I'm glad you guys are actively taking steps to include LFS into your magazine. However, I could never shake the feeling that you have a bunch of hippies writing all the articles over there. I don't think I've read one article about a new sim that doesn't describe it as having "revolutionary" physics, and describing them as "arguably the most realistic physics of any racing sim to date". "Arguably"? Any sim can be argued to have the most realistic physics so this statement is just dull and shows a writer who's just too damn scared to have an opinion. I also never found out what's so damn revolutionary about these physics when ISI have been selling crapMotor in different disguises for so long now, only adding a new variable every few months or so. Your articles are never technical enough to get anything but a huge yawn from me. Let's face it, none of your writers really know how tyres behave, what a lateral slip curve looks like, what the effects of having a combination of slip ratio and slip angle are, how fluid dynamics work or anything like that. Instead of pretending to and hiding behind language in case you're wrong, why don't you just tell me what's so "revolutionary" about these physics and let me make my own mind up about which sim makes which aspect most accurately? Oh, shit, sorry, that would mean that the writer who has to review the latest rFactor patch (and is secretly a biased fanboy) has to say that it's not really revolutionary.

Quote from axus :

"Arguably"?

Well, this term has to be used, mainly because if it is not then a massive flame war starts somewhere or other. Probably does anyway.

Quote :

Let's face it, none of your writers really know how tyres behave, what a lateral slip curve looks like, what the effects of having a combination of slip ratio and slip angle are, how fluid dynamics work or anything like that. Instead of pretending to and hiding behind language in case you're wrong,

So, hang on, now you know what I know? And what all of our writers know? Perhaps you need a different magazine because the fact is, when we have provided technical articles, they have only received negative feedback from people that don't understand them.

I am glad you feel it necessary to offer insult here, I don't think I would knowingly assume that I know what you know.

Quote :

why don't you just tell me what's so "revolutionary" about these physics and let me make my own mind up about which sim makes which aspect most accurately?

Don't you do that anyway? Or does an author having an opinion force you into complying with it?

Quote :

Oh, shit, sorry, that would mean that the writer who has to review the latest rFactor patch (and is secretly a biased fanboy) has to say that it's not really revolutionary.

Words fail me.

I'll see you guys later.

i thot to suggest this, now someone sad it before me. ok i think we should have LFS magasine like 1 month edition whit report from all big leagues, and small ones too. LFS news (pach and stuff). Hardware part for wheels and other stuff. LFS tools like CSR, pit spotter etc. Interbiew and so on...

This should do about 10 writters. And drivers from leagues should send reports.

I like the idea

edit: i think this magazine should be only for LFS drives. Not public

Quote from N I K I :

edit: i think this magazine should be only for LFS drives. Not public

Why?

some random person might stumble upon it,read it and buy S2

mah, maybe it can be public but in first for LFS users and then for others

Quote from shrapnel :

Now, there will be bugs and problems with every piece of pre-release software, and the developer will tell you that those problems will not exist in the release version.

So, in the interests of not upsetting that developer, and eventually every developer, and eventually not having a magazine because you have no content, do you believe them? Or do you slate their unfinished code that you are previewing as.... Erm, unfinished code?

On that basis, there are way too rude and way too mean articles about LfS in your magazine... You even dare to criticize features that are not fully implemented! Boy, you must be pissed about LfS...

See, that's exactly where it all goes wrong... I WANT to know what problems there are so I can evaluate if I throw my hard-earned money into the throats of some developer, who might not even bothered researching slip angles... State the FACTS, that's what I expect from a journalist who takes himself serious and wants to be taken seriously... And if you can't write an article AND stay true to the facts, maybe it's best I didn't read much of that magazine...

You feel the need to break down my post and take each statement out of context so now I'll do the same.

Quote from shrapnel :

Well, this term has to be used, mainly because if it is not then a massive flame war starts somewhere or other. Probably does anyway.

But what's the point of using it EVERY single time? The statement that Sim X arguably has the most accurate physics of any sim doesn't say anything to begin with and you're taking away any possible implied meaning (saying it because it's very likely true but covering up in case you offend someone) by repeating it in every review.

Quote :

So, hang on, now you know what I know? And what all of our writers know? Perhaps you need a different magazine because the fact is, when we have provided technical articles, they have only received negative feedback from people that don't understand them.

I am glad you feel it necessary to offer insult here, I don't think I would knowingly assume that I know what you know.

Wasn't an insult. If you knew enough on vehichle dynamics to back up a definitive statement on physics you wouldn't be writing magazine articles for AutoSimSport. I can name probably 5 people off the top of my head all in all in sim racing circles (that doesn't include me and there might be more, but I highly doubt the numbers go into double digits) that can make a statement like that - and those are not all necessarily people with whom I have direct contact.

Quote :

Don't you do that anyway? Or does an author having an opinion force you into complying with it?

No, I merely have a problem with the fact that writers don't back up anything they're saying in the articles so it's just the same generic article every time a new sim comes out.

EDIT: What I'm basically saying is because everyone only reads articles about the sim(s) they love, if you slate them, they're gonna get offended and not like your magazine. But rather than writing your articles in such a way that you don't offend anyone yet still give valuable information you guys just write empty articles that don't really say much so there's no way anyone can be offended.

Quote from Alex111111111 :

<supermassive snip>

How many out of the A.S.S. people are S2 licenced? You deffo aren't, and I hope ASS are not basing their reviews on cracks or the demo.

Quote from Alex111111111 :

First: money. <snip>

Whilst you may or may not be taking front or backhanders regarding coverage, are there strings attatched to your advertising arrangements (Like the old Xingular-sponsored cars in NASCAR using greyscale NEXTEL cup logos and so-on).

To clarify my comments on "arguably best" - I have no problem with it being used. It's just when it's used in every single review it completely loses its meaning. I'd rather hear what's so revolutionary about physics in terms of features than read such a meaningless phrase chucked about. If you got behind the secnes and asked developers to comment on certain aspects of their code and then wrote about that, I'd quite happily read the magazine because I actually learn something from it. As it stands, it's just completely lacking substance because all the writers are to obsessed with sitting on the fence. On the other hand, think about Top Gear - everyone loves Top Gear because it's edgy and funny and the presenters aren't afraid to say what they think.

Quote from Alex111111111 :

Let me also remind you all that autosimsport has been a good friend of LFS, and we have remained very positive and enthused by the project, including handing it best sim for 2006.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't that a community poll?

You refer regularly to the accusation that you are receiving bungs from the industry. Has anyone here actually suggested as much? I said that your habitual glowing praise makes you look like a shill, which perhaps seems a bit strong to you. Maybe you're not as cynical as I am (famously so).

Quote from axus :

To clarify my comments on "arguably best" - I have no problem with it being used. It's just when it's used in every single review it completely loses its meaning.

I do have a problem with it being used. If it's not clearly "the best" then why not say it's "good"? It's not like English has any great shortage of adjectives. If someone took issue with me declaring myself "arguably the best lover in the world" I don't think I'd be too upset. Presumably that person hasn't heard of my legendary prowess.

Quote from Alex111111111 :

Your assertion is, in fact, incorrect: I have an S2 license.

You can log in to the forum to post with your S2 licence name and WEBpassword. Such is protocol for any dealings with S2 licenced content round here, as anyone with demo racer underneather there username posting images of S2 licence means a banana and source of ignition interface.

@ Alex111111111 - sorry if my post upset you. It was not aimed at ASS, but at the assumption that a magazine has to lick dev-ass in order to survive, which I don't agree with, just like you.

I wanted to write more, but I couldn't think of ways to describe it so that it wouldn't sound bad coming from a developer, so I won't. I'll just say : don't be pissed at people - listen to them instead. Or ignore them, but don't be pissed.

Good luck!

Quote from Alex111111111 :

Your assertion is, in fact, incorrect: I have an S2 license. I would ask that you check your facts before posting. The allegation that we would use illegal copies of simulators is woefully and patently absurd.

Logging in with your S2 license rather than a demo account you made just today would have prevent that assumption. All demo users here under-go interrogations upom claiming to have licensed content. They are usually crackers and get banned but we will of course believe you in this case.

Quote from Alex111111111 :

not to mention a host of real-world motor sports personalities.

That's a bit vague to be honest. Being a motorsport personality does not automatically mean they are sufficiently knowledgable on the subject. Just look at Murray Walker.

Quote from Alex111111111 :

And finally, yes it was a community poll: In which LFS was nominated by us as one of the candidates. Your point is?

Nominated? I thought that was a complete list, although again I could be wrong. So your sentenced should have read:

"Let me also remind you all that autosimsport has been a good friend of LFS, and we have remained very positive and enthused by the project, including nominating it for a community poll which decided the best sim for 2006."

Doesn't have the same ring to it really when the facts are straightened, does it?


Also you keep mentioning one game (sim) being better than another. Why can't comparisons be drawn where games are just different to one another, without having to stamp a label on one as "better".

Quote from Bob Smith :

Logging in with your S2 license rather than a demo account you made just today would have prevent that assumption. All demo users here under-go interrogations upom claiming to have licensed content. They are usually crackers and get banned but we will of course believe you in this case.

I alluded to that earlier, Bob. However, the more accurate case would be replacement of usually with almost always.

Quote from duke_toaster :

I alluded to that earlier, Bob.

By 8 minutes. How long did you think it took me to read that gargantuan post and them type out my reply?

Quote from Alex111111111 :

Finally - we don't review crap products.

I'm sure some people here will beg to differ.

I'd like to tell a little story on how ASS lost all the little credibility it might have had for me at a certain point (please, ASS-staff, don't take this as slander, take it as something to think about):

I'm not a regular ASS-reader, but I sometimes do read it, and like many others here, couldn't help but noticing that most of the reviews are mainly praise and little critique (talking about my personal impression here). Now, that in itself may not be bad, if it really reflects the mindset of the authors. It does seem a little odd, though. And it obviously also applys to any piece of hardware that's reviewed.

Now, it always makes me somewhat suspicious, if I find a praiseful article about a certain product in a magazine and right next to it I see a paid ad for the exact same product. Effective ad-placement, you might say, but nonetheless, it makes me suspicious. What made me more than suspicious, was an "article" in the latest issue. It's the one about the Ultraforce GS-1 G-Seat (a piece of equipment, I don't really believe in to be honest. Can't really imagine that it does what it supposedly does). I read it and thought, god, this sounds like a press release, printed without further editing, let alone toning down the marketing blahblah. So, I read back two pages to find out that the author of that "article" was a guy named Pat Dotson. Pat Dotson? I thought, didn't I just read that name in the article itself, and wasn't that the developer of the G-Seat, and wasn't he quoted in that so-called "article"? Well, yes, he was. And I honestly think, that a magazine which does those kinds of things, cannot be regarded as a source for valueable independent information. Sorry.

I'd like to hear what the ASS-staff thinks about this .

Quote from Alex111111111 :

Presuming is arguably in a different form:

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that the above was a subtle gag. If you were genuinely recommending that I put more effort into making the lightening of my responses more contextually appropriate I would be very disappointed in you!

Quote from Alex111111111 :

And, btw, our first LFS feature - in jan 2005 - predates, i notice, many posters on this thread.

Are newcomers precluded from picking on you? Gunn lost the hierarchy chart over christmas, Bob's been a bit slow sharpening the crayons to make a new one and so we've all been getting a bit above ourselves in the interim. Please accept our humble apologies.

Quote from Linsen :

I read back two pages to find out that the author of that "article" was a guy named Pat Dotson. Pat Dotson? I thought, didn't I just read that name in the article itself, and wasn't that the developer of the G-Seat, and wasn't he quoted in that so-called "article"? Well, yes, he was.

Oh that's a sweet one.

Quote from Alex111111111 :

Stating - as a fact - that I have no license is not quite the respect you should be showing anyone, much less a customer.

you have no idea how many fools crack the game, post on the forum as a demo user going on about their S2 content that only works offline, the majority of banned users are crackers, so it's not suprising that a mod asks questions, all the evidence says you have no license, you say you do, but give no details - of cours he'll be suspicious!

