Quote from DeadWolfBones :

I haven't, no, as I'm not that technically inclined. However, instead of phrasing it as "Eric's managed to screw up the mapping on the tracks so royally," you could simply say "the mapping of the tracks is badly designed." It's a simple change but it greatly reduces the personal attack element of the comment while at the same time preserving the meaning. Everyone knows who does the mapping, so if you're going to say it's crap there's no need to excessively drag Eric's name through the mud while you're at it.

Fair enough. I didn't mention Eric by name to drag it through the mud.. I'm just one of those people who often use people's names in reference rather than 'him' and 'her' or simply leaving it out.. it wasn't added to be spiteful or to create a personal attack.

I know I've mentioned both Eric's and Scawen's name in some posts. Maybe that was wrong indirectly. Again, I'm not wanting this to be anything of a personal attack, if I'm "attacking" anything, it's LFS as a business, not the individuals per-se (I know that's not always easy, especially when they're just a small group of lads).

After pulling away from rF, I brought my textures with me that I'd made for some of my own tracks I was experimenting with. Most of these were adapted from photos I took or grass / tarmac etc. I tried using them in LFS to update the textures and things didn't work out. I know LFS isn't "moddable" but would be nice to be able to replace the textures more easily, especially seeing as they're loose files (ie: the devs haven't gone out of their way to make it difficult / impossible like.... modifying cars / physics etc).

Quote :

I can assure you that it gives me no pleasure that your business failed. I know how hard it is for small business owners--my father has been one for all his life--and I'm sorry that it happened to you. I appreciate that you have a similar perspective to the devs when it comes to running a business. I just feel that repeatedly referencing it isn't really necessary, and only serves to perpetuate an image of you as a self-important gasbag.

Thanks for not flipping out on me for my post. Like I said, I think you've made a lot of constructive criticisms in this thread, and I hope some good comes of them. I just wish you'd express yourself a little differently sometimes.

Again fair enough. It was a PITA having to close the hosting side but customers become fewer and fewer as big hosting companies now seem to offer almost complete servers for the price of a pint.. something any small business can't afford to do.

Not all's bad, the coding side is picked up more and more and now outweighs what I may have got from the hosting side.

No probs at all regarding flipping out. I'd far sooner have a very heated discussion (about whatever today's topic maybe) than a flame fest. I fully expect others to be just as blunt to me as I am to them (not that you were, just generally).. I take as good as I give.. something my Mum drummed into me at a very early age



Regards,

Ian

Quote from Ian.H :

No, I prepaid for S2 (in it's final form).. of which I don't yet have. I don't pay £2 a week until the updates are complete, I paid the full amount, yet haven't received the full product... this isn't a case of putting down a deposit.

I think there is a difference in terminology here also, alpha/beta/final as applied to most software products is not the same as what Scawen uses to describe LFS. So when you paid for an S2 license you bought access to the current content, I looked at the purchase page and I didn't see anywhere that promised a final(in the terms that you and not the devs judge)version of the game.

There are definetly things that need work in LFS, it is obviously a WIP, but I have faith in Scawen and his choices on what to develop when. Saying things like insim are pointless and a waste of time just seems a bit short sighted.

Quote from BrandonAGr :

I think there is a difference in terminology here also, alpha/beta/final as applied to most software products is not the same as what Scawen uses to describe LFS.

Read one of my first posts.. you're now using this alpha / beta state to suit your self.. as people also tell others to buy S2 because it's not really alpha. It either is or it isn't.. and with the current flaws / items missing, it most certainly is, but by now, 2+ years down the line since release, it should _at least_ be beta almost ready for final.

Quote :

So when you paid for an S2 license you bought access to the current content,

Yes, agreed.. had I known I'd have to wait 2 damn years for no progress, I most definitely wouldn't have wasted the cash.

Quote :

I looked at the purchase page and I didn't see anywhere that promised a final(in the terms that you and not the devs judge)version of the game.

As per their download page: Download Live for Speed S2 ALPHA - FULL VERSION.

It's not a full version at all.. it has no proper turbo modelling, it has no proper collision detection, it has no proper damage modelling, it has no proper aero modelling.. HTF is that ever a "full version"... full of temporaries, full of bugs.. most certainly not a full product with so much missing.

Quote :

There are definetly things that need work in LFS, it is obviously a WIP, but I have faith in Scawen and his choices on what to develop when. Saying things like insim are pointless and a waste of time just seems a bit short sighted.

No kidding!

I didn't say insim was pointless (although the scripting engine is IMO).. but it should be treated as a _far_ lower priority than the things I list above. Everyone here goes on about physics, how LFS' are great (I'm not denying some are good).. how physics must be put before gfx etc.. yet, insim and some stupid scripting ability get put before everything.. doesn't make sense to me from both my perspective and seemingly what just about everyone else on this forum wants.



Regards,

Ian

Quote :

I think there is a difference in terminology here also, alpha/beta/final as applied to most software products is not the same as what Scawen uses to describe LFS. So when you paid for an S2 license you bought access to the current content, I looked at the purchase page and I didn't see anywhere that promised a final(in the terms that you and not the devs judge)version of the game.

Its alpha because its not feature complete, correct? For example, the GTR's don't have their own dashboards, the damage model/diffs aren't complete, etc.

So how is the terminology being applied differently to LFS? I would expect it to have a very short beta time before going gold.

Edit: Took too long.

Quote from Ian.H :

had I known I'd have to wait 2 damn years for no progress, I most definitely wouldn't have wasted the cash.

So your cash was so wasted that you managed to do nearly 1000 races?

GTR2 bored be rigid within 100 laps....now that's wasted cash

Quote from Ian.H :

As per their download page: Download Live for Speed S2 ALPHA - FULL VERSION.

It's not a full version at all.

Is it a demo version? i don't think so, therefore it is a full version.

Finished product? No, indeed not, but as has been pointed out to you many times you didn't pay for the finished product.

Ian - It doesn't matter if the stuff in LFS meets your lofty requirements or not. You try the demo, decide you like it, then buy the full game. So long as the full game reflects the demo (and it does), that's all that matters.

Now, if the demo played perfectly and the full version didn't, you might have a leg to stand on. But, since the two are essentially the same, other than the extra cars and tracks, they are comparable. So you DID get what you paid for: the demo, with some extra cars and tracks added. If you paid thinking that EVERY one of your desires would be fulfilled by now, that was your mistake.

I actually agree with you about many of the points you've made. I also would like to see many things addressed, and would really enjoy some faster progress. But, complaining that you didn't get what you expected is nobody's fault but your own.

Quote from Ian.H :

Yes, agreed.. had I known I'd have to wait 2 damn years for no progress, I most definitely wouldn't have wasted the cash.

You just said it's not about money?

Quote :

As per their download page: Download Live for Speed S2 ALPHA - FULL VERSION.

It's full as not demo.

Quote :

It's not a full version at all.. it has no proper turbo modelling, it has no proper collision detection, it has no proper damage modelling, it has no proper aero modelling.. HTF is that ever a "full version"... full of temporaries, full of bugs.. most certainly not a full product with so much missing.

Where does it say the full product includes these? (well it's not even a full as finished...d'oh)

There are no promises on LFS site, you can not have been mislead to believe that those should be here or the issues fixed. You thought things would go your way, they didn't, you made a mistake purchasing your S2 license too early. It wouldn't even been necessary as S1 license (or even demo) has access to the same LFS content than S2..well of course excluding S2 cars and tracks.


And_wtf_is_up_with_this_thing?




I guess this has no use as you will draw the fanboi card again.

To people who want better graphics:

Sure, graphics are nice, I even bought a new PC to speed up my games and see more eye candy. However, games are loved and cherished for the game play they offer, not good graphics. It is the game play the games are played for if you keep on building on that, you can't go wrong. If Scawen kept the graphics up to date, he wouldn't be getting any work done to improve the gameplay.

I see improving gameplay as a long term investment - smth that is there to stay forever. Improving graphics is just for short term gains - in 1 year people will start to complain again why DX11 isn't supported... Sure, LFS needs a graphics overhaul some time, but I'd take physics update any day over a graphics update.

you can _call_ me a fanboi - noprobs.

After reading a while I cant really see any argument more than moaning gimmegimmegimme...

Quote from JJ72 :

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.

I'd rather have devs glancing at their cashflow rate on their accounts (btw, updates and so on dependant) than hard on deadline forsaking physics quality and putting eyecandy effects to present "finished product" on time.

And if you check the list:

Quote from Tweaker :

Tracks in LFS are really not complete in my opinion (of course they will be touched up, but when?), there is still some work to do, or else they will feel like a flat/planar track with no proper fringe, bumps on kerbs (and yes there are bumpy kerbs that can be driven both directions), poorly designed chicanes on pit exits/entrances, texture bugs, lack of crowds (no ambiance), etc. Look around and you'll see. Nothing is complete of course, but then look at the animations. Poor driver modeling for the body and helmet, no decent animations while driving... not even a pit crew in the pitlane. What about lights (and day/night), better smoke, glowing brake discs, exhaust backfire, sparks, real looking dial clusters, sun glare, wet weather, pace car, proper penalty flags, AI that work and can drive fast, built-in telemetry, useful pit strategies, shattering/breakable objects on tracks & cars, damaged body panels (and fall off), dirt visible on the tires, rewind in replays, proper gearbox simulation and stalling, blown engines / mechanical failures, racing line grip levels (marbles), track temps... There is probably a lot more to list.

you can divide into many details I dont mind (I'm in the process of creating a rig - that what I call immersion - and can find LFS exciting still), and features that can come with more environmental simulation (day/night/wet/rain etc.)

Quote from DeadWolfBones :

That's what keeps me playing LFS--the knowledge that I can log in on any given night, play with guys I know and trust, and have a great, close race without worrying about weird physics inconsistencies or bad multiplayer code ruining things

And I can assure you that I was not at any time busy worrying about the lack of bump mapping or realistic hi-res cracks in the pavement.

I see Ian like a guy coming for track days and moaning for tableflat Tilke's design. You said, Ian, you get bored with lack of modding - but well, I would like to have well done 20-30 tracks than 1000 poor quality efforts.
Nevertheless I must say with new balancing system a new car in a class every couple of months would be neat...


All I can say, after several years in LFS I just found out yesterday that when you go near the beach in FE, turn the radio off, you can hear the waves. You can try and relax there

Thats nice, but I won't be coming back to race in LFS for that feature.

I knew I should know better than not explain every sentence clearly when not saying LFS is perfect.

It's not about money, the "wasted cash" comment just means that had I known I'd have been waiting so long for some decent updates, I wouldn't have bothered. I don't sit here thinking it's £24 quid down the drain or that I want a refund or something equally stupid.. I spent the money, it's long gone.. no worry.. at the time however, I would have conserved it as now it seems like a waste, not that I'm sitting here missing it.

I know I bought an alpha version (with the understanding it wouldn't be this way forever).. I'm not denying that. I did buy it as a WIP too, and that it would eventually become an S2 final release. What I didn't expect to be buying is such a delay in progress. Is that really hard to understand? I really don't know how to put it any clearer (I'm not being sarcastic, I'm just explaining.. or trying to).

Ignoring additional content for now, why did it take so long for false starts to be implemented when LFS is supposed to be a sim over arcade game? Why has the collision detection been temporary since S1 days? Why is the damage modelling still as primitive as the day it was implemented? 2 years is a long time. I'm not even looking for S2 final right now, just some substantial update to see that LFS is infact progressing as it was meant to be.. but all we're seeing is gimmicks like this scripting engine being added, when surely, 95% of people here would rather have some half-decent aero modelling? collisions that didn't send you to the moon that in reality, would barely knock a person off their feet. It's this I fail to understand and accept, not really the fact that S2 final isn't here or just around the corner. These are things that should be in the game.. not because I want them, but because it's supposed to be a simulation. Maybe I didn't word some of my posts too clearly, but all I want is progress, substantial progress.. after 2 years I don't think that's being unreasonable.

What I don't expect is for the devs to say "hey, Ian wants X,Y,Z.. stop what ya doing and get on with it!".



Regards,

Ian

Quote from Ian.H :

OK, that's fine. I'll go with current content, but I want all the bugs ironed out.. no more temporary damage modelling, no more temporary moon launching collision detection, turbo boost modelled correctly, diffs that act like diffs, aero modelled correctly etc etc. These are what make a sim, right? but also things sadly lacking for years in LFS.

Do we have this? no.. it's not all just about additional content.. the above are flaws / bugs. These aren't optional (or shouldn't be ).



Regards,

Ian

You have no clue, do you... What bugs? When have you ever seen a simulation that is totally perfect!?!? All these so called bugs are just features that are lacking. Just like all other sims are lacking features. There is no defined criteria for what a sim needs to have. It is reasonable to expect a sim to feel more real than most games. LFS does that - way and beyond. Tell me which games are so much better sims that you need to put LFS down? rFactor? GTR2? Are you kidding me? Which simulation you can go online with and race other than LFS? None! rFactor promised online gameplay and there is 2 racers online! Now that is a disappointment!!!!

You bought because you wanted it.
LFS as it is now is very playable and has little bugs. Go play GTR2 and see a lot more bugs. You want collision detection? Go see how its modeled in GTR2 and have a laugh.. This is only one example, i can be all day here.. but i have my point.
I don't care if its alpha or whatever, for me it looks like a complete sim and i know it can only become better in future.
Sure i miss some new content, but don't claim devs because you paid something with no guarantee of new content.

Cya

One point nobody has mentioned: LFS S2 non-alpha/beta, full, final, whatever, is not intended to be complete. It's two thirds of LFS. There is nothing stating what is going to be left out at stage two of a three stage development process, or what will be included. From what is included at this stage, doesn't even necessarily have to work well. The sim is not complete until S3 final (or whatever), so don't expect perfection. LFS models turbo-chargers but they don't spool realisitically... nobody said the modelling had to be perfect. LFS doesn't model superchargers at all. Which is worse?

LFS develops at its own pace, enjoy the ride if you can, if not, take another break and come back in another 2 years. Perhaps you'll be happier then.

It has been a while since any major graphic upgrades, I'll grant you.
I understand that's huge in some peoples minds, but in others ( mine included) the graphics barely enter into the picture ( no pun intended).

I don't watch the scenery as I'm racing. I don't look at the dash to see
if the 8 track is still playing ( pun intended).

I don't watch replays and think 'look how beautiful my car looks as it passes that tree'.

Compared to most current sims I've seen, LFS graphics are pleasant and non-obtrusive.

I agree with DWB, the reason LFS keeps me coming back after 3 years is
the game play - it's just fun to pop on and race wheel to wheel, and know what the car is going to do in most instances.

It's all moot in the end, just another opinion. I'm just a bit surprised at times that people get so worked up about graphics.

I would like to see more content, specifically more tracks. More cars would be nice, but I don't drive all of the current ones. The amount of tracks are fine up to now, or a least recently, but it would be nice to have about
half a dozen fresh alternatives, as thats what really makes the game interesting, imho.

Spent some time going through Scawens posts, some of these are somewhat interesting, and somewhat related to the topic.

About model updates:

Quote from Scawen :

Quote from Cue-Ball :

If that's true then can I assume that every surface carries the same weight? If so, this would account for the fact that the hot hatches seem very top heavy. Sometimes after going over an inside curb I swear that the engine must be mounted on the roof!

The meshes aren't used in the mass calculation any more. However, they are used to create a physics collision box and also to determine a radius. So they can affect physics in small ways.

Any tiny change to the car could put replays out of sync. For example, if a driver's position was moved by one millimeter, because of an updated steering wheel or whatever, the replay would be out of sync.

Not all the car interiors are done and Eric wants to release them at once, not having half a car class updated while another car is not. And one thing leads to another, so if the XRR is updated, the XRT is updated, so then the XFG should be updated as well. I expect all the interiors will be released at once, in an incompatible patch.

--
December 29th 2006
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=298604#post298604
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=17074

Criticisms:

Quote from Scawen :

Simply, the criticisms of LFS development stated a few posts back are just wrong and displaying a lack of understanding, and failure to see the big picture. Or if you wish, you may interpret that as my failure to explain to you what I'm doing every step of the way. But seriously, my job is not to explain to you every step of LFS development and every plan I have for it, while they run through my head. My job is to get LFS done.

It was actually the two Vista compatibility issues (unlocking and sound) and the arrival of the G25 wheel that got me onto this series of test patches. It's very important, with more and more people getting Vista, and us receiving several technical support emails "I can't unlock on Vista" and so on, for LFS to work on Vista. Also we need that improved controller support to be readily available to new users. Also I've had enough of "How do I install a patch, I've downloaded it and LFS doesn't work any more" so I've been working on and nearly finished the auto updater. And that means, Patch V needs to go on the main site. And guess what - it should not go up there completely bug ridden and full of hundreds of small issues that have been waiting a long time to be fixed. But it should be compatible, I need to do some months of incompatible work, which I have outlined elsewhere and won't go into here. And there's no point delaying the compatible fixes, leaving the much poorer version U up there when we are so close to V.

The compatible fixes and improvements are totally necessary. The irritated commentators on this thread have no idea how much reworking and improving goes on inside the program while I'm on a roll. Also they don't understand how much simply MUST be done, outside the core physics, to keep the program on track. It does actually take more time than the core itself. If a great majority of the time was spent on the core alone, we would have a physically accurate, but totally unusable simulator that attracted no more than the absolute hardcore simmer. And we'd be poor and have to give up LFS and go and get a job!

This work NEEDS to be done. It's nothing different from any time in the past. A lot of compatible fixes, tested thoroughly by the community, followed by an apparently quiet period while we work on incompatible things which cannot be tested by the community because every day's test patch is incompatible, which would causing hotlap and online madness. And in that apparently quiet periiod there will be a new post each week "Where are the devs gone" and "They've taken our money and run" and "The devs owe it to us to write a detailed progress report each week" etc, etc... you know how it goes by now.

Anyway, I'm very happy with these improvements, I'm sort of embarassed now by version U and it's flaws and imcompatibilities, the visible things and the internal messes it contains that I have sorted out. I'm itching to get that version V up there but it needs the auto-updater finished (a couple more days work) and the new (minor) sound updates (a few more days work - still awaiting some longer work in the future). Nearly every one of these test patches has had some VITAL fixes, along with a few irritations fixed and some minor or major features. It really is not a bad thing for LFS, these compatible things that have been done, bringing us so much closer to a final S2 that can be released, when the other craved updates are completed.

It's a little sad the lack of trust displayed in those preceding posts. The belief that something has gone wrong inside our heads, that the developers who once knew how to develop, have changed mentally in some way, are hiding away in a hole, scared to develop anything but just scratching at the surface. It's quite a pathetic belief in fact, when the truth is Eric's there working on things that will improve LFS a lot amd I am working 10 hour days getting so much done, as fast as possible to get a stable version up there ready for the approaching silent period of core development.

It's going so well, and as described elsewhere our lives have been sorted out a lot this year helped by the S2 success, after neglecting ourselves for years, due to LFS development. It would be nice if the off topic commentators could just be happy about it and have some faith in the simple understanding that we developers who got it this far, and have devoted so much of our lives to this, probably want to take it to the next stage as well!

--
November 4th 2006
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=255879#post255879
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=14689

Progress report, October 2006:

Quote from Scawen :

Hello to all.

This is just a really quick note as I am starting to see more questions and frustration, from people who want an update. I hope this post will help to explain how things are going.

I first want to remind you how we work here. We don't work to a specified schedule or an exact feature list. We have our lists of things to do and we get on with them. We do allow ourselves to get sidetracked onto related tasks as we go, or even do completely unrelated things which we feel like doing, along the way. It's a good way to work, because we can follow our inspiration and interest, and so get a lot done. This is one reason why Eric and I left the company we used to work for, and set about working on our own. The only disadvantage is that sometimes, a planned thing takes longer to complete, while we finish something that wasn't planned. But that doesn't worry us at all - it just makes some people get impatient, sometimes.

Although progress is good, this year has been the slowest one yet. There are a lot of reasons for that, but none of them are really permanent.

On my side... as you know my first child was born this year, so there have been a lot of home improvements being done, and a lot of old rubbish to clear away, after years of letting things pile up when I only had a motorbike. Another issue has been the neighbours building. We are attached to a house which has had a loft conversion and a large rear extension. I won't describe what a building site is like, if you don't already know, you won't believe my description of the amount of dust and noise! Anyway, that has been on the go for 7 months now and they are really in the final stages, so most days are peaceful now. Of course Leo himself is quite a distraction and something to get used to. But you don't want to miss out on the first months of your first baby's life. He won't be small for long!

On Eric's side... he was finally able to buy his own house, something that was impossible in the earlier years of LFS and he was forced to waste a lot of money renting a house. Now with S2 sales, he got the chance to get his own house again, so of course he took that opportunity. That kept him off his work for a little while. As anyone knows, who buys a second hand house, there is a certain amount of work to be done before you move in.

So, I hope you can now understand the reasons for our slower progress in 2006. This is by no means an apology! We never give estimates of when things will be done - we are very careful about that because we don't want to be in the position of failing to deliver on our promises. We are very happy with the improvements to our homes and our lives, and I am happy to report that our improved environments are helping us to continue working on this project we love so much! You can look forward to many improvements to LFS - graphical, physical and audible. We won't give any estimates though, of when any particular patch or version will be out. But we are progressing towards it day by day.

--
October 16th 2006
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=239869#post239869
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=13882

Read through these threads for more posts by Scawen:
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=14689
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=17074
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=13882

Thank you, DanneDA.

I really do believe this thread has more than run its course. We've ALL talked ourselves out, and had the opportunity for a vent and to contradict ourselves thoroughly and to get right down to the nuts and bolts of why were happy or why we're not.

The thread could not be concluded more appropriately than with Scawen's own words, specifically on the subject at hand.

If anyone really genuinely has any further relevations to post, feel free to PM me and I'll consider re-opening the thread. Otherwise, I reckon it's bedtime for this one.