So you would disagree with me, that lowering the price would in fact increase their profit? Its all based on the simple theory of supply and demand. I see more people racing demo versions than licensed versions. Why is that? If it was cheaper to buy, more people would probably buy it and then you would make more money in the long run. Plus the community would be more put together.
S1 is a nightmare right now. You should allow S1 players to connect to S2 servers and only use S1 cars. That would make a lot more sense than having only 1 server to play in regularly.
No, it wouldn't. And how would you know anything about the amount of profit they make on LFS, and whether or not the profit is acceptable or too low?
Please try to understand that a game like GT is made for the mass market. People who just want to have fun racing on their consoles not caring too much about realism or physics. FYI, I play GT occasionally at a mate's, and we have fun doing it. Do I take it seriously as a sim? Hell no, just a fun game to play once in a while.
Sims like LFS are in a niche market, with big profits not being the single most important thing. The community and devs know that, and accept that.
You however are comparing these two products like they are in the same market. They're not.
You make so many assumptions with so little insight, I don't even know where to start.
To you it's this simple: GT sells millions of copies-->LFS doesn't sell as much as GT = GT must be better.
All because millions of people play it. So because the masses think so, it must be true. I once saw Britney Spears get an award for "best singer", chosen by the masses. Go figure.
GT isn't better, but more popular, big difference. Why? Because like I already said, the mass market just wants to do some casual racing, sim racers are a minority. If you want to compare a sim like LFS in terms of price, compare it to flight simulators. A much better comparison.
Because a) the demo is free and b)people crack the game.
There will ALWAYS be more demoplayers than S1/S2 players. And that's a good thing. If the amount of demoplayers would decrease relatively to the amount of S1/S2 users then there would be a problem. It would mean less people finding their way to LFS.
It's pretty simple really. Demoplayers upgrade to S1/S2 and new demoplayers come along. Sure, some people play the demo for ages and never upgrade. And often time just because they're cheapskates complaining about the price like you. But I believe those are the minority.
Oh, and just stop calling LFS just as expensive as GT. It simply isn't.
Raleigh made more bikes than anyone else, for years. Raleigh bikes were really, really, REALLY poor quality, mass-manufactured rubbish. Didn't matter. They made more and sold more, and people thought they must be the best. An industrial illusion.
Also, anyone that thinks that Gran Turismo, or rFactor, or GPL, GTL, GTR or GTR2 have real cars... HELLO!? It's a computer simulation. Nothing here is real. Take the blue pill!
@ fuzzmonkey, IF you are PERSONALLY enjoying LFS, then S2 is worth going for. S1 is worth having in the meantime, until you can afford an extra £12.
However, I would agree that, if you're not enjoying LFS then hold off buying it. If you're looking for glitzy graphics, perhaps hold off. Nobody here would encourage you to buy something you don't like, or something that wouldn't be a good purchase for you to make.
If you're enjoying LFS, but are sick of the wreckers, S1 or S2 is for you. If you are looking for the most realistic physics representation and the most active online community of any racing sim, which is guaranteed to have new features and improved elements (and any bug fixes along the way) LONG after you've paid for it, then I personally would recommend LFS as a one-stop solution.
that's exactly what is going to happen based on SCawen's recent comments about the upcoming X patch.
anyways, you shouldn't compare GT3 to LFS. it isn't fair and it has no point. they are also aimed at different audiences and strive for two different things.
LFS wants to please the sim fans and aims for realistic driving physics. GT aims for the masses and to provide the most content. If the latter appeals to you more, then you shouldn't waste your time on LFS.
Do you look for arcade game like Grandturismo or for hardcore sim racing like LFS?
I would not call the GT a racing simulator.If you want to call it that way then I am afraid you failed to see the difference between racing simulator and something like GrandTurismo.
Well,LFS lacks some official tracks,cars but does it make LFS worst simulation?No.
Its not about the cars and tracks but its about the physic model which is far the best in racing simulator games around.
At the moment I can only agree that in my eyes is S1 a bit waste of money but S2 is really different story.As was said this shoud be changed soon.Thats something which is very a different against other games.LFS devs listen to their customer/comunity and they not asking for more and more money for every graphical,physical or content updated.
Real cars and tracks? What does it exactly add to the sim? Does it make the sim more realistic? I think not.
Think about real life situation:
You get an opportunity to drive a BMW M3 (mentioned somewere above) on Silverstone circuit. Well and you take that opportunity, you have fun, adrenaline rush and regular stuff that happens when you drive fast
How different would it be if the car didn't have BMW badges all over it and the track wasn't named "Silverstone" ? If the car had similar handling and performance? And the circuit was just as fun even if it WASN'T the Silverstone?
Think about it... is it the name that matters to you most?
I don't think the devs can do anything about the price tag for obvious reasons. One stage of LFS will always cost 12 pounds and bearing in mind that almost everything will change over time except for the cars and tracks for each stage, you'll most probably find new things from time to time, unlike in other games.
I have been really enjoying the STCC server so far, its very fun. At first I found it difficult, but I'm getting the hang of it and improving my lap times. I must have been in a bad mood or something when I hinted that I don't like this game, because I actually really like it a lot. I'm going to buy S2 next week, hopefully I can improve my license until then. I appreciate everything you guys are doing to make the game more enjoyable, keep up the good work.
SKaREO, I'm glad to hear you're finding your feet in LFS Everyone's entitled to an off-day, doubly so when you admit it yourself posthumously. No victim, no foul
When I look at the amount of additional content you get with S2, compared with S1, I have to say that it blows me away. LFS grew exponentially between these two stages. I think S1 is definitely fantastic value for money for £12 (although the lack of other players online is definitely unfortunate, albeit inevitable with the advent of S2). The 2nd £12 you spend, getting S2, is the most extraordinary value for money, IMO.
Just for grins, I just went and looked at my online stats. I've driven just over 60,000 miles on LFS since I bought S2 less than 2 years ago. That means that LFS works out, for me, at (unless I'm completely useless at math) almost exactly 25 driven miles per penny. And I'm STILL loving it! Incredibly good value for money!
