I still remember the enjoyment of making my first track (in rFactor).
The enjoyment comes from creating something that is partly artistic, but at the same time trying to make it challenging and interesting.
I'd love to be able to do the same in LFS but I don't expect that to happen anytime soon.
The enjoyment comes from creating something that is partly artistic, but at the same time trying to make it challenging and interesting.
I'd love to be able to do the same in LFS but I don't expect that to happen anytime soon.
I think ssm is responding to this post.
It would be foolish to judge a sim purely by a video of it.
The physics behind the sim were superb and the way it was constructed so that differnt physics parts could be plugged together was very clever. Perhaps it was too ambitious for a one man show and that's why we never saw further development.
Last news was that Eero Piitulainen, the guy behind RBR and Drivers Republic now works for Blimey doing the physics for their Ferrari sim. My hope is that DR get reincarnated with Blimey's support ... perhaps this is what the secretive Project Falcon is all about?
Anyway ... I've yet to try iRacing but I do hope it has force feedback like in DR's.
It would be foolish to judge a sim purely by a video of it.
The physics behind the sim were superb and the way it was constructed so that differnt physics parts could be plugged together was very clever. Perhaps it was too ambitious for a one man show and that's why we never saw further development.
Last news was that Eero Piitulainen, the guy behind RBR and Drivers Republic now works for Blimey doing the physics for their Ferrari sim. My hope is that DR get reincarnated with Blimey's support ... perhaps this is what the secretive Project Falcon is all about?
Anyway ... I've yet to try iRacing but I do hope it has force feedback like in DR's.
Sure, I'm betting many people already run rings around it.
iRacing makes a huge step forward with delivery of accurate tracks, an excellent physics model and great netcode and will be the dominating sim for the near future. Unfortunately this may stifle competition, especially as people get “locked in” to iRacing; when it comes time to renew they will be faced with either losing all their cars/tracks, or pay another year’s subscription. I’m no iRacing hater, in fact I think it’s the best thing to happen in the scene for some time, but I would hate to see the demise of other racing sims.
I would like to see LFS be more competitive and there are two things that I can help with:
1. The use of laser scanned tracks.
2. The ability to add more 3rd party track content.
The Eastern Creek project was a “Proof of Concept” using cheap laser equipment and rushed development tools, but even so it’s been a great success and is now recognised as one of the best tracks in rFactor. To appreciate it fully you need to drive on it using a car with stiff suspension and with the RealFeel plugin installed and set up correctly (sometimes a pain in rF). I’ve been a LFS player long before rF and I would say that LFS has greater fidelity of feeling and would benefit even more from the laser scanned tracks.
As for Real vs Fictional, I would agree that a very well made fictional track can be just as good as a laser scanned real life one, but I also think the time to make it would be comparable, in costs, to scanning one (using my methods). Incorporating the minor details such as the way camber changes through a corner, small bumps, or the rough areas under braking can be very time consuming. No offence to Eric and his building skills as I understand the enormity of creating many tracks with great levels of detail, but the surface variation you currently see in LFS is nothing compared to what you get with a laser scanned one and the driving feeling is very noticeable. This is not a problem unique to LFS either, all driving sims seem to suffer the same fate.
With BTB I developed a way to create detailed track meshes from the laser scanned data in much less time (cost) than other laser scanned projects. There are more in the pipeline but none of this will come to LFS without the devs support.
The second item will no doubt be controversial since it will mean an influx of tracks built with varying quality. But the modding scene also generates some of the best tracks around for rFactor and you find that people naturally gravitate towards the better ones.
I have written to the devs in the hope they might open up the track building scene but have been around LFS long enough to know they work to their own agenda and are always busy. I would still encourage that people continue to let them know politely your feelings about having additional content. Hopefully we can open up some means of getting more, very detailed work into LFS.
I would like to see LFS be more competitive and there are two things that I can help with:
1. The use of laser scanned tracks.
2. The ability to add more 3rd party track content.
The Eastern Creek project was a “Proof of Concept” using cheap laser equipment and rushed development tools, but even so it’s been a great success and is now recognised as one of the best tracks in rFactor. To appreciate it fully you need to drive on it using a car with stiff suspension and with the RealFeel plugin installed and set up correctly (sometimes a pain in rF). I’ve been a LFS player long before rF and I would say that LFS has greater fidelity of feeling and would benefit even more from the laser scanned tracks.
As for Real vs Fictional, I would agree that a very well made fictional track can be just as good as a laser scanned real life one, but I also think the time to make it would be comparable, in costs, to scanning one (using my methods). Incorporating the minor details such as the way camber changes through a corner, small bumps, or the rough areas under braking can be very time consuming. No offence to Eric and his building skills as I understand the enormity of creating many tracks with great levels of detail, but the surface variation you currently see in LFS is nothing compared to what you get with a laser scanned one and the driving feeling is very noticeable. This is not a problem unique to LFS either, all driving sims seem to suffer the same fate.
With BTB I developed a way to create detailed track meshes from the laser scanned data in much less time (cost) than other laser scanned projects. There are more in the pipeline but none of this will come to LFS without the devs support.
The second item will no doubt be controversial since it will mean an influx of tracks built with varying quality. But the modding scene also generates some of the best tracks around for rFactor and you find that people naturally gravitate towards the better ones.
I have written to the devs in the hope they might open up the track building scene but have been around LFS long enough to know they work to their own agenda and are always busy. I would still encourage that people continue to let them know politely your feelings about having additional content. Hopefully we can open up some means of getting more, very detailed work into LFS.
The cost I mention is when a small track would be scanned and produced using a top-of-the-line scanner that produces even greater results.
And you are correct, the only money I have received for this is a $20 donation of thanks. The saving I make mostly through the use of my customised version of BTB which allows me to easily adjust the track mesh, edit terrain and make walls ... see here for an example ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpnMjD_v1yY
Last edited by Piddy, .
2m SRTM data would be great for the terrain, not good for the road. Although the mesh I ended up making in Eastern Creek is more spaced out, the point cloud data used to position the vertices is a lot more dense.
Wrong. I funded the entire project myself. Future projects will require financial backing as I cannot afford to continue doing this.
Wrong. I funded the entire project myself. Future projects will require financial backing as I cannot afford to continue doing this.
lol ... This time Subaru have excelled at it!!
For those that are lucky to have great graphics cards you may want to try some of the latest developments ... http://www.bhmotorsports.com/b ... topic.php?p=253616#253616
That's an awesome effort!! Took me ages with wheel!
That's an awesome effort!! Took me ages with wheel!
Vaguely rings a bell with me
... here's some Work In Progress shots of the new Terrain feature ...If drawing over an image then you would do the general elevation using the nodes, then fine tune smaller bumps and crests using the surfaces cross-section.
You could also create a path in Google Eart, export the kml file. In the public GE version height info seems to be missing but there are several ways to get it back. Best to ask AolBites in the BHM forum as I've not really pursued it myself. Some kml sources on the internet already have height data.
@danowat, I'd love to support LFS and have asked Scawen but I think he's been so busy with the latest release that he's not had the time to consider it yet.
You could also create a path in Google Eart, export the kml file. In the public GE version height info seems to be missing but there are several ways to get it back. Best to ask AolBites in the BHM forum as I've not really pursued it myself. Some kml sources on the internet already have height data.
@danowat, I'd love to support LFS and have asked Scawen but I think he's been so busy with the latest release that he's not had the time to consider it yet.
v0.3.1.0 has been released!!
http://www.bobstrackbuilder.net/news.aspx
Now with Richard burns Rally support. Watch this to see how easy it is to create a track.
Other additions:
http://www.bobstrackbuilder.net/news.aspx
Now with Richard burns Rally support. Watch this to see how easy it is to create a track.
Other additions:
- Sped up loading of track window.
- Implemented new iconic method of selecting materials / textures.
- Materials can now optionally used the Specular and Bump maps thus allowing better framerates.
- Specular colour and power now editable.
- Can set rFactor material name that is then matched to an entry in the TDF file.
- "Mat Packs" can be added to group materials and textures together for distribution, also allowing default values to be set via xml.
- New default shapes determined by cross-section xml files.
- Textures can be rotated any angle, not just 90 degree increments.
- Added a "Update Immediately" option that, when unchecked, will speed up the interface when modifying large tracks.
- Only loads/exports textures being used.
- Rewrote the Undo function to be more reliable and offers new method of retrieving work in case of a crash.
- Google Earth KML import.
- Support to import Longitude, Latitude, Height from CSV.
- Ability to ignore first row of CSV import.
- New Licensing technology to allow Demo of latest version.
Meh .. where does studies ever get anyone!!
Bobs Track Builder - New Demo Track
I have created a new demo track using BTB (WIP version) based on real-life data (thanks to AolBites). You will need to have the previous demo track installed first (http://www.bobstrackbuilder.net/games/rbr.aspx), then overwrite the TRACK_1 folder with the one contained in this zip.
http://rbr.worldserve.de/btb/SS13.zip
It’s a 41kms tarmac road, now surrounded by grass/dirt on either side with walls to stop most accidents. Takes about 14 minutes to drive 9some of which is very boring). I made some adjustments to the shape and camber of the surface however all changes in height and direction (baring a couple of weird data entries) were fed in from the data provided by AolBites.
Ideally I would have liked to spend more time making it "prettier" but the intention was really to show off the GPS captured data, long stage and good frame rates possible.
