Quote from Scawen :

Thanks for the test. One thing I'm wondering about is the positioning of the output image. The view point of each image is simple, use the left and right eye approximate positions. But if I understand this correctly, there is something different about TVs and VR headsets. For looking at far distant objects your eyes should be parallel, and I think this works naturally for VR headsets. As you see far distant objects are in the same place on the L and R image in both screenshots I posted. But on a TV, I'm concerned that the far distant objects will look like they are at screen distance, because they are displayed in the same place.

Do any games with 3D support have some options like "image separation" or "VR headset / TV" or "3d effect strength" to adjust the effect or make it work differently with different hardware? Or do 3D TVs have an image separation option?

an updates for 3d engine (shadow, light ...) is required to have a good experience in 3d right?

Quote from Scawen :

[..]As you see far distant objects are in the same place on the L and R image in both screenshots I posted. But on a TV, I'm concerned that the far distant objects will look like they are at screen distance, because they are displayed in the same place.[..]

Well, actually not really (I'm speaking for my experience only). The horizon it's more or less "flat" anyways as you cannot really position it.. what gives the deph feeling is more the very close-range (cockpit), close-range (car's nose) and mid-range objects (opponent, or objects close to you). In your "demo" images the cones are a perfect example. The separation between tha car's cockpit and the environment is pretty decent. What is less good, it's the off-set of the two images in the cockpit (the very close-range field). Like I said, you cannot focus in the same time with the exterior.. you have to adjust your eyes to see it. And by doing this, you cannot see the exterior very good. One might say that this is "normal", it's what you do IRL (focus close or far). But it is an effect less obvious in other games, and this ruins somewhat the immersion.
Hope other ppl can give some feedback also.. I am not a veteran of 3d..

Quote from Scawen :

[..]Do any games with 3D support have some options like "image separation" or "VR headset / TV" or "3d effect strength" to adjust the effect or make it work differently with different hardware? Or do 3D TVs have an image separation option?

For the games I have mentioned, I didn't even searched for a 3D option (not sure they have one). It was TriDef3D that did all the work. And it kinda' worked out-of-the box, meaning on default settings. TriDef 3D (or the software you use) would have some options for the "3d effect strength" that basically modifies the offset between the 2 images to suit your tastes.
Also, my TV has some settings (defaults are balanced). See attachment, for the TV's available options and their description.

Quote from Scawen :

But on a TV, I'm concerned that the far distant objects will look like they are at screen distance, because they are displayed in the same place.

That´s true. If you overlapp both pictures on TV and objects in large distance (sun, hills) are drawn on the same position on TV, then they will indeed appear as the would be on screen distance. Instead all other geometry will appear in front of the screen, so the cockpit seems to be in the living room.

3D on a monitor/TV is more tricky than that. The depth experience also depends how near you sit before the screen. The whole scene can appear distorted into depth. Either shrunken (kind of billboard effect) oder enlarged in depth.

Luckily on a headset these problems are not existing. The distance from the screen is always fix, and you focus you eyes (thanks to the lenses) to infinity. And... you have a screen that can display live sized objects

OK, I have included slider bars for HUD adjustment and 3D adjustment.

HUD adjustment : Brings the 2D elements closer - this is good for a headset because you can bring the interface as near to you as the steering wheel.

3D adjustment : Makes 3D elements further away - this is good for a TV because the sky and distant objects will appear to be behind your screen.

I'm preparing a patch to upload in about half an hour, very much a test patch with no support for external views in 3D mode. It supports SBS and TAB half and full driving views.

Only really of interest for the 3D support :

https://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=84420

The clock cannot tick fast enough at my work. Can't wait to test it out!

Quote from imthebestracerthereis :

The clock cannot tick fast enough at my work. Can't wait to test it out!

You mean you can't try it out at work?

I actually do have access to 3D TV's and a laptop.

Hello, Scawen!

I would like to ask a question. Is there any chance to improve LFS performance in a such way that, for example, you would have way more FPS on the starting grid?..My PC is not exactly monster or even a gaming PC, but when I tried out some other simulators, I didn't seem to encounter the problem of having fairly low FPS on the starting grid. Does it have something to do with LFS ''engine'' or could I blame my PC for not being powerful enough to run LFS @ the best performance possible?

I hope you understood my question.
Best regards,
MousemanLV.

You could turn down the User LOD or other options in Graphics Options such as low res shadows and low res textures.

In Misc Options, make sure Multiplayer speedup option is enabled, reduce Multiplayer car draw and increase the Dynamic LOD reduction.

Is it the physics or the graphics that is causing the slowdown? Test with a multiplayer replay - is the frame rate a lot higher when you press pause? In that case maybe the physics is the problem and you don't need to reduce the Graphics Options.

Quote from MousemanLV :

Hello, Scawen!

I would like to ask a question. Is there any chance to improve LFS performance in a such way that, for example, you would have way more FPS on the starting grid?..My PC is not exactly monster or even a gaming PC, but when I tried out some other simulators, I didn't seem to encounter the problem of having fairly low FPS on the starting grid. Does it have something to do with LFS ''engine'' or could I blame my PC for not being powerful enough to run LFS @ the best performance possible?

I hope you understood my question.
Best regards,
MousemanLV.

I assume you are using Win 7 or something newer ?
Try Win XP, for me like 10x fps boost Since Bill Gates left Microsoft everything went wrong

Quote from Scawen :

Is it the physics or the graphics that is causing the slowdown? Test with a multiplayer replay - is the frame rate a lot higher when you press pause? In that case maybe the physics is the problem and you don't need to reduce the Graphics Options.

For me in Windows 7, LFS is much more hungry for CPU time (physics).

for example win XP : CPU 100% of 1 thread; GPU 85-90% usage
win 7: CPU 100% of 1 thread; GPU barely hitting 50% usage
also general FPS is much lower in newer versions of Windows

Can i just ask... Why are you pissing about with 3d support when there are far more important things you should e working on?

no

Hi Scawen, yups although I do not play anymore I am how ever still around It would be better to have a new Graphics engine rather than dinasour direct x8engine you currently have, You should bring LFS back with a good graphics engine rather than have new track or wheel stuff,
I would like to see your eply on this..

Quote from Scawen :

Hello everyone
The developers are all alive and working on LFS.

Eric has been working on new tracks. He slowed up a bit during some of the great English summer which we don't get very often. I have enjoyed test driving on two of his new tracks which look great and I look forward to the time when they can be released.

I am still working on the tyre physics, though I haven't really made serious progress this year. I also enjoyed the summer, did a lot of cycling and running too. It's a better hobby than smoking like I used to, and I really enjoy it. But the good news is it won't pay the bills!

LFS income has gradually gone down as it always does between updates. That that has increased the urgency of finishing the tyre physics. So I plan to get down to it, make the appropriate approximations and sort out a good physically based system, with enough assumptions to make it workable, accepting that total realism is an unachievable goal.

I just got a bit excited about stereoscopic 3d support, which some people will like because they'll be able to see LFS in 3d on a 3d TV, if their TV supports "side-by-side" or "top and bottom" mode. Also headsets should be supported if they accept one of those output modes. The old headsets that require specific support and sequential output will not be supported. For example a Sony HMZ works but a Vuzix VR920 does not. A more recent Vuzix should work but the field of view is not really good enough to give you peripheral vision. I'm not sure how much it will benefit the Oculus Rift at the moment. I think that depends on a pixel shader to provide the proper distortion, which I think is not available in D3D8. Anyway, one of the output options will be non-squashed (full) side-by-side 3D, which may possibly make it easier to use the Oculus Rift. Anyway it is a step in that direction. It does appear that the current Oculus Rift's resolution is too low for a racing simulator at the moment. Anyway I should be able to post a 3d test patch in a few days, I'm guessing early next week. Some people will enjoy that, though I realise most people, like me, don't have 3d equipment.

Victor is still with us, although he has indeed got another job, which looks like a really good one, putting his excellent skills to more use. I'm pleased for him about that, as his job here wasn't often really full time, although he is an absolutely vital member of our team. He needed a job as well because our profit share isn't one third each and depends on our actual contributions to the project. Victor started later and never has so much work, so for that reason only, his profit share was a bit of a tight squeeze to live on, specially with the gradual reduction in profits while we are waiting for a serious update.

People ask why I don't come here more often with progress reports. But there hasn't been enough progress to give a report. And it's not appealing to come here and say that. Every month I've thought I would be making more progress, and would have some good progress to report the following month. Hope you see what I mean...

Anyway, we do have to pay the bills and I'm very interested to get the better feeling tyre model out there for everyone to enjoy. You've heard it all before so I don't expect great enthusiasm. It will take a while yet, but hopefully not too long.

well, happy to see lfs on the rail again


@Scawen
after read all the comments and study a bit your progress report, there is one point that doesnt to be clear to me

Is about the 2 new fictional tracks, are you gona include rockingham? making a total of 3 new tracks ( 2 fictional + rkgm ) or just the 2 new fictional tracks?, Also about that rumored new car ( apart from the vw ) is truth?

That all, hope everthing go smooth with the updates, thaks again for the report, have a good time.

He said he'd tested "two of his new tracks", so I assume there are more than 2 new tracks, but I can be wrong

Quote from popps258 :

Hi Scawen, yups although I do not play anymore I am how ever still around It would be better to have a new Graphics engine rather than dinasour direct x8engine you currently have, You should bring LFS back with a good graphics engine rather than have new track or wheel stuff,
I would like to see your eply on this..

Why does the graphics engine matter? LFS still, with better textures than what is shipped stock, looks quite good. It's no Assetto Corsa, but that shouldn't be expected considering LFS still has GFX which are, effectively, from 10 years ago. Scawen noted that DX9 would allow him to implement some more complex shaders (one of which are essential to the Oculus Rift's distortion), but that won't help one of LFS' current weaknesses of stale content.

Releasing more tracks and cars is more important IMO than releasing a revolutionary set of tyre physics or a graphics update.

Only the superficial people will care about "better" graphics, when they really don't provide any additional information essential to driving. LFS is about having that great feeling of driving and online racing. Without new content, the online portion will continue to dwindle in its current fashion.

Quote from chris_uk :

Can i just ask... Why are you pissing about with 3d support when there are far more important things you should e working on?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsf8LnThk5Y

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Without new content, the online portion will continue to dwindle in its current fashion.

You richt it.

Quote from MousemanLV :

Hello, Scawen!

I would like to ask a question. Is there any chance to improve LFS performance in a such way that, for example, you would have way more FPS on the starting grid?..My PC is not exactly monster or even a gaming PC, but when I tried out some other simulators, I didn't seem to encounter the problem of having fairly low FPS on the starting grid. Does it have something to do with LFS ''engine'' or could I blame my PC for not being powerful enough to run LFS @ the best performance possible?

I hope you understood my question.
Best regards,
MousemanLV.

I get 70 fps in end of 20 AI car grid maxed out on a freaking laptop, with LFS running on integrated GPU

what kind of calculator are you running LFS at that has significant lag?! It runs fine even on 5 year old PCs ._.

My max FPS that I can get is over 200 with +- 25 people on the track, but as soon as I hit a traffic jam - kaboom! FPS drops down to ~ 45.

You are seriously calling 45fps significant lag?

I need at least 60fps to have smooth gameplay.

Quote from MousemanLV :

I need at least 60fps to have smooth gameplay.

Really?

I drove the entire GT1WS season with less than 20 FPS.

Okay.