Hello. This is my newly created account, some of you know me. I have been using LFS for about 20 years. I want to get straight to the point, this post will probably serve only as an ornament. I mistakenly posted this in the "TEST PATCH" section, every human being can make mistakes, but I got an extreme reaction from Scawen, so I deleted it and I keep writing in this section, which is where he said it is. Scawen said he doesn't care about my opinion no matter what the circumstances and he won't read my post. But since my priority is the users, since I've been talking about this with my friends on LFS for the last five years, and since I've spent more than two hours on this post, I'll address the shortcomings that caught my eye and get straight to the point.

First of all, the asphalt on LFS is like slime. I don't know why, apart from that: People can downshift unrealistically without damaging the engine, they can handbrake dozens of times per second on a memorized race track, they can put the car on the racing line, and they can even set world records doing it. But what would happen if they actually did these things? If they kept downshifting the same way, they would probably die before they even got into the corner because they wouldn't do the Heel-And-Toe shifting. Realistic driving techniques should be at the forefront and physics improvements should be made to keep everything as realistic as possible.

For example, brake disks should heat up realistically and the sounds from the brake disks should be audible. Tires should cool down faster, just like in real life, and the drifting technique should be faster in some corners, just like in real life. On a racetrack where the racing line is memorized, you can't set a world record by handbraking hundreds of times a second and then just sitting the car into the corner without any technique. The grip limit is unrealistically high or can be increased by unrealistic actions by drivers. The grip limit definitely needs to be lowered. There are unrealistic responses when adjusting pressure, camber and toe settings in the vehicle settings, for example, toe settings do not have the necessary effect on the tires. When driving at abnormal and unrealistic grip speeds, tire temperatures can be fixed very easily and driving can continue. When high speeds are reached, the car's response is often unchanged and the feeling of high speed is insufficient.

Let me ask you a question, how many people in real life can drive like in LFS without realizing it? To be honest, if you're going to drive realistically in LFS, it's harder to drive at the same speed as people who drive unrealistically than it is to race Senna in real life. I'm a former street racer and an active licensed retro racer and these are the biggest shortcomings I feel.

My requests from the developers are as follows:
1) Lowering the grip limit and improving the response between the asphalt and the tires. Better optimization of the asphalt.
2) Tires to cool down in about the same time as in real life.
3-) Physics improvements that have the same consequences as in real life when not driven with the correct driving technique.
4-) Accurate modeling of the effect of Camber, Toe and Pressure settings on the vehicle in LFS.
5-) Physics improvements that will not allow the clutch limit to be increased by drivers with unrealistic moves.
6-) Between drift and grip, grip is not always faster, drift can be a faster technique in some corners. But this is not the case in lfs. There may be many reasons for this and some of these reasons are related to my requests 1,2 and 5.
7-) Damage to mechanical parts when incorrect driving techniques are applied, as in real life. Mechanical parts should also be damaged during an accident.
8-) To feel the high speed when driving at high speeds and to improve the car's reaction to this high speed.
*9-) Definitely and definitely make a track editor program. Users should be able to model tracks and thus avoid driving on the same tracks all the time.*
*10-) LFS can be open source, so that it can get to the level it has come to in decades in a few weeks. Drivers can agree among themselves to bring the optimization they want. If the original version is left untouched, a program like "Content Manager" can be made, just like in AC.*

There is much more to say. These are not improvements that cannot be made, these improvements can be made and LFS can come to a much better place. I would especially like to draw your attention to my requests number 9 and 10. Please comment below this post, I have no bad intentions but I am not treated well by the developers. These are my demands and requests as an experienced user of LFS. Thank you very much.

smh

tl;dr when physics update

Hi and happy 20th aniversary of your loyalty to lfs.

You first have to understand that Scawen is under a lot of pressure lately as he is busting his ass off to bring all the recent updates into an official patch. Luckily, many of us do recognize and appreciate his efforts and we try to encourage him. Unfortunately, there are also some people who think that Scawen is obligated to fullfil their requests and wishes for improvements, just because they paid some 35eur or so. If there would be some kind of a monthly subscription system like in iRacing, then maybe, but as it's now, it's just ridiculous to expect anything other than what lfs already is.

Second, please do not forget that LFS is just a PC game and it is a master piece of coding, done by 1 guy. What do you expect? Very realistic modeling of all phenomena required for accurate simulation of a racecar is simply not possible yet, so many aproximations (simplifications) have to be done. Maybe with quantum computers in future things could go much closer to reality, who knows.

Now, my humble opinion about your requests. Points that are equivalent to the claim "make lfs better" and which do not explain any issue in particulair or do not add any value to improvement suggestions are: 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8, therefore not even worth disscusing. Point 2 is reasonable, we'll see how that works with new tyre physics model. Point 6 is straight out lie, in lfs any tire slip = loss of traction and that results in loss of time. Point 7 is ok, but needs a major rehaul of lfs game engine and we will probably not see this for a long time even as a possibility that will be considered. Point 9 is reasonable and will probably be realized some time in the future. Point 10, this is entirely on LFS devs to decide, but I do not see why would anyone who makes a living out of this would do such a thing. Even if they workout a way to sell some licences, who's to say that following lfs iterrations would be better or worse than original?

Quote from rane_nbg :

Hi and happy 20th aniversary of your loyalty to lfs.

You first have to understand that Scawen is under a lot of pressure lately as he is busting his ass off to bring all the recent updates into an official patch. Luckily, many of us do recognize and appreciate his efforts and we try to encourage him. Unfortunately, there are also some people who think that Scawen is obligated to fullfil their requests and wishes for improvements, just because they paid some 35eur or so. If there would be some kind of a monthly subscription system like in iRacing, then maybe, but as it's now, it's just ridiculous to expect anything other than what lfs already is.

Second, please do not forget that LFS is just a PC game and it is a master piece of coding, done by 1 guy. What do you expect? Very realistic modeling of all phenomena required for accurate simulation of a racecar is simply not possible yet, so many aproximations (simplifications) have to be done. Maybe with quantum computers in future things could go much closer to reality, who knows.

Now, my humble opinion about your requests. Points that are equivalent to the claim "make lfs better" and which do not explain any issue in particulair or do not add any value to improvement suggestions are: 1, 3, 4, 5 and 8, therefore not even worth disscusing. Point 2 is reasonable, we'll see how that works with new tyre physics model. Point 6 is straight out lie, in lfs any tire slip = loss of traction and that results in loss of time. Point 7 is ok, but needs a major rehaul of lfs game engine and we will probably not see this for a long time even as a possibility that will be considered. Point 9 is reasonable and will probably be realized some time in the future. Point 10, this is entirely on LFS devs to decide, but I do not see why would anyone who makes a living out of this would do such a thing. Even if they workout a way to sell some licences, who's to say that following lfs iterrations would be better or worse than original?

Hello. First of all, thank you for your kindness. The users can decide for themselves whether these ideas are better or worse when they are realized. But I don't think that will happen as Scawen has already said that he won't read and consider this post under any circumstances. There are many ways to improve LFS, if I could do it, I would have done it myself, I wouldn't have written it here. After what Scawen said, I just wanted to write down my wishes in general and see the comments of the users. As for numbers 1,3,4,5,8, these improvements are not very difficult to make. Not everyone may agree, but anyone who has raced at least a couple of times in real life would tend to agree. Anyway, when the physics are improved, 1,3,4,5,8 will be fixed automatically. LFS is a place for me to develop driving theory, prepare setups and test vehicle physics, I never saw LFS as a computer game. I applied the same things in real life and even learned to drive 12 years ago from LFS. How and for what we use what we have is a very important factor.

6 is not an outright lie, traction reduction = loss of time, this is true, but sometimes you need to reduce traction to enter a corner faster, this is just one factor and there are many others. If we could go straight into every corner anyway, drifting wouldn't have been invented. In short, drift is faster in certain corners, grip is not always the fastest. Moreover, there is a limit to grip in real life, but almost none in lfs, because drivers have the opportunity to pull the handbrake dozens of times a second and put the car on the road. Therefore, there is usually no need for drifting techniques. If LFS is realistic enough, why isn't there a track racer in real life who can apply the handbrake dozens of times a second and put the car on the racing line? Then why don't rally drivers only drive with the grip technique? Also, as a very simple example, imagine that you enter a 90 degree corner driving an evo 6, would you use grip or drift? In such a situation the answer depends on many factors, as an example of a single factor, if you are using normal tires, of course drifting is faster. To enter a 90-degree corner without slipping, it is more logical and faster to have slick tires on your car, but how many evo 6s have slick tires? Drift technique depends on conditions such as the type of car, downforce, tire and the degree of the corner. There is no generalization between drifting and grip, that grip will always be faster. The reality is that in some situations drifting can become the faster technique, especially in sharp corners. The point here is that the driver can use both techniques skillfully according to the situation. Drifting starts when you cross the grip limit. Drift is a racing technique.

The simple scientific explanation of the drift technique is based on the following factors:

Radius of rotation (R): The turning radius depends on factors such as speed (v), turning angle (θ) and coefficient of friction (μ). In an ideal situation, the radius of gyration is smaller when drifting. The radius of gyration is expressed by this equation: R = v^2 / (μ * g)

Friction force (F_friction): When drifting, the sliding of the rear wheels of the car affects the friction force. The friction force is expressed by this equation: F_friction = μ * m * g

Newton's second law of motion: Newton's second law of motion relates the acceleration (a), mass (m) and applied force (F) of an object. When drifting, the force applied to the rear wheels causes the vehicle to gain lateral acceleration. This acceleration can be represented by this equation: F = m * a

I can provide more detailed explanations and better scientific evidence, I can show it to you live or LFS. I also suggest you to research master drivers like Juan Manuel Fangio and Takahashi Kunimitsu. This is my general response to your article "Point 6 is straight out lie". I respect all your opinions and thank you again for your kindness and valuable opinions. Thank you for replying too, I wrote this article to get the opinions of all users on this subject. I wish you all a good evening.

I would love you to educate me on the physics of drifting by using elementary school level equations. This truly made me laugh, thank you for that

If you drift into a corner, you may enter the corner more quickly, but then exit will be slower as excess speed that you carried into the corner will make you slide = lose grip = lose time. Driving style on high grip track and rally style gravel driving are very different. What I'm refering applies only to smooth driving on a tarmac track.

Quote from rane_nbg :

I would love you to educate me on the physics of drifting by using elementary school level equations. This truly made me laugh, thank you for that

If you drift into a corner, you may enter the corner more quickly, but then exit will be slower as excess speed that you carried into the corner will make you slide = lose grip = lose time. Driving style on high grip track and rally style gravel driving are very different. What I'm refering applies only to smooth driving on a tarmac track.

Have you read my article completely and carefully? There are places where drift can be used, and there are places where it cannot be used. There are places where the grip technique can be used, and there are places where it cannot be used. A generalization such as gripor drift alone cannot be made faster, this is not possible. Also elementary school level equations I don't need to offer more because the basic principles are simple. The problem is that your average speed determines the lap time. Let's consider it as corner entry-corner middle-corner exit. Imagine entering a corner on a 90-degree asphalt road with a grip technique in an AWD car. Will you be able to enter the 90-degree corner straight at full throttle without any hesitation? NO. If it were possible and the grip limit was actually this high, drifting would not have been invented!

With random numbers:
Probably with the grip technique, your speed at the entrance of the corner will be 85km/h, your speed in the middle of the corner will be 55km/h, and your speed at the exit of the corner will be 60km/h. Your average speed in the corner: 66.6km/h.

Let's take the drift technique, usually you don't even need to brake, you can release the gas pedal and put the vehicle in the slip angle drift line, because you are driving an AWD car. Your speed at the entrance of the corner will be 100km/h, your speed in the middle of the corner will be 50km/h and your speed at the exit of the corner will be 60km/h. Your average speed in the corner: 70km/h. Because the car you are driving is an AWD with low downforce and grip tires.

These are just primary school addition and subtraction operations, just a simple example. Because there is no need for more. Likewise, knowledge of primary school physics is sufficient for evidence. Instead of discussing primary school science, you can measure the reality of what I say by entering the LFS and trying it, if you have sufficient control. "make you slide = lose grip = lose time." There is no such thing as such, the higher your average speed in the corner and the sufficient speed after the exit of the corner, the better your lap time. Sometimes you may need to slide to increase your average speed in the corner. There is some truth to what you say, but it is not right to describe it as definitive. If what you said were 100% true, we would not have heard of names like Takahashi Kunimitsu or Fangio, nor would they have shown superior success in the races they participated in. What you say may be generally true, but it is not always true. A generalization such as grip is faster than drift can never be made. This is against the laws of physics. Depending on what you understand from the word drift, what comes to your mind changes. You wouldn't try drifting with an LMP or F1 car, but if you're going downhill on a mountain road in an Impreza, you definitely HAVE to drift. Downforce, car type, tires and cornering radius are the biggest factors.

The lower the Downforce of a vehicle and the worse the tires, the more effective the driver's driving technique is on driving and speed. As downforce increases and high-grip tires such as slick tires are installed, o/s or u/s driving style ceases to be important or valid, because you can't display a driving style that slides to either the o/s or u/s side. Your driving style shifts to neutral as these factors increase. So there are many factors affecting here. "Point 6 is straight out lie, in lfs any dash slip = loss of traction and that results in loss of time." You said that, but you did not include a validity such as asphalt road here. Moreover, even if there was an asphalt road, nothing would change. Because this is not just a factor depending on whether the road surface is asphalt or not. Now let me simplify the issue even more: "If you drift into a corner, you may enter the corner more quickly, but then exit will be slower as excess speed that you carried into the corner will make you slide = lose grip = lose time." you said. I assume the corner is 90 degrees, when you do this, slowing down at the exit of the corner depends on the type of your tires, whether your car's traction is FWD, RWD or AWD, downforce, your car's engine technology, engine power and engine response, driver's style, experience and level, road conditions, tire and asphalt. It varies depending on the temperature, suspension, camber, pressure, toe settings, and even depending on the car available, assuming two people are racing. LoL.

So "ahhh, I drifted into the corner at speed. I will definitely exit the corner slower than the person driving with grip technique." It is not possible to make such a statement. Then I ask you, not as a physicist, but as a primary school child, to give evo 6 to both Tommi Makinen and you on the asphalt and downhill mountain road. Which of you will win this race? Makinen is four-wheel sliding, which means he will slow down on corner exit, slower than grip driving, and therefore his lap time will be poor. According to your theory, you will win this race. Do you think this is possible? Probably not.

i need to see some of your awd hotlaps...

there's always some degree of slip and sometimes it's beneficial to throw the car around a bit, but going full on 4wd drift on tarmac to go faster seems a bit silly.

Quote from YukselYilmaz :

As for numbers 1,3,4,5,8, these improvements are not very difficult to make.

That's quite a bold assumption from you saying that "these improvements are not very difficult to make" without having any knowledge about the underlying code that's responsible for the physics in LFS.

Also, some of your requests are quite vague, like "better optimization of the asphalt", "the same consequences as in real life" and "improve the car's reaction to this high speed". It's easy to point out that something is wrong with the current model (and I'm not denying that there are inaccuracies in the public version), but that doesn't automatically make it easy to fix or improve.

Anyhow, this whole topic of improving tyre physics will be more relevant once the new tyre physics is released. Right now we don't know how exactly the new model will affect handling.

Quote from rane_nbg :

I would love you to educate me on the physics of drifting by using elementary school level equations. This truly made me laugh, thank you for that

If you drift into a corner, you may enter the corner more quickly, but then exit will be slower as excess speed that you carried into the corner will make you slide = lose grip = lose time. Driving style on high grip track and rally style gravel driving are very different. What I'm refering applies only to smooth driving on a tarmac track.

You can also find a more detailed explanation here.

The dynamic friction force (F_s) depends on the friction between the sliding wheels and the road surface. Dynamic friction is a force that prevents the vehicle from sliding and gains momentum in the lateral direction. The friction force (F_s) is calculated as follows: F_s = μ * N Here: F _s, dynamic friction strength μ, friction ratio between the road surface and the tyres N, normal force equal to the weight of the vehicle In this equation, the friction factor (μ) varies depending on the characteristics of the road and tyres. A high coefficient of friction ensures better grip of the wheels and a more controlled drift.

During a drift, it is important that the vehicle rotates by gaining lateral momentum. The relationship between the lateral momentum (a_lat), the radius of rotation (R) and the speed (v) is expressed by the following equation: a_lat = v^2 / R In this equation, the lateral momentum(a _lat) represents the speed of the vehicle's rotation. The smaller the rotation radius (R), the sharper the vehicle's rotation movement.

During a drift again, the slide of the vehicle's rear wheels and the friction force are important to ensure this slide. The rear wheel slide gives the vehicle a boost in the lateral direction. The relationship between the rear wheel slide (s_r) and the lateral momentum (a_lat) is expressed by the following equation: s_r = (I_r * α * w _r) / v

Here:

s_r, rear wheel slide
I_r, the moment of the rear wheels
α, the angular momentum of the rear wheels
w_r, the angular speed of the rear wheels
v, vehicle speed


In this equation, factors such as the momentum of the rear wheels (I_r), angular momentum (α) and angular speed (w_r) influence the back wheel shift. The sliding of the rear wheels causes the formation of the friction force and the application of a driving force to the vehicle. I think this explains the situation better.

Quote from johneysvk :

i need to see some of your awd hotlaps...

there's always some degree of slip and sometimes it's beneficial to throw the car around a bit, but going full on 4wd drift on tarmac to go faster seems a bit silly.

I advocate the idea that a driver should only make the necessary move where necessary.

Quote from Flame CZE :

That's quite a bold assumption from you saying that "these improvements are not very difficult to make" without having any knowledge about the underlying code that's responsible for the physics in LFS.

Also, some of your requests are quite vague, like "better optimization of the asphalt", "the same consequences as in real life" and "improve the car's reaction to this high speed". It's easy to point out that something is wrong with the current model (and I'm not denying that there are inaccuracies in the public version), but that doesn't automatically make it easy to fix or improve.

Anyhow, this whole topic of improving tyre physics will be more relevant once the new tyre physics is released. Right now we don't know how exactly the new model will affect handling.

If one day my 10th wish comes true, we will be able to know enough about the underlying code responsible for the physics in LFS. Moreover, no matter how difficult it is, a society can overcome this challenge. So this is not a difficult thing for a community. However, for this, lfs needs to be open source, but unfortunately it is not. These requests are valid provided that they are open source, so I put an asterisk on my 9th and 10th requests and wanted to draw your attention there. Because my 10th request is about LFS being open source. Of course, this is at the discretion of the developers.

Also, it is impossible for everything to be exactly like real life, but at least it can be better optimized. I would further expand on my requests, which you say are vague, but that would cause the post to be longer and people not to read it. That's why I kept it short. Of course, if one is coding, some things are not easy to fix or optimize. We need open source because usually only one person codes it anyway. As I said, it is in everyone's interest to be open source, but this is at the discretion of the developers. Thank you.

Exactly 0 development would happen if LFS was open source becuase as much as everyone talks a big game, the reality is the majority have 0 actual capabilities to make the changes they desire.

Not to mention a successful open source project does require a project lead to act as the benevolent dictator for the project and none of you kids who come in with "just make it open source" would be capable of listening to anything other than the sounds that come out of your own ass.

Quote from YukselYilmaz :

The relationship between the rear wheel slide (s_r) and the lateral momentum (a_lat) is expressed by the following equation: s_r = (I_r * α * w _r) / v

Here:

s_r, rear wheel slide
I_r, the moment of the rear wheels
α, the angular momentum of the rear wheels
w_r, the angular speed of the rear wheels
v, vehicle speed

What if the car is not moving?
With v=0, you divide by zero and the car explodes. (WR trick)

Quote from gu3st :

Exactly 0 development would happen if LFS was open source becuase as much as everyone talks a big game, the reality is the majority have 0 actual capabilities to make the changes they desire.

Not to mention a successful open source project does require a project lead to act as the benevolent dictator for the project and none of you kids who come in with "just make it open source" would be capable of listening to anything other than the sounds that come out of your own ass.

I guess you were expecting me to re-code the LFS and post the new LFS here, if that's the way it's going to be, why is there an Improvement Suggestions section! How do you know if you haven't tried it? Are you an astrologer? I think things need to change, at the same time many people have the necessary equipment. LFS is already a simulator that hasn't been developed for a long time, what harm would it do if it was open source! But I'm not going to tire myself any more for a simulator that doesn't develop and a community that doesn't want development. There are many examples of disasters not only now but also in the past. I've been following lfs since its inception and the result will be just talk, because it's not in the interest of the developers to fulfill the 9th and 10th requests. After this post I will stop replying on this topic, users can discuss among themselves.

Quote from Gutholz :

What if the car is not moving?
With v=0, you divide by zero and the car explodes. (WR trick)

Hahahahaha

Quote from YukselYilmaz :

After this post I will stop replying on this topic, users can discuss among themselves.

Thank you. I'm not sure where were you for 20years, but lfs is in constant developement and small improvements are happening all the time, many of our suggestions got realized and saw life in the game. It is slow, yes, but considering that it's all on Scawen alone is quite a remarkable programming achievment.

Quote from YukselYilmaz :

Hello. This is my newly created account, some of you know me.
...

Aahahahahahahahah

Quote from YukselYilmaz :

(...) But I don't think that will happen as Scawen has already said that he won't read and consider this post under any circumstances.

The fact that he won't care bout this post doesn't means he disregards all the ideas this post tries to sell. In fact, physics related issues are announced to be improved soonTM.

Sometimes setup changes you apply result in counterintuitive behaviour, because those values are not more/less effect slides, but they represent ranges. And sometimes you can overthrow the range of some value where it actually starts decreasing it's effect it's supposed to provide.

If you drive more powerful cars, with bigger tyres, the lock-up from downshift is actually present to the extend where it's not controllabe. I see you're mainly discussing GTi class things, but here I gotta agree with you: the broken locked differential meta, which turns users into handbrake steering has to be adressed. We just got to wait for brake temperature system and maybe axle damage? But yeah, soonTM.

Open source and games is really diffrent case. You can see 0.A.D project, where open sourceing isn't really grinding some boost to the project. Some things just need their time to cook, and some things taste better when served by single man (Scawen), as he can just spend all his time into makeing his vision happen instead of expleing to a group how he envisions LFS. The fact that this vision sometimes differs from expectations or lives in 20y backwards time is diffrent matter.

However, I still do see some open-sourcment to be made here. Look at Urban Terror or other quake-like games, they let all the repetitive but neccessary stuff out in opensource, but kept the game cream logic closed behind a VM. And there's actually now more than 10 game engines that run .qvm VMs thanks to this, some are optimised for particular .qvm (Urban Terror). They wanned game to run in Dx12 backed, they done Dx12 backend support. They wanned game engine with Vulkan backed, they made game engine with Vulkan backend. Everybody was happy. Now, here comes 2024 and WASM: an easy VM out of existing source files for everyone! So basicly: Scawen could keep his netcode and physics code shut in the .wasm, and everyone else could do a wrapper around this .wasm aka game-engine that would run LFS. Than we would get linux builds, even web builds! And it will really show who's cappable of writing game engine and who's only criticing soly by some theorems. And Klakacz will get his optimised, no netgraph, 1bit textures linux build aswell. Ofc. the transition to VM like solution will require some time, but something to consider after all planed updates are merged into stable release.

Also big thing to consider about LFS is it's graphic part: let's be real, there's no way single dev will ever manage to compete with big AAA studios without some compromise. But in what others see as disadvantage, I actually see a oppurtunity! The simple graphics are obviously a low compute resources requirment, and this can be utilzed into shifting the LFS into Web: again throught WebAssembly and WebGPU. LFS was always a pioneer in how accessible it is, to the point where some wheel manufactures have packed CD discs alongside their wheels. So the possibility to one day send an URL to someone upon entering it will load LFS instance on some desired track/car/server configuration would be just step forward in a direction we're already far-in.

Quote from YukselYilmaz :

I guess you were expecting me to re-code the LFS and post the new LFS here, if that's the way it's going to be, why is there an Improvement Suggestions section!

For people to give reasonable feedback and suggestions.