Quote from Jakg :

you have no idea how many fools crack the game, post on the forum as a demo user going on about their S2 content that only works offline, the majority of banned users are crackers, so it's not suprising that a mod asks questions, all the evidence says you have no license, you say you do, but give no details - of cours he'll be suspicious!

It's his job to be suspicious. And majority can be replaced by almost all.

Quote from duke_toaster :

How many out of the A.S.S. people are S2 licenced? You deffo aren't, and I hope ASS are not basing their reviews on cracks or the demo.



Whilst you may or may not be taking front or backhanders regarding coverage, are there strings attatched to your advertising arrangements (Like the old Xingular-sponsored cars in NASCAR using greyscale NEXTEL cup logos and so-on).

One here, smartass.

LFS294676200
Purchased 6/24/05

Bob Simmerman

I'am REALLLYYY fed up with all these accusations from people from this forum.
Alex111111111 writes a really long post, and a really good one, and an immediate question is "are you TEhH crackerRR, it says DEMO user"..
FFS!!
Give him the credit for that post, read what he has written.. THINK, before you reply!
It really takes a lot of time to make something as this ASS magazine, and you get it FOR FREE..
Ok, it IS really biased, and it is mainly "rFactor is the next bext thing since sliced bread", but give them a break for god's sake..

Quote from Alex111111111 :

2 - Linden - you make the case for me - by stating that Pat wrote the article, we made sure no-one was mis-informed as to the bias of the writer of the article. Pat is a good friend who has spent a lot of time and passion and money to developing a fabulous product - sorry if it doesn't meet with your approval, but Indy 500 winner Lazier thought otherwise, and we thought that was newsworthy. Also, like the moderators on this forum, you make a misguided assumption when stating it was a paid ad - it was no such thing, and, not that it is any of your business, but we have taken no money from Pat for his advert.

Sorry, but that's not enough. No serious magazine or newspaper would do such a thing, because it doesn't comply with journalistic ethics. You clearly seem to think it does too, though, which I find quite disturbing, especially since you apparantly have, as you stated, experienced journalists in the staff. The whole article should have been marked as advertising or not published at all. God, I really can't get over the fact that you actually think it's perfectly fine ... unbelievable.

Plus: Just because I noticed who actually wrote that "article" when I read back, doesn't mean that every reader will (I didn't notice the author until I stumbled over the marketing blahblah). Heck, the author is quoted in the bloody article!?

And even if the ad was not paid for, it doesn't make it much better. The fact that Pat is a "good friend" of yours also makes me very suspicious. As I stated before, my post was not meant offensive, but just to give you an idea why I don't hold ASS in very high regards, and your reply made it sink even lower, tbh.

Edit: And, yeah, people, please cut these constant cracker-accusations. It's becoming ridiculous, really.

Quote from SmokinBob :

One here, smartass.

LFS294676200
Purchased 6/24/05

Bob Simmerman

You've got some exemplary online statistics too, Bob. I'm glad to see that you really put LFS through its paces to allow you to write about it knowledgeably.

Quote from BuddhaBing :

You've got some exemplary online statistics too, Bob. I'm glad to see that you really put LFS through its paces to allow you to write about it knowledgeably.

Thanks for the backhanded compliment, but if I remember correctly, Alex, Christoph Schirmer, Jon Denton, and my self played quite a bit on private server for that review, and I have quite a bit of time offline as well. Surely not to your level of proficiency, but hey--at least I don't steal Live For Speed licenses.

It is ineresting to discover that the LFS community wants little to do with AutoSimSport which is too bad. However, after reading this thread--and some of the things that Becky mentioned, well, I am starting to not be too surprised why the coverage is 'lacking' for this product and wish you all good luck in your magazine endeavours.

And I really don't think we need to be slammed for 'previews' as LFS is, as advertised by the very developers themselves, Alpha.

That hypocrisy alone is almost blinding.

Thanks again for the compliment, BuddhaBing, we need more folks like you in the other communities, and who doesn't like a healthy dose of
condescension once in a while? No wonder I scored it so high.

Enjoy your superiority, you've earned it.