I'd love to see this kind of track too, but unfortunately the way Lfs is developed now (1 modeler/texturer),
I think this would take just too long to create.

A point to point track would have to be very long to be satisfying imho...Longer than a lap of the racetracks that we currently have...
Add to this that it is not a circuit, therefore there are much more turns, less straights, more irregularities,
which will take even more time to model than normally.
Even the environment around the track would have to be bigger, more complicated and more diversified.

On the other hand Eric DID model South City didn't he?

I think the biggest problem with a track like this would be the sheer number of trees it would need to have. I know that these days everyone wants higher poly tracks and cars, but I don't think the LFS engine would deal with hundreds of trees very well.
And flat tree textured walls just look bad

+1

I asked about this a while back. Personally I'd prefer slightly wider roads so we could still have say 4 cars at once battling it out at once.

Dunno if LFS would cope, but it'd be blummin good fun.

Awsome idea!

Like the most demanding road in europe thats in France (Featured on Top Gear - JC driving new RS4).

That would be so so cool. Drive around without having to race, bumbs, normal road conditions! "Racing" along real roads would be much better than on a track in some cases tbh, Gran Turismo 4 and the alpine tracks for example.


All this increase system resorces. Well, some of us have high end hardware, and we want huge maps and awsome graphics.

Im using 28% CPU at 1600x1200, 6xAA and 16xAF using 156mb ram and GPUs at ~60% load. And im at 85FPS all the time... so I'd love HDR/high texture graphics/dense smoke.

What about people with low end hardware I hear you cry? Well it was high end once, now it isn't. Just because some hardware can't cope with decent graphics and huge maps doesn't mean you don't have to stop developing graphics and not have big maps. LFS on the whole looks ok, not the best I've seen but not at the bottom or the middle.

Big maps = alot of mesh data, everyone has 512mb now, if they don't well then that is their problem, means they can't play that track while the majority of us can. BF2 for example, every non DX9 card out there can't play it. Well there you go, tech going forward.



So im 100% for huge/long maps, country roads etc.

I have no problems with LFS gfx detail the way it is. My PC could handle a little more, but with a GeForce FX5500 higher than 1.1 pixel shading and my frame rate crumbles. We have rent and bills to pay for so I can't just go out and spend all my cash on something as trivial as a computer upgrade just to keep playing a game I love.

But that's irrelevant anyway, it's not about the hardware. It's the LFS rendering engine that myself and Lowe were talking about. There's no way it would handle the polycount required to make a forest look good - it's years old and wasn't designed for it. So even if we were all running the latest spec computers, the game itself would die.

And if you want to tell ScaViEr that you want them to totally rewrite the rendering engine, go right ahead

Quote from Dajmin :

But that's irrelevant anyway, it's not about the hardware. It's the LFS rendering engine that myself and Lowe were talking about. There's no way it would handle the polycount required to make a forest look good - it's years old and wasn't designed for it. So even if we were all running the latest spec computers, the game itself would die.

And if you want to tell ScaViEr that you want them to totally rewrite the rendering engine, go right ahead

Problem is, if LFS track quality is to make the quantum leap required to compete with other sims on a level plane, especially in the future, an upgraded engine is an inevitability.

Personally, LFS is mostly about greatt physics for a pc racing sim, and to be honest the current graphics and level of track detail is still somewhat good, especially at higher graphics settings. However, if LFS is to be on par and even beat its competitors on all major planes (graphics, sound, etc), upgrades are a must. those who've tried U30 will already know about the sound upgrades made to the existing sound engine.

Seriously, if S3 is ever going to happen, graphics and sound upgrades will be just as essential as physics improvemnets too. Anything that aids immersion benefits a simulator of anything.

Quote from Dajmin :

I have no problems with LFS gfx detail the way it is. My PC could handle a little more, but with a GeForce FX5500 higher than 1.1 pixel shading and my frame rate crumbles. We have rent and bills to pay for so I can't just go out and spend all my cash on something as trivial as a computer upgrade just to keep playing a game I love.

But that's irrelevant anyway, it's not about the hardware. It's the LFS rendering engine that myself and Lowe were talking about. There's no way it would handle the polycount required to make a forest look good - it's years old and wasn't designed for it. So even if we were all running the latest spec computers, the game itself would die.

And if you want to tell ScaViEr that you want them to totally rewrite the rendering engine, go right ahead

I doubt they have to re-write the engine to upgrade the graphics, I think common sense shouts out that its going to have to happen so they have written it too allow for larger textures/spaces/maps to be used.

If thats your PC then fair enough, you can have it set on low/med while we can have high/max.

To keep LFS in the graphics/modding game they have to make better gfx and allow for custom maps. (I know this is already planned for a proper release).

you don't need a bunch of trees for a MOUNTAIN road, just have solid rock on the side of the track going uphill, and a few trees on the other side of the track going downhill. and streetsigns would be fun too, it would be great to ride against the wall and take out a bunch of them

+1 definitly a fun idea