Quote from Big Daddy :

Btw. talking about contributing:

The new graphics are pretty good, but the cars are looking really flat. It´s not about the design, its about the reflection.

Angle of reflection dependency must be integrated in order to create a good depth.

Fresnel reflections have been in LFS since 0.6K.

Quote from Scawen :

As in the real world, the amount of reflection depends greatly on the angle between your eye and the surface. When a shiny paint surface faces you directly, the reflection is down to around 4%. When you are looking at reflection on the surface from an extreme angle, nearly parallel to the surface, the reflection amount increases to 100%. It's similar with glass but glass has two reflecting surfaces so when it faces you, the reflection is around 8%. If you want to read up on this, search for Fresnel reflections or Schlick's approximation.

It has been difficult to keep up with forums in the last months, so is The_Great a new troll account of cargame.nl or what is going on?

Funny how people with valid concerns are called trolls in this forum.

Quote from benjamin.torres :

Funny how people with valid concerns are called trolls in this forum.

Not sure if it's concerns. In my eyes you guys just complain about everything and everything the devs work on or did in past 5/6 years isn't good enough

To be frank, devs probably have (or rather don't have) a weird definition of priority.
The game has been needing the tyre patch for a long time? Here's a graphic renewal.
Well, not what was really needed but still, nice for those graphic junkies.
Then: November """"progress"""" report
Look guys, slimmer fonts!

I mean, are we serious? How can you defend this way of thinking? And before I get labelled as a troll, I'm going to say that LFS is the only sim I play, despite having AC as well (believe me or not, I couldn't care less).
To be honest, it's like the devs themselves don't really care to bring back the old playerbase, or for what matters, to build a new one

Quote from David 96 :

it's like the devs themselves don't really care to bring back the old playerbase, or for what matters, to build a new one

Even if it's like that - you still can't do anything about it. It's their work,it's their decisions,accept it or leave it. I accepted it and I'm using the most of LFS I can and you should too. Don't worry too much about stuff you cannot influence,it's not good for your health.

Yes, Devs definitely do what *they* want, and they have the right to do so. There is no need to defend that kind of thinking, because we simply cannot but accept that another person do what he wants to do.

Of course they don't aim to bring back the old playerbase, because with two developers its nothing else than impossible. Deloping a high quality racing sim 15 years ago was much more simple than it is nowadays. If you have any experience on software development, you don't need explanation on this.

Maybe this is useless to say, since some people seems to be bit stubborn to understand that in life there are some things (usually outside us) that we cannot change.

So what is the reason to be still happy? Think for example an other wonderful simulator GT Legends. The sim was introduced in 2005, and they already closed master server years ago.

We can still play this online for fkin free, and even the Devs are doing something on this. Its brilliant. What can we wish more? Okay, somebody says now "what about 8 years ago when they promised...." please...let go of the past! It was what it was and its useless to cry for that forever.

For me it sounds, more Devs are working on something, more they hear crying. Maybe better they don't tell us they are working on it.

In my opinion the november progress report was honest. They could have chosen not to say anything. Instead, they tell us honestly at what speed things are progressing. And yes, the progress is not what most of us wish, so what? Go and buy that Project Cars 2 and stop crying please

It has been said:

“Lord, grant me the strength to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”

Please, understand the difference. Because as long as we don't understand, we can only S L O W D O W N the progress, by crying and spreading bad atmosphere.

Nice lucaf, this Sim maybe old but still a great sim.

I believe in Live for Speed.

Quote from Evolution_R :

I believe in Live for Speed.

Me too.

I dunno... with LFS, will the children carry on the development after Scawen and Company get too old to code?
Will I be able to transfer my license to descendants as part of my estate when I kick off? Will people even be using cars once LFS is finished?
Will someone reading this be gullible enough to take this rant serious?

I'm not all that bent outta shape about the game's progress.
There are so many other titles that have come and gone since 2003.
At least this one is still here. And people show up on the forums to whine about the progress. The fact that it's still maintained and serviced AND being developed should mean something.
I also realized something a few years back. We're not playing somebody's game. We're playing somebody's dream. The pros to that is we have a superior game to play. The con is Damn! It sure does take a long time to get developed. But what do you want? Bologna? Or Pastrami? It takes a while to make good pastrami.... Maybe not 15+ years, but still.
Oh and about Pastrami. If you make your own, try not to use the whole brisket - unless you REALLY like pastrami.

Quote from Flame CZE :

Fresnel reflections have been in LFS since 0.6K.

An interesting point on that is that although a correct calculation was used (in the current public version) the output effect is not fully realistic because the rendering is not done in a linear colour space. As the new graphics uses gamma correct rendering, the rendering takes place in a linear colour space, and is gamma corrected at the final output. Reflections come out brighter in the new correct version.

Quote from Gutholz :

It has been difficult to keep up with forums in the last months, so is The_Great a new troll account of cargame.nl or what is going on?

Yes, exactly.

It seems to me he wants to keep telling people they are stupid for hanging around here, while he continues to hang around himself. He is telling people to accept reality, while using a fake account to post.

Quote from benjamin.torres :

Funny how people with valid concerns are called trolls in this forum.

Why don't you use your real account too? Do you have something to hide?

Quote from David 96 :

To be frank, devs probably have (or rather don't have) a weird definition of priority.
The game has been needing the tyre patch for a long time? Here's a graphic renewal.
Well, not what was really needed but still, nice for those graphic junkies.
Then: November """"progress"""" report
Look guys, slimmer fonts!

I mean, are we serious? How can you defend this way of thinking? And before I get labelled as a troll, I'm going to say that LFS is the only sim I play, despite having AC as well (believe me or not, I couldn't care less).
To be honest, it's like the devs themselves don't really care to bring back the old playerbase, or for what matters, to build a new one

It's always a danger if I actually tell people what I have been working on. So frequently it is some internal improvements, highly technical things that the average person has no concept of, or belief that's what coding could be about. We are just dealing with drawing pixels on a screen and vibrating your speakers, all with numbers. There is no car, no track, just triangles and code. People often cannot understand how vast the system is or how much time it takes to make improvements.

Anyway, I know that some people are interested in such seemingly small improvements, but was well aware of the 'danger' of people being unable to understand why I would work on them. Quite a few people now are using 4K screens and there were obvious flaws in the text rendering when drawing at larger screen sizes. So to someone like me, when I saw it that way, it comes across as a 'bug' or something that definitely needs improvement. Not a bad thing in any way to spend a week or two on those improvements, along with a massive graphical overhaul that has been taking place for years.

Even in VR I can see the text improvements coming in handy as the font edges will be a bit tighter.

I'm really happy that the new graphics uses gamma correct rendering, it looks so much better. ^^

How about /thread this and let's just wait as we have done so to these days...

@Scawen I don't understand why pps is max 6 in dcom. I know this is asked earlier with test patches I believe. Thought reason was cpu load it gives on servers. But I lately found out u can set this to 12 pps when u make a local server. Wonder on what speeds this is based (thinking 15 years ago u had 100mbit lan) But these days many have that speed on internet. Just the poor guys with adsl/dsl get 20mbit average down.


So I hope we will get more pps in dcom think it can help making more steady connections. Upload 47 slot server with 12 pps in LFS is about 2 MB/s. When I compare this to Assetto or Project Cars their server uploads for 24 cars about 4MB/s. And I Never see cpu busy with dcom (running my server on a i3 3rd gen).


So still wonder why

It's not just the server though, the client needs to be able to recieve those packets as well, or their experience will be significantly degraded/dropped packets

@Scawen:
You know these progress reports are good and all, but to be honest, most of what you go on about is so far over my head. Hell, you could post that
the reason you're doing this or that to your shaders was due to the phases of the moon on the days you coded them, I really couldn't call you on it. But I have learned quite a bit about the subject over the years thanks to you. Yeah. I learned I don't want to make video games.

Quote from RC-Maus :

So still wonder why

The main problem is latency rather than bandwidth. In other words, the problem is the time delay between the server and the guest computers, not the frequency of the position packets.

Of course, we can't solve this latency problem by increasing bandwidth. In some cases the latency can be made worse by increasing bandwidth.

Each time a packet arrives on your computer, LFS runs that car through the physics system from the time it was sent, to the time it arrived, to try to predict where the car is now. It is always a bit wrong, of course, or sometimes a lot, depending on how long the delay was and how many driver input changes have been taking place.

Increasing the number of packets per second increases your CPU load (which can result in lower frame rates and worse latency - imagine this at T1 of a race) but will not get the cars into better positions than they already are, because that error is due to latency rather than bandwidth.

I think when you and other drivers are connected with good connections to a server with low latency, the other cars are not jumping around all over the place. Is that true? The problems begin when you or someone else has a laggy, high latency connection to the server. That problem wouldn't be helped by increased packets per second. In that case the lagging remote car would just flick more frequently into more of the wrong positions.

Quote from Scawen :

The main problem is latency rather than bandwidth. In other words, the problem is the time delay between the server and the guest computers, not the frequency of the position packets.

Of course, we can't solve this latency problem by increasing bandwidth. In some cases the latency can be made worse by increasing bandwidth.

Each time a packet arrives on your computer, LFS runs that car through the physics system from the time it was sent, to the time it arrived, to try to predict where the car is now. It is always a bit wrong, of course, or sometimes a lot, depending on how long the delay was and how many driver input changes have been taking place.

Increasing the number of packets per second increases your CPU load (which can result in lower frame rates and worse latency - imagine this at T1 of a race) but will not get the cars into better positions than they already are, because that error is due to latency rather than bandwidth.

I think when you and other drivers are connected with good connections to a server with low latency, the other cars are not jumping around all over the place. Is that true? The problems begin when you or someone else has a laggy, high latency connection to the server. That problem wouldn't be helped by increased packets per second. In that case the lagging remote car would just flick more frequently into more of the wrong positions.

I understatnd time delay is main problem. But my thinking is more packets gives LFS less quessing where the cars are (Biggest problem are the keyboarders from other side world and LFS calculating ). When I check my CPU load it's Always between 8 and 16% playing LFS. So I also not really see a problem there. Offcourse the guys with cheap machines will get problems running LFS with intel cpu gpu.

Flikkering cars then connection is really bad probally also with packet loss. I just kick those guys if they don't stop downloading (thats mostly the case).


Edit: packet loss is handled with airio at our server and airio spectates car when to much packet loss.

Quote from Scawen :

It seems to me he wants to keep telling people they are stupid for hanging around here,

hey! doing big assumptions! nice. "keep telling people they are stupid for hanging around here" so, where exactly this is being said? raving about greener grass and nicer fonts is not automatically stupid hah, its just ...special.

rest of message is trying to derail this topic again, good job as superadmin. same story in repeat; if you want to know where The_Great is going, open a topic in off topic section because this is where such discussion belong. this topic is about where LFS is going which is clearly stated on the top of every page of the topic.

summary of all this; "LFS is going offtopic again in upcoming patch" . bravo, ten pages of discussion but finally a good conclusion. good that you came to express yourself here like this!

I am glad to see progress with LFS, no matter how small it may be. Keep bringing us updates.


=D

Small... this is going to be a huge update. ^^

Quote from Evolution_R :

Small... this is going to be a huge update. ^^

indeed, no other companies are updating their already sold product more than ten years later ... free of charge . I wish Scavier to sell many more licences in the months to come
And again, in current world, having a beautiful product that is not leaving the taste of half-done things is a very good move : LFS is clearly going to be highly polished in all aspects and this is a very good news. I hope Scawen is progressing well on tire physics assumptions (if we can call his algorithms assumptions ), and his will to separate graphics and physics parts : understandable he is not talking too much about it. Eric is undoubtfully doing great things on the 3 remaining tracks.

Why complaining when it is clear we will get a huge (and not small) update coming ?
It is great to have motivated and nice guys doing such great things, some would try to demotivate them ? You can’t be serious !
Enjoy waiting for the test patch ! (BTW, will we get test patches track per track or the whole thing at once ? Eric will go mad if he has to address all the small thingies we will found)

Packets..... It's that time of year again. May as well talk about packets. Oops my bad. Packets. Not Packages..... OK

Now the latency is affected by the amount of packets there are.
What about ISP's and them throttling customers? How much of an affect does throttling have on LFS gameplay? Enough to notice?