There was a LAN party recently and LFS was shown to a few people who were not familiar with sims. Mostly the reaction was, "it doesn't look like you're going that fast" "oh I can go much faster than that in real life"
This was the XRT by the way, interior view, and about the default FOV. Chances are that the XRT is faster than any car these people have ever driven in RL. I guess you can't really blame them; I felt the same way when I first played. Doing 30mph in RL in my XFG-lookalike feels like I'm doing 120 in LFS.
I have noticed that these days, it's all about first impressions as well as some sort of unexplained personal EGO that prevents people from stepping outside their comfort zone. It is as if they will look like a gimp for saying "wow this is cool" when the person before them said completely otherwise.
Eventually you will run across that one person who has been looking for something like this all their life (slight exaggeration) and there will be another loyal user.
"The people who want to play LFS will play LFS"

the problem with LFS is that you arent emmersed in the game thus speed feels... all wrong, but when i look around when i am driving, going 50 mph looks slow outside..

its just.. there is a serious lack of sounds that you get when you drive

Quote from XCNuse :

the problem with LFS is that you arent emmersed in the game thus speed feels... all wrong, but when i look around when i am driving, going 50 mph looks slow outside..

its just.. there is a serious lack of sounds that you get when you drive

I have never felt an issue with the speed perception in LFS but then I drive with a low(ish) FOV of 62 compared with the normal wide FOV that people use.

Try setting your FOV to about 50, as this is more realistic given the fact most people run a smallish 4:3 monitor just behind the wheel. You will find LFS has a REAL sense of speed.

Next, IRL go driving and close one eye. Make sure you keep the other eye focused straight ahead, don't let your eye do the natural flit around it will try and do to refresh peripheral vison. You will notice that everything will look as slow as LFS now depth perception and peripheral vision have been removed.

You can also see this easily by looking at the majority of homemade in-car hotlapping videos on YouTube. The lack of peripheral vision, tarmac detail, and proper sound makes it seem like the car is barely moving, even with hard cornering.

/shrug. Who here can put their hand on their heart and say they get their advise on simulator realism / great computer games from Intel?

I couldn't give a hoot what Intel say about games and race sims, that'd be like asking British Telecom for technology advise - and when you consider it took BT 17 years to prove the transistor worked maybe that analogy makes sense

I think the feeling of Speed is very good in LFS, 100 km/h really looks like 100 km/h and not like 300 km/h in PGR for example. But then I also have TH2GO and that added really alot to the immersion and feeling of Speed. I think the feeling of Speed is excellent in LFS, but I'm always wondering if the cars are to fast, some cars who are close to cars I have driven in the real life are just a little bit too fast from 0-100 km/h or on a Quartermile, they seem to me like about 2 seconds too fast from 0-100 and approximately 3 seconds too fast down the Quartermile... Especially the Road Cars.

Quote from George Kuyumji :

I think the feeling of Speed is very good in LFS, 100 km/h really looks like 100 km/h and not like 300 km/h in PGR for example. But then I also have TH2GO and that added really alot to the immersion and feeling of Speed. I think the feeling of Speed is excellent in LFS, but I'm always wondering if the cars are to fast, some cars who are close to cars I have driven in the real life are just a little bit too fast from 0-100 km/h or on a Quartermile, they seem to me like about 2 seconds too fast from 0-100 and approximately 3 seconds too fast down the Quartermile... Especially the Road Cars.

As Woz said, the FOV setting really affect the sence of speed you get. Just as it should.
This is not an issue in LFS at all, it's a setup issue.

now that i think about it it makes sense for intel to support rfactor

lets review:
rfactor is basically sports car gt (which came out in 99) in steroids ... at the end of the day its the same thing with a few fixes here and there
intels core 2 duo on the other hand is basically an 8080 on roids (and still fully compatible ... at least on assembly level)

so while rfactor is a regurgitated version of f1c to which the same applies in respect to scgt, the c2d is a 64 Bit extension to the 386s 32 Bit alu, which in turn was derived from the 16 Bit core of the 8086, that was built on base of the 8 Bit 8080, which grounds upon what they learned with the 4 Bit 4040 made by a 2 Bit company that doesnt have a single bit of common sense

Ermmm Lets not all forget that these companies ie. Intel, AMD, nVidia get paid big $$$$$ to endorse these products.

Also why is this stupid argument about development of LFS compared to other sims going on again. rFactor is barely getting "Developed", Modded yes... Dev'd hardly.

Can't we all just stop this bashing of sims. Everyone has their favourite and I know all those LFS diehards (tragics) will defend until the cows come home.

Cant we just agree LFS is a great sim in its own way as is rFactor.

Quote from Shotglass :

now that i think about it it makes sense for intel to support rfactor

lets review:
rfactor is basically sports car gt (which came out in 99) in steroids ... at the end of the day its the same thing with a few fixes here and there
intels core 2 duo on the other hand is basically an 8080 on roids (and still fully compatible ... at least on assembly level)

so while rfactor is a regurgitated version of f1c to which the same applies in respect to scgt, the c2d is a 64 Bit extension to the 386s 32 Bit alu, which in turn was derived from the 16 Bit core of the 8086, that was built on base of the 8 Bit 8080, which grounds upon what they learned with the 4 Bit 4040 made by a 2 Bit company that doesnt have a single bit of common sense

Yes, that sounds about right + the fact that to play rFactor you need rather powerful rig, where with LFS you don't need to buy new rig and that makes Intel financial department whine, so bosses naturally can't take that and are perhaps even hoping that they add more bling to rFactor so people should get even more powerful machines.

Both games have points + and - points, other I drive other is my lego bricks

Dunno what PC`s you got, but i can run rFactor fine with a 5 year old PC in DX8 mode. And for those with not so good gfx cards there is always Directx 7 mode.

Remember to get rid of all that spyware on your PC`s if things is running slow and don`t reinstall the graphic card driver over the old one without completely removing the old one.

Anyway, with Windows Vista and DX 10 i guess everyone will be forced to update sooner or later as games probably will be pure DX 10 based in some years.

Quote from LRB_Aly :

Ever thought that LFS may never hit it big? Maybe it's too hardcore to attract a lot of poeple (in commercial sense).

I mean I showed LFS to a lot of friends and also let them drive. Most of them were amazed of the car feeling. But they would never buy it because it's a simulator where you actually have to "work" to become better. Not like NFS or TDU where you actually can jump in for a race or two when it pleases you and where you can have fun right away.
For most poeple it's frustrating if they don't get a success experience (don't know if you say it so in english) right away.

If my crystal balls tell me right then LFS will be big very soon - then bought by EA and then turned into Live For Speed:Most Wanted Carbon Underground 12...*HUMOUR*

Quote from frankwer :

Dunno what PC`s you got, but i can run rFactor fine with a 5 year old PC in DX8 mode. And for those with not so good gfx cards there is always Directx 7 mode.

Remember to get rid of all that spyware on your PC`s if things is running slow and don`t reinstall the graphic card driver over the old one without completely removing the old one.

Anyway, with Windows Vista and DX 10 i guess everyone will be forced to update sooner or later as games probably will be pure DX 10 based in some years.

Had to buy new gfx card for rFactor as my old card that did run well LFS did not run rFactor, even in DX7 mode got fps below 50 and that makes wheel in it very sluggish already, now I run in dx8 mode even I did pay well over 300€ from upgrade (needed upgrade my gfx card and PSU too). Dx9 is slow still.

It just shows how these two different games focus on different areas.

I tend to hold respect for any game which makes me want to update my PC. Doom III made me do that. Looking back through the rear-view mirror of hindsight, sure, it maybe wasn't such a great game, but the technology was exciting enough that I laid down my money. If LFS ever turns into a resource hogging beast, (like, if you drive into a fire extinguisher, it explodes, and the wall crumbles realistically- hehe) I'll probably start saving my pennies for a new computer.

Quote from Fetzo :

lfs has problems on the market?

on my pc lfs looks way better than rfactor, but i dont have a high end machine.

ok, then you havent even got a clue

2nd is lfs lost the F1 from intel, because well its utter crap, the rfactor sauber f106 is amazing in phisics, lfs needs a lot of work, or even a small amount of developing , it has the ability to be good, but i want, exact of the real thing, including electronic diff, high &low speed traction controll,the TC atm is pathetic, when it comes on u literally only get 50hp thru the wheels, brake biasing, also brake travel, better tire phisics, like u cant even run 3 degrees neg camber without 1 lap making the temp go thru the roof, lfs rushed thir sauber and are paying for it

:rolleyes:

Quote from AndroidXP :

:rolleyes:

Exactly, Mr Seinfield is on a trolling mission it seems.

Hm, I don't really know what the rFactor-Sauber feels like (mostly because I don't like rFactor's overall feeling and therefore don't drive it), but do you guys really think that the LFS-Sauber feels good/realistic? Of course, hardly anybody will be able to compare it to it's rL counterpart, but I'm finding it hard to imagine that what we have here is even close to what a modern F1 is like. I could be wrong, but for me it really falls far behind anything else in LFS.

Quote from seinfeld :

ok, then you havent even got a clue

I guess that you're the one who doesn´t have a clue...
With my 7600 GT I get an average of 100 fps in LFS with every graphic setting maxed out. I if take my copy of GTL, put in DX8 and with every graphic setting in low, I'm pretty sure that I still won´t get the same kind of framerate, and it will look much worse than LFS does. So, the question with the games based on the ISI engine, is not that they need a powerful machine, because they have great graphics, but because graphics are not optmized to run smoothly.

I've started reading the topic, but i will not read the whole... too long
The only things i can say are:
1- Is it a casualty that i have an AMD processor and i play LFS S2?
2- RFactor -> Arcade bull t
3- LFS is made by 3 people.... just think about that
4 -I also add: can u imagine what can those 3 fantastic people do in the next years.
5- LFS will be for ever and ever the best sim on the market, i sincerely think that this are the best money i've ever spent.
6-AMD RULEZ!!!!! Prove it if i'm wrong.

PS Rfactor demo is included in the G25 box i had 3 days ago:
INSTALLED - MADE 3 LAPS - UNINSTALLED - THRASHED CD

Quote from Linsen :

... do you guys really think that the LFS-Sauber feels good/realistic? Of course, hardly anybody will be able to compare it to it's rL counterpart, but I'm finding it hard to imagine that what we have here is even close to what a modern F1 is like. I could be wrong, but for me it really falls far behind anything else in LFS.

I agree, it's my least favourite of all the cars in LFS at the moment largely because it doesn't feel convincing*.

*standard disclaimer: I've never driven an F1 car so this is based entirely on subjective impressions.

Quote from seinfeld :

because well its utter crap, the rfactor sauber f106 is amazing in phisics, ... more incoherent poopoo

To successfully make such an assertion; one must be able to spell the word "physics". Intellectual challenges from someone unable to complete even one (massive run on) sentence with a period is dreadfully ineffective. However, if you had a brain, you could probably discuss at least something in civilized fashion... Try & figure out what that means. If you need help, I'm sure someone here would be glad to assist you.

Quote from Linsen :

Hm, I don't really know what the rFactor-Sauber feels like (mostly because I don't like rFactor's overall feeling and therefore don't drive it), but do you guys really think that the LFS-Sauber feels good/realistic? Of course, hardly anybody will be able to compare it to it's rL counterpart, but I'm finding it hard to imagine that what we have here is even close to what a modern F1 is like. I could be wrong, but for me it really falls far behind anything else in LFS.

Just look at the diff and you know it's way off.
In that sense all LFS cars are unreal, but on the BF1 it's most apparent, because a real F1 car has a very sophisticated diff.
Oh, and our TC is way off too of course. I don't even have to mention aero.

Edit @ Testpatchthread:
I think Scawen knows very well that LFS is far away from being completed and that there is a long way to go. He is one of the persons who decide which way to go to 'LFS 1.0 final'. Of course other people will have different priorities along this way than Scawen does, and they will lay down their opinions and reasons for those. Why that is worth a 'this makes me sad'-post is beyond me!
Scawen wants to spend his time on InSim, I would have spent my time on differentials. No reason to go all .


Vain

Quote from chunkyracer :

I guess that you're the one who doesn´t have a clue...
With my 7600 GT I get an average of 100 fps in LFS with every graphic setting maxed out. I if take my copy of GTL, put in DX8 and with every graphic setting in low, I'm pretty sure that I still won´t get the same kind of framerate, and it will look much worse than LFS does. So, the question with the games based on the ISI engine, is not that they need a powerful machine, because they have great graphics, but because graphics are not optmized to run smoothly.

the problem is lfs is optimized in DX8 graphics, gtr 2 is direct X9 , which u will need better hardware to run it, simple, I have a 8800 and the graphics are no different from ur 7600, in gtr2 they are outstanding, reflections lights, track detail all perfect, if uwant to run gtr 2 u will need good hardware simple

Quote from Vain :

In that sense all LFS cars are unreal,

Vain

Not the UF1, it's Open only

But seriously, how is some preload going to drastically affect all the cars in LFS? I could see maybe in rallycross where traction is feces, but under normal conditions with the road cars at least why is preload such a big deal? I'm not saying it isn't, I just don't understand why it would be, unless it was a silly amount of preload that you'd never find in a production car anyways.

Clearly, the BF1 is a whole different ballgame.