Quote from Gunn :

Since I found LFS, chicks dig me more. Live For Speed gave me the confidence I needed to turn my life around. I kicked my petrol-sniffing addiction, became an astronaut, and found a cure for cancer. Life is good, Live For Speed.

LOL

it really is a personal prefernce at the end of the day. i play both lfs and rfactor and love them both. some people seem biased towards other games, which i find pointless. they arte both great games. i know the ff is not as good on rfactor but as a driver who has not had ff for a whole 2 years it really isnt a problem. but there is the case that lfs drivers hate rfactor, in the same way that rfactor drivers hate lfs.

i think the main issue is what game is played first. some ppl will either buy rfactor or lfs first, then play the other and expect it to feel like the other game. it doesnt (obviously) so they immeiatley ditch it and call it rubbish.

6 ppl online on rfactor.

rfactor comes alive in the evenings, especially on the weekend. during the day its usually leagues that are running they always get a full house, many people do go to work and school, i dont no why lfs racers dont . i find the problem generally with lfs its the same old servers with the same cars that are popular, there are never many variations, is any people will not really go in them. rfactor you can stay in one server and do a race weekend, then go to next track, do it all over again, in a class car.

but still. live on both games. they make me both very hapy

Quote from George Kuyumji :

Okay, but dont be scared of the price

I'm glad I bought it when it was released, then

one word: multiplayer

Quote from matze54564 :

-1
Everything what u write is absolutely annoying!
U are right by the children-games. It is better u leave LFS i guess.

annoying because? its better if you just give some proper feedback instead of 'oh my god you don't like lfs you must prefer kiddy games'

Quote from axus :

I can't really understand your lack of development point though. LFS is developing quite quickly considering the size of the dev team. The fact that Eric's latest work doesn't appear in any of the compatible patches is surely part of the reason for what you think. Another would be the fact that Scawen has mostly worked on polishing off things insignificant to the overall experience in the past year - I see it as preparation for a massive physics push though.

Just look at the news page, i'm not saying i want updates every day or demanding too much but LFS has really not developed as fast as i maybe felt it could of, atleast since i've owned S2. Yes this is because of the small team and the maybe lack of wanting to exspand or money i'm not sure has had alot of influence on this.

LFS still pretty much has had the same quality car models/tracks/textures since it was released bar a few updates/improvements, now alot of time has passed since then and even when lfs was first released the content was below standard so now 4/5 years on its really missing that quality edge that is seen in other products.

IF LFS saw improvement in this area, for example a proper well designed and made race track, and a well designed car both inside and out i believe LFS would be more accepted as a racing simulation, as so much of this affects how much people believe in something.

Why is it always the guys with the fewest miles driven that cry for more content??

I don't get it.

Quote from --==Gogo==-- :

Why is it always the guys with the fewest miles driven that cry for more content??

I don't get it.

its not really about 'more' content, its about higher quality content. I haven't driven LFS online in a while, and its basically because of the things i have said here and the fact that most online servers blow major ass far as quaility goes, all the decent races are on private servers which i barely know. But LFSWorld only counts online play, so i don't know how you know how many miles i've actually driven.

Quote from --==Gogo==-- :

Why is it always the guys with the fewest miles driven that cry for more content??

I don't get it.

Because most of the time they've not been around long enough to know how futile a request it would be. Everyone else still wants it, but we know there's no point in asking. Threads like these are what usually lead many of the long-term license-holders to voice their opinions again. No harm in that at all, but unfortunately it's still pointless

Quote from --==Gogo==-- :

Why is it always the guys with the fewest miles driven that cry for more content??

I don't get it.

Why on earth is Raikkonen in a F1 car? I dont get it, i drive more miles a year than he does (ON GERMAN AUTOBAHN EVEN!!)...

if you find irony, keep it

Richard,

Quote :

LFS still pretty much has had the same quality car models/tracks/textures since it was released

If you like I offer some pretty thorough higher-res track texture replacements for most of the tracks in LFS, the other tracks are also being worked on as we speak. Give them a try- I can't say they're finished to the quality I'm eventually hoping for, but maybe they're better than nothing. It's worth a shot- just click on the link in my signature if you're interested.

Quote from RichardTowler :

IF LFS saw improvement in this area, for example a proper well designed and made race track, and a well designed car both inside and out i believe LFS would be more accepted as a racing simulation, as so much of this affects how much people believe in something.

I'm sure you've explained this in depth elsewhere, but could you go a little bit into what you feel is lacking in LFS's tracks? Seems to me that most of them are a huge improvement on Tilke-like tracks, and most would be fairly adaptable to real world racing (some safety improvements would have to be made, obv).

Quote from RichardTowler :

LFS still pretty much has had the same quality car models/tracks/textures since it was released bar a few updates/improvements, now alot of time has passed since then and even when lfs was first released the content was below standard so now 4/5 years on its really missing that quality edge that is seen in other products.

IF LFS saw improvement in this area, for example a proper well designed and made race track, and a well designed car both inside and out i believe LFS would be more accepted as a racing simulation, as so much of this affects how much people believe in something.

Accepted by who? IE; specifically what demographic?

Other than dreadful interiors, I'm interested to know what makes the vehicle design so poor?

I'm also interested to know why you think the tracks are so terrible, specifically. Most of the tracks in LFS have what I think is very good flow and rhythm, and a few of them really stand out in those areas; at least to me. In terms of character and technical requirement I find them much more interesting than all but a handful of the plethora of tracks in GTR2. There are lots of real life tracks that are extremely boring!

Personally I'm more interested in the mathematical / physical modelling aspect of sims, and LFS in definitely ahead (I didn't say perfect) in this area by quite a margin at this point. I'm not sure I agree on your point regarding catching a sliding vehicle, since it really isn't very hard IRL. Not that I've tried it in a single seater (Tristan maybe?) or a 500hp 1200kg car with fat slicks, but the road cars seem pretty reasonable in this area. Drifters IRL don't seem to have a lot of trouble either...

Personally; I hope the devs get filthy rotten rich.. rolling in money from LFS. They totally deserve it. I'm going to email a tv games show, n suggest they review it on their show. Its the best damn racing game I've seen in 25 years.

V

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

I'm also interested to know why you think the tracks are so terrible, specifically. Most of the tracks in LFS have what I think is very good flow and rhythm, and a few of them really stand out in those areas; at least to me. In terms of character and technical requirement I find them much more interesting than all but a handful of the plethora of tracks in GTR2. There are lots of real life tracks that are extremely boring!

I am not Richard, but I might as well tell what I think about LFS' tracks. Most of corners and straights feel like the terrain has been made just for those tracks. Much of the corners are brake-hit apex-accelerate types. They lack blind, off-camber, connected or otherwise 'non-perfect' corners. Especially forward direction tracks are like this, in reversed the tracks have more variety in corners.

I think Richard makes some good points. I'm a bit tired of some of the "LFS-ey" aspects of LFS too - I'm finding the homeliness less and less endearing as time goes on.

Online it might have good numbers of active racers, but for me it might as well be dead for all the variety it offers.

Quote from Ball Bearing Turbo :

I'm not sure I agree on your point regarding catching a sliding vehicle, since it really isn't very hard IRL. Not that I've tried it in a single seater (Tristan maybe?)

LFS is pretty damn close. Still a bit easy to slide, but not far off. I have pictures of nice big slides in reality to prove it!

Like your MSN avatar?

Quote from geeman1 :

I am not Richard, but I might as well tell what I think about LFS' tracks. Most of corners and straights feel like the terrain has been made just for those tracks. Much of the corners are brake-hit apex-accelerate types. They lack blind, off-camber, connected or otherwise 'non-perfect' corners. Especially forward direction tracks are like this, in reversed the tracks have more variety in corners.

The terrain issue doesn't concern me since I focus more on the driving than the surroundings, but I could see that being a point in some places I guess.

I will also agree the the reversed configs tend to be much more demanding and interesting (KYGP R anyone? WE1R?) SO4 has tons of character, connected corners, hills, dips etc in both directions. I'm struggling to see your point on connected corners because I can think of tons of strange combos in LFS that I don't see in anything similar to in GTR2 (the only ... drivingish software... I play regularly other than LFS). There's only a few blind corners in LFS, but how common are they on RL tracks?

Quote from RichardTowler :

IF LFS saw improvement in this area, for example ... a well designed car both inside and out i believe LFS would be more accepted as a racing simulation, as so much of this affects how much people believe in something.

I agree with you on this, to a point. The car interiors can really detract from the immersion sometimes. User made car interior textures help tremendously in this aspect (at least in the road cars). Hopefully patch X will take care of this issue for the GTR cars.

The outsides of the cars seem fine to me. Sure, they could use things like hood pins, door handles, safety nets, etc. But when I'm racing, in the heat of battle, I really don't notice whether or not the cars have these little details anyway.

I also think the tracks are pretty damn awesome. South City and Westhill are my favorites, despite their huge differences. Again, a few user made texture packs and a little AA/AF and the game really does look gorgeous. Maybe not quite as nice as GTR2 with all the lighting effects it uses, but damn good none the less. (Thank you, Electrik Kar!)

Quote from RichardTowler :

IF LFS saw improvement in this area, for example [...] a well designed car both inside and out i believe LFS would be more accepted as a racing simulation, as so much of this affects how much people believe in something.

i think youre preaching to the wrong chior here as i dont think this community cares much about players who think eye candy makes or breaks a sim

Quote from Cue-Ball :

I agree with you on this, to a point. The car interiors can really detract from the immersion sometimes.

who the ... heck even looks at those while driving and truely immersing himself into the sim ? honestly i dont get any of the critzism about immersion being destroyed by models or helmetless drivers or anything else as i just dont notice any of it once ive really sunken into the world of lfs and everything around me up to and including lfs itself becoming a blur
for all i care lfs could have battletzone type vector graphics or box models for the cars it wouldnt change anything once im in the zone and all my brain sees is the bounding box of the cars around me

Quote from Shotglass :

i think youre preaching to the wrong chior here as i dont think this community cares much about players who think eye candy makes or breaks a sim

maybe if you read what i said, you'd see i covered both the visual and the techincal side of things, so don't jump up too fast to dismiss my views because i'm a 'console graphics whore'

Quote from RichardTowler :

maybe if you read what i said, you'd see i covered both the visual and the techincal side of things, so don't jump up too fast to dismiss my views because i'm a 'console graphics whore'

tbh the only thing thats stuck was the usual "the cars are too easy to catch" which i believe is rubbish brought into the community by isi
yes the aero doesnt stall enought when youre sideways at speed but other than that the lateral behaviour of the tyres appears to be pretty much spot on

ISI CONSPIRACY, written by Shotglass.

well thats a new one, care to explain?

most of the explanations can be found on the "drifting issue" thread in the rfactor section of rsc

but the basic idea is that all isi sims so far are WAY off (by about 1/3) on the lateral tyre curves which renders catching slides more or less impossible
and for some strange reason a large portion of the sim community thinks that this behaviour is correct

It's a common ISI sim player contention that LFS's cars are too easy to catch in a slide. This, as Shotglass mentioned, is a load of feces. The common argument is that, for the downforce cars, once the car begins to yaw at all, all hell breaks loose - both figuritively and literally. The shape of the lateral tire curves in said sims is very wrong, but the excuse is that it "compensates for loss of downforce". Nevermind the fact that there isn't much at 50km/h, but the car still acts like it's a hovercraft. His point was that despite the fact that LFS will still need to model proper aerodynamic stall, the tire model is correct in it's behaviour. Anyone who's done some "spirited driving" in a road car can see that, and apparantly Tristan can attest to the small single seater portion of things. I would bet that once proper aero effects are modelled, he'll think it's spot on rather than just "not far off"

edit: ack, beaten.