly brilliant) has been working on this has to be measured in years, then I do have to wonder about the concept of realistic possibility. I guess only he has any remote idea where he may be in the process of granulating and distilling the new tyre physics; but not knowing where you'll end up once it runs on an abacus might be setting you and your fanbase up for a massive disappointment.

Listen, if you can't even see the difference in the end then it seems that years will be spent perfecting the last 15% of a feel that nobody who played LFS long enough to appreciate it will be able to tell anymore because they haven't run LFS in almost the same amount of time this development is taking.

Not even sure why I'm saying this I'll probably get nailed as being negative, so I'm sorry for that. I wish you guys all the best and I genuinely hope you're still making some dough from LFS, it was/is a great sim and worth every penny 10 times over.

Quote :

So no, it isn't 'tough shit' for people wthout mega PCs. What complete and utter nonsense.

Anyone who actually sim races as a hobby has a wheel, and therefore can afford a basic rig as Homeless already indirectly informed you. I suppose you know a lot of people that use a laptop with their G27 right? Sure thing Alan. Don't you have a chandelier to shine or something? He didn't say HE can build a "4gb/3zsjs/ram.dhewjd,jpg.exe" as you so intelligently put it, he said that you can buy a beast rig for peanuts by LFS standards. I hope that clarifies it for you, there's no need to jump on the guy for making a simple, valid point.

thanks victor for taking the time to reply too these post and i know that s3 will be worth the wait when it does get released.
For now i quite happily enjoy the amazing job thats been done so far and will continue to do so.

All the best

Thank you for your time Victor

Quote from MrSam :

this car will remain unpopular
maybe popular in 10 years

I dont think that the it would be more popular if something change.
I believe that is a matter of skills.

I see it from my self. I am fast enough (i think:shy but with this car i am 3secs slower at small tracks and more than 5 at biggest.

My mind cant accept that at X corner i can turn with 100km more

Quote from Imprez :

Good post Alric, my thoughts exactly! Kudos to you Victor for taking the time to respond. A little regular update now and then from you or Scawen would go a long way and would be much appreciated!

this would make everyone happy, but then they'd complain about the time between updates...

oh wait...

Many thanks for the conversation Victor, this is what keeps the game alive, the ability to actually communicate with the devs.

100% agree with ballbearing, for the following reasons;

LFS already has good physics, ok, they aren't perfect but what is? Ever driven a hillman hunter? Talk about bad physics in the real world............

Why not release the damn beetle and shut people up regard scrawens view on the physics, it's only another shopping basket after all so if it handles like one then so be it.

At least release Rockingham as a track to keep the punters quiet for a month or two regarding updates.

Bring on Lynce and give the poor sod enough money to upgrade his pc and incorporate his work, which is pretty good, into the game.
Cheap way to update the graphics !

Accept that LFS has very low pc requirements and set a bottom line for a pc standard, any dual core will run it happily so try to forget about p3's and other steam age tech, sorry to those of you who run history but please accept that any 4 year old pc will run LFS more than well enough, why code for older pcs ?

I fully support perfection as a target but sometimes you have to accept 90% and patch.

It really depends on what you guys as developers want to achieve, but I'd hate to see LFS die and fail to become what it's capable of being.

Sorry to everyone I've offended by this but LFS still feels the most realistic racing sim I've tried and I'd love to see it progress closer to its potential.

Quote from MrSam :

this car will remain unpopular
maybe popular in 10 years

Didn't you think it's unpopular because the masses can't drive it properly, and also giving it to the hand of the drivers who are used to the contacts with GTR is fatal? Well, can you drive it?

Quote from vourliotis :

Thank you for your time Victor


I dont think that the it would be more popular if something change.
I believe that is a matter of skills.

I see it from my self. I am fast enough (i think:shy but with this car i am 3secs slower at small tracks and more than 5 at biggest.

My mind cant accept that at X corner i can turn with 100km more

may be, after all it was just an idea, if the devs do not want, it's not matter.

Quote from Kristi :

Didn't you think it's unpopular because the masses can't drive it properly, and also giving it to the hand of the drivers who are used to the contacts with GTR is fatal? Well, can you drive it?

I do not think, with a good setup the car feels good. and I do not believe that one can speak of multi-class with this car, except can be with FO8 and FOX.

Quote from Flame CZE :

It's important to know that S3 is not going to be a graphics or physics change as it was with S2. S3 will be only a content package with additional cars and tracks. The graphics, physics and other kinds of development will be released as global updates to LFS, not as an 'S' stage.

