Our agenda or your paranioa? Honestly I don't think there's any kind of organised subversion happening here, just a rather introverted, occasionally-dysfunctional little community.
Our agenda or your paranioa? Honestly I don't think there's any kind of organised subversion happening here, just a rather introverted, occasionally-dysfunctional little community.
You know what Kev?, I think you have quite possiblly summed up the LFS forum in a few words, introverted is a perfect word to describe many, maybe chuck xenophobic is there somewhere too
I'm thinking of sticking together a couple of pages of PDF as a sort of LFS magazine if anyone's interested. It won't be anything the regulars haven't already seen, but it should be a nice little piece (if I can gather all the info I'm looking for).
It actually reminds me of a family. Or maybe that's just my family. People who are together not really through choice, and while some of them get along sometimes, others merely tolerate eachother when they have to.
Well I said I was thinking about it, and here's what I knocked together a few minutes ago. Bear in mind this is a very early draft, the page size is wrong and I've no idea where the white lines came from!
Oh, and file is massive, so 56k-ers beware
Oh, and file is massive, so 56k-ers beware
Was there supposed to be any text in that pdf or just the graphic?
If ASS was as well optimized as that, Dajmin, it's 107 pages would take about 210 megabytes 
Gigantic pdf proportions aside, I still don't see the need for a dedicated LFS mag. I can't speak for anyone else, but I simply wouldn't read it. Between this forum and liveforspeed.net I get all the LFS news I need and much more than I want sometimes I'm just not convinced it would have the readership to make it worth all the effort.Been reading this thread since all this hand bag swinging started and the only thing I find revolting is that you judge a whole community because of an argument you had with a very minute portion of the LFS community.
On the note of your articles, i'm glad we wont be seeing any from you, as I said above you have judged a whole community on the basis of a few people you don't like. So (Unless your only being this way about LFS in general) you must judge games in the same way too huh? For example, oh I don't like the intro to rFactor, this game is sh*t.
And briefly to lower myself to you Bob, you can stick your perfection up your ASS as it's got more chance of survival in there than in your magazine.
Very Nice...
I want to see a lfs magazine or a pfd !
+30
Sadly I dont think this will be really "embraced" by the community, but you know what? Thank you for making an effort. Really.
This may be a seed that grows a tree, so to say.Exactly what we need. Thanks for contributing. As if Bob (or anyone else for that matter) didn't need another reason to think this community is a pack of one-eyed, short-fused, uber-fanboy wankers. Just as the thread was evolving back into a discussion on the original topic, too. Great timing, you're a bloody genius.
I am quite dissapointed really in this community...
So you guys are competing in which one can be a bigger as*hole??
You are copying Kidcodea's style or something?
You guys from ASS, thank you for your magazine, and those articles about LFS... i hope you can realize that these couple of smartass'es of the year, are not representing the whole LFS community...
So you guys are competing in which one can be a bigger as*hole??
You are copying Kidcodea's style or something?
You guys from ASS, thank you for your magazine, and those articles about LFS... i hope you can realize that these couple of smartass'es of the year, are not representing the whole LFS community...
@Boris
I have to admit that reading these forums and being involved in this LFS community has changed my additudes towards some things, like other racing simulators or an e-magazine. I wouldn't call it spoling my nature, but rather opening my eyes.
This community is indeed the freakiest one I've ever seen, but that's not because of the people themselves, but the way they have started to behave together over time. The answer why we are what we are is a sum of many little things, I think. Existence of LFSworld being maybe one of them, and behaviour of some individuals another, just for example.
I have to admit that reading these forums and being involved in this LFS community has changed my additudes towards some things, like other racing simulators or an e-magazine. I wouldn't call it spoling my nature, but rather opening my eyes.
This community is indeed the freakiest one I've ever seen, but that's not because of the people themselves, but the way they have started to behave together over time. The answer why we are what we are is a sum of many little things, I think. Existence of LFSworld being maybe one of them, and behaviour of some individuals another, just for example.
@Bob Smith:
No, there was no actual content there, just the background pic, the headline and a couple of subtitles. I figured there wasn't much point putting a whole lot of effort in until I found out if people were interested.
And I'm glad I did, since nobody really seems all that fussed
No, there was no actual content there, just the background pic, the headline and a couple of subtitles. I figured there wasn't much point putting a whole lot of effort in until I found out if people were interested.
And I'm glad I did, since nobody really seems all that fussed
For the people that mostly respond on this forum it's a waste of effort to make an ezine for LFS, as I doubt there is more than a sentence or two that could be written that we don't already know. Want to tell me about the auto-update feature? Well, sorry, but I already know everything Scawen has said about it, so the article would be useless for me and most here.
However, it's the people who aren't regulars here, or who aren't LFS players in the first place that would mostly benefit from such a publication about LFS, and they are harder to ask because, by definition, they aren't coming here.
But the same problem would exist with 'our' ezine as does with ASS, notably the lack of unbiased writing. If I write an article on an LFS feature it will be biased towards the mindset I have developed following LFS for 3 and a half years. And, in the same article, I wouldn't be able to discuss the pros and cons of similar features in other sims because I don't play the other sims enough to make an equally in-depth appraisal, and I don't play the others because I don't regard a single simulator to be on par with LFS in terms of realism and physics - not fanboy treatment, just the opinion I've developed after playing every single sim to some extent (nKP is close, but still have very peculiar physics bugs, as well as massive software bugs in general).
I don't think it's possible for a sim player to write entirely unbiasedly. The people that play lots of sims obviously have slightly lower standards about some things than me (I wouldn't sacrifice physics for modding or shaders even if you paid me), so their opinions on those matters would be less meaningful because (by the fact that they can put up with very different approaches) means they care less about them in the first place.
But then, car magazines aren't unbiased either - a roadtester might not like Ford, and so will rate the Ford product lower than a Ford lover. It's just that cars, roadtests and manufacture preferences are so ingrained and have nothing to do with some coders opinion about whether slip curves have two or more peaks. In sims we are testing, say, four different 'realities' in four different physical universes that utilise sound, feedback and graphics in very different ways.
The only fair comparison is between rFactor mods by the same person at about the same time - same mindset, same physical world (the joke called rF) and the same opinion on what makes a sim race car feel real.
However, that doesn't change the fact, for me, that any ISI/Gmotor simulation is only worth using as a frisbee, and has next to zero good points. And therefore I choke when I see ANYONE (including in ASS, or an LFS ezine) mount untamed praise on one of those sims' shoulders, because it quite patently isn't THAT good.
However, it's the people who aren't regulars here, or who aren't LFS players in the first place that would mostly benefit from such a publication about LFS, and they are harder to ask because, by definition, they aren't coming here.
But the same problem would exist with 'our' ezine as does with ASS, notably the lack of unbiased writing. If I write an article on an LFS feature it will be biased towards the mindset I have developed following LFS for 3 and a half years. And, in the same article, I wouldn't be able to discuss the pros and cons of similar features in other sims because I don't play the other sims enough to make an equally in-depth appraisal, and I don't play the others because I don't regard a single simulator to be on par with LFS in terms of realism and physics - not fanboy treatment, just the opinion I've developed after playing every single sim to some extent (nKP is close, but still have very peculiar physics bugs, as well as massive software bugs in general).
I don't think it's possible for a sim player to write entirely unbiasedly. The people that play lots of sims obviously have slightly lower standards about some things than me (I wouldn't sacrifice physics for modding or shaders even if you paid me), so their opinions on those matters would be less meaningful because (by the fact that they can put up with very different approaches) means they care less about them in the first place.
But then, car magazines aren't unbiased either - a roadtester might not like Ford, and so will rate the Ford product lower than a Ford lover. It's just that cars, roadtests and manufacture preferences are so ingrained and have nothing to do with some coders opinion about whether slip curves have two or more peaks. In sims we are testing, say, four different 'realities' in four different physical universes that utilise sound, feedback and graphics in very different ways.
The only fair comparison is between rFactor mods by the same person at about the same time - same mindset, same physical world (the joke called rF) and the same opinion on what makes a sim race car feel real.
However, that doesn't change the fact, for me, that any ISI/Gmotor simulation is only worth using as a frisbee, and has next to zero good points. And therefore I choke when I see ANYONE (including in ASS, or an LFS ezine) mount untamed praise on one of those sims' shoulders, because it quite patently isn't THAT good.
Well written, Tristan! You just read my mind and dressed up in words what I couldn't
Just my words..
I agree with everything you said, tristan. But I'd be taking a BBC-style standpoint in my writing - giving the facts with no personal opinions other than describing how something works.
It'd be easy enough to fill out pages and pages of "Wow, this is great because <blah>", but all that'd do is piss off non-LFS players. And since it's both them and the more casual players that it's aimed at, I think it makes sense.
And can everyone arguing about whether ASS suxx0rz or r0xxorz (ZOMG!11) please stop replying to each other and stoking the flames?
It'd be easy enough to fill out pages and pages of "Wow, this is great because <blah>", but all that'd do is piss off non-LFS players. And since it's both them and the more casual players that it's aimed at, I think it makes sense.
And can everyone arguing about whether ASS suxx0rz or r0xxorz (ZOMG!11) please stop replying to each other and stoking the flames?
In which case I would suggest you continue for a bit longer - write an article or two and let us see how it is received. If you can write open mindedly and unbiasedly about different aspects of LFS, and perhaps compare them fairly with other sims that you may have used to a similar level, then not only will you have disproved my theory that being unbiased is impossible, you'll have produced a good read.
Have a crack, and we'll see whether the intention of BBCesque writing is actually the final result. Remember, even the most technical magazines have to be entertaining to read to some extent (we are mostly reading them for pleasure not education, but that also doesn't mean a reviewer can gloss over technical stuff just because it's too hard - if he can't write fluently about slip-curves he shouldn't be reviewing race sims, just like if a motoring writer can't drive he shouldn't be reviewing an Ariel Atom). Listing 'facts' is easy but dull. Adding interest generally means adding personal opinion, especially when the difference between sims can often be put down to preference.
But, and I stress this again, I would like to read an example of what you intend, even if it comes to nothing. It'll be a much better indicator that a pdf poster. And whilst I find a lot of faults within ASS (covering some of the points I've raised above and more, some of which other people have discussed eloquently) I still read it - there is often a little gem of news or fact that is worth the few minutes it takes to read it. Constant praise on every sim - yes, it's annoying, but if you take everything with a pinch of salt (ok, a dumper truck of industrial grade sodium chloride), and laugh at the obvious bits of fanboyism, then it can be quite entertaining.
I was trying to keep out of this thread, but... oh well...
I read through your post Tristan, and was thinking that it seemed intelligent and reasonable until that last paragraph.. which is just another example of an immature and negative mentality that is spreading here like a bad dose of H2N1
I just don't get it - why are so many of the vocal LFS supporters so aggressive and unreasonable?
If they truly believe (like I do) that LFS is head and shoulders above the rest, then they should be confident and relaxed about others folks having slightly different opinions... so maybe they're not so sure ?!
It seems obvious to me that most of the current sims that are are in competition with LFS are very good - they have loyal fans, large user bases, accurate physics, excellent content etc. The ASS folks would not be positive about them if they were not of a high quality. (These guys are not stupid, they are experienced simmers, and are intelligent and dedicated. And, at least in this 'discussion', have proved themselves to be a cut above the average LFS eejit)
It's a sad reflection on LFS when the LFS 'pack' start throwing schoolboy style vitriol around. The most sickening thing though is when they get pally and back up each others petty and aggressive behaviour..
I want LFS to succeed and grow - when representatives of other parts of the wider sim community 'visit' we should be polite and helpful and try to build relationships with them - this would be good for them, good for LFS and good for us as a community. But time and again, the same thing happens - they come here to see what the all fuss is about LFS, and they are attacked mercilessly until they leave with a very bad taste in their mouths.
LFS forum is like the Royston Vasey of the sim world - and they 'aren't local'.
You guys with the pack mentality are damaging LFS !
Can I just say I did clarify my point with FOR ME - I don't like it, and I'm happy enough to not like it.
The second point is the one about untamed praise. Do you see my saying LFS is perfect? No, although I often say it's likely to get better (thus implying it NEEDS to get better). But some (though not ALL) ASS articles are so complimentary about a product to be a bit of a joke, and it was this I was referring to.
If I don't like, say, GTR2 that doesn't make me a bad person, just like someone who likes it isn't a bad person. They can say they like it, and I can say I despise it. I don't troll on the GTR2 forums saying how rubbish it is, and I generally keep my thoughts to myself on this here forum too.
Do you think that nKP is as good (in V1.0.0 form as well) as was stated in the ASS article? No, neither do I, and that's kind of what I referring to.
Pack mentality - I think you'll find I am beyond that. I say what I think, I always have done and until the day I get banned I always will. If others agree with me it's not pack mentality, but indicative of the kind of car-nerd required to get maximum enjoyment out of LFS. I couldn't accept GTR2 because it's standards are way too low (cutting corners, tweaking slip curves for 'playability' rather than realism), and I appreciate that a majority of people are happy with this.
I don't play MS Flight Sim because it's just too cheesy and unreal, but is vastly more accesible. Being the sim-nerd I am I HAVE to go with X-Plane because it doesn't stoop to the low standards of MS. Is it more playable, more accesible or popular? No, and that's also something in it's favour.
LFS is the X-Plane of sim racing. Racer and nK are also in this catagory but either haven't been developed enough (racer) or haven't matured and sorted themselves out to be a true player (nK).
rFactor, GTR, GTL etc are the MSFS of sim racing. Accessible, lower learning curves, fancier 'BUY ME' graphics and sound, more modable, but (for me, and I must stress that anyone who reads this post takes note that this is all just how I see it in my world with my experiences and expectations) they lack depth of character. The soft option as it were. Closer to the drunken arcade blasts at 3am I alluded to in another thread the other day than to a hardcore simulation of what I think a modern simulation could be.
And I write all of this, yet people still want unbiased articles on the sim racing scene? Yeah, right.
The second point is the one about untamed praise. Do you see my saying LFS is perfect? No, although I often say it's likely to get better (thus implying it NEEDS to get better). But some (though not ALL) ASS articles are so complimentary about a product to be a bit of a joke, and it was this I was referring to.
If I don't like, say, GTR2 that doesn't make me a bad person, just like someone who likes it isn't a bad person. They can say they like it, and I can say I despise it. I don't troll on the GTR2 forums saying how rubbish it is, and I generally keep my thoughts to myself on this here forum too.
Do you think that nKP is as good (in V1.0.0 form as well) as was stated in the ASS article? No, neither do I, and that's kind of what I referring to.
Pack mentality - I think you'll find I am beyond that. I say what I think, I always have done and until the day I get banned I always will. If others agree with me it's not pack mentality, but indicative of the kind of car-nerd required to get maximum enjoyment out of LFS. I couldn't accept GTR2 because it's standards are way too low (cutting corners, tweaking slip curves for 'playability' rather than realism), and I appreciate that a majority of people are happy with this.
I don't play MS Flight Sim because it's just too cheesy and unreal, but is vastly more accesible. Being the sim-nerd I am I HAVE to go with X-Plane because it doesn't stoop to the low standards of MS. Is it more playable, more accesible or popular? No, and that's also something in it's favour.
LFS is the X-Plane of sim racing. Racer and nK are also in this catagory but either haven't been developed enough (racer) or haven't matured and sorted themselves out to be a true player (nK).
rFactor, GTR, GTL etc are the MSFS of sim racing. Accessible, lower learning curves, fancier 'BUY ME' graphics and sound, more modable, but (for me, and I must stress that anyone who reads this post takes note that this is all just how I see it in my world with my experiences and expectations) they lack depth of character. The soft option as it were. Closer to the drunken arcade blasts at 3am I alluded to in another thread the other day than to a hardcore simulation of what I think a modern simulation could be.
And I write all of this, yet people still want unbiased articles on the sim racing scene? Yeah, right.
I'm into Flight Simulations and I strongly disagree. With just a few Payware Add Ons you can have a real Simulation in Microsofts Flight Simulator. If you leave all at the default, well yes than its just another Game, and not a X-Plane.
I have 17 years experience in Racing Sims, have raced in real Race Cars. GTL, Race, GTR2, rFactor these are nice Games and if you want the "Microsoft Flight Simulator" of the Racing Games, you cant beef it up into a "X-Plane" style Simulations because the Physics of the Mods for example for rFactor, are mostly a guess from Computer Geeks who have never actually Raced anything, and are further limited in there work because of ISI's crappy basic Engine.
All I have seen for rfactor so far is the same old, converting of other old stuff by noobs that have no idea what they are doing, its really awful. The "X-Plane" type of Simulations in our Genre are NASCAR Racing 2003, netkarPro, GPL, Live for Speed and Richard Burns Rally.
i fail to see any disagreement with tristan in your post
The disagreement is that with FSX or FS9 you can have a decent Simulator, even with a X-Plane level of quality. You need Payware Planes and other Add-Ons to raise the Game into a serious Simulation. But it is very possible with all those Quality Plane Products for MSFS.
LFS Magazine?
(191 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG