EDIT by Scawen: Originally posted by BeNoM in "LFS in the news" but sparked a conversation so moved to separate thread.
LFS wrongly assumed to be abandoned by developers and supported entirely by community
(130 posts, closed, started )
Strange how people can't understand that we are still working on this game. 
What's the logic? The community must have been adding wheel support and VR support, because there's no way it could possibly be that the developers added that themselves, to this game from 2002?
I do hear a lot of that. They download the latest version then say, wow this is so amazing for a 20 year old game.
What's the logic? The community must have been adding wheel support and VR support, because there's no way it could possibly be that the developers added that themselves, to this game from 2002?
I do hear a lot of that. They download the latest version then say, wow this is so amazing for a 20 year old game.
Perhaps there is something to do with the communication on the news of the game?
What do you mean? Please can you make that comment clear, as I don't know what you are saying.
We have a highly active twitter, and a website that clearly shows updates and news from recent times. Constant involvement with the community. It may be a cool narrative, but LFS is not abandonware that has been kept going solely by the efforts of the community. That has been the case for some other games but that is not what is happening here. The community do have a huge involvement but they have not added wheel support and VR support, it's total rubbish.
Nice that the guy was complimentary about LFS, but I think it's a bit lazy for a journalist not to even spend 1 minute to check their facts.
I know it's total rubbish and does not correspond to reality.
When you search Live For Speed on the internet, what do you see?
Only people who test the demo version of the game saying that this game is 20 years old.
Afterwards, bloggers, lazy journalists, people in general repeat what they see on the surface.They don't look any deeper.
What I mean is that it would probably help if the community got together to post recent S3 videos that make you want to play the game. And unfortunately, even if such videos exist, this videos are not visible enough.
I think that collective reflection and action on communication about the game would be useful.
(sorry for my English)
When you search Live For Speed on the internet, what do you see?
Only people who test the demo version of the game saying that this game is 20 years old.
Afterwards, bloggers, lazy journalists, people in general repeat what they see on the surface.They don't look any deeper.
What I mean is that it would probably help if the community got together to post recent S3 videos that make you want to play the game. And unfortunately, even if such videos exist, this videos are not visible enough.
I think that collective reflection and action on communication about the game would be useful.
(sorry for my English)
It's a bit annoying, so I posted a comment under his video about this.
In my opinion with the release of the new graphics, people will be less confused.
His answer:
In my opinion with the release of the new graphics, people will be less confused.
His answer:
It annoys me every time I hear someone saying âLFS is 20 years oldâ. I havenât heard people reviewing iRacing saying âwow not bad for a game from 2008â or other popular sim racing titles.
I have read similar about other games/software.
It seems basically every longer running project gets such comments, some more, some less. Sometimes people are annoyed because the "15 year old program" no longer runs on their 15 years old hardware.
The problem is that LFS looks like a game from 20 years ago.
And that's why the new upcoming LFS 1.0 in particular about the new graphic system will surely change the impression of this game to the people!
Have you checked on recent racing sim games? Assetto Corsa? GT7? BeamNG? Have you see how realistic they are and how different they look from the actual LFS? Seriously, please. It is absolutely normal that from the point of view of a foreigner to this game, the real impression is for a 20 years old game. They cannot see any development because of the graphic level. That's just why.
The worrying part for me is not that the people don't understand LFS at first look, it is that the devs don't understand the people and the basic graphic level required to be considered a modern sim racing. Please look more what is around.
This is iRacing in 2009: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZLgUGTyrZU
This is iRacing in 2023: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJaIOQlYB2s
Anything people say wrong about LFS is harmful.
We all have our history with LFS. Personally, I replay LFS because I know the game since its release. But I must admit that if I was referring to what I can read or see about it today, I would not have tried it.
Yet LFS is my favorite sim (and the only one I still play after trying almost everything).
The problem is that I would have no way of realizing that I'm wrong not to test LFS. And it's not only due to the graphic aspect. LFS has many other qualities that are not well known to today's car game audience.
{to Scawen} This is where I say it might have something to do with communicating about game news. I'm not saying you don't do anything or you do wrong. I think something is missing to attract a new audience to the game. And that's a shame because this game is (already) one of the best in the world.
We all have our history with LFS. Personally, I replay LFS because I know the game since its release. But I must admit that if I was referring to what I can read or see about it today, I would not have tried it.
Yet LFS is my favorite sim (and the only one I still play after trying almost everything).
The problem is that I would have no way of realizing that I'm wrong not to test LFS. And it's not only due to the graphic aspect. LFS has many other qualities that are not well known to today's car game audience.