So do not expect any physics changes only to S3, it will be a global update to LFS.

(Quoting this post by Scawen)

I don't see that Scawen said that it will not be graphics update in the next "content package". As the current LFS graphics is what bores me the much, can you explain more about it?

Quote from MrSam :

may be, after all it was just an idea, if the devs do not want, it's not matter.






I do not think, with a good setup the car feels good. and I do not believe that one can speak of multi-class with this car, except can be with FO8 and FOX.

Who spoke about multi-class? I'm talking about the driving mentality and culture that the GTR driving formed. Also, the car might feel good but you sure aren't doing WR times.

If Victor says that there will be probably a use of DX9 it means there will be graphics updated otherwise you don't need DX9.

But why talk about such things while there isn't even a Scirocco and/or new tire physics released?

If you believe there will be a S3 release this year then you are not thinking realistic.

Quote from cargame.nl :

If Victor says that there will be probably a use of DX9 it means there will be graphics updated otherwise you don't need DX9.

But why talk about such things while there isn't even a Scirocco and/or new tire physics released?

If you believe there will be a S3 release this year then you are not thinking realistic.

directX is just a 3D API, I talk about refined 3D meshes and textures, more environment "dress up" to make the game more alive and immersive.

And I talk about it to piss on your realistic trolling attitude.

Thanks Victor...

Thanks a lot for the information, Victor.
It feels good to have something interesting / new to read on the forums from time to time!

no matter if I say stupid things, but thank you for your presence and reply Victor, and thank you again for all the work you do

Read carefully so you don't jump to conclusions before reading the entire thing.

While I understand what Victor said, the fact still REMAINS, VWS and Rockingham were both announced YEARS ago. Falling back from those updates because you are TRYING to improve the physics is a bad move. If I announce that I completed a layout change on my server but then decided not to do it because I was trying to fix the Insim, masses of trolls would call me out and trash my name because I announced something was done and ready but then decided against it because I wanted to fix SOMETHING else first.

Now I understand the physics is what helps make this such a good and fun racing sim to own and play BUT Doing all this hard work like Rockingham and the VWS and then just having it sit around and not be seen is really HURTING the future of LFS. Like most everyone has pointed out, the stardard for pc gaming has risen and LFS trying to make up for the advances in the gaming standard is not only killing the gameplay but it is also killing the interest in LFS as well. Take a look at RFactor and CARS for example, yes they are still being majorly developed and are flawed and have bugs but what they have that LFS doesn't is PROGRESS. Updates here, updates there. Adding cars here, adding tracks there, adding new graphical features, etc.


Signs of progress are what help attract and KEEP players.

You get your facts straight before you start throwing words around, the devs never intended to publicly announce both Rockingham and the Scirocco, at least not as early as they happened to be confirmed, they where both part of a deal struck with 3rd parties. The rocco was made for the games convention in Germany so VW could use it at their booth, rockingham was made for the rockingham track owners so they can use it in their simulators on site. Only when there where rumours and videos posted by people actually going to those venues and driving there they had to react and confirm that indeed both the track and the car where legit and will be in lfs at some point.

You complain very noise intense in this thread but seem to miss basic facts in pretty much every post you do.

edit: just to be perfectly clear, that doesn't mean I'm happy with the developing speed and the resulting state of public racing in lfs, but I do understand the need to get the physics out of the way first.

To add on to troy's response. rFactor went from 2005 to 2012 before any developer update. CARS also just started, and when LFS first started (actually for the first 5 years) was updated quite often.

Thanks Victor the answer to all these questions

Could you tell, will AI had improved* intelligence?
You wrote in this topic that you realize that there are players playing only a single...

*) behavior in the pit & overtaking

Quote from edge3147 :

If I announce that I completed a layout change on my server but then decided not to do it because I was trying to fix the Insim, masses of trolls would call me out and trash my name because I announced something was done and ready but then decided against it because I wanted to fix SOMETHING else first.

Let's look at it this way. Say you release the new layout and start overhauling your InSim app which means long boring ours of debugging and testing. At the same time you get people complaining about the new layout, misplaced cones and barriers, a possible way to cut the track you overlooked etc., so while you're knee deep in your InSim app code you have to stop, fix the layout first and only then get back to your InSim app hoping that there'll be no more problems with the layout. That's not how programmers usually like to work.

Scawen has exactly the same problem, I imagine that releasing a new major version of LFS is not an easy job and I guess the last thing he wants is to fix all sorts of nasty bugs instead of completing the new physics engine.