Quote from YukselYilmaz :

I think things need to change, at the same time many people have the necessary equipment. LFS is already a simulator that hasn't been developed for a long time, what harm would it do if it was open source!

It's a good thing that what you "think needs to change" doesn't actually matter. It's Scawen (and Eric/Victor)'s project. And it is under development. Scawen's spent the better part of the last 2-3 months in a test patch phase adding a lot of community requested improvements to the modding system.

And I'm sure Scawen's family wouldn't appreciate it going open source considering I'm sure they enjoy eating food and having the lights on.

Quote from YukselYilmaz :

But I'm not going to tire myself any more for a simulator that doesn't develop and a community that doesn't want development. There are many examples of disasters not only now but also in the past. I've been following lfs since its inception and the result will be just talk, because it's not in the interest of the developers to fulfill the 9th and 10th requests. After this post I will stop replying on this topic, users can discuss among themselves.

Just because the simulator isn't developing in a direction you like doesn't mean there's no development. Hell, in this thread alone you've said some ridculous things that go against most conventional wisdom about racing. (drift being faster than "grip" lmaoooooo).

And I don't believe that you were even born when LFS was "incepted" with how you behave.

Quote from gu3st :

And I don't believe that you were even born when LFS was "incepted" with how you behave.

How can you not believe this, after all he's a former street racer so he must know a thing or two

On a more serious note the first post makes no sense, of course people are capable of making world records and driving on the optimal lines, and they will be always capable of doing that even if physics are different, that is usually a result of hours/days/weeks of practise to get a single good lap in. You only see the best lap in hotlaps, that doesn't mean it's the only lap in a track/car that the person has done.
You can adjust your clutch pedal in real life to have bite earlier or later depending on your preferences. Many racers use handbrake to get extra rotation into tight turns, especially in rallying but it works in circuit racing too. Most famous example i can think of is late 90s F1, when McLaren fitted their cars with an extra brake pedal that worked on one of the tyres on rear axle.
The only thing i can agree on is that the tyres at the moment do not cool down as fast as they should in my opinion, but i have no data to compare it to. Road tyres are pretty much perfect in LFS. Im not sure about how much the sidewall/tyre carcass should flex under forces, road tyres seem ok here but slick tyres have a bit too much flex in my opinion. hybrids/knobbly could have less grip, too.

I learnt valuable stuff regarding driving in LFS, but only after i got my real license and drove tens of thousands of kilometers in real life (some kilometers went by faster, some at road speeds) i became somewhat faster in LFS too. You can use driving principles learnt in LFS in real life, and vice versa. As long as you understand how to take in the information from force feedback and how different it is from driving a real car.

Quote from YukselYilmaz :

*10-) LFS can be open source, so that it can get to the level it has come to in decades in a few weeks. Drivers can agree among themselves to bring the optimization they want.

Open source is does not magically compact a decade of work into a few weeks.
Usually in OS contributors work only on the project in their free time. Rarely does that mean a more than a few hours per week.
People tend to be unreliable, they take long random breaks or quit without notice.
Money is a necessary evil that allows developers to concentrate on LFS instead of working 12 hours per day in a steel mill or coding 850MB sized printer drivers or whatever.

It is also interesting to look at other open source racing games, for example Speed Dreams:
http://www.speed-dreams.org/
It is based on TORCS and if you see that as its starting point then it has been in development longer than LFS.
Speed Dreams is a great project and it even has some features LFS does not have. For example weather or track editor. If I recall, mentioning it due to recent interest: it even has live delta timing!
But in my opinion LFS is overall more advanced and polished.

Regarding bugs and abuse of certain flaws, those do exist in every game.
iRacing has maybe the biggest budget of all racing games and even there players continue to find new exploits like "brake dragging" or "driving on grass."

Quote from CRAAACH :

The fact that he won't care bout this post doesn't means he disregards all the ideas this post tries to sell

The problem was simply that this was originally posted in a Test Patch thread. There is a sticky "Rules" thread and important messages are repeated with big colored letters in first post of current thread. It is nothing to take personal, it has always been that off topic routinely gets removed there.

The one difference I guess with iRacing vs other sims is that the exploits do get addressed quickly.