You didn't at any point pay for a final product Ian. You bought a licence to use a game that is in development, while it's in development. Whether you now want to move the goal-posts or not, that's what you bought.

I was going to address individual points you made, but they're mostly just agitative crap for the sake of it. I have had my fill. Based specifically on your responses to my post, I'm firmly of the opinion, now, that you're just being a prat for the sake of it. Surely nobody could be so far off the mark and mean it?

I think graphics are a bit of a different story. The way I work is- I make some graphics, zip them up and upload them somewhere. Then people have a choice whether or not they want to download a 20meg file or whatever. There have been times when I've thought- 'I wish I could have changed this or that, or included some more textures'. So, then I do a followup. It's pretty messy and files are being written over all the time. If Eric were to do the same thing, people would have no choice but to download these extra files with every patch, and I imagine some folks would get a bit annoyed at that. Many wouldn't- but if that's the way the dev's have chosen, then who are we to complain?

(Also, any track changes would also break hotlaps).

Quote from Ian.H :

Quote :

Well, last but not least, this is one of the best threads that I've ever seen in this forum. Despite the funny team recruiting threads at the team section, there are still too many pointless threads. Keep this one as a clean and high-quality discussion.

I'm hoping it'll be somewhat productive, but not holding my breath.. but am glad that it hasn't turned into a piss fight (yet?) and that as "heated" as it may be, it seems to be fairly adult so far

Quote from SamH :

I'm firmly of the opinion, now, that you're just being a prat for the sake of it. Surely nobody could be so far off the mark and mean it?

It is a pity that it was a MODERATOR of all people that dragged this thread into the gutter and started the slanging match

While I can understand the frustration (to a point), anybody who paid for LFS knew at the time that it wasn't finished and there was no timetable for its completion. Thus, you can grumble all day but the devs have no obligation to finish it just because you're bored of it.

If they sacked if off tomorrow and never finished the thing (which I don't expect will happen, but...) I would still be stoked with the two years of fun I've had with it. Well worth the price of admission IMO.

The argument that other sims with bigger development teams are catching up with or overtaking LFS in terms of quality make me chuckle a bit, to be honest. If they're so good then go use them! For me, LFS still has the most engaging physics, so I can't go anywhere else unless another product betters it - which hasn't happened.

Quote from Bladerunner :

It is a pity that it was a MODERATOR of all people that dragged this thread into the gutter and started the slanging match

It's far from a slanging match. It seems quite obvious to me that Ian is just agitating for the sake of it. There's lots of noise with little substance. If I'd wanted to start a slanging match, I would have said he IS a prat. I'm not saying that. I'm saying he's BEING one for the sake of it.

Quote from JJ72 :

Glad you see the point Ian.

First, they don't work trapped in a office with a boss watching their back, they are their own boss and we are just customers, and just not the usual customers, we are a group of loyal customers who have more then a fair share of patience, so their motivation is their own quest in creating what is a great online racing simulator - so it's down to them really. Money might also be a motivation, but they are bold enough to quit their all time job for this, so I guess their economical needs aren't pressing enough to make them superhuman.

They might be moody and not very transparent, they keep things in their head and do make huge promise, it's the nature of "artists", however it's the same character that make LFS possible, it's why LFS have gone down a different route, and that's why it is special - special in a sense that with different priorities than usual game developers, they manage to use very little man power to create what is a very respectable sim.

So to me it is PERFECTLY NORMAL that LFS is lagging behind in other aspect, again just think about the odds.

I am a freelance designer as well and I know how it is, doing a website is one thing, it's merely handful of weeks for a project to be completed. But making a sim is a matter of years, keeping up the same level of commitment and concentration over such a long time is difficult, furthermore they ain't nobody who is trying to build their reputation, they are already accomplished individuals in their own field, just trying to do things the way they want to be after years in the industry, so in a sense, this is a hobby project, just a very big and serious hobby project, if a hobby project become the same as a standard practice, then there's no point doing it right?

If scavier set out to do LFS with the same priority as common game developers, we won't get LFS as it is. It could be something more mainstream, more updated, however less unique, and for that genre we have more then enough choice already, and still there's no way they can compete against big companies all on their own.

You think they are slacking, maybe part of it down to the differences in your priority and theirs, take insim/outsim for example, it is a coder's sandbox that does not matter to you, however to some people, people who make their own cockpit/controlling device/remote host control it is important, and they do make up of part of sim racer's population, I don't mess with insim myself but I could understand the value of that.

All in all, the problem is the same as the solution.

the problem of LFS is that.... it is just what it is. the business model is the problem, however without this business model...LFS will never happen, it might have been sold to some publishers, revamped and dumbed down for a BTCC game.

So fact is, the root of the problem, is the root of everything. change it, there's no LFS to complain about. and I wouldn't bother if it becomes GTR3 or TOCA4, people will complain about the lost of personality and everything in the game industry going the same directly and we need something fresh...

To say LFS is a bad commerical product...is just stating the obvious in my opinion. As my first reply say, love it or frustrated by it, we are emotionally attached by it, how many game in the world makes you feel that way?
Feel is a very vague thing yes, however it is also very true and no body knows how you can design that.

To talk about how we can progress LFS better, I think we must work within the business model. If that is denied, then any suggestions would be out of context.

For me this post sums it up superbly!!!

I'm still having so much fun with LFS that didnt realise this much time had slipped by

Quote from ebola :

For me this post sums it up superbly!!!

I'm still having so much fun with LFS that didnt realise this much time had slipped by

I missed that post initially. Glad you quoted it. JJ72, you're right on the nose. Beautifully put. And it covers every point raised completely. Way to go

Quote from Bladerunner :

It is a pity that it was a MODERATOR of all people that dragged this thread into the gutter and started the slanging match

I have to disagree with you. I read through the thread and it's sliding to a gutter by teamwork from both sides.

Ian H. does come up with somewhat deluded points like this:

Quote from Ian.H :

I've already paid for his updates, surely I'm entitled to see the progress? Wouldn't you expect to hear progress from Ferrari say, if you'd paid for a model that was being built for you if you asked? Only difference is LFS is being built for everyone rather than an individual.

And you honestly thought 24£ would buy you a personal racing sim? Where were you given the promise that on this day, you would have S2 Final on your computer? Go browse Liveforspeed.net, search RSC, you'll come back empty handed. It was made clear no release date could be given and still you chose to support the development.

If you buy a product from Ferrari, you're not entitled to see any of their upcoming products in advance. You're just supporting their business to make cars in the future you might or might not like.

Eric's work comes with the incompatible patches from Scawen, no such version has been released since last april as Scawen decided to do a compatible patch before an incompatible one (patch V).

I'm guessing it took a little longer than expected to complete that patch (about 8 months), after that some fixes and updates where released in patch W. With those patches released Scawen was able to start work on incompatible work - this time a mulitiplayer incompatibe patch before a physics one.

While Eric's work may be ready for release Scawen's work isn't. I remember reading in one of the threads for the U test patches that model updates (such as interior, car and track) isn't compatible updates (if anyone can find that post please post it). As they decided not to do an incompatible post just for Eric's updates they'll have to wait for Scawen to complete his incompatible stuff.

I am all for progress, but not just for the sake of progress itself. It's better to take baby steps then rush new features that dramatically change the game. This is what I always liked about the LFS development. I know it's not a choice that it is going so slowly, but with slow progress each patch get's tested completely and feedback is given.

I know of another game that has all the resources it needs, money, professional advice, a chance to hire the best developers...and the game is going down hill. Each patch they add alot of things without really thinking them thru. It seems the only thing that matters is that new "stuff" is added which always messes with the existing things. It feels like the game is falling apart (literally).

So I guess my point is that fast progress is very risky.


The current graphics look more then just fine to me. They are not all that important in a game like this, physics > graphics. The game's hardware requirements must be as low as possible! Or you can have everything modeled multiple times and then you choose how complex you want the models to be? I've always wanted to see that in a game.

The sound is lacking a bit, but we have CSR now and you can even make your own sounds.

Quote from kurent :

The game's hardware requirements must be as low as possible!

This I think is a very important point for LFS because of the nature of the project. A sim is by default a niche product, and therefore it has to target as wide a range of hardware, or rather hardware owners, as possible. The devs would be stupid to target only people with high end hardware within an already limited user base. The more people that can run it, the more customers they get. Car enthusiasts are not necessarily also computer enthusiasts, so requiring high end hardware might alienate a lot of these potential customers.

You can of course argue they should target both high end and low end hardware and make it a choice, but that would also double the workload. Just not an option for a small dev team in my opinion. This isn't Valve which can afford to have artists in the hundreds churning out content targeting a wide range of hardware.

LFS will most likely never be able to compete graphically with the big ones as that just takes too much effort these days, so it has to focus on the aspects it can compete in, namely physics and the community (which is why insim updates allowing the community to add features to the sim are a good thing, even though the timing arguably could have been better).

Quote from SamH :

You didn't at any point pay for a final product Ian. You bought a licence to use a game that is in development, while it's in development. Whether you now want to move the goal-posts or not, that's what you bought.

I'm well aware LFS itself is a continual WIP, however, I paid for a final version of _S2_, nowhere have I said a final version of LFS, which would S3 final. Stop trynig to put words into my mouth to cover your ignorance.

Quote :

I was going to address individual points you made, but they're mostly just agitative crap for the sake of it.

Or you don't have the intelligence to converse.. fair enough, I'd sooner you didn't bother either

Quote :

I have had my fill. Based specifically on your responses to my post, I'm firmly of the opinion, now, that you're just being a prat for the sake of it. Surely nobody could be so far off the mark and mean it?

You, sir, are just a fool.. a blind one at that. You want to be careful, noses are hard to remove brown stains from, I've seen a lot of residue from RSC members... and yours is caked!

Quote from spankmeyer :

I have to disagree with you. I read through the thread and it's sliding to a gutter by teamwork from both sides.

Ian H. does come up with somewhat deluded points like this:


And you honestly thought 24£ would buy you a personal racing sim?

Where did I say I want a personal sim? We're _all_ entitled to a full version of S2 now that we paid for it. If I wanted to buy half an arcade game, I'd expect to pay £8 in a bargain bucket, LFS to date has cost me £24, hardly a bargain.

Quote :

Where were you given the promise that on this day, you would have S2 Final on your computer?

I wasn't, but after 2 years, don't you think that's long enough? Even if not for the absolute completed S2, at least some substantial progress, not dribs and drabs as Scawen's been knocking out recently like a bored kid kicking a can.

Quote :

Go browse Liveforspeed.net, search RSC, you'll come back empty handed. It was made clear no release date could be given and still you chose to support the development.

Right, and now they're flipping the finger at me.. "thanks for the money lads, we'll eventually get around to giving you the product you bought, but right now, we're having more fun adding pointless scripting engines.

Quote :

If you buy a product from Ferrari, you're not entitled to see any of their upcoming products in advance. You're just supporting their business to make cars in the future you might or might not like.

No.. if I buy a specific model that's tailored for me, I expect to hear of progress.. so change Ferrar to Caterham or something where they'd build the car for you. As I said, the only difference here is that LFS isn't being coded just for me, but for everyone.

LFS is _not_ a "hobby" for Scawen et al, it's a commercial poroduct that so far is falling waaaaaaaay short of what it should have been sometime ago.

If you want to blindly defend the devs, feel free.. but don't expect me to buy it.

Quote from Ian.H :

Right, and now they're flipping the finger at me.. "thanks for the money lads, we'll eventually get around to giving you the product you bought, but right now, we're having more fun adding pointless scripting engines.

You HAVE the product you bought. You paid to take a part in the development process (beta testing if you will) of S2, with the promise of a copy of the full version whenever it gets released. You got what you paid for the minute the first S2 alpha was released.

The fact that that's not really what you wanted is no-ones fault but your own. Research before you buy.

Quote from wien :

You HAVE the product you bought. You paid to take a part in the development process (beta testing if you will) of S2, with the promise of a copy of the full version whenever it gets released.

No, I have a half-arsed pre-beta that has seen no real progress in 2 years.. that to some would be verging on vapourware.. except we have a shiny new scripting engine to keep us quiet

Quote :

The fact that that's not really what you wanted is no-ones fault but your own. Research before you buy.

I did buy S2 before it was released, granted.. but just how long am I supposed to wait for the software I paid to use? (and no, not a half-cocked beta version of it).

It's really quite cute to see such profuse defence.

Quote from Ian.H :

Preferably something that made the cars sound like...... cars, not synthetic echoing spaceships. Sorry to piss on your bonfire, but the LFS sound engine is nothing but a _seriously_ bad joke right now.

Seems like you simply don't care is the engine sound actually produced and simulated instead of the game just playing sample1-sample2-sample3 etc? You know in real life, the engine produces sound. It doesn't have speakers that plays re-recorded samples.

What game you prefer in sounds wise then? GTR2? Why don't you do this:

1) go http://youtube.com and search and watch some nice onboard movies
2) go play GTR2 (?), watch a replay and close your eyes and simply listen the sound, do you really think the engine "note" and "load" is even near that what you just heard in the real onboard movie?
3) now do same thing in LFS and continue doing that as long as you hear the difference, you will sooner... or later.

Quote :

Look at everything's DaveWS has tried to do with the sounds.. he's not even come close to anything sounding like it should, but has worked his plums off trying.. the sound engine is like ISI's tyres... inherently flawed.. you can't build a stable house on sloppy foundations. Scrap it and start again.. there's no hope for it.

Between Patch V (default sounds) and Patch W (DaveWS's sounds) is already a huge difference. DaveWS is not part of the dev team (unfortunately?), he can't magically get his hands on the source code. You don't seem to understand this.

Quote :

Fully aware, thank you.. and have in the past said that once developed, the method used would offer the best solution, however, no one's bothered with it.. lets just add new coding interfaces instead of the important stuff.

What method? Samples? Synthetised sound engine is the future. Once other sims hopefully starts to turn to that, LFS already has some advantage in that area. I'm not saying sounds are perfect in LFS, until Patch W I actually used Car Sound Remixer (you familiar with that?) and I pretty much hated how the game sounded but I've always thought generated sounds is the right way to go. Now it starts to show some potential.

Quote :

What do you think goes through the minds of people who have played the likes of GTR2, rF or damn, even some NFS title when they try LFS for the first time? I can pretty much imagine... "my damn ears!"

I don't think the sound is that big issue anymore, not even for new players, all thanks to DaveWS.

Quote :

And RBR IIRC, which lets face it, is in a completely different league to what we hear in LFS.

Indeed it's in a completely different league - though not why you thought it to be but because it uses sample system (and does not sound exactly anything special imho, and I'm RBR fan too).


.

I guess if you preassume we are going to "blindly" defend the devs then I guess any more talk is meaningless.

Not going to change your mind or something, just want to say if you insist on seeing LFS as just another commerical product then you are in for a hard ride.
I don't know what can you go to in UK, but there should be some kind of consumer's right department that you can go and make a complaint.

The devs can at any point declare a version as S2 full, since we have all the contents already, but I would care less about the name.

Quote from Ian.H :

If you want to blindly defend the devs, feel free.. but don't expect me to buy it.

Oh but you already did

I've bought many games, most of which have long since been forgotten LFS is not forgotten and I still race online at least once a week since 2004 so 24 pounds is mighty cheap for that amount of use

So yes I am a happy customer

Every patch is just a bonus to me

So am I a fanboy? I personally don't think I am, I just have a different outlook to you.
Does that make me right and you wrong? No we are both right. It's just our expectations differ and I will be more easily content with whatever happens

Quote from Ian.H :

No, I have a half-arsed pre-beta that has seen no real progress in 2 years..

Which is exactly what you paid for. I don't agree at all that it's half assed, and I also believe it will improve massively before final, but that is essentially what you bought. There were no promises made about when or how S2 would be released, so any notion you might have of things taking too long, or the importance of certain features is entirely your own doing. The devs can't be held responsible for what you thought you would get.

Quote from deggis :

I agree. And what would be the point of adding few fancy DX8/9 effects for as long as we have lo-res textures? I really wonder what's the reason for that, I mean even the default skins are 512x512. It can't be keeping the download size small (not like we're still in 56 kbps modem era) and as some tests seems to prove, using hi-res texture addons doesn't actually make that much difference to fps, so it can't be that either. Seems like someone is obsessed with lo-res textures size.

This is some of the exact reasons that I do stick with LFS apart from the physics. I have still been in that "56k modem era." It wasn't until just a month or so ago when my phone service changed companies that broadband was available. Well, it was available for quite some time, but $50 a month was ridiculous for 256k broadband when everyone else seemed to have MB's for close to what I was paying for dialup. Fortunately now, my DSL modem is arriving on Wednesday and I'll have 1.5 mb including my phone service and extra phone features that I previously didn't have for around the same cost as strictly basic phone was for me. To note on the dialup, two years I have never had problems with 56k. Since the test patches of W were released, I haven't been able to connect to anything in UK/Europe. I've tried them all. Australia with a high ping, I'm just fine. Last night I connected to a 900+ ms ping server and didn't disconnect. I would have lagged, sure, but I didn't time-out. This is one reason I stuck with LFS and soon with finally having broadband, I should be back on the UK/Europe servers.

Graphics are the other reason I stick with LFS, mainly the DX8. I am still in the "onboard graphics" era and don't have much hope of upgrading any time soon. I've tried GTR (the first one), GTL, and rFactor, all the demo versions. The fact that I can stretch LFS to 80 FPS if I wanted to, run normally at 40-50 FPS, and can get a maximum of 10/normally 5 FPS in all other sims with DX9 forces me to stick with LFS. I have no other choice unless someone wants to send me a hundred bucks so I can get a gfx card.

Graphically, there is no problems with FPS from hi-res textures even with onboard gfx chip (mine is an ATI chip). I share 256 mb with the system's 1 gb ram. A friend of mine has no problem with a laptop and an nVidia onboard chip sharing only 32 mb, but he doesn't use unofficial hi-res textures downloaded from here. Texture size doesn't hammer the gfx chip all that much. It only comes down to how much gfx memory you have as I run just fine with the normally super slow onboard I have.

I can understand where everyone is going about the graphics of LFS. Unfortunately, I have to disagree where I DON'T want to see an update graphically. Graphics update would force me off LFS and sim racing in general because LFS is the only one I can run. That of course doesn't mean that because of this LFS should not expand and improve. It is only my hope that LFS doesn't get updated graphically because I will be left at the door. Car model updating and general other 3d model updating would be the end to my sim racing.

All that said and disregarding hardware inefficiencies, the main reason I stick with LFS is simply the physics. I don't have much to compare with because I can't respond on physics of other sims at 5 FPS, but I do know how LFS physics feel. I do like LFS's physics very much.

Quote from deggis :

Seems like you simply don't care is the engine sound actually produced and simulated instead of the game just playing sample1-sample2-sample3 etc? You know in real life, the engine produces sound. It doesn't have speakers that plays re-recorded samples.

I don't care how it's put together, it just sounds crap. RBR managed to use the same (kind of) engine, yet that works.. so why doesn't LFS? For the same reason the AI don't know their way around half the tracks, because Scawen couldn't be arsed to do it properly.

Quote :

What game you prefer in sounds wise then? GTR2? Why don't you do this:

GTR2 sounds infinitely better than LFS does and probably will.

Quote :

1) go http://youtube.com and search and watch some nice onboard movies

Because I don't view flash files.

Quote :

2) go play GTR2 (?), watch a replay and close your eyes and simply listen the sound, do you really think the engine "note" and "load" is even near that what you just heard in the real onboard movie?

Yes.. if the samples are good.

Quote :

3) now do same thing in LFS

LOL please tell me this step is a joke? Nothing in LFS sounds like a car, NOTHING AT ALL!

Quote :

Continue doing that as long as you hear the difference. You will, sooner or later.

That GTR2 sounds far far more like a car than LFS? I can tell you that without doing any of the above 3 steps.

Quote :

Between Patch V (default sounds) and Patch W (DaveWS's sounds) is alread a huge difference.

Yes, shovelling 10 tonnes of shite from a stack that has 30 tonnes in total also makes quite a difference.

Quote :

What method? Samples? Synthetised sound engine is the future. Once other sims hopefully starts to turn to that, LFS already has a huge advantage in that area.

And also the past.. look at RBR.

And duh! LFS already uses samples.

Quote :

I'm not saying sounds are perfect in LFS,

Thank god for that!

Quote :

until Patch W I actually used Car Sound Remixer (you familiar with that?) and I pretty much hated how the game sounded but I've always thought generated sounds is the right way to go. Now it starts to show some potential.

Never used sound remixer.. I shouldn't have to rely on a 3rd party addon to make the original game content reasonable.. that's what I (and many others) paid Scawen to do.

Quote :

I don't think the sound is that big issue anymore, not even for new players, all thanks to DaveWS.

Then you need new ears. I've worked in the sound industry, I DJ'd for 10 years.. my ears function pretty well, and LFS sounds like a spaceship in a plastic tube with all it's perfect smoothness and waaaay OTT echo.

Quote :

Indeed it's in a completely different league - though not why you thought it to be but because it uses sample system (and does not sound exactly anything special imho, and I'm RBR fan too).

So does LFS.. which sounds even less special.. and I'm not an RBR fan in the slightest, just tried it a few times and know it sounds infinitely better than LFS.



Regards,

Ian

Quote from mrodgers :

Graphics are the other reason I stick with LFS, mainly the DX8. I am still in the "onboard graphics" era and don't have much hope of upgrading any time soon. I've tried GTR (the first one), GTL, and rFactor, all the demo versions. The fact that I can stretch LFS to 80 FPS if I wanted to, run normally at 40-50 FPS, and can get a maximum of 10/normally 5 FPS in all other sims with DX9 forces me to stick with LFS. I have no other choice unless someone wants to send me a hundred bucks so I can get a gfx card.

The screenshot I posted a few pages ago of the Leons on an old WIP track I started is running in DX8 mode too.. I can't run DX9 stuff due to lack of gfx power.. but LFS looks completely 2D and dead compared to what can be achieved with DX8 even if Eric has done a pretty good job within the limitations he's set himself as far as textures go (track mapping / modeling however leave much to be desired).



Regards,

Ian

Quote from Ian.H :

LFS to date has cost me £24, hardly a bargain.

You've joined in April 2004. 24£ / 3 years = 8£ per year
28006 km driven = 0,0008£ per km.

Just look at all the money! :wow:

EDIT:

Quote from Ian.H :

Yes, shovelling 10 tonnes of shite from a stack that has 30 tonnes in total also makes quite a difference.

You're just trolling now. Godspeed!

Dude, you wouldn't know what trolling was if it bit your left nut if you think I'm trolling, but I never expected this thread to be easy as I'm fighting the flow of fanbois.

The actual money involved isn't an issue (I've actually bought 4 licenses.. so yes, I did think LFS was worth something at some point), it's more principle.

Had I known S2 was going to be an alpha product for 2 years, I would never have bought it.. but at the time, I thought people were actively working on the project.. not adding stupid, non-sim related gimmicks.



Regards,

Ian

Quote from Ian.H :

Dude, you wouldn't know what trolling was if it bit your left nut if you think I'm trolling, but I never expected this thread to be easy as I'm fighting the flow of fanbois.

Only thing you're fighting against is your inability to understand that you're nothing special and you just have to wait and see just like the rest of us.