Sure, but the question of this topic is a little too "WHY ISN'T IT HERE YET!?!? PUT DOWN YOUR MOUNTAIN BIKE AND IGNORE YOUR KIDS!!" than the "I am interested in the path we're on as well as our position on it" that I'm here for 
There is too many ignored kids already in this world.
Yes is a single core app, but are modify for more potencial on multi core system, right? LFS use more than one core in my Laptop , so i cant understand what you mean with "jump to multi core", I recommend you install LFS 0.6E and watching the difference..
btw i don't know so much about computers, i appreciate good explain
LFS 0.6E used Direct3D 8 for rendering, 0.6F and beyond use Direct3D 9. Increased use of multiple cores most likely comes from the graphics drivers trying to process the command stream in parallel. nVidia definitely does this with OpenGL, I imagine they have done something similar with D3D because until D3D11 there was no easy way for programmers to create multithreaded display lists. Direct3D 8 code path most likely does not make use of this behind-the-scenes parallelism because multicore CPUs were not around back in those days. When LFS moved to D3D9, it got a little bit of parallelism for free so to speak.
Make sense.LFS have a long discuss about D3D11 around years because cant do nothing with it ,i also remember read something like "Iracing still use D3D9 also....".so my video card already separate processes in parallel and D3D9 from LFS "lieing" for my video card nvidia (with d3d11.4) to use and take more efficiency on multicore system,right?i think LFS can work really well with new tyre physics like he is , you think can having more advantage converting LFS in a real multicore app or "tune" D3D is enough?
This parallelization done by the GPU drivers can only do so much and its efficiency depends a lot on how the rendering engine of a game works inside. In some cases it can even hurt performance. It can also only help with the rendering speed. If a game needs a lot of CPU power for something else (advanced AI, complex physics) the GPU drivers obviously cannot help with that. A proper parallelization implemented in the game itself will always be more efficient.
There are plenty of ways what LFS could do to take real advantage of multicore CPUs. Perhaps the easiest one would be to decouple physics and rendering loops and have them run on separate threads. The physics loop itself could then use one thread per car. This would theoretically scale very well with the size of the racing grid which is pretty much exactly what we need.
I get it.it's interesting thinking how LFS run in a future. thanks for your time man, i really appreciate that.
cheers
Me too... (not sarcastic)
In recent weeks I sort of expect new test patch to appear, but still nothing... and the worst part about it: it may easily take months before one will happen. ... hmm...
Well, about the physics, it's a huge YAY for sure but i don't think that people still care about the Scirocco at all, like what everyone knows it's that LFS is all about physics>content and the licensed content it's not so relevant nowadays but look, that's just my point of view, like, when the Rockingham track was still on development, everyone was crazy about it and since the S3 came out, on the racing and drifting forums that i used to check, people would play it like 24/7 but the reality is that the track is forgotten and people are still about the customized layouts, having fun with it's old physics and you know, enjoying the game as it should, but again, that's just my point of view.
If we had proper tools or just an easier way to make our own mods for LFS like on Assetto Corsa or rFactor, tools to create tracks and cars, things such as bikes, karts and trucks wouldn't be a problem for the dev team, i mean, we know that you guys have a lot of thing to do and LFS it't not a priority on your "to do list" so, release the tools and let the community bring the game back to it's gold days.
People have already done amazing things with layouts, having track editing tools would really take LFS to the next level with some user created content.
This. The truth has been spoken.
LFS started with physics, there was even surprise that there was big interest for the first versions of LFS. In other words the attention was/is welcome but not a necessity.
This is still the same situation.
This is still the same situation.
Think LFS has still best physics (offcourse some cars can be better) and I never tried iracing cause i can't buy that game and i refuse to rent a game.
But I think most guys want real cars and tracks + good graphics
i agree with tools for user can made tracks, give tools for car mods is like saying good bye Live for speed. i also dont think drivers take Lfs more serious after having all tools , people want to go where having more people, no matters if have good drivers or if have the best physics(race are the best example on LFS). just my honest opinion
The main problem is that LFS is no priority anymore since 2009 (The announcement of Scirocco), LFS lasted a few extra years on its own success. Amazingly long actually.. But everyone can feel it's a dead end now, unless some magical happens. Is it possible that one person can do this with a busy family life and an aging brain? I highly doubt that, it is against all odds. It, is, humanly, not, possible.
Don't forget that LFS was among the fastest to implement VR. The ability is there, enthusiasm we can speculate on. If LFS were at a dead end, i think we would see more S3 content, as the potential S3 income decreases as LFS ages- though no one ever accused the LFS team of being marketing geniuses.
The physics release will revive the community, for some amount of time, and I think implementing multithreading will be one of those things Scawen excels at. From there we can see graphics improvements, and then LFS is right back in the conversation of "which racing sim should I play?".
The physics release will revive the community, for some amount of time, and I think implementing multithreading will be one of those things Scawen excels at. From there we can see graphics improvements, and then LFS is right back in the conversation of "which racing sim should I play?".
Yes, this whole VR thing.. Was it all being done by own intel? Or where there talks in the scene and the job got done faster due to help of others? The thing with this physics is that no assistance can be called and I assume thats the reason why it is being stuck for so long. Running into problems by which nobody can help.
You are delusional thinking that you are the only truth holder saying others know shit and have bad tast.
Ac or AMS (eg) are as good as lfs if not better in terme of driving physics, but as you may know ( but don't want to admit ) LFS lack the appeal of a modern game ( graphics, content, steam integration ), thats all, nothing more, nothing less.
Yes ^
Simple as that.
Simple as that.
Delusional only truth holder??? It's just my opinion. But I don't like the user interface in AMS and AC think physics just bit the same got 500+ hours in AC and arround 30 hours in AMS that game didn't catch me at all.
Anyway I enjoy the online world LFS offers much more .... spectating and chatting much eassier and more fun.
If LFS was released today "AS IS" with shiny graphics and a cool (real) car and track list, people would say the physics are next level.
chitchatting sure is fun, that's why lfs is so popular nowdays....
The development of racing simulators nowadays is in a dead end,no one developer can not do realistic enough physics.They loudly claim for super realistic physics but reality is different!They only add shiny animation and new cars which road behavior does not match with the real cars.If Scawen can"t released new physics I will have to change my hobby!
Any WIP new physics progress?
(233 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG