Hey all. I was thinking about this last night/yesterday. Could LFS be more scaleable for low(er) end PCs. By this, I mean to have LFS be more scaleable to low(er) end PCs. For example

Today's current top of the range machines: No change

1-3 year old machines: A few options.

3-6 year old machines: A lot of options

6+ year old machines: All the options for tweaking

I was thinking about stuff like more LOD levels, lowe(er) texture resolutions, less details.

DK

them option would be nice , concidering my machine is 4-5 years old ( most parts of it are ) it would be nice but i should be getting a better graphics card soon so i can say goodbye to 30 fps

That is off-topic Ben. :P

On-topic anyone?

/me sits on top of a Topic bar

There :P

DK

You already have all the options for scaling to lower end machines. Why take out options for more upto date computers?

@Electrik Kar: I disagree. More people playing LFS = more sales, right? Also more people who can spread the word of LFS to your friends.

DK

I don't think we need any more lower-scaling options. Seriously, by the time you've lowered everything as far as it goes you're pretty much playing with coloured squares.
And if people can't run the game on it's current lowest settings, they probably shouldn't be trying to play online games anyway.

Even my old 1.5Ghz CPU, 64Mb GeForce 5500 and 10Mb bad sector HD ran LFS at a respectable frame rate, and if that could run it, anything can.

Quote from theirishnoob :

aswell as admin lvl would help

i think admin lvls would help because you could have :

lvl 1 = respected racer ( he's abloe to cancel votes , restart race and maybe spec someone )

at the top end of the scale

lvl 10 server host/head admin ( he gives out admin lvls , adjusts the servers options , he can kick ban anyone etc )

This ain´t no mmorpg


I agree with Dajmin´s points.. got nothing to add

I do think it would be cool to add a no textures option though- just plain surfaces. It would look quite wild in an 80's tron way (and totally relieve the graphics burden on older computers)

That would look kinda cool. So I guess you know what your next texture pack should be then, eh?

hey DK, the option to lower the detail and textures in LFS would kinda be counter productive in as i mean time spent to work out the various bugs etc. could have been time on other areas especially as most users would call for the option to improve graphics and envoirmental physics. LFS is not so dependant compared to other titles.

If you, or any other members have lower end machines the first thing imo that you should upgrade is the cpu.

If not post your full system specs along with a screenshot of:

- with the above info we can give you advice as to where the bottlenecks are in your system. A PC running at 40 fps with little graphical detail should be your goal with a low end PC.
Also everyone should note that using a wireless router in most cases is not the best choice. No matter if the PC can produce smooth frames this can be hampered by network lag(lost packets from the wireless router)

Quote :

I guess you know what your next texture pack should be then, eh?

Already started... (new South City mod)

@CSU: Upgrading isn't easy or an option in some cases (e.g. laptops). What if, as a hypothetical example, you can't upgrade the system.

The way I see it, it's a matter of economics.

DK

Quote from DieKolkrabe :

@CSU: Upgrading isn't easy or an option in some cases (e.g. laptops). What if, as a hypothetical example, you can't upgrade the system.

Which is why I suggested to post your system info.

Quote :

The way I see it, it's a matter of economics.

DK

No it's not, its a matter of understanding how to get the most from the tools you have to work with

It is, but when you have people constantly saying "upgrade, upgrade, upgrade", and you can't, it is irritating, yes? So that is why I feel that LFS should support lower end PCs. How many casual gamers (don't forget, there are a lot of casual gamers out there who play LFS), have upgraded their systems in the last year.

If you can't upgrade, how will posting your system info help?

DK

Quote from DieKolkrabe :

If you can't upgrade, how will posting your system info help?

DK

- with the above info we can give you advice as to where the bottlenecks are in your system. A PC running at 40 fps with little graphical detail should be your goal with a low end PC.
Also everyone should note that using a wireless router in most cases is not the best choice. No matter if the PC can produce smooth frames this can be hampered by network lag(lost packets from the wireless router)

It's just that LFS is already so friendly towards lower-spec computers. I'm not really sure what else you could do. Scawen is always optimising the code (gfx are again optimised in latest x7 test patch), and LFS has become smoother and more playable for me with almost every patch that has come out since I joined a year or so ago. I'm not sure what you're suggesting?

Quote from Electrik Kar :

It's just that LFS is already so friendly towards lower-spec computers. I'm not really sure what else you could do. Scawen is always optimising the code (gfx are again optimised in latest x7 test patch), and LFS has become smoother and more playable for me with almost every patch that has come out since I joined a year or so ago. I'm not sure what you're suggesting?

He's suggesting that LFS caters for really low spec machines maybe the infamous Gateway 2000 series! pHoweR!!!

@DK: honestley you can't suggest this; as I and Electrik already pointed out that LFS is not so dependant compared to other titles.

If you think that your machine is not running as it should, take my advice given above...al we can do is try to help.

LFS already works on low spec machines. If anything I'd rather see people upgrade or get a new PC.

Quote from Electrik Kar :

I do think it would be cool to add a no textures option though- just plain surfaces. It would look quite wild in an 80's tron way (and totally relieve the graphics burden on older computers)

With high-res textures selected I think LFS reports that it's using about 30Mb of texture memory. That's easily manageable by a five year old graphics card, and five year old graphics cards can be bought for less than a takeaway pizza.

LFS already scales extremely well to old computers, far more so than most modern simulators. If anything LFS could use a bit more (optional) high-end gloss.

Quote from DarkTimes :

LFS already scales extremely well to old computers, far more so than most modern simulators. If anything LFS could use a bit more (optional) high-end gloss.

not really my nvida graphics card is about 2 years old ( not that old , tho it seems really old ) i have to play Everything on low quality also my dad has this p.o.s kicking out 3200 gh'z ( at 500 watts ) with only 12 of the 80 gb hardrive being used i manage 30 fps , so i fail to see how it run good on older machines tho i know theirs a few rich guys here with top-end pc's ( nerds )

S2 doesn't support elderly computers as well as S1 did, but you have to keep in mind, getting 30 or so FPS or lower in LFS means you can't play any games with a playable FPS in the last 5 years or so. From S1 to S2 there was probably a 25 to 50% drop in FPS, but you can't expect anything to get better when you have a 10 year old computer or so. Stuff isn't that expensive these days. 5 Years ago 1GB of RAM was almost unheard of, now you can get it for around $50 which is extremely cheap.

Things aren't going to get better, LFS is always going to increase the load on CPUs, and as hard as the devs are trying to keep it widely compatible it just isn't going to happen. There is a limit as to how low you can go when it comes to older computer capabilities. If you can afford S2, then you can afford a graphics card which will support LFS in the 50 FPS range.
And if you're still running a P3 or lower then I'm surprised you even can access the internet.

The devs can only do so much for people with lower end computers, and in the end they'll just have to upgrade, complaining about getting low FPS isn't the dev's fault, they are on a mission to create a realistic racing simulator, not the widest computer capable game in the world. And if that means leaving a few users behind, then so be it, but there is only so much you can do these days, and as technology increases, prices decrease on lower end, but still capable cards and hardware.

Quote from theirishnoob :

not really my nvida graphics card is about 2 years old ( not that old , tho it seems really old ) i have to play Everything on low quality also my dad has this p.o.s kicking out 3200 gh'z ( at 500 watts ) with only 12 of the 80 gb hardrive being used i manage 30 fps , so i fail to see how it run good on older machines tho i know theirs a few rich guys here with top-end pc's ( nerds )

I have a 3ghz Athlon with an x800, and I have no problems running LFS. My computer is sadly old by todays standards.

Quote from DarkTimes :

I have a 3ghz Athlon with an x800, and I have no problems running LFS. My computer is sadly old by todays standards.

That certainly isn't old. I have sitting beside me at another desk an old PC that my daughter messes around with LFS on. I'm loading LFS right now, but it's only on patch U28, I think.....

Here goes. I am sitting at the startline of Blackwood in the XFG and I switched to wheels view. Frame rates with wheels view are sitting at 30 FPS. Unfortunately, I wouldn't be able to run multiplayer or against any AI with this machine, but considering what it is, 30 FPS by yourself is REALLY good. My daughter (6) usually races against 1 AI car, and it's fine for her. We also have run together through multiplayer lan with my computer as the lan server.

What is the machine? Many of you know from a while ago. I use to run the S1 demo online with it. Celeron 667 MHz with old version PCI Radeon 9250 card and I think 512 mb of ram.

How low of a PC do you want available to run LFS?

Tron 2.0 by Monolith.

Quick Wiki link here