Hey guys, maybe you don't agree with me, but personally, i think the interior of cars on LFS look a little bit... hm... flat? they just look like it just has a photo placed on the dash, and it would be way better if like the bolts and screws on the dash or car were actually a 3d model, not a image, and like the radio and stuff on the xrt.. it is just really low quality photo.. and it doesn't look 3D enough, and i just think it wouldbe better if the radio and stuff were made on a 3d modelling program, not photoshop, lol. Im not criticising LFS in any way, as it is a great game, i just think theres some room for improvement.
If you dont agree, or want to hate, please dont comment :P

While I agree that some parts of the interiors are not perfectly "3D", I think there should be an option to choose from low and high quality, because some people don’t have their PCs powerful enough to cope with high-poly interiors.

I’m not saying "no" to high-quality 3D models, but I’m afraid that there will be a group of users who won’t be able to play LFS smoothly then. I know some people who are forced to use force mode to have decent FPS while racing.

So either have low / high options for interior quality, or find some optimisation or balance between 3D model quality and performance.

Quote from Donkey_DriftKing :

If you dont agree, or want to hate, please dont comment :P

Doesn’t that lose the point of a discussion?

OMGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!
What a great idea
Keep it up

Quote from Flame CZE :

While I agree that some parts of the interiors are not perfectly "3D", I think there should be an option to choose from low and high quality, because some people don’t have their PCs powerful enough to cope with high-poly interiors.

I’m not saying "no" to high-quality 3D models, but I’m afraid that there will be a group of users who won’t be able to play LFS smoothly then. I know some people who are forced to use force mode to have decent FPS while racing.

So either have low / high options for interior quality, or find some optimisation or balance between 3D model quality and performance.


Doesn’t that lose the point of a discussion?

Yeah, an option for that would be great, because LFS could go so much further that way, not just for home racers, but for simulator companies. Like when you look at games for the best simulator, personally this is what i look for This is a picture of a car interior on rFactor, and i think if lfs was like this, it would be cool: http://racesimcentral.com/wp-c ... _AudiS5_2011_Interior.jpg

wish i could help dev this.. http://gyazo.com/2f7726be88cb995d924312dbd21a8565

Quote from Flame CZE :

because some people don’t have their PCs powerful enough to cope with high-poly interiors.

Right... If people don't have a computer powerful enough to cope with high quality interiors they might need to consider to step into the new millennium. 486DX4/100 and AGP has been 20 years ago now.

Quote :

Answer to: System requirements:
Minimal system :
1 Ghz CPU, 3D accelerated video card, 128Mb system memory, 400Mb free HD space.

Recommended system :
2 Ghz CPU, Video card bought after 2006

.

Omg I've been in LFS almost 5 years and never once thought about complaining about the freaking cockpit textures. YOU CAN CHANGE THEM!

Now, seeing as you've been here for less than 6 months I will assume you don't know how to use the search feature.

We can't change the models so use textures....

Yes they are just pictures from real cars , 3d improoved models are needed but you wont notice them so much while racing , its nice but nothing more. Let them keep working on the physics , its more importent .

I think it'll be a great idea for those who have good computers but for people who don't like me.. It's going to be kinda tricky. Maybe LFS should have a option to choose between high end interior and one low end. Depands on their equipment.
Also I thought about moving animations.. Like when you change gear you can actually see the driver touches the stick and moves it.. But it's only an idea :-)

I sort of agree, but I also pose this question???

You are ment to be racing, so concentrating on the car in front and mirrors and cars around you....Why would you like a 3D interior and think, WOW those Dials look nice, where's my coffee cup holder, or blimey, this car has a fire extinguisher in it??

Why would you spend time looking around your "in car environment" when you should be doing the above

If you want full motion interiors then play Forza and you get to walk around the WHOLE CAR

Just saying

Fordie

It doesn't need polys it needs a bump map. I suppose you could tesselation but Scawen already ruled out DX11.

Bump mapping will barely move the system requirements, and trick you into thinking its higher detail than it is.

It requires a shader, and Scawen has suggested he will be going DX9, which does support some shaders.

The LFS fascination with entry level computers from a decade ago does baffle me. I've bought two entirely different machines since I stopped playing LFS over half a decade ago...

It's like the sim racing antique shop.

Becky Rose, DX9 and "some" shaders? You could do incredible stuff with DX9 but "progress" forces everyone to use newer and newer software - otherwise computer industry would fail..
The best example is ENB Series project, take a look at some screens from GTA 4 or Skyrim It's all on old and outdated DX9, and Boris himself says you can do pretty much anything on this API.

Quote from Darecki :

Becky Rose, DX9 and "some" shaders? You could do incredible stuff with DX9 but "progress" forces everyone to use newer and newer software - otherwise computer industry would fail..
The best example is ENB Series project, take a look at some screens from GTA 4 or Skyrim It's all on old and outdated DX9, and Boris himself says you can do pretty much anything on this API.

There are limitations in DX9 and potential to do things in DX11 that DX9 simply cannot do.

New technology doesn't happen just for the benefit of sales. It's also extending the boundaries of what is possible.

Given the rate of progress of LFS, or indeed any game put together by a small team these days, aiming for DX9 now means that by the time it is finished then it will be more than the one generation behind that DX9 already is. DX9 only goes up to pixel shader 3. DX11 is on pixel shader 5... There's a lot of things PS5 can do that PS3 cannot, just in terms of the complexity of the branching within the shader for a start, let alone actual billboard catching headlines like tessellation (not actually part of PS, but still a DX11 advantage).

I have a couple of DX11 machines, I run the latest games on maximum resolution and settings at full tilt and they look amazing and run smoothly... The thing is, one of those machines is a two year old mid range laptop. And many games are taking advantage of DX11 features and then dropping down to DX9 when that is all that is available.

I don't understand the "entry level machines" argument. It's not like Windows XP was something special that should be cherished.

https://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=84730&page=7

I hear what your saying Becky, Like, "We must move to DX9" Oh, and that was released when ? And XP was released when ? So, in 2014, this is bleeding edge tech is it ?

PHUQ, there is no point in living in the past, 6 years ago, "WOW, thats awesome" Today, "and, so ?"

( FYI, DX8 was released in 2000, 14 years ago, DX9 was released in 2002 ! )

If I was busy telling my clients that Server 2003 is the latest, this is awesome tech, this is what you really need. Well, guess how long I'll have a business ?

Yes, DX11 does great graphics, so does OpenGL. If you can sort drivers for wheels, pads etc that don't rely on DX'*' then even better.

The issue that people keep raising is device drivers, there seems to be no arguement about how good OpenGL graphic drivers are, especially with the work Nvidia is putting into Debian with SteamOS.

Quote from Racer X NZ :

Yes, DX11 does great graphics, so does OpenGL. If you can sort drivers for wheels, pads etc that don't rely on DX'*' then even better.

The issue that people keep raising is device drivers, there seems to be no arguement about how good OpenGL graphic drivers are, especially with the work Nvidia is putting into Debian with SteamOS.

OGL is something else entirely, there are a number of architectural changes when migrating a DX game to an OGL platform.

For a start, all the maths are backwards and upside down... Literally, if you hold out your hand and with thumb pointing up, index finger pointing toward the other hand, and the next finger pointing forwards these are your three 3 dimensional axis... OGL uses one hand, and DX uses the other.

And that's the easy problem to fix