Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

A game with options for hard core gamers, with proper setups (wheel with clutch at a minimum) and another, with the same basic rules behind it but that would allow us to simply drive, without being worried about things like clutches (because we don't have enough interest to buy the appropriate gear).

Thats not a lot to ask for.

Well then it wouldn't be "hardcore" ain't it?

and in the current LFS if you turn on auto clutch, you don't have to worry about clutch damage as well.

You do realize your definition of what is the right amount of realism is just your individual opinion?

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

"Mode 2" for those of us who don't have a way to give the REALISTIC INPUT a clutch needs.. and so on.

There's already such driver's aid to help those who don't.

Why there's a need to have two seperate modes when you can perfectly customize what you want? if you don't want to deal with setups, find a bunch of mates and get a one make race going, if you find resetting weird and unrealistic, then go to a server without reset, I mean why categorize these settings into "hardcore" and "softcore" when everyone has their own preferences?

And really the clutch thing is just like tire wear, it's part of driving. It's nothing to do with the engineers and designers, it's part of the job for the drivers to take care of them.

Quote from JJ72 :

You do realize your definition of what is the right amount of realism is just your individual opinion?

Now, thats a good point, thanks for bring in it. Do you realize that EVERYONE'S definition of the right amount of "realism"... its THEIR INDIVIDUAL OPINION??? Yep, including Scawen.

Scawen MADE THIS GAME.

So What's wrong with him making his game base on his definition of realism?



you are free to realize your dream in your simulation as well, if you have the gift, time and resource.

You CAN express your opinion, but LFS has never been a democracy, although there are always things that seems obvious which has not been solved in LFS yet, there are also alot of new features and the devs had brought out and surprised us, so it's a fair dictatorship that yields good result.

Getting back to the argument itself I still can't see why categorizing such preferences will improve the experience over the current model.

i think this thread its gonna go out of control... in less than 11 hours

Quote from JJ72 :

You CAN express your opinion, but LFS has never been a democracy...

... Getting back to the argument itself I still can't see why categorizing such preferences will improve the experience over the current model.

Both points taken, you are right, its not a democracy, and yes, Im only venting MY opinion. But who knows, maybe the developers take, from time to time, ideas from their users, because several heads think better than one.

Aside from the ocassional refreshing demo-racer post who appreciates the FBM, or has bought S1/S2, this thread (and all like it) is really going nowhere. Everything needed to be said for both sides was stated within the first few hours of Y being out.

I propose all future posts need to be reserved for witty one-liners from forum regulars who have somehow managed to steer clear from this deluge of conflict...

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

I understand, the goal is REALISM.

Yet, the new patch should include two modes:

1) Simulation

2) Arcade

Thats like asking valve to make one noob version and one hardcore version of Counter Strike. Not going to happen.

Quote from MyBoss :

Thats like asking valve to make one noob version and one hardcore version of Counter Strike. Not going to happen.

And going to a final release seems equally difficult.

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

And going to a final release seems equally difficult.

What are you trying to accomplish exactly?

From the polls you've seen you are in the very small minority that are having trouble/dislike the patch. You've read the EULA which basically spells out your going fundamentally against what LFS is and is moving towards.

So what do you realistically want to happen???

Quote from lizardfolk :

do you go from CounterStrike to Halo and ask the Halo devs to change their game to play like CounterStrike? Logic people logic

This game is a simulation. Which means that the devs are trying to make this game AS REALISTIC AS POSSIBLE.

Since this isn't Need for Speed, an arcade mode is not a goal that the devs have in mind. They want to appeal to the racing enthusiasts audience and not the average "I just want to play a racing game every now and then" person.

If you are not a racing enthusiasts than maybe you're playing the wrong game.

The devs want to achieve the most realistic racing game. This is a independent variable to the game's current status.

After trudging though this thread it seems like some people get it and some people dont. I'd atleast like to think I do.

Live for Speed is aiming to simulate realistically as many aspects of racing/driving (or drifting and cruising if that fancies you) as possible. The devs are just a small handful of guys putting long hours of coding, research, blood, sweat and maybe even tears to perfect thier creation. People that haven't paid for the game are not going to influence anyone. People that have paid for the game rarely will influence anyone and 'anyone' most likely isnt going to be one of the devs.

As said before, if you do not like the changes that improve LFS as a simulation then perhaps LFS wasn't what you were really looking for. Forza 2 is a wonderful game for the 360. The whole GT series can be fun and challenging. Both have aspects of simulation but aren't "hardcore".

Heck, even the simbin games can be halfway decent but when it comes down to it LFS just feels so natural. Things happen as they should. Drive too agressively and whoops, there go your tires. Flatshifting or just shifting poorly? tisk tisk...the napalm gremlins will gladly disable your clutch in a hurry.

LFS shall not pander to those using non-car-like means of controlling the cars in the game.
LFS shall not pander to the complaints of demo users unless something is actually wrong with the fundamentals of the game itself.
LFS shall not pander to those who, while even using a wheel in S2, cannot comprehend the processes used in properly propelling your vehicle of choice through space. (well, this isn't Live for Space...but that'd be cool:razz

Quote from mattlikespeoples :

(well, this isn't Live for Space...but that'd be cool:razz

I don't do Sig quotes... but this needs to be written down and passed on to the next generation!!

Quote from srdsprinter :

So what do you realistically want to happen???

Exactly what is happening. People talking about it, discussing it. That we, the community of LFS, grow as a group. In the end is a personal decision. Do I like the game as it is now? Do I like where is going? Do I blindly support the developers or do I want them to listen to their customers?

Such kind of questions lie all around, of course, not only in this thread, and that keeps us motivated and enjoying/demanding a better game.

Quote from lizardfolk :

This game is a simulation. Which means that the devs are trying to make this game AS REALISTIC AS POSSIBLE.

Quote from mattlikespeoples :

Live for Speed is aiming to simulate realistically as many aspects of racing/driving (or drifting and cruising if that fancies you) as possible.

Right, thats the mantra some people have learned and repeat over and over. I will also repeat my words: What about custom views, what about Shift+P, what about the lousy physics when you crash? what about a proper damage model?

Some of you react when somebody like me dares to question things, but I have not seen a lot of complains for something as (excuse me) lame as a Shift+P... in a S I M U L A T O R.

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

Exactly what is happening. People talking about it, discussing it. That we, the community of LFS, grow as a group. In the end is a personal decision. Do I like the game as it is now? Do I like where is going? Do I blindly support the developers or do I want them to listen to their customers?

Such kind of questions lie all around, of course, not only in this thread, and that keeps us motivated and enjoying/demanding a better game.

But yet all you do is bitch and moan in every one of your posts without offering anything constructive.

And the "discussions" starting within minutes of the patch being released, when Clearly people had not gave it a chance.

The "growing" of which you speak, is what exactly? Dumbing down LFS so its just another run-of-the-mill crap racing game? No thanks. Thats all you really want, is it not?

The only motivation I have to stay here is so the dev's don't here only this negative moaning, as the true LFS base is out there loving LFS racing online.

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

Do I blindly support the developers or do I want them to listen to their customers?

I support them because they have proven that they always listen to their customers, and that they care about what we want. If you have ever posted in the bug sections then it is likely you have been part of improving LFS. I myself posted some bugs and within a few weeks they were fixed in the next test patch. They were very minor, but it was enough to show me that no matter how small the bug, they will listen to you and try to fix it.

Anytime people have doubted them they have come out with something that shocked people. Remember those 'Nothing new for a long time' threads? Oh look a brand new (REAL) racing car, and TV coverage for LFS.

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

Right, thats the mantra some people have learned and repeat over and over. I will also repeat my words: What about custom views, what about Shift+P, what about the lousy physics when you crash? what about a proper damage model?

Some of you react when somebody like me dares to question things, but I have not seen a lot of complains for something as (excuse me) lame as a Shift+P... in a S I M U L A T O R.

We keep giving a counter to that argument but you refuse to listen

READ WHAT SRDSPRINTER WROTE.

Quote from srdsprinter :

But yet all you do is bitch and moan in every one of your posts without offering anything constructive.

And the "discussions" starting within minutes of the patch being released, when Clearly people had not gave it a chance.

The "growing" of which you speak, is what exactly? Dumbing down LFS so its just another run-of-the-mill crap racing game? No thanks. Thats all you really want, is it not?

The only motivation I have to stay here is so the dev's don't here only this negative moaning, as the true LFS base is out there loving LFS racing online.

EXACTLY.

Quote from srdsprinter :

The only motivation I have to stay here is so the dev's don't here only this negative moaning, as the true LFS base is out there loving LFS racing online.

Thats nice of you, but IMO, they get A LOT more of "congrats" and "thanks" and "u roxx" than honest criticism. I get your point though, and you are right, my comments should be more constructive. Thanks for the heads up.

Quote from lizardfolk :

We keep giving a counter to that argument but you refuse to listen

Sorry about that. What is the argument to support something like Shift+P as part of a simulation?

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

Right, thats the mantra some people have learned and repeat over and over. I will also repeat my words: What about custom views, what about Shift+P, what about the lousy physics when you crash? what about a proper damage model?

some servers have forced cockpit view. Shift P is necesary. Cant efficiently run servers if everyone is forced to have to drive back to pits. what about the people that might have crashed and flipped? Maybe we'll implement the server's own wrecker/tow option. I'd love to drift a 8000lb deisel tow truck around FE black rev...

As far as the physics go, I guess the fact that the game is still in the alpha stage explains alot. Games go like this (AFAIK): development, alpha testing, further development, beta testing, refinement, release. We're currently in the 3rd stage of 'further development'.

Proper collision detection will come in time but what are you doing running into stuff anyways?

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

Thats nice of you, but IMO, they get A LOT more of "congrats" and "thanks" and "u roxx" than honest criticism. I get your point though, and you are right, my comments should be more constructive. Thanks for the heads up.

Just judging by the threads created in the past 2 days, the number Approving 'Y' is about equal to the number Angry with 'Y'...

But the two polls I've seen show 12% and 8% actually dissappointed/struggling with the changes.

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

Sorry about that. What is the argument to support something like Shift+P as part of a simulation?

The same reason you didn't spend £50 million just to get your BMW Sauber back on track after you crashed it.

Quote from Bodhidharmazen :

Sorry about that. What is the argument to support something like Shift+P as part of a simulation?

It's a work in progress and also, a few "unrealistic" things have to be overlooked for the convenience of the players.

But just because there's a few elements of unrealism (that IMO doesn't even matter) doesn't mean we should scrap everything that we already have that are realistic and turn it into another mediocre arcade racer.

I dont like the polarized extremes of your opinion of whether we should make it completely realistic or not realistic at all.

It is impossible to make something completely realistic, but that is by no means an excuse to not incorporate as much realism as possible

Quote from mattlikespeoples :

some servers have forced cockpit view. Shift P is necesary. Cant efficiently run servers if everyone is forced to have to drive back to pits. what about the people that might have crashed and flipped?

Thats realism. Thats what people use as an argument against criticism like mine. Thats why I made OBVIOUS that their argument is not really an argument, but a mantra that they have learned to repeat and put against any one daring to question things.

What does server efficiency have to do with Shift+P, care to explain it?