{to Scawen} This is where I say it might have something to do with communicating about game news. I'm not saying you don't do anything or you do wrong. I think something is missing to attract a new audience to the game. And that's a shame because this game is (already) one of the best in the world.
What FIZ wrote, it looks old. I even personally prefer the LFS art style over too much glare/bloom/blink/perfect chrome, but most of the players & co. compare it with ACC, project cars and similar, and LFS looks and behaves very differently, instant load times, less photo realistic gfx, not available on regular channels like steam, no console versions, ... the easiest way to explain it to themselves is to assume this is 20 years old, and the obvious fact that 20 years ago this would be hyper realistic graphics doesn't strike them.
Maybe consider renaming the game with release of new gfx patch, like LFSS (how AC went ACC
). For example "Live For Speed Supercharged" or something like that. Leave almost everything else as is, maybe reshuffle demo cars and default cars, keep S1/S2/S3 licenses for long term LFS users... and I think this kind of people will be happy to think it was released in 2024 and not 20 years ago. 
You have to play their game, at least a bit of it.
We all know that
. Graphic work is in progress. That's not the point. People say and think the game is abandoned and community run. Journalists talk without even bothering to check. The problem is elsewhere.EDIT : Perhaps a separate topic should be created to discuss these issues? We pollute the topic.
EDIT 2: I don't know who created a separate topic, but thanks
Thanks, I've moved the posts to a new thread.
Interesting thoughts that the new version might help with this, and even the thought of a slight rename with that version, so that journalists don't keep saying it's a 20 year old game and implying that the developers have vanished. Though there is a slight problem with that as it really is an ongoing project. When the 'big release' comes out there will still be some outdated stuff remaining that Eric and I still want to work on.
Anyway it's not a big deal, just slightly annoying to hear the same old crap which is just made up on the spot, or copied from other journos. Or maybe they are confusing it with some other old game, it does sound a bit like that. Probably the guy is quite young too as he appears to think that wheel support is something new, doesn't realise LFS had support for FF wheels long before 2002.
But now I'm making up my own stuff.Anyway nothing more important than the new version that we are still working hard on!
The problem maybe it's because LFS is being developed by 3 developers.
Hence the progress is slow. Hence there is not as much content.
Looked from outside the game just feel outdated.
To get rid of some of that (in my opinion):
Graphics upgrade.
Sounds/Engines upgrade.
Add more tracks (we have plenty of car mods already).
Overhaul the remaining default LFS cars (just like the RB4).
Release it on Steam.
But to do all of this in a reasonable time frame... it just need more developers.
And since this does not match the philosophy behind LFS, these things will be happening slowly.
To be fair, the "rebranding" is not that uncommon, I don't even have to go far for a real life example:
There is a spaceflight/engineering game similar to Kerbal Space Program. For 6 year it was simply called "SimpleRockets2". Few weeks ago they went out of early access / pre-1.0 state and they did rebrand the game to a new name "Juno: New Origins". There was no apparent reason to do so, they just felt the need, that the game that was very same to 0.9something version of SR2 requires a new name.
So the 1.0 version of SR2 was named Juno: New Origins.
And really, while the SR2 was mostly reffered as a 6 years old clone of KSP, the J:NO title held some sense of novelty despite being the very same game and the general public perception appeared to consider J:NO to be a newly released game after all...
So I think rebranding LFS might help a bit in this sense, although I'd prefer not to do it that way (just saying it seems to be a viable option).
Rebranding is not really something worth it in my humble opinion. It would lead to further questions rather than anything else. Maybe something in the middle would be to add a word to the version number of major r leases like for smart phone operating systems⊠in the style of OS 17.5 Singing Kitten I ply currently fail to imagine a suitable example that would fit LFS
I ply currently fail to imagine a suitable example that would fit LFS Uninformed reviews do my head in. I can understand the frustration that this one would cause.
"The community keeps bringing new mods, wheel support, VR..." wat...
Even though this review was only short, that sort of thing doesn't help LFS' image at all, and it's quite a wide-spread problem on YouTube, though most of the time it's less obvious than this video.
People who make review videos generally aren't hardcore players, they're casuals who drop by and give their face-value opinion. The problem is when they go into details that they haven't properly researched or articulated.
I started an LFS review (not just a review, more of a showcase/discussion) video about 4 years ago, but I stalled on progress and never finished it. That was mainly because I didn't think it would be worth the effort if it only bounced around the LFS community. Every time I watch a "review" of LFS that gets it wrong, it makes me want to finish it... Maybe this time I will, even if only a handful of non-LFS players watch it. At least it will be based in fact, from a long time fan.
EDIT: Don't listen to Michal, LFS forever
"The community keeps bringing new mods, wheel support, VR..." wat...
Even though this review was only short, that sort of thing doesn't help LFS' image at all, and it's quite a wide-spread problem on YouTube, though most of the time it's less obvious than this video.
People who make review videos generally aren't hardcore players, they're casuals who drop by and give their face-value opinion. The problem is when they go into details that they haven't properly researched or articulated.
I started an LFS review (not just a review, more of a showcase/discussion) video about 4 years ago, but I stalled on progress and never finished it. That was mainly because I didn't think it would be worth the effort if it only bounced around the LFS community. Every time I watch a "review" of LFS that gets it wrong, it makes me want to finish it... Maybe this time I will, even if only a handful of non-LFS players watch it. At least it will be based in fact, from a long time fan.
EDIT: Don't listen to Michal, LFS forever
{to Scawen} I hope that the meaning remains perceptible.
I agree with everything that has been said. Except Steam. I think it's also an advantage (for some players) not to be dependent on Steam. Strategically, for the visibility of the game, it can be discussed.
When I say something is missing, I was thinking of something simple and possible to do now. A few concrete actions, without waiting for ongoing developments (which we hope will be rapid).
I start with the following idea. We all enjoy LFS as it is today. Even if we expect more (it will always be so, even after the next updates). It must be recognized that few things, among those that we see on the net, make you want to test the game. While at home, racing on my ultra-panoramic screen in real fov, the question of quality graph no longer arises. It's beautiful, immersive, intense. I don't care if the graphics don't live up to the next Rennsport.
A new name (LFS revival), linked to an update, is a good idea. The problem is that we have to wait for the update and the game needs visibility today. Good demonstration videos, with views and comments, on the topic "LFS forever", would be a good way to react on the net. 
I agree with everything that has been said. Except Steam. I think it's also an advantage (for some players) not to be dependent on Steam. Strategically, for the visibility of the game, it can be discussed.
When I say something is missing, I was thinking of something simple and possible to do now. A few concrete actions, without waiting for ongoing developments (which we hope will be rapid
). I start with the following idea. We all enjoy LFS as it is today. Even if we expect more (it will always be so, even after the next updates). It must be recognized that few things, among those that we see on the net, make you want to test the game. While at home, racing on my ultra-panoramic screen in real fov, the question of quality graph no longer arises. It's beautiful, immersive, intense. I don't care if the graphics don't live up to the next Rennsport.
A new name (LFS revival
), linked to an update, is a good idea. The problem is that we have to wait for the update and the game needs visibility today. Good demonstration videos, with views and comments, on the topic "LFS forever", would be a good way to react on the net. This might be a bit of an offtopic, but perhaps you should consider giving a few peek days for all Demo racers in a year. Let's say twice a year, S3 is unlocked for everyone for a long weekend etc. People could come and try how fantastic the paid content is. They probably would spend some money to continue.
One useful addon would be that you could go straight from the garage to browse public setups for the track that is loaded at the moment. When I came to LFS as a newbie, it was frustrating not to have sets and I didn't know to ask for them. Easy UI is the best advantage of LFS and we should spread the word.
One useful addon would be that you could go straight from the garage to browse public setups for the track that is loaded at the moment. When I came to LFS as a newbie, it was frustrating not to have sets and I didn't know to ask for them. Easy UI is the best advantage of LFS and we should spread the word.
It is what it is.
I mean people do always cite iRacing having "NR2003 engine" as a negative, ignoring the fact that it's a real Ship of Theseus as every system from graphics to sound has been replaced (multiple times even with graphics, from DX8 to DX9 to DX11).
Its just showsign of modern day where its important to get the news out, fact checking doesn't matter.
Yeah, people can't be bothered to spend even more than a minute on going through a tiktok video, let alone be invested to know why this or that game is superior. If it's not precise in its news delivery, none cares.
Can you blame people, though? It feels abandoned outside of this community when the tyre physics have been in development for the past 14 years for example. While the new additions like the mod system keeps the community alive for now, there is absolutely no incentive for new drivers to join. When a reviewer or a person that used to be here long time ago and who decides to visit the forum, does anything here really show that the sim is alive and well? While I appreciate the roots of my simracing career, I just get laughed by others when I mention them about LFS. And I think that says enough about the state of the sim.
That says more about them than anything else.
There are plenty of recent news articles showing that progress is happening, and the reasons for why we don't have access to those updates yet are well documented too. If you, and "the others" can't see past that, then you're painting yourself with the same brush as the reviewers we're talking about.
If people laugh at you because you used to play LFS, it sucks, but that's on them. I don't think it's fair to lay all of the blame at the devs feet.
This thread is closed
LFS wrongly assumed to be abandoned by developers and supported entirely by community
(130 posts, closed, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG