What's been bothering me for a while, is why don't we actually don't have night yet? Is there actually real limitations what DX8 can do, or what is it? I remember B&W having seamless daytime sifts, well, it's a bit different type of game but still. It's one of the most favorite requests, but I think there hasn't even been a good conversation about it.

Everyone just suggest that we have it in S3 with rain and other such things, once we move to DX9 and the graphics are rewritten? Why even have DX9, if there isn't any actual limitations why it can't be done now? Or is there? It's not like it changes the physics. It would be one of those special things that changes the game and how it's played. Wouldn't mind some fog either to spice things up a bit.

Not that I'm complaining, had some great races tonight!

Quote from Blackout :

What's been bothering me for a while, is why don't we actually don't have night yet? Is there actually real limitations what DX8 can do, or what is it? I remember B&W having seamless daytime sifts, well, it's a bit different type of game but still. It's one of the most favorite requests, but I think there hasn't even been a good conversation about it.

Night racing is quite rare in real life, like long endurance races and rallying but not much else. Even if the darkness could have a big impact on racing it is still the marginal stuff and probably not even very fun. Night racing is not all about the darkness so it is not that simple either.

The most simple things like engines stalling and better longnitudal grip and a real-alike clutch/gearboxes can't be too much... And a UFR skinning contest!

Maybe it's the time of the year again: http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=13882

Quote from Hyperactive :

Maybe it's the time of the year again: http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=13882

Agreed, Scawen has been very business like these past few months. It's nice to know there's still a real person behind the keyboard, and not just Scawen the coding machine.

Dunno if this is O/T or not, but has anyone realized that HL2's physics (Havok Physics engine) Could possibly be the only thing to match up to LFS?

Wtf? If that was a joke, I didn't get it.

Shoot, I just don't have time much anymore for playing LFS. I used to play on weekends, but even that is getting cut back. Things should be slowing up soon, so hopefully I can get to playing again. I just hope all the rust I got built up doesn't make me cause too many wrecks

I was thinking about this recently, and I'll throw it out there for general discussion......

Firstly, the LFS business model makes big advances in S2 very cost prohibited, Scawen has our money, why would he want to put in big improvements on S2 when it isn't going to make him any money from the current licensed population.

However, on the flip side of that, Scawen needs to attract new licensee's, so on one hand it makes no sense making big improvments (i.e. cars and tracks) to S2, but on the other, it does.

Discuss........

Quote from Hyperactive :

The most simple things like engines stalling and better longnitudal grip and a real-alike clutch/gearboxes can't be too much

Well I can't really think S2 as final before those, and they must be high on Scawen's priority list. I wouldn't even stand looking my G25 set with unused pedal if I could do something about it! Clutch pedals are so common now that it should be important getting it to use properly.

Quote :

Maybe it's the time of the year again: http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=13882

Well, a short report would be nice. If I remember correctly that one was born after numerous threads, report demands, flame wars, and ingenious business improvement suggestions. It was a mess. Short report would be nice, but I'd be very happy with a single picture. It tells a thousand words after all.

edit.

Quote from danowat :

Firstly, the LFS business model makes big advances in S2 very cost prohibited, Scawen has our money, why would he want to put in big improvements on S2 when it isn't going to make him any money from the current licensed population.

However, on the flip side of that, Scawen needs to attract new licensee's, so on one hand it makes no sense making big improvments (i.e. cars and tracks) to S2, but on the other, it does.

The textbook answer would be to build value for his customers, and as you said, lure in more customers. There is no flaws in the business model, other companies do it the same way too. Difference is that sim-racing is niche and potential customer base is rather small. But the license system works very well, keeping the crackers away from online play which is not the case in many games. The devs have also broadened their business nicely in the last few months with the skin service and LFS shop. Only problem I see, is that they only have 24 hours a day to work on their lovely program!

Personally I'm really enjoying LFS at the moment. I have just started to enjoy the AS3 GTR combo (before I hated it), and I can lap about 1:43.1 (so close to 1:42.X !).

I think a graphics update would be really nice. I know that its probably going to be a very long time until we get a graphics update, but LFS is really starting to show its age. DirectX 9 effects like bump mapping would be really really nice to see.

Also now that Logitech has released the G25, a lot more people have a clutch pedal. Proper clutch simulation would possibly attract more people.

But I think the most important update we need is collision detection and net code.

Quote from word. :

Personally I'm really enjoying LFS at the moment. I have just started to enjoy the AS3 GTR combo (before I hated it), and I can lap about 1:43.1 (so close to 1:42.X !).

I think a graphics update would be really nice. I know that its probably going to be a very long time until we get a graphics update, but LFS is really starting to show its age. DirectX 9 effects like bump mapping would be really really nice to see.

Also now that Logitech has released the G25, a lot more people have a clutch pedal. Proper clutch simulation would possibly attract more people.

But I think the most important update we need is collision detection and net code.

What exactly does bump mapping anyway? Just put on some AA and AF and LFS looks good enough for 10 years to come. We need new stuff, graphics are not important since they are allready good enough.

Quote :

Dunno if this is O/T or not, but has anyone realized that HL2's physics (Havok Physics engine) Could possibly be the only thing to match up to LFS?

Pretty O/T- but anyhow

Havok may do falling bricks and the like very well, but from my understanding tyre physics are a whole different ballgame. The reality is more complex than any of the models which have been built to simulate it. I think that's why there aren't that many true racing sims- it's a very difficult thing to do right.

A few years ago, the company Bugbear set out to create 'the Half Life of Racing' - Flatout. Sure, everything fell apart nicely, but the car handling itself was very arcadey.

AFAIK TDU uses Havok, as well...

Quote from The Very End :

What exactly does bump mapping anyway? Just put on some AA and AF and LFS looks good enough for 10 years to come. We need new stuff, graphics are not important since they are allready good enough.

Here is a simple explination. http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Bump_mapping and another http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bump_mapping. Basically it would make the road textures, tyre textrues, car skins and everything look awesome.

I too would rather have better physics over better graphics, but I think that improved graphics is important for the long run.

edit: oh, and if you wan't to know what LFS graphics will look like in 10 years time compared to what will be out then, just look at Quake graphics

Quote from word. :

Here is a simple explination. http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Bump_mapping and another http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bump_mapping. Basically it would make the road textures, tyre textrues, car skins and everything look awesome.

I too would rather have better physics over better graphics, but I think that improved graphics is important for the long run.

edit: oh, and if you wan't to know what LFS graphics will look like in 10 years time compared to what will be out then, just look at Quake graphics

I didn't get the feel that graphisms were getting better at a constant rate! It has slow down a lot and i think it won't go much further since game companies don't have infinite budget!
Rfactor use Dx9 features but is still far from being as good looking as LFS (I'm not talking about replay).
Few things could get better around the tracks tho! Like the trees but it's far from being a priority.

It certainly takes a hell of a long time to develop the big graphical titles these days, but also having an option like AA, which makes the graphics look nicer, takes a second to switch on.

Quote from word. :

edit: oh, and if you wan't to know what LFS graphics will look like in 10 years time compared to what will be out then, just look at Quake graphics

I do prefer other colours than different shades of brown, thing that I always hated in Quake, also whole game idea is bad, but that is not part of subject I guess.

Quote from JTbo :

I do prefer other colours than different shades of brown, thing that I always hated in Quake, also whole game idea is bad, but that is not part of subject I guess.

Id Software: "Putting the frown back in brown."

Quote from Blackout :

Well, a short report would be nice. If I remember correctly that one was born after numerous threads, report demands, flame wars, and ingenious business improvement suggestions. It was a mess. Short report would be nice, but I'd be very happy with a single picture. It tells a thousand words after all.

Looks like we've got a plan then.

Quote from Bob Smith :

Agreed, Scawen has been very business like these past few months. It's nice to know there's still a real person behind the keyboard, and not just Scawen the coding machine.

I think you got it a bit wrong, or my words were wrong. What I mean is that when that post was posted about a year ago nothing has changed really. The development is still what it was in 2006, slow. I see that Scawen's thread as an apology thread which isn't an apology. Kinda denial of denial. What I meant was that maybe it is about time for Scawen to make another "sorry for slow progress in 2007 - not an apology"-thread.

Quote from Blackout :

Well, a short report would be nice. If I remember correctly that one was born after numerous threads, report demands, flame wars, and ingenious business improvement suggestions. It was a mess. Short report would be nice, but I'd be very happy with a single picture. It tells a thousand words after all.

And it wasn't about a progress report either. I can live without one and more specifically the devs have said that they are not interested making those.

But that was about the progress of LFS, wasn't it? How it's slow and why nothing happened. Sadly, you are pretty correct that it's been the same this year too. We've had two patches, some sounds fixed which I'm sure aren't what they wanted to be yet, and increased grid size with false starts, so indeed it's not actually more than we saw in 2006. But I don't know how an apology report from Scawen would be any use, it doesn't make sense, we still don't own them. Wouldn't mind if they told what is going on, so we didn't have to guess, but it's not like we don't already know, and they never promise anything either so.

Quote :

LFS Wiki
T.B.A.2007: 0.5Y - Improved physics, updated interiors, updated tracks (likely South City and Kyoto)

I wonder who added that?! Has it really been confirmed to this year? Doesn't sound normal if you ask me.

Talking Havok again, I just came across this bizarre Havok/Oblivion video, simulating the result of dropping 10,000 watermelons on someone's head...

http://bethblog.com/?p=242#comments

GTR interiors and South City overhaul have been confirmed.

But not for this year.

Or did I miss something?

Quote from Fabri91 :

GTR interiors and South City overhaul have been confirmed.

eric must have done more then that, those things would usually take not more then 6 months, tops.

I must be confused.

I thought this was a "state of the community", not a "state of LFS" (read: "needlessly bitch about patches again") discussion? Or have I taken the original post a little too literally?