why on earth do people feel 'it's only alpha' is some form of justification? It's a game that people have been paying for and playing for years. There's more to come, great, but this is what we've currently got! What next, someone reviews quake 4 and 'oh, it's only version 1.03, there's patches coming out, you can't review it'??
Nice review 
The fact that LFS is still in alpha doesn't change a thing. If a game is available, it's also available for reviewing. Since people are playing LFS why shouldn't reviewers write about it?
LFS is incomplete, yes. But how would a reviewer know what there is to come in the future? How could he write about something that isn't there yet, or even let the things to come affect the score he gives for the game in the state it is at the moment?
I like LFS, I hardly play anything else. It is very good (IMO) but it can (should?) be a lot better.
The fact that LFS is still in alpha doesn't change a thing. If a game is available, it's also available for reviewing. Since people are playing LFS why shouldn't reviewers write about it?
LFS is incomplete, yes. But how would a reviewer know what there is to come in the future? How could he write about something that isn't there yet, or even let the things to come affect the score he gives for the game in the state it is at the moment?
I like LFS, I hardly play anything else. It is very good (IMO) but it can (should?) be a lot better.
There is a big difference between Alpha's, Beta's and patches!
I'm sure somewhere another game is currently being developed in an office would we review it? no!
I'm just saying from my point of view that reviewing unfinished games is pointless. The whole point of reviews from a consumers view is to help decide weather you should buy it or not. A review of an un-finished game can damage reputation which will not help when the game is finished.
It's fine if it's reviewed, i just think it should be more clearly stated that it is a work in progress. Maybe the reviewer could have given a bit of background about the development process of LFS.
ALPHA is very different from Final in many ways. Alpha means that not even all the features are in and it may be very very buggy. In that sense, the LFS Alpha is a good alpha beacuse it is possibly among the most stable Alpha software ever released. Beta means that all the features are in, but there are still bugs floating around. You purchased LFS knowing that there is no official release date for the final (if you read anything before purchasing that is) and even though an alpha may come along at some stage, it is not everything you paid for. Show me what GTR or rFactor Alpha looked like and I doubt it was even playable. True, most big companies will never release an alpha version to the public because they are running behind schedule but S2 Alpha isn't your average alpha either.
that comment was a general thought on sim racing, not just LFS, I was not saying LFS WAS QUAKE 2 standard, more the community is quake 2 level and perhaps maybe what the community wants isn't aimed much higher than that when it should be.
Like I said it's not an excuse.
It's the context it needs to be taken in.
I agree about the community being on the primitive side.. been of that opinion since the first time I read the forums and played online.
It's the context it needs to be taken in.
I agree about the community being on the primitive side.. been of that opinion since the first time I read the forums and played online.
This thread is starting to be like oval racing - there are even drafting groups forming... 
Perhaps I should point out that nikimere races IRL and believes LFS is the one to go for, as he has stated many times in different places? How long has the Race-Sim industry been around? Since the days of GPL and even then it was far from being an industry as such because there was no competition. And how long has the FPS industry been around? This is like going back to 1994 (or whenever it was) and telling everyone that Doom was rubbish. Some people don't want to just sit there and blow the heads of people - something I find mind-numbingly boring for one - but persue their passion (racing for most of the LFS drivers). The fact that the genre isn't as evolved as some others is no reason to call LFS a poor racing simulatior for its time. If you prefer to go and play quake or UT, be my guest.
lol!!
I wouldn't call it an unfair review but I think it misses the point of LFS. LFS takes time and I don't think you spent the required amount but that's ok because maybe you shouldn't have to. That's where the philosophies are different, you seem to want something different out of LFS which is fine but there is a reason why I've played LFS for more than 2 years and that's because overall it is outstanding. You say it needs to reach the levels of mainstream game titles, I say that there are very few mainstream titles that reach the level of LFS. I've played video games for 20 years and LFS stopped me playing any other games for near on a year, and that was S1.
I can appreciate your point of view but from my perspective you focus too much on the negatives and not enough on the positives which are far more numerous.
Anyway, with such limited online experience I don't think you can give an accurate representation of LFS but then I don't expect everyone to put that much effort into it and to a certain extent if you don't like it you just don't like it. In that respect your review is probably accurate for the general gaming public who value similar things and don't have the time to invest in it.
I can appreciate your point of view but from my perspective you focus too much on the negatives and not enough on the positives which are far more numerous.
Anyway, with such limited online experience I don't think you can give an accurate representation of LFS but then I don't expect everyone to put that much effort into it and to a certain extent if you don't like it you just don't like it. In that respect your review is probably accurate for the general gaming public who value similar things and don't have the time to invest in it.
So, what are you expecting for the full S2 release?
Everyone who doesnt agree with the review, seems to think S2 final will be totally different to the current alpha, so, you tell us what will be different..
Personally, i dont think it'll be all that different from what we have now. And brilliant physics cannot make up for what it is still missing in LFS, so i think the score given is just about right.
I dont think it will be any different. I'm talking about LFS Final which will be released in many years from now. I dont think that LFS S2 Final should even be reviewed unless it is explained that it is NOT A FINISHED PRODUCT!
LFS is developed alot differently to any other game and this should be explained properly to the people reading the reviews.
If you had read my previous posts you would know that I expect quite a lot from S2 Final in the physics department (most of my hopes are already fulfilled, just low-speed tyre model, aero fixes and extra grip on the racing line is pretty much gonna cover it but more is always welcome). In terms of sounds and graphics I expect an almost complete work-over because they are far behind that of the competition and far behind that which the community has come to expect from LFS. Physics have always been most important, but the other stuff still has to be upto scratch if LFS hopes to be a sales success. I don't think that the devs would release an S2 Final that is a let-down for such a chunk of the community in terms of graphics and sound and I doubt they would want to release a 100MB graphics patch half way to S3 so S2 Final is where they would want to release it. Only polishing off the graphics in ~2007/8 would put LFS far behind the times.
@nikimere - you have a point about the review not explaining the development process of LFS properly. A review like this can make LFS suffer severely because of people not knowing this.
REVIEWED FOR THE FIRST TIME - GTR3
This game is in the early development stages so what I write may change before the final release.
The sound is virtually non-existent, just a light buzzing from the speakers. This is best cured by turning the speakers off, or playing music. The graphics are extremely outdated, with just 0 polygons used for cars and tracks and no textures. It is believed this will be increased for the final version though. Netcode is great. I detected no high pings throughout the game. Being a racing game, immersion and physics are the defining bits, and here GTR3 falls on it's face. The physics are probably great but without mass, friction, animation or any real time behaviour it's hard to say. The immersion remains as good as any other ISI based game despite this - you really feel like you overpaid for a mediocre product. No other 'sim' can make you feel this more. As I said it's a very early alpha stage, so don't read too much into the review. It'll probably get better. Final Score 4/10.
This game is in the early development stages so what I write may change before the final release.
The sound is virtually non-existent, just a light buzzing from the speakers. This is best cured by turning the speakers off, or playing music. The graphics are extremely outdated, with just 0 polygons used for cars and tracks and no textures. It is believed this will be increased for the final version though. Netcode is great. I detected no high pings throughout the game. Being a racing game, immersion and physics are the defining bits, and here GTR3 falls on it's face. The physics are probably great but without mass, friction, animation or any real time behaviour it's hard to say. The immersion remains as good as any other ISI based game despite this - you really feel like you overpaid for a mediocre product. No other 'sim' can make you feel this more. As I said it's a very early alpha stage, so don't read too much into the review. It'll probably get better. Final Score 4/10.
But they are selling S1/S2/S3 as seperate games, you can either buy S1, S2, or when S3 comes, all of it.
If they are selling them as seperate games, then reviewing them as seperate games is fine, imo.
All i can say is he's reviewing what we have now, and for what we do have now, i think his score/some of his opinions is justified.
Anyone can justify any score. Depends how much weight you put on the good bits and how much you put on the bad bits. An NFSU driver would probably give LFS 1/10. The point everyone is trying to make is that the score is not explained therefore people can read the review and get the wrong impression about LFS.
I didn't say it wasn't justified, i agree with the review. It should though explain the development process of LFS. Reviews can and do put people off the game, i dont want people put off a game thats going to improve greatly.
Did you read the review?
He made it perfectly clear. Crap sounds, not the best graphics, no feeling of been "at the races", lots of things still missing ect ect ect
Read it again and im sure you'll see why it got the score it did. But the score isnt that important, some of his comments are.
I think you're going to be dissapointed once s2 finally comes.. I dont see any chance of them doing all that before an S2 release, unless they plan on holding the release back until 2010.
Yes, I read it. The score, as you say is not important to those of us who love LFS, but for someone reading the review it can even stop them from bothering to read it. Also I disagree with some of his points - the lack of feedback for one and the poor tracks for another. There are two points I am trying to make here. The review has a misleading score and LFS is better than what he discribed purely because he hadn't put in enough online milage to make a fair review.
how is it a misleading score, the score represents my own feelings as where I feel LFS currently is, why way of scoring games is to give them a score based on what I think it deserves for what the product I''am reviewing is.
As for online experence, I played it enough to know the following
1. Online code is excellent
2. Races can be excellent
3. Races can be awful
4. LFS World is amazing
Just because its a good online experence, doesn't make up for the physics, sound, lack of race feeling, or anything else. as I said, I spent alot of time with LFS. more than most games and it is something I will come back too, it wasn't if i just picked up S2 and had never driven LFS before.
As i said, he should wrote it to his litlle diary, and not on the internet, so the whole world can see it.. When i see scores like this, no matter what, movies/games.. i don't even bother reading it, because i assume it must be horific for such a low score.. But in the feature i won't jugde by the scores anymore, because i see that people don't seem to know what they are talking about, and don't deserve that job.
"no feeling of being at the races" or whatever..?!
illepall the only game i actually feel being there, but sure there is lots of room for improvement..
If this game have blur effects, neon lights under the car, he would surelly rate it couple of scores higher..
"no feeling of being at the races" or whatever..?!
illepall the only game i actually feel being there, but sure there is lots of room for improvement.. If this game have blur effects, neon lights under the car, he would surelly rate it couple of scores higher..
Maybe I will. But I'm only talking about physics and by that I mean about the feel of the car. And the feeling is still the same.
I agree to that 800 miles online isn't maybe enough, but he says he have driven a lot offline too. Maybe he is like those (sick) hotlappers that can drive single laps from dawn 'till dusk.
But this is exactly what I was feeling after 800 miles - couldn't drive rwd cars, except XRT, so I drove FXR mostly. The powerful rwd cars just felt totally unnatural and evil as I was trying to get the car accelerating out of the corners and suddenly the car just spinned. The rwd cars demand a lot in LFS - may it be that the physics are lacking some much but in general you have to drive them a lot to get used to their handling - which is different that in any other sim.
Agree. But the cold hard physics are essential for a good sim, and a good sim can be excellent with very little content. What do the current hi-end 1st person shooters (modern quakes, if you allow
) have what LFS needs?Well its the most fun ive ever had with a 5/10 game or any other rated game for that matter so i guess i just have low standards...
The only thing that has come out of this review that im not happy with is the fact that new customers will be put off by that score, and i think thats rather cruel considering what has been achieved with this title.
Regards Pete
The only thing that has come out of this review that im not happy with is the fact that new customers will be put off by that score, and i think thats rather cruel considering what has been achieved with this title.
Regards Pete
It was not about not been able to drive the RWD cars, it was why they felt the way they do, which took the 'reward' factor out of LFS, when driving LFS you do not feel you are picking up a car and driving it, you feel you are driving to an invisible limit, driving blind to a certain degree.
As I said in the review, this is hard to pin point, but I feel its physics, but also, the way the sim transfers what the physics are doing to the player, for example, imagine watching real life footage on tv and you driving it behind a TV, you couldn't feel that level of immersion from just that. You have to put things into the 'sim' to represent certain feelings, so when you slam on the brakes you feel that power of braking, when you turn into a corner you feel that grip, the tires pushing and than the tires losing the grip.
I just didn't get this in LFS because it feels so weak, visually, sounds, and just general atmosphere, the way the cockpit moves event when adjusted doesn't get that feeling across.
If you watch any car tv program, for example, like Top Gear when they really throw the cars about, and compare to LFS, real life has much more anger to it, more bite to it, more weight to it.
This is just my view of course
As I said in the review, this is hard to pin point, but I feel its physics, but also, the way the sim transfers what the physics are doing to the player, for example, imagine watching real life footage on tv and you driving it behind a TV, you couldn't feel that level of immersion from just that. You have to put things into the 'sim' to represent certain feelings, so when you slam on the brakes you feel that power of braking, when you turn into a corner you feel that grip, the tires pushing and than the tires losing the grip.
I just didn't get this in LFS because it feels so weak, visually, sounds, and just general atmosphere, the way the cockpit moves event when adjusted doesn't get that feeling across.
If you watch any car tv program, for example, like Top Gear when they really throw the cars about, and compare to LFS, real life has much more anger to it, more bite to it, more weight to it.
This is just my view of course
RichardTrowler thx for taking the time to review LFS and giving it some exposure on your website.. Look forward to future reviews when S2 final is released as I respect your opinions even if mine differ somewhat 
as they say any exposure is good publicity even if its not what we want exactly...
Axus take a chill pill
your not only telling Richard how to do his job but now your also instructing Scawen what is good for him and LFS 
life doesn't always go the way we want it too 
you'll learn this no dought as you go along 
I'm sure Scawen has gone to bed many a night thinking what is best for LFS and has a strategy in mind for getting to his goals... and if that coincides with what we want as individuals great
otherwise tuff 
shit happens
[Edit] P.s. I think it takes guts to write such an article and then show up here and defend it kudos for that..
And Axus I'm not trying to offend you here either I respect and like you as a person and fellow racer but think your perspective along with some others is getting abit out of wack, but thats just an opinion feel free to take it or leave it [/Edit]
as they say any exposure is good publicity even if its not what we want exactly...Axus take a chill pill
your not only telling Richard how to do his job but now your also instructing Scawen what is good for him and LFS life doesn't always go the way we want it too you'll learn this no dought as you go along I'm sure Scawen has gone to bed many a night thinking what is best for LFS and has a strategy in mind for getting to his goals... and if that coincides with what we want as individuals great
otherwise tuff shit happens [Edit] P.s. I think it takes guts to write such an article and then show up here and defend it kudos for that..
And Axus I'm not trying to offend you here either
I respect and like you as a person and fellow racer but think your perspective along with some others is getting abit out of wack, but thats just an opinion feel free to take it or leave it [/Edit]This thread is closed
LFS reality check - review at GAMEFACTION
(217 posts, closed, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG