Okay then.. "Girls don't like me."
I remember Scawen mentioning that improving the start was on his list for the next incompatible patch (or one afterwards, anyway, pretty high up on his list)... Might even find that post...
Edit: Yes, deggis pointed one out, I also found another one, where he tells the same, but a bit more between the lines...
Edit: Yes, deggis pointed one out, I also found another one, where he tells the same, but a bit more between the lines...
Imo the most unrealistic part of LFS is...
...the trees :rolleyes:
...the trees :rolleyes:
I too hate the start system, but I can guess why it's like it is... LAG. By automatically releasing the cars at the same time this stops those with higher pings from reacting quicker than everyone else.
I have always thought that LFS is the purest example of how some things are more important than others. Thing like tire physics will always be the number 1 of LFS. Every incompatible patch we get has some tire physics updates, and I can see most of us agreeing with that. Car handling characteristics are and always will be the number 1 point of LFS. Online part is the 2nd. I guess that's why we the other stuff so unfinished at this stage. With tires we can overheat them, flatspot them, blow them (oops) etc. But some other stuff like engine damage or proper race procedures are very basic.
LFS is defenately a wip, but it does its core stuff 1000x better than anything else. And that is physics.
As said earlier, realism is a subjective thing. On the other side we have people who want ghost cars and on the other side we have people who could only take ghost car if it was used in real life racing. There is a lot of people in the middle too, some closer to other side than others. The extreme ends tend to be the loudest ones.
The first group thinks that "it is a computer program, making a ghost car is not something very hard and there are (or can be) some benefits gained of using using it. For this group LFS is better with ghost car. The second group sees LFS as a computer program that aims to be as close to real life as possible as it can be on a computer screen. With this group every suggestion and feature request goes through the "is it used in real life? / how is it used? /where is it used etc." and if the suggestion has valid it gets the OK.
I see myself as 80% part of the second group and 20% part of the 1st group. I want LFS to simulate real life racing as closely as possible, but I don't want to wait hours to get my cars fixed. With this belief I am, of course, pursuing my own interests when I see a ghost car topic on the forum. I don't see ghost car as part of racing sim, because ghost car mods aren't used in real life. I understand that ghost cars are not probably used in real life because of technical limitations but imho that doesn't mean that we could have it in a sim, just because it is possible and could be useful.
LFS is defenately a wip, but it does its core stuff 1000x better than anything else. And that is physics.
As said earlier, realism is a subjective thing. On the other side we have people who want ghost cars and on the other side we have people who could only take ghost car if it was used in real life racing. There is a lot of people in the middle too, some closer to other side than others. The extreme ends tend to be the loudest ones.
The first group thinks that "it is a computer program, making a ghost car is not something very hard and there are (or can be) some benefits gained of using using it. For this group LFS is better with ghost car. The second group sees LFS as a computer program that aims to be as close to real life as possible as it can be on a computer screen. With this group every suggestion and feature request goes through the "is it used in real life? / how is it used? /where is it used etc." and if the suggestion has valid it gets the OK.
I see myself as 80% part of the second group and 20% part of the 1st group. I want LFS to simulate real life racing as closely as possible, but I don't want to wait hours to get my cars fixed. With this belief I am, of course, pursuing my own interests when I see a ghost car topic on the forum. I don't see ghost car as part of racing sim, because ghost car mods aren't used in real life. I understand that ghost cars are not probably used in real life because of technical limitations but imho that doesn't mean that we could have it in a sim, just because it is possible and could be useful.
Very well written, fully agree.
I'm about 95% second group, and 5% first if anyone cares
That sums it up very nicely. :up:
Yes, very nice post Hyperactive. Problems listed in the original post here are problems due to the fact that it is a WIP. Other stuff like Ghostcar stuff is unrealistic. So is autoclutch, autothrottle blip/lift, keyboard/mouse control, sequential shifters in road cars, etc, but they are there due to hardware limitations. I'm all for LFS becoming as realistic as possible, but not at the cost of it being a $30,344 sim.
That would be $44(USD) for LFS, $300 for G25, and $30,000 for motion platform to get rid of the unrealistic gforce movement on the screen. It would be proper and real to actually have your head bouncing around, not just the visuals on the screen.
That would be $44(USD) for LFS, $300 for G25, and $30,000 for motion platform to get rid of the unrealistic gforce movement on the screen. It would be proper and real to actually have your head bouncing around, not just the visuals on the screen.
Realism
(60 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG