How about, support for multi-threaded dual core optimization (for those so well endowed with a X2 or dual core), and support for emerging technology like the new advanced physics support by the physX processor from ageia.

The physics processor is quite a stretch for LFS in some regards, as it is not fully proven technology, and it certainly hasn't been utilized with regards to a racing sim. Already incorperated into the new ghost recon game, bet on soldier and rise of nations, the physX is planned to be incorporated into many new titles. The technology is amazingly promising, and would be incredible if unleashed into a sim like lfs. Imagine if you will:

A close race between 20 FOX's racing down the front stretch of blackwood, white flag, last lap. 5th place going down the back stretch as all drivers jockey for position in the draf. The second place car goes for the lead, but locks the brakes up. The smoke pours off the front tires as he slides through the gravel. As the cars in front of you pass, the smoke vortexes and spirals off the aerodynamic surfaces of their cars. Into the right-left chicane bits off ruber fling towards your visor as the new found second place driver battles off the racing line. Going wide out of the turn, down hill the leader puts his right rear off into the grass. The blades of grass and dirt are sprayed in perfect detail at 100mph in all directions as you concentrate on making it through. In an instant, the leader helplessly crosses the track, clipping the left rear of the next driver sending his car cartwheeling. Before the leader crashes into the armco, the engine cover of his car flutters through the air, while the suspension bits of the 2nd place car are ripped off and thrown in every direction. The former leader's tire and suspension bounce off the armco barrier and fly towards the helpless car in front off you. He dodges right but to no avail, as the red-hot, smoking headers of the cart-wheeling FOX fall downward demolishing his rear wing meters from your nose. Through the smoke, grass, flying tires and carnage, you see the drivers hopes go disappear as you blow by to take the checkerd flag.

Now I KNOW this isn't what LFS is about, but the technology the dedicated physics processor (or using part of the huge processing power of SLI for physics processing) can do all of this without affecting really affecting the frame rate, or causing LFS to loose what makes it so great, the vehicle dynamics. In 5 years, it will probably be mainstream to expect this level of interactive environment, but it is possible now (alienware, falcon, and the dell renegade are shipping with this processor, ATI and Nvidia are experimenting with the idea, and Agia plans on shipping the physX cards this summer). LFS can use all the cpu processing power on the physics engine of the vehicle dynamics, while the physics processor can make sure that every piece of rubber, blade of grass, bit of armco, piece of suspension and engine can be destructed and will interact with you the driver. If not, the technology is still very exciting and I imagine will at some point be integrated by someone into a driving sim.

Info on physX:
http://gear.ign.com/articles/697/697450p1.html

http://media.gear.ign.com/articles/697/697450/vids_1.html
(check out "hanger of doom" as it shows the how it can release the main CPU from bogging down. also the "cell factor" movie is fairly amazing, looking more like 3d rendering rather than fast paced fps)

http://physx.ageia.com/footage.html
The real time ghost recon comparison is amazing.

http://www.ageia.com/physxinaction/demos.html
These demo videos (the boulder one) are neat

http://physx.ageia.com/titles.html

The games it will optimize, maybe LFS some day...

There was a big thread about this on RSC... don't you have to use their own propriety physics engine to use the card?

From what i've gathered, ageia is:

• Very expensive
  
• Not very accurate
  

Pretty poor combination that, and muxing two different physic models doesn't sound good to me, and replacing the current one seems like a really bad idea and probably an incredibly long process.

Quote from Bob Smith :

.. don't you have to use their own propriety physics engine to use the card?

Quote :

..it's also a closed piece of hardware. So unless you want to "sell" your physics SDK to those guys, you won't be able to expose this hardware with your own SDK.

http://saschawillems.blogspot. ... to-realistic-in-game.html

Quote from Bob Smith :

There was a big thread about this on RSC... don't you have to use their own propriety physics engine to use the card?

I'm not sure, the articles I read were pretty vague. (i dont go to RSC much )

Quote from filur :

From what i've gathered, ageia is:

• Very expensive
  
• Not very accurate

Pretty poor combination that, and muxing two different physic models doesn't sound good to me, and replacing the current one seems like a really bad idea and probably an incredibly long process.

From what I've heard the add-in cards available this summer will be produced by manufactures of video card like BFG and Sapphire(not sure exactly which brands). They will have a MSRP of about $299 USD. This is about the price of a mid-high end graphics card, which is high, but not a huge amount when you consider a SLI or top of the line Crossfire can cost you well over $1000 USD.


EDIT* I intended this as a what-if, not just to be bashed for technicalities. IF they can use there own physics, and IF its not impossible to implement into current programming, Would it be Cool?

Once they work things like this out, it should be neat IMO. Game Programming seems to be about optimization now more than ever. Dual-core optimization (cell processor in the not-too-distant future with ps3 and pc's), multithreading, sli/crossfire, and advanced physics modeling all now challenge game developers and programmers.

Quote from srdsprinter :

.. They will have a MSRP of about $299 USD.

I meant the cost of licensing ageia, but you're right, the addon card is also pretty expensive

Quote from filur :

I meant the cost of licensing ageia, but you're right, the addon card is also pretty expensive

Ah, I hadn't crossed that path. Mainly I just wanted to express that this technology, is here in somewhat infancy, but it is pretty mindblowing. It will become more mainstream just as sli and dual core have become because it can take gaming to new levels. It will come sooner or later, it seems these things sometimes come later to racing sims than other games, and it could be cool if LFS was a leader (as it already is in terms of online gameplay, driving physics, etc...)

Quote from srdsprinter :

It will become more mainstream just as sli and dual core have become

I really don't think you can call SLI and dual core cpu's mainstream just yet, they're all still in the very bottom of an ascending price-sorted list of items in any online computer store.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

IMO PC gaming hardware is already too expensive. If additional garbage like physics processors become commonplace I'll just switch to consoles like everybody else seems to be doing.

I agree, if you use a PC solely for gaming and gaming only in place of a console, then it is highly expensive. I (and most people) dont, it is a multimedia tool I use for gaming, studying and writing reports, web browsing, watching dvds, burning dvds, watching tv, tivoing listening to music, mp3 management, file storage, networking, messaging, getting the weather, checking news, stock markets, buying equipment, buying gifts, and countless other things.

If I didn't have a computer to do ALL these, I would need a seperate tv, dvd player, file storage hard drive, a tivo, some way to get mp3's to an ipod, a radio, cd player, typewriter, internet web brower, digital cable, more phone service, have to DRIVE to stores and deal with people, watch the news, read newspapers, buy newspaper subscriptions and magazine subscriptions, get a broker, and still not be able to game! I'd need a good console (there really aren't any anymore) and then buy another steering wheel, and buy games I couldn't try before I buy, which I have to go out and actually buy in Person! Now, I'm not a math major (i'd need like 6 more credits) but it seems to me that the savings in space alone would be worth a good multi-purpose pc, but the cost of the individual replacements would be greater than the sum of all the parts of a good pc.

Sorry, but when you think what a pc REALLY does for you, the price is not that high...

Quote from filur :

I really don't think you can call SLI and dual core cpu's mainstream just yet, they're all still in the very bottom of an ascending price-sorted list of items in any online computer store.

sorry, you are correct. Gamers know SLI, multi-taskers know dual-core. The general public might not know yet, but they are learning. With both amd and intel making relatively inexpensive dual core chips now, mainstream computer users are being introduced to what dual core offers.

Also, sli is really only known with gamers. I'm not even sold on the idea. But it is something you that is being devoloped heavily, and hasn't up-and-dissappeared-like-a-fart-in-the-wind after a year of existence.

physics processors haven't been around that long. But they are being embraced (by mainstream pc maker dell) as part of the ongoing evolution of the home computer. If it is embraced and used in games like ghost recon, some hardcore gamers will go out and grab it without thinking. Most gamers will wait (as with sli and dual core) and get a feel for the impact that it REALLY makes on games. After mainstream gamers support it and buy it, and tell dell and hp to use it, it will become mainstream IMO.

i think after time as this technology is improved then it will be spot on. but as with all technology.. nothing is perfect

Quote :

gaming, studying and writing reports, web browsing, watching dvds, burning dvds, watching tv, tivoing listening to music, mp3 management, file storage, networking, messaging, getting the weather, checking news, stock markets, buying equipment, buying gifts.

Task(s)(-s) requiring a cpu over 500MHz marked in bold type above.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Me neither. I need a PC at home for work, and I use it for all the myriad other reasons you mentioned, but the fact is that a pretty slow box could do all that stuff - the only real reason I've got performance hardware (or it was when I paid for it anyway ) in there is for gaming.

Anyway, you're american, your cost of living is practically nothing compared to the rest of the world (and I've lived in Raleigh and Myrtle Beach, so that appraisal is based on experience!), so your definition of "expensive" is probably quite different.

Agreed, people all over the world have different ideas of expensive, no doubt about it. I feel, for me anyway, that once you have a basic computer, the additional cost of making it a good gaming pc will also make it a much better all round pc, and if it can replace my need for an 800 dollar ps3 (which pretty much nessecitates a REALLY expensive HDTV to utilize the effect), all the better. I think the sooner a young new technology like this embraced, the sooner it becomes reasonable in price, and the sooner it makes my pc gaming That much better. With a console, you get shafted because there are no upgrades, and IF there are, it comes in the form of a new model, which you DONT have! My psp for example, is about to have 4 gigs flash memory and a camera on it, I had to buy the aftermarket 180 dollar 4 gig hard drive on top of the price of the psp... bummer.

Quote from filur :

Task(s)(-s) requiring a cpu over 500MHz marked in bold type above.

Not if your getting them all done at the same time in the 10 minutes before work/class.

1. On the games-and-hardware-situation:
I will think about buying new, modern and fancy hardware when people start to make good games again. When I go to the shop to look at new games I always end up thinking "and where... are the good games?". No need to buy hardware for 800€ just to play games I don't like.
2. On the PPU (let's abbreviate physics processing unit):
Let's look at how the GPUs came to the world. First graphics were done on the CPU. Then someone said "hey, look at this GPU, with it you get fancy textures!" and a hand full of developers began optimizing their code for this product, and later products. And it was a hassle, because every device did it's thing differently. Then people came up with libraries to make things more simple. OpenGL, DirectX, you know them. After the hardware became compliant to these standards the GPUs became much more popular, because about every program could support these devices very easily.
Let's go back to the PPU. We should wait until somone releases a OpenPL or DirectX 273*2,71/3,14 or the like that offers a common library for developers to utilize all current and future PPUs on the market.

Vain

Quote from thisnameistaken :

I think I'm just getting a bit jaded with the PC gaming scene in general. To be honest, that's how I ended up at LFS - because the big publishers are releasing the same tired old crap over and over again with an extra <x> polygons each time and a few re-hashed effects.

The returns have diminished to the point that investment in new hardware seems futile. Do I really want to spend £500 to get the next-detail-up textures in Battlefield 2? Even if I do, it won't make all the other players on the server suddenly become less dickhead-ish, and honestly I'd rather upgrade the gaming public than my gaming PC.

Lol at your avatar

Quote from Vain :

We should wait until somone releases a OpenPL

Very good point.

I'm familiar with ventrilo, and teamspeak, but has it been suggested that built in communication be written into the software? (i searched but couldnt really find anything) If it was a clearly marked well defined option would it be good to be able to do this without an additional 3rd party program running just for your microphone?

(im sorry if this has already been discussed, hence why no new topic )

I watched the 1stPS video with the PhysX thing doing its thing in one clip, and a high-end card doing the same thing in another. It looked pretty well identical, except for a rather impressive explosion with bits flying all over the place. Very gory, I'm sure.

What I did notice was that in the PhysX clip, a guy (not the 1st person) appeared to get hit by flying debris and finished up on the ground, either dead or seriously wounded. In the other clip, he didn't get hit by anything because there wasn't the impressive collection of flying debris, and didn't finish up on the ground.

So I came to wondering.. if PhysX WERE included in LFS, where would the information about the flying bits come from? And how quick would that flow of info be, between different racers? I don't wanna be wiped out by an invisible piece of flying debris from one guy's car, just because the PhysX processor of some guy, behind us both, said it happened that way.

I may be wrong, but I suspect the PhysX engine doesn't actually contribute to the multiplayer physics data. It merely makes "big" what it sees locally. But if this is the case, then wouldn't PhysX-users be swerving around before our eyes, to avoid trailing bumpers and bouncing wheels that the rest of us can't see, and resulting in erratic and unpredictable driving for seemingly no reason?

Quote from SamH :

I may be wrong, but I suspect the PhysX engine doesn't actually contribute to the multiplayer physics data.

I'd guess you could tie in the solved physics to whatever you'd like, question of design, and a very huge amount of network traffic if you'd like it all to be interactive and not just fancy effects.

Quote from SamH :

I may be wrong, but I suspect the PhysX engine doesn't actually contribute to the multiplayer physics data. It merely makes "big" what it sees locally. But if this is the case, then wouldn't PhysX-users be swerving around before our eyes, to avoid trailing bumpers and bouncing wheels that the rest of us can't see, and resulting in erratic and unpredictable driving for seemingly no reason?

Yeah, who knows...

the technology is in its enfancy, but the cell factor video looked pretty good, with those gravity mine things... it seemed like things would fly "through" you in a lot of those videos. Don't know what they're planning on doing about that.... but it certainly seems as if it should effect the user. Interesting conundrum.

The problem is that both PhsyX, ATI, and Nvidia are working on their own solutions regarding physics rendering, so it's better to wait until the dominant player emerges.

Quote from hideaki-san :

The problem is that both PhsyX, ATI, and Nvidia are working on their own solutions regarding physics rendering, so it's better to wait until the dominant player emerges.

I Agree. I'm imagining most probable thing is that either ATI or nVidia integrates a physics processor on their gaming GFX cards. But once again it's the catch 22 situation (you need a killer app with amazing physics only available with the new hardware, but no company wants to spend boatload of cash and release new hardware without software support on consumer lever).

Hopefully I got that description right, confusing stuff for non-native English speaker.

I believe, if NVidia and ATI get involved in the PPU-market, that there will propably be a library like I talked about above that has a software-engine built in. That means all game developers can use this library to have objects automatically behave physically correct (of course, within a given frame) and the library decides wether the CPU has to take the burden or wether there is a PPU to do all that stuff. That'd mean that you can either have no PPU and a high-end-CPU to do the physics at expense of otherwise-cpu-related performance, or a dedicated PPU and an idle CPU that can make calculations on AI or calulate pi or whatever.
That'd be my approach and it's obviously the best.

Vain

Quote from Vain :

I believe, if NVidia and ATI get involved in the PPU-market, that there will propably be a library like I talked about above that has a software-engine built in. That means all game developers can use this library to have objects automatically behave physically correct

Probably, but only as with all other standards after there have been 10 "standards" competing for some time.

This will be a case of until a solution that people accept is ready it will not take off. That coupled with a killer app. It took years for Voodoo to establish the 3D market and the physics card is the same.

Trouble is they do not have the time to establish the market. NVidia and ATI are looking at SLI to do physics processing. But worse than that we now have dual core CPUs and quad are in the pipeline. I would expect quad to be later this year or early next

So with 4*CPUs running at 3GHz why would you need a physics card.