Quote from HeerBommel :

...and rFacor is difficult to join online hosts becouse of all the modifications.....

Seems that this is the big downside if you let your program to be moddable.

Quote from LRB_Aly :

Seems that this is the big downside if you let your program to be moddable.

It is , if it is done like in rfactor, but I would make it so that there is required version number in mod, that must be 1.0 for first version and 1.1 for next etc. Now this number would be seen then at online lobby so we instantly know about what version server is running, then there would be one centralized place where all mods are presented with latest versions.

This way it is at least possible to know what version is needed and where to get latest.

Best would of course be that you could update your version when you are about to enter to server at lobby, but that might be bit difficult to make working as nobody won't have enough resourses to host all mods in one location.

Does anyone know if the ZR cars in the demo are on road tires or slicks + is there a way of telling this in rF?

Quote from ajp71 :

Does anyone know if the ZR cars in the demo are on road tires or slicks + is there a way of telling this in rF?

Hmm, maybe would be better if you ask question in rFactor forum instead of LFS forum

In garage you can see text 'street' under tires, so they claim to be street tires, but they are not very good presentation of street tires actually.

Just to keep this ancient thread alive...

I think LFS mods will be possible in the future, but one of the things that might make it a lot better than rF, is that you won't be tweaking the "physics".

You build the car using real life data: suspension type, mounting points, weight, weight distribution, engine type/size, coefficient of drag, etc. Then put it in the game. No physics changes, all you need is to download the car, which could possibly be automated to some degree.

Tracks would be close to the same. It could even be that Eric could provide a series of texture "pallets" that could be used for different tracks. As long as the traction settings for all of the textures are consistent, I don't see why it would be as much of a problem to support tracks than it is in rF.

But, anyway, that is years off for LFS. I am happy with the direction things are going now. I trust the devs to come up with a great system when and if they do get around to supporting mods.

Damn, it made 30 pages with out getting locked.....
that just sucks

@Hallen The Devs have already said that LFS will be moddable when S3 final is released. To what extent I don't know but your ideas are certianly possible.

As for RFactor Vs. LFS how could you even think of compairing them? I think BBT's saying says it all =P

Quote from Viper93 :

As for RFactor Vs. LFS how could you even think of compairing them?

Because some of us may have to choose between one or the other. It could be
money, time, focus, whatever. In my case it is a choice for our league...we cannot
expect members to buy multiple sims and get familiar with them all.

So a choice sometimes has to be made.

As for our choice, we are undecided. We (organizing members) have been working
up a mod in rfactor that is just some tweaks to suit our league, but we have also
been working with LFS.

Our opinion so far...opinion. Again, opinion:

The funny thing is that we have the opposite opinion about some things than the
prevailing opinion here, for better or worse. For example, I think LFS sounds are
better than rFactor. Certainly they sound synthetic, but they also sound alive and
informative (although I have raced RL as well, and engines in RL are not always
so nicely informative). LFS wins sound.

LFS FF is unquestionably more immediate and real, but in a funny way is floatier
and less informative. The hackery in rFactor's FF does bridge the information gap
we have from not being in a real car. I'd have to call FF a draw, in spite of LFS's
clearly superior FF base. That extra rFactor information is worth something, and I
don;t mean the canned bumps, which I turn off. I means the hacks to convey loss
of front end, etc. Not strictly realistic, but in RL we get the information in other
ways...so overloading the FF with more info can be justified (same goes for
sound...which is why LFS wins sound).

The physics is misleading. Drive one or two hours of both and you'll likely
agree that LFS has better physics. However, drive two weeks of both, and the
tables even out. Drive two months of both, and they both have irritating breaks
from reality. They clearly are both based on multibody time integrated dynamic
simulations. rFactor is NOT table based at its core, although it seems to have more
layers of something going on above this core...for better or worse. LFS has a
cleaner rawer feel, like GPL, and seems truer to its own
model, and breaks down only when the core model itself breaks down, which only
happens in subtle ways. rFactor, like with FF, seems to have more hackery atop of
its model, but often for the better. Any simulation model is just that, a model, a
simplification, and they all break down somehow somewhere. LFS gently just
seems to follow its math where ever it leads, always natural within its own reality.
rFactor on the other hand seems to explicitly make an effort to feel right, as in more
calibrated to reality in feel, within its sweet spot...which is normal driving within low
mistake slip angles. Within this window I have to say rfactor actually feels better.
However, when rfactor breaks downs it is jarring and unnatural, unlike LFS. Worst
case is pre-spin slip angles and angular momentum, where rFactor gets downright
whacky.

To summarize physics, if you want a full performance envelope that feels self
consistent and natural within its own approximation at all times, LFS wins. If you
want more RL realistic feel within nominal conditions, and can deal with odd
behavior and strange transitions in extreme conditions (like pre-spin), rFactor wins.
I think this is why the RL drivers in our league prefer rfactor physics (when you
don't make big mistakes, rfactor feels more real, and the rfactor junk you get when
you screw up serves you right ) while both the hardcore sim racers
and console migrants in our league prefer LFS physics (without RL experience there
is no 'real', and LFS is a tighter cleaner feel throughout the envelope).

Despite the two big preceding paragraphs on physics, both LFS and rFactor have
what I'd call state-of-the-art consumer grade physics. Hopefully, rF2, S3, DR, etc
will move the state-of-the-art itself forward.

Graphics engine, rFactor wins, no question. Pallette-wise, within the default content,
LFS makes some better choices...but rFactor has the better graphics.

Flexibity, results exposure, and all the other stuff that comes with modability, goes
to rFactor. What LFS does, it does right within it decisions, but it just doesn't do this
part (yet).

UI and setup, for our league, actually is better served by LFS. It is cleaner, tighter,
and just the right amount of setup parameters. rFactor can be overwhelming in
this respect to the console migrant and RL contingent (RL racers seem to have
simpler cars they tune themselves or have engineers for more complex cars).
rFactor's suspension can make even RL racers feel like they are doing more work
and less play. LFS also pops between screen much quicker and the whole
UI experience is quicker, cleaner, faster, and less frustrating. LFS wins UI and
garage, despite its seemingly arcadey approach to the matter.

AI. Bleck. They both suck to an embarassing level. This is like trying to decide
which sewage smells better. I'll actually give it to LFS for the humor vote. It is
still a riot watching untrained AI spin about just like human newbies.

So our league is undecided, and may come down to one last issue. Aids. Our
league trys to accomodate consolers, RLers, and hardcore simmers...which means
consolers need/want aids to play along with non-aid hardcores. RLers tend to
go in between, optimizing for for RL feel of their particular RL car. rFactor wins
in aids support. Still, lower powered cars don't need aids even for consolers, so
the decision is not made.

Quote from orangutan :

Because some of us may have to choose between one or the other. It could be
money, time, focus, whatever. In my case it is a choice for our league...we cannot
expect members to buy multiple sims and get familiar with them all.

So a choice sometimes has to be made.
...

One of the best, most comprehensive posts I've ever read here (and by far not the only one), it made me break my long-kept silence "watching, waiting" - Well it seems it took you some time too
Opinions may and will differ - but this was well written

Quote from Falcon77 :

One of the best, most comprehensive posts I've ever read here (and by far not the only one), it made me break my long-kept silence "watching, waiting" - Well it seems it took you some time too
Opinions may and will differ - but this was well written

Indeed, is it sure that he is not writing to autosimsport soon?

Indeed, very articulate way of discussing the physics differences.

Quote from JTbo :

Indeed, is it sure that he is not writing to autosimsport soon?

Not with that positive opinions about LFS I guess

But great review!

Quote from frokki :

Not with that positive opinions about LFS I guess

But great review!

Well, don't know about that, maybe ABS do have sometimes bit biased views, but maybe it is just that LFSers are looking trough LFS glasses

That BF1 vs rfactor F1 was bit odd at places indeed, but I don't think there was any favor towards either title.

Quote from JTbo :

Indeed, is it sure that he is not writing to autosimsport soon?

Whoa there, careful. Some people might take that as an insult.

Let's just say, it did its part to make netKar Pro what it is today... and got an insanely good reputation in return
But I'm wandering OT, sorry *runs*

Quote from JTbo :

Well, don't know about that, maybe ABS do have sometimes bit biased views, but maybe it is just that LFSers are looking trough LFS glasses

That BF1 vs rfactor F1 was bit odd at places indeed, but I don't think there was any favor towards either title.

i agree, they arent anti lfs at all ASS isnt critical enough imo its like they are trying very hard not to piss anyone off

Ok, I managed to get my hands on a code for Rfactor (Thanks Thommo) and I can honestly say, even though everything to do with driving in LFS is miles better, that I like the game.

I've only installed 2 car mods, the Megane trophy and the ETTC 2003 mod, when you get a decenttrack like the F1 Nurbugring or Barcelona with a few cars you can have good fun races which is what i've been needing.

I do think that the physics is pretty weird and poopy but it's still fun trying to keep the RWD megane from spinning, as once the cars go in Rfactor u very rarely can catch them and thats part of the fun for me.

However I rarely play it, only once every few days when i'm bored and that doesn't usually last long, but I can see why people play it and preffer it over LFS.

Quote from Bawbag :

Ok, I managed to get my hands on a code for Rfactor (Thanks Thommo) and I can honestly say, even though everything to do with driving in LFS is miles better, that I like the game.

I've only installed 2 car mods, the Megane trophy and the ETTC 2003 mod, when you get a decenttrack like the F1 Nurbugring or Barcelona with a few cars you can have good fun races which is what i've been needing.

I do think that the physics is pretty weird and poopy but it's still fun trying to keep the RWD megane from spinning, as once the cars go in Rfactor u very rarely can catch them and thats part of the fun for me.

However I rarely play it, only once every few days when i'm bored and that doesn't usually last long, but I can see why people play it and preffer it over LFS.

Try V8Factor or McLaren (sportsrcar) mod too, those have bit different physics, sure they still don't feel quite right, but better, ETCC and Megane are not most realistic mods to be honest, but rFactor community seem to prefer gfx over anything else, well at least that is what impression I have got when looking comments about mods.

ETCC specially has certain flaws in physics side that makes it fun to race but not so realistic, I have my own physics for it and it is much better, but still not very real as would need to make new tires to get it as real as it is possible with ISI engine.

There was a patch released the other day for the ETCC and it done tot he cars specificly what I had to mod the setups for, less twitchyness and oversteer when you lifted the throttle a tiny bit.

The megane one is quite fun IMO.

Yea I also forgot to say the onlin play is MUCH better than LFS, you can actually have close racing with people and touch them without wathicng them fly hundreds of feet into the air, or watching yourself fly.

Quote from Bawbag :

Yea I also forgot to say the onlin play is MUCH better than LFS, you can actually have close racing with people and touch them without wathicng them fly hundreds of feet into the air, or watching yourself fly.

Why do people always say this about LFS. Name a time when we've raced and one car goes "flying" illepall If you want to hit each other head on, or play some destruction, then the hitting becomes a circus, but typical side-by-side racing happens all the time in LFS, I don't see people being catapulted into the sky, or even myself. Such a dumb argument.

lol tweaker . yeah there is lots of very close bumper to bumper, or door to door racing in lfs, but sometimes when cars make ever so slight contact... one of the cars gets catapaulted off the track. this is usually happens if there is a bit of lag right as the cars make contact, i think.
i dont know if this happens in rfactor, since i've never played that game online.


lol of course you have never seen any accidents because you are always far ahead of everyone you race.

Quote from orangutan :

Because some of us may have to choose between one or the other. It could be
money, time, focus, whatever. In my case it is a choice for our league...we cannot
expect members to buy multiple sims and get familiar with them all.

So a choice sometimes has to be made.

As for our choice, we are undecided. We (organizing members) have been working
up a mod in rfactor that is just some tweaks to suit our league, but we have also
been working with LFS.

Our opinion so far...opinion. Again, opinion:

The funny thing is that we have the opposite opinion about some things than the
prevailing opinion here, for better or worse. For example, I think LFS sounds are
better than rFactor. Certainly they sound synthetic, but they also sound alive and
informative (although I have raced RL as well, and engines in RL are not always
so nicely informative). LFS wins sound.

LFS FF is unquestionably more immediate and real, but in a funny way is floatier
and less informative. The hackery in rFactor's FF does bridge the information gap
we have from not being in a real car. I'd have to call FF a draw, in spite of LFS's
clearly superior FF base. That extra rFactor information is worth something, and I
don;t mean the canned bumps, which I turn off. I means the hacks to convey loss
of front end, etc. Not strictly realistic, but in RL we get the information in other
ways...so overloading the FF with more info can be justified (same goes for
sound...which is why LFS wins sound).

The physics is misleading. Drive one or two hours of both and you'll likely
agree that LFS has better physics. However, drive two weeks of both, and the
tables even out. Drive two months of both, and they both have irritating breaks
from reality. They clearly are both based on multibody time integrated dynamic
simulations. rFactor is NOT table based at its core, although it seems to have more
layers of something going on above this core...for better or worse. LFS has a
cleaner rawer feel, like GPL, and seems truer to its own
model, and breaks down only when the core model itself breaks down, which only
happens in subtle ways. rFactor, like with FF, seems to have more hackery atop of
its model, but often for the better. Any simulation model is just that, a model, a
simplification, and they all break down somehow somewhere. LFS gently just
seems to follow its math where ever it leads, always natural within its own reality.
rFactor on the other hand seems to explicitly make an effort to feel right, as in more
calibrated to reality in feel, within its sweet spot...which is normal driving within low
mistake slip angles. Within this window I have to say rfactor actually feels better.
However, when rfactor breaks downs it is jarring and unnatural, unlike LFS. Worst
case is pre-spin slip angles and angular momentum, where rFactor gets downright
whacky.

To summarize physics, if you want a full performance envelope that feels self
consistent and natural within its own approximation at all times, LFS wins. If you
want more RL realistic feel within nominal conditions, and can deal with odd
behavior and strange transitions in extreme conditions (like pre-spin), rFactor wins.
I think this is why the RL drivers in our league prefer rfactor physics (when you
don't make big mistakes, rfactor feels more real, and the rfactor junk you get when
you screw up serves you right ) while both the hardcore sim racers
and console migrants in our league prefer LFS physics (without RL experience there
is no 'real', and LFS is a tighter cleaner feel throughout the envelope).

Despite the two big preceding paragraphs on physics, both LFS and rFactor have
what I'd call state-of-the-art consumer grade physics. Hopefully, rF2, S3, DR, etc
will move the state-of-the-art itself forward.

Graphics engine, rFactor wins, no question. Pallette-wise, within the default content,
LFS makes some better choices...but rFactor has the better graphics.

Flexibity, results exposure, and all the other stuff that comes with modability, goes
to rFactor. What LFS does, it does right within it decisions, but it just doesn't do this
part (yet).

UI and setup, for our league, actually is better served by LFS. It is cleaner, tighter,
and just the right amount of setup parameters. rFactor can be overwhelming in
this respect to the console migrant and RL contingent (RL racers seem to have
simpler cars they tune themselves or have engineers for more complex cars).
rFactor's suspension can make even RL racers feel like they are doing more work
and less play. LFS also pops between screen much quicker and the whole
UI experience is quicker, cleaner, faster, and less frustrating. LFS wins UI and
garage, despite its seemingly arcadey approach to the matter.

AI. Bleck. They both suck to an embarassing level. This is like trying to decide
which sewage smells better. I'll actually give it to LFS for the humor vote. It is
still a riot watching untrained AI spin about just like human newbies.

So our league is undecided, and may come down to one last issue. Aids. Our
league trys to accomodate consolers, RLers, and hardcore simmers...which means
consolers need/want aids to play along with non-aid hardcores. RLers tend to
go in between, optimizing for for RL feel of their particular RL car. rFactor wins
in aids support. Still, lower powered cars don't need aids even for consolers, so
the decision is not made.

There are things that i don't agree, but i have to admit that this is a very very logical comparison.

About the rf and LFS comparison on normal and limit situations and on FF i think that you are right, and i think to have understood why:

atm lfs does not simulate ground effect and changing of wing's angle of attack.
When those 2 things will be introduced, imho that comparison will be changed

Quote from Tweaker :

Why do people always say this about LFS. Name a time when we've raced and one car goes "flying" illepall If you want to hit each other head on, or play some destruction, then the hitting becomes a circus, but typical side-by-side racing happens all the time in LFS, I don't see people being catapulted into the sky, or even myself. Such a dumb argument.

Saw it happen loads of times but a smaller instance of it happend in the last OLFS race, 2 cars touched and both got thrown to differnt sides of the track and into the walls, I don't think people would say it if it didn't happen.

Not a car on car crash but still, this is what people are talking about, something EVERYONE in LFS will most likely have encountered. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... ;mode=related&search=

Quote from Tweaker :

Why do people always say this about LFS. Name a time when we've raced and one car goes "flying" illepall If you want to hit each other head on, or play some destruction, then the hitting becomes a circus, but typical side-by-side racing happens all the time in LFS, I don't see people being catapulted into the sky, or even myself. Such a dumb argument.

With little contacts there is always a chance to get an instant flight to moon. It's kind of lottery do you get one or just minor damage. I don't know why you try to deny this because the collision model is just clearly unfinished and it has big problems. Of course there is also some good things about it, like proper wheel-to-wheel contact. Though the fact that you have to be SO afraid of getting catapulted is actually making online racing cleaner.

Quote from Tweaker :

Why do people always say this about LFS. Name a time when we've raced and one car goes "flying" illepall If you want to hit each other head on, or play some destruction, then the hitting becomes a circus, but typical side-by-side racing happens all the time in LFS, I don't see people being catapulted into the sky, or even myself. Such a dumb argument.

It's not at all dumb. Close racing in LFS is much more difficult than reality because of the collision model that does not absorb energy, and has no ability to correct for lag. It's rare to 'go flying' but tiny taps between cars often affect you far more than they should. There are even still sections of the track that if you touch you get launched.

Never happened to me but I sometimes see bizarre things happen ahead of me when two cars collide. Funnily, the cars sometimes settle back down on the track a split second after blasting apart, like the engine anticipated an enormous collision and then realised that it wasn't really a big deal.