Quote from Delerue :

Just to make myself clear: I don't play Starforce (even hating it). Poor physics is your opinion, that can't be proved. Fake force feedback, idem (BTW, have you ever read what you said in another place?). Netcode is worst, you're (finally) right, but I play offline almost all the time. More expensive is in your insane math world. Oh! I forgot to say: GT Legends is a finished game.

Ending here...
Later

Just like GTR then which is made by Simbin and is still full of bugs

See you! I'm happy you are going! The LFS community needs no ignorant losers that like you. It is great as it is.

No, Delerue is on to something.
Even now, Scawen is trashing all the work towards S3 and switching over to sample-based engine sounds, polishing unfinished graphic framework with tons and tons of pixel shader tech, giving up any and all open-ended development in conjunction with players...
It's all band-aid patches and cash-milking users with quick and dirty coding from now on!

Quote from Delerue :

. Poor physics is your opinion, that can't be proved.

This realy puzles me. Have you thougt even at once that you could be the one who is wrong? As you replyed to Delerue about his opinnion about physics can't be proven, but what about your opinnion on the LFS physics? It is possible that the lack of realism that you feel is just that you can't see it right (like sensation of speed for example) or you are used to some other game's sensations of realism and you just think that it's more real than LFS.
Also there are lot of settings in games that affectd to the feeling of realism, so it's very hard to say which one is closest to realsim. That's why you just have to try different settings to LFS and the cars so perhaps you can found what you are looking for.

Not all LFS fans are blind, not all LFS fans are seduced by the game to an extent that we overlook all problems, no all LFS fans debate for the game beyond reason and common sense - however LFSers that are not blind will usually sit out an debate which peaceful and constructive argument is absent, and LFSers that are not blind won't put a clear mark between "you" non-LFSers and "us" LFSers, the moment such differentiation occurs then there's no point arguing anymore, because whatever points can be entited as "fanboyish" or "GTRboyish", which is unfair for both party. LFS is found on self-evaluation and criticism, that's it nature and indeed it has it holdbacks, it's easy to point a finger at it and it's as easy to use it as an excuse of the game's shortcomings. Honestly no one knows what LFS will eventually become, no one can be sure which game will eventually become the sim of all sim, we all came in anticipation, in high hopes, and so far what we have seen is much more than satisfactory - why can I say that? Can I prove that? No, but its' something that I can feel being part of this community, this development programme, such thing is totally subjective, outside the scope of consumer psychology, beyond marketing principals, but it's real, at least for most of us. I don't think anyone choose a game with absolute reason, feeling and senses are just as important, it's a simple fact- you choose a game by test driving it, not looking in it's physic codes. Because it's the end product that matters, and in LFS, such imperfections and sometimes frustration is part of the end product.

Does it make it a better game? Or a worse game? I don't know, history might tell, and by the time the answer arises, it might not matter anymore.

Love always include some sort of blindness, and it's not a fault, it's just a thing that get us going, keep us doing this stupid unrealistic activity in front of a monitor, just as we do since the first day video games were born.

Fallicies or not, valid argument or not, I wish you have fun with GT legends, and I hope you does share the same emotions with that game, because it isn't much fun steering a wheel in front of what you know is just a bugged line of codes, if you find that game more immersive then so be it, just bare in mind when you are lapping happily and on the limit, in the same time you are just as blind as everyone.

^ What he said

*applauses JJ72 for his great statement*

I totally agree with you...

I bought an ALPHA version...does the Delerue boy knows what an ALPHA version means? I know what it is...an unfinished version who can have some bugs etc. etc. I bought GTL as a finished game, but still there are bugs in it. Simbin working on a patch i guess, the LFS devs. works to FINNISH the S2 and then make S3, when thats finnished its a COMPLETE game, then you can compare it with other finnished games...

Quote from Richard Torp :

I bought an ALPHA version...does the Delerue boy knows what an ALPHA version means? I know what it is...an unfinished version who can have some bugs etc. etc. I bought GTL as a finished game, but still there are bugs in it. Simbin working on a patch i guess, the LFS devs. works to FINNISH the S2 and then make S3, when thats finnished its a COMPLETE game, then you can compare it with other finnished games...

While I do agree with what you are basically saying, I would aslo like to point out that S2 Final aims to have as much of the physics of racing covered as most complete products out today - basically most things, apart from weather effects. Even if those are simulated in some games at the moment, the simulation is not very good and therefore S2 will be very much comparable with the likes of GTL and GTR, if you just exclude their "simulation" of weather effects.

Quote from Shotglass :

i just hope scawen will pipe out incompatible patches as they are finished and not care about the hotlappers too much

Hear hear, screw the hotlappers until S2 is finalized.

Quote from cannonfodder :

Hear hear, screw the hotlappers until S2 is finalized.

:iagree:

:star: :biggrinfl

:huepfenic

Could some people please stop thinking that the only reason they don't get physics updates is because of hotlaps. SPRs and hotlaps being made invalid are only one reason. But i'm seeing the same thing mentioned all over the place, some myth that hotlaps are stopping people getting new physics updates.

If there is any change in physics, there is an ONLINE COMPATIBILITY issue. Old physics and new physics cannot join together. Some people will download the test patch, and some people will upgrade their hosts. So then the people with the new version, would be all alone in their sub-community of people who like to get incompatible test patches. So then they'll say "we like the new physics" and some other people will start to get the new patch. Meanwhile, the people who never heard about the new patch, will wonder where everyone's gone. Then we'll discover a bug in the new physics so hundreds of people will be annoyed that they got the test version and didn't wait for the final version. Then a new patch will come out with some more improvements. People will wonder whether they should get the new one or not.

Then what you can't imagine is the anger that starts to be stirred up. Posts all over the web on different forums and shout boxes "why are there so many stupid patches" and "what is wrong with these developers". For some people it's a big effort to download a patch, and it makes them angry and uneasy.

Compatible test patches are very easy, get them if you want to, no disruption to the community. So it makes sense to do as many compatible things as possible (which need to be done anyway - it's bad when people can't type in their own language) before starting on and releasing physics changes, changes to car models and tracks, and other online compatibility changes. Anyway, how could i code physics changes, at the same time as updating the language support? I can only do one thing at a time.

So, as we always say, and as we have learned from experience, incompatible patches are kept to the minimum, due to the community distruption they cause. Compatible test patches can be released freely and that's the time when many game updates are done. When i'm working on the incompatible things, you probably won't hear from me for a few months, as i'll just be focussed on those very difficult things, and there won't be anything to test until several things are done.

Would it not be possible to only make final patches (Q, R, S) incompatible and then have the master server send a packet with the current version when you connect? Then if there is a new incompatible patch out, it would let you know... If a new incompatible patch is realeased at at most, once a month (which is ambitious too considering all the coding involved) I can see no reason for people to complain... Just my 2c... I see your point though.

Quote from Scawen :

Could some people please stop thinking that the only reason they don't get physics updates is because of hotlaps. SPRs and hotlaps being made invalid are only one reason. But i'm seeing the same thing mentioned all over the place, some myth that hotlaps are stopping people getting new physics updates.

If there is any change in physics, there is an ONLINE COMPATIBILITY issue. Old physics and new physics cannot join together. Some people will download the test patch, and some people will upgrade their hosts. So then the people with the new version, would be all alone in their sub-community of people who like to get incompatible test patches. So then they'll say "we like the new physics" and some other people will start to get the new patch. Meanwhile, the people who never heard about the new patch, will wonder where everyone's gone. Then we'll discover a bug in the new physics so hundreds of people will be annoyed that they got the test version and didn't wait for the final version. Then a new patch will come out with some more improvements. People will wonder whether they should get the new one or not.

Then what you can't imagine is the anger that starts to be stirred up. Posts all over the web on different forums and shout boxes "why are there so many stupid patches" and "what is wrong with these developers". For some people it's a big effort to download a patch, and it makes them angry and uneasy.

Compatible test patches are very easy, get them if you want to, no disruption to the community. So it makes sense to do as many compatible things as possible (which need to be done anyway - it's bad when people can't type in their own language) before starting on and releasing physics changes, changes to car models and tracks, and other online compatibility changes. Anyway, how could i code physics changes, at the same time as updating the language support? I can only do one thing at a time.

So, as we always say, and as we have learned from experience, incompatible patches are kept to the minimum, due to the community distruption they cause. Compatible test patches can be released freely and that's the time when many game updates are done. When i'm working on the incompatible things, you probably won't hear from me for a few months, as i'll just be focussed on those very difficult things, and there won't be anything to test until several things are done.

Two cats running sideways.

Quote from Scawen :

Could some people please stop thinking that the only reason they don't get physics updates is because of hotlaps. SPRs and hotlaps being made invalid are only one reason. But i'm seeing the same thing mentioned all over the place, some myth that hotlaps are stopping people getting new physics updates.

If there is any change in physics, there is an ONLINE COMPATIBILITY issue. Old physics and new physics cannot join together. Some people will download the test patch, and some people will upgrade their hosts. So then the people with the new version, would be all alone in their sub-community of people who like to get incompatible test patches. So then they'll say "we like the new physics" and some other people will start to get the new patch. Meanwhile, the people who never heard about the new patch, will wonder where everyone's gone. Then we'll discover a bug in the new physics so hundreds of people will be annoyed that they got the test version and didn't wait for the final version. Then a new patch will come out with some more improvements. People will wonder whether they should get the new one or not.

Then what you can't imagine is the anger that starts to be stirred up. Posts all over the web on different forums and shout boxes "why are there so many stupid patches" and "what is wrong with these developers". For some people it's a big effort to download a patch, and it makes them angry and uneasy.

Compatible test patches are very easy, get them if you want to, no disruption to the community. So it makes sense to do as many compatible things as possible (which need to be done anyway - it's bad when people can't type in their own language) before starting on and releasing physics changes, changes to car models and tracks, and other online compatibility changes. Anyway, how could i code physics changes, at the same time as updating the language support? I can only do one thing at a time.

So, as we always say, and as we have learned from experience, incompatible patches are kept to the minimum, due to the community distruption they cause. Compatible test patches can be released freely and that's the time when many game updates are done. When i'm working on the incompatible things, you probably won't hear from me for a few months, as i'll just be focussed on those very difficult things, and there won't be anything to test until several things are done.

Too bad Delerue has left already... Even though this post is kind of offtopic thank you for explaining the reason behind not releasing incompatible patches this clearly...

Now, can the rest of you please get back to defending this "God" from Delerue? (that was a JOKE... Laugh, dammit!)

Quote from TagForce :

Even though this post is kind of offtopic thank you for explaining...

I was just replying to the two posts before mine, and the what the quote referred to, whenever that was.

I can't reply on topic. How to reply to "WTF happened with the DEVs?"

Actually, come to think of it, you just told us wtf is up with the devs to a fair extent so you were on topic

Quote from Scawen :

I was just replying to the two posts before mine, and the what the quote referred to, whenever that was.

I can't reply on topic. How to reply to "WTF happened with the DEVs?"

don't let u down because of such posts!
you are doing a great job and you are on the right way...

Quote from Scawen :

How to reply to "WTF happened with the DEVs?"

"Nothing, besides some karting"

Quote from AndroidXP :

"Nothing, besides some karting"

lol

Quote from Scawen :

I can't reply on topic. How to reply to "WTF happened with the DEVs?"

Well, considering you've all been working on LFS for 3-4 years, i think it's normal that you guys take some time off. Everyone does. I
for one would like to thank the 3 of you for your vision, your perceverance and the sheer guts to go against the grain and try to do
all this on your own. Sure makes it funnier to read some peeps complain of lack of licensing when they won't even pay for LFS.
They'd rather give more money to already rich super-mega-organisations rather than help honest people start out from scratch.
Values are so corrupted today it's crazy They' ll all be crying the day they learn their soul belongs to EA.

There may lie another reason for enjoying LFS, getting aways from all you crazy people !!!! AHHHH :scared:

I still remember the day i found LFS.

"Mmm, looks interesting...OH, it's free too !"
Then, after a few laps...
"Wow, i can't believe this game is free !!"

Quote from Scawen :

When i'm working on the incompatible things, you probably won't hear from me for a few months, as i'll just be focussed on those very difficult things, and there won't be anything to test until several things are done.

Okay, so when we don't hear from you for a few months, and all the demo weirdo's start crying, we know what to say.

Have you thought about (who am I kidding, of course you have) an auto updater thing? X-plane, which has many parallels to LFS, have recently implemented such a thing, and it grabs only the updated files, thus making downloads really quick. Add to that a little check for updates bit on loading LFS (or on searching for servers, when LFS actually connects to the net) and everything would be relatively hunky dory.

Of course, you still need a method to ensure hosts get updated, but most hosts are LFS regulars and will notice an update.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not telling or advising you how to do your job, I'm just discussing the merits or otherwise of different methods. On one side players want to see lots of updates, regardless of whether its compatible (at least during Alpha states), but on the other it's quite a big change to make an incompatible version that stops older LFS's from working, and they may not know why. I personally think there is a solution somewhere, although quite what I don't know. And obviously we can't speed up the changes because you have to program them in the first place, so no arguments there.

There is also this suggestion of having LFS remember several states, which was mainly thought of to keep replays working after updates. Could a similar thing, theoretically, be used for all aspects? i.e. someone running patch Q connects to a patch P server (or loads a patch p replay), and LFS uses the physics/values/curves etc from the relevant patch? If someone connects to a patch Q server with patch P they get a polite message saying this is running on a new version, and you need to go here to get the update (which will only be a few MB probably anyway). Maybe only have it so that LFS is backward compatible by one or two stages at the most.

Just brainstorming, and not necessarily well...

Quote from tristancliffe :

There is also this suggestion of having LFS remember several states, which was mainly thought of to keep replays working after updates. Could a similar thing, theoretically, be used for all aspects? i.e. someone running patch Q connects to a patch P server (or loads a patch p replay), and LFS uses the physics/values/curves etc from the relevant patch?

Whoa there! LFS is tricky enough as it is - I don't want to be switching between different physics models each time I change servers!

Somehow I think that this matter has been blown way out of proportion and analysed to death.

If some people don't have patience and insist on updates, that's okay - it just means that they're used to updates to LFS (something not many gaming communities can boast about).

It might not be important to you - but personally I like it that I can use LFS in Greek and type in Greek characters to other users about as much as I like seeing other people converse in cyrillic chars on my screen... it just adds a little something of diversity. A pal of mine the other day saw the LFS garage menu on my screen and did a double take - "hey, this is... in Greek!" (a very rare sight for games, not to mention simulators).

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Whoa there! LFS is tricky enough as it is - I don't want to be switching between different physics models each time I change servers!

I agree with that... that would complicate things waaaay too much. I can imagine my setup folder: "WE1_0.5P_Race", "WE1_0.5Q_Hotlap"... "AS5_0.5P_RACE2"...