Enjoy!!
http://rbr.worldserve.de/btb/SS13.zip
It’s a 41kms tarmac road, now surrounded by grass/dirt on either side with walls to stop most accidents. Takes about 14 minutes to drive 9some of which is very boring). I made some adjustments to the shape and camber of the surface however all changes in height and direction (baring a couple of weird data entries) were fed in from the data provided by AolBites.
Ideally I would have liked to spend more time making it "prettier" but the intention was really to show off the GPS captured data, long stage and good frame rates possible.
Enjoy!!
Any luck? I sent you a PM so we can test further without filling up the forum, but then the forum was offline for a while so I hope you received it.
There is a bit of interest judging by the webstats showing hits from this thread.
I rarely get to play any sim these days as making BTB consumes almost all of my spare time. I do still come back to LFS when I want to feel contact with the track again. It and RBR are my main sims of choice but rF is good for sheer volume of cars and tracks available and the netcode is still the best I've seen but admittedly I don't get online much these days.
As for support for LFS, I hope it can happen one day and there's a glimmer of hope on the horizon but the devs are naturally very busy making more improvements so it may be a while away before we get an answer either way.
@MAGGOT, I am still listening for your feedback in the RSC thread if ever you do decide to build again but seeing as no one else has had your problem, and because BTB was working on both of your machines at one stage with certain display drivers seems to indicate that this issue is particular to your setup. Finding a solution will be difficult but I will persist if you want to keep giving feedback. I am getting a new PC soon so I'll have both a nVidia and ATI card config so should be able to load up the same drivers as you.
If BTB can eventually offer LFS support then it will still be worth building those tracks in preparation. Exporting to one sim or another will be very simple.
Cheers,
Brendon.
I rarely get to play any sim these days as making BTB consumes almost all of my spare time. I do still come back to LFS when I want to feel contact with the track again. It and RBR are my main sims of choice but rF is good for sheer volume of cars and tracks available and the netcode is still the best I've seen but admittedly I don't get online much these days.
As for support for LFS, I hope it can happen one day and there's a glimmer of hope on the horizon but the devs are naturally very busy making more improvements so it may be a while away before we get an answer either way.
@MAGGOT, I am still listening for your feedback in the RSC thread if ever you do decide to build again but seeing as no one else has had your problem, and because BTB was working on both of your machines at one stage with certain display drivers seems to indicate that this issue is particular to your setup. Finding a solution will be difficult but I will persist if you want to keep giving feedback. I am getting a new PC soon so I'll have both a nVidia and ATI card config so should be able to load up the same drivers as you.
If BTB can eventually offer LFS support then it will still be worth building those tracks in preparation. Exporting to one sim or another will be very simple.
Cheers,
Brendon.
BTB doesn't do it yet but there are plans for a "Surrond ground" system. Currently it's all in my head and working pretty well despite the few bugs.
For the time being you can do it "relatively" simply using Max as shown in this tutorial ... http://forum.rscnet.org/showthread.php?t=282160
Looks good Todd and I am glad you're making good use of BTB. I like seeing the wheel and I assume this is also showing tyre flex - slow mo close up would be nice. The engine sounds are not bad for a calculation.
rFactor was my first target since it's a very moddable platform but as Todd has demonstrated, BTB can be used for any game accepts Direct X. There's a few people using this method for their own projects.
rFactor was my first target since it's a very moddable platform but as Todd has demonstrated, BTB can be used for any game accepts Direct X. There's a few people using this method for their own projects.
If you've got a LOT of money .. look here ... http://www.sensics.com/
I don't believe the clutch is implemented yet so gear changes are a bit abrupt.
The standard setup does need a little tweeking, especially to get it stable under brakes. The FF (for me) in DR is the best I've felt in any sim. I've got a DFP and had to adjust the FF effect from 1.4 to 2.4 to get a stronger feeling.
The interface is crappy and will unfortunately turn off a few people I'm sure. LFS certainly has a great sensible interface that's for sure. The torrent-like downloading of files serves one very good purpose and that is the sharing of modded material and keeping everyone up-to-date with any changes to a particular mod. No mismatches that plagues rFactor.
The new version seems to fix the NAT/router issues by using a specific port (5341) which you may need to open.
I only had time for a quick check last night and it seemed to work ok.
If you're having problems connecting to a server, try connecting to the simcito one (assuming of course this was not the one you tried ).
There is currently a bug that prevents proper connection to people that are hosting behind a NAT/router (eg ME). The next version will apparent address this issue.
Oh .. and there are more cars on the way too which will make racing a little more interesting.
).There is currently a bug that prevents proper connection to people that are hosting behind a NAT/router (eg ME). The next version will apparent address this issue.
Oh .. and there are more cars on the way too which will make racing a little more interesting.
The guy that did the physics in RBR is now working on another project ... http://www.driversrepublic.net and the Force Feedback in that is superb. It's only in very early beta stage though so lacks a lot of polish in many areas.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG