For a moment, mere moment, I had hopes that Ian H. could contribute in a positive, constructive way to this thread. Didn't happen after all. Sad in a way.
Where did I say I think I'm special? I'm certainly not the only one with these feelings.. just maybe one of the few that'll post those feelings here.
Regards,
Ian
No you didn't pay for any final version of LFS. Again.
Bahh.. you're just a troll, Ian. It's almost laughable that you question my intelligence and then spew forth such wholly insubstantive nonsense as this. If I am a brown-noser, then you are a troll.
Pathetic. Grow up, Ian.
Because it doesn't use same kind of engine.
Ok, back to square one: do you understand the difference between synthetised and sample based sound engines?
You're just being a smart-ass? The samples in LFS are less than 0.1 secs long, and that sample creates all the engine sound for the car. For example GTR2 has total 3-4 files (throttle off, low, med, high) that are all 2-4 secs long.
And yet you don't understand the difference between dynamical and non-dynamical sound engine? Pretty much like progressive rock vs. techno crap.
Yeah, you're quite the martyr.
I think if you'd actually stop an read what people are saying here, you'd find that quite a lot of people agree with your major points. The difference though is that most people also are fine with things taking time because they understand that's how the development process of LFS works. As JJ72 so eloquently put it; that's why LFS is the way it is. Change the process and you change the sim. Most people here don't want that.
"You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time."
I don't think anything in this thread is revolutionary or new, it's human nature that with any project or activity that involves a bunch of humans there is going to be an ebb and flow of opinion so that in itself doesn't prove anything
to be honest, it doesn't matter if it's sample or synthesized (whatever) sounds. As long as it sounds good.
Fact is LFS doesn't sound good at all, yet games like GTR2 sound very very good.
Yes, it might be a good way that LFS does it, but it sounds (right now) bloody awful! Yes it's a big improvement over earlier sounds, but there's still a long long way to go.
I actually fear that we may never get satisfactory engine sounds.
EDIT: Also RBR does use a similar system to LFS, as it's not samples. and it does sound really good, the cars sound like WRC cars. LFS cars sound like... well crap.
Don't think we need a lecture on how LFS sound sucks compare to other sim do we 
can't really agree here....if you put away the sound of debris/ suspension jerking the engine sound is very much like in a tin can.
it's better then LFS but not really that far.
But it gives feedback. That's the most important thing for me.
I absolutely adore how I can tell exactly what the engine and drive train is doing just by listening to it. If I shift down too early during braking and lock up the driven wheels, I can hear it in the gear whine. Stuff like that is needed since you can't feel what the car is doing through your arse.
:doh:
How many times I need to say RBR simply does not use similar sound engine than LFS uses? Or give me water-proof proves then.
Do you know where and in what kind of file form the sound files are located in RBR? I know that at least.
Without some nice sound mods, all you hear in RBR with the default sounds is the transmission whine, actual engine sound is very low volume.
Hmm I think we will never agree!
So why not agree to disagree!
To be honest I am on the fence on most of the issues being discussed here. Call me indecisive, but I can see the glass, it not half full or empty, its in the middle!
Sure it is taking ages and it would be good to see faster development, but tbh I am happy to keep playing LFS as it is and having alot of fun in the process. I enjoy the small patches when they come along, they keep me interested, and I love the big patches with content and major physics changes. Even the last patch with clutch preload has breathed new life into LFS for me.
I agree with the thoughts that Scawen should focus on more important aspects of the game instead of things like InSim. IMO InSim should be like a SDK and released afterwards, i.e. to breath life into LFS a while after it's full release. I know it is VERY hard for Scawen knowing what exactly his priorities should be, it's just that sometimes (to the average joe) the updates seem pretty meaningless unless they are bundled with a physics or graphical tweak.
I'm in no rush to receive S2/S3 full, but I just hope for the devs sake that they can pull some major progress out of the bag, if only for their own sanity and to possibly see some light at the end of the tunnel.
So why not agree to disagree!
To be honest I am on the fence on most of the issues being discussed here. Call me indecisive, but I can see the glass, it not half full or empty, its in the middle!
Sure it is taking ages and it would be good to see faster development, but tbh I am happy to keep playing LFS as it is and having alot of fun in the process. I enjoy the small patches when they come along, they keep me interested, and I love the big patches with content and major physics changes. Even the last patch with clutch preload has breathed new life into LFS for me.
I agree with the thoughts that Scawen should focus on more important aspects of the game instead of things like InSim. IMO InSim should be like a SDK and released afterwards, i.e. to breath life into LFS a while after it's full release. I know it is VERY hard for Scawen knowing what exactly his priorities should be, it's just that sometimes (to the average joe) the updates seem pretty meaningless unless they are bundled with a physics or graphical tweak.
I'm in no rush to receive S2/S3 full, but I just hope for the devs sake that they can pull some major progress out of the bag, if only for their own sanity and to possibly see some light at the end of the tunnel.
I always thought,
s2 = physics updates
s3 = graphics revamp
if that is the case then I don't understand what the big fuss is about. In my opinion, LFS is progressing nicely and every update is a added improvement.
Would you rather wait 2-3 years for a final s2 to come out, or get the alpha and see progress being made?
s2 = physics updates
s3 = graphics revamp
if that is the case then I don't understand what the big fuss is about. In my opinion, LFS is progressing nicely and every update is a added improvement.
Would you rather wait 2-3 years for a final s2 to come out, or get the alpha and see progress being made?
That was the idea at one point in time, but I seriously doubt if it will work out like that. To my knowledge I don't think this was ever actually stated by the devs, but even if they did I think things have changed too much for this highly simplistic approach.
Sorry JT.. thread's moving quickly and I missed your reply..
Maybe they do need someone watching over their shoulder to steer priorities into the actual _sim_, not gimmicky add-ons.
Patience wears thin, I've been patient for 2 years.. I even took an entire break from LFS as I was getting bored beforehand, now I come back and very little has changed. I supported the devs by pre-paying for S2, I had hoped LFS would have been "the one and only real sim".. but alas, while it feels quite nice to drive some of the cars.. it doesn't mean it's great.. progress isn't really "down to them".. they have an obligation which they're not meeting within a reasonable time frame.
I quit my job to do my own thing too. I make less than LFS has.. yet I can still work on projects and keep clients happy because I focus on what _needs_ to be done as priorities.. I can add fancy externals after the core is functioning properly (and LFS isn't.. diffs, aero, damage, collision.. as we've all been told, these are "temporary".. how temporary!? everything about LFS now seems to be "temporary".. it's a cheap excuse).
Maybe being different isn't always good.
There are ways to rectify those odds however............
Not always. I've just got back from a meeting with a client where I need to change a fair few things as they've changed their mind on it. I also have until the 5th of May at the absolute latest due to that being the launch party date (a big launch party too.. live PAs, DJs, restaurant etc). What should I say if I don't hit that deadline? that it's still currently WIP? That'll mean I'll be lucky if I get paid.
LFS haven't announced a final release date for S2, but c'mon, there's being WIP and there's being all but stationary, which is what the development cycle appears to be right now.
As they say, "can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen"
Good job, as the reputation would be sliding and already is amongst some.
No. My recent LFS Replay Manager is a hobby project, it's free. Say I released that at a cost of.... £5 that would include free updates until for arguments sake, version 3. If I don't update that for 2 years and it's full of bugs, how many do you think would be pissed off with me for not meeting a certain standard of progress? LFS is severely broken in some areas (others it does ok, others it does well, I'm really not saying everything about LFS is screwed or crap) so has bugs, but these aren't being worked on.. Scawen would sooner add toys like insim and scripting rather than removing the temporary collision detection that launches you to the moon at 5mph as one example.
Why does it have to be unique? Why can't it just be a good sim? LFS is nothing special.. it's a driving game
I'm also well away about being the "small guy" in a huge pond.. I was also in the hosting business.. don't think I need to explain how saturated that area is, especially for an individual
On the contrary.. I don't really think they're slacking, just misplaced priorities.
I love coding, coding's a major part of my life and has been since I was 8.. I code for the sake of coding sometimes.. but LFS is a race sim, not a coder's toolbox.. or at least it's supposed to be.
Of course, I'm sure there's a few that do, however, in a massive minority compared to people who just want a race sim. I don't think they should drop insim etc, just that it's hardly more important than aero or collision / damage physics, surely?
Why does it have to go that way? Scawen could still be the head honcho, just employ a couple of more people to help speed up progress. If he's decided that isn't going to happen, then that's his issue, but also our problem.
What's fresh about LFS? it's a driving game. I'm not saying either of the titles you mention would be worth buying (TOCA in particular), but there's only so much "being different" within a driving environment.
Very few. LFS was actually the first game I really played.. I've always been a coder / system person / geek. Everyone's just trying to say I'm an idiot pretty much and should STFU about their beloved sim, but maybe there's a reason? As you say, maybe I really do like LFS a lot. I do, at least in theory, else I wouldn't be wasting my time with these posts. I do want to see LFS succeed, but if it doesn't pull its finger out of its rear end, success will be hard to achieve as many will just move on as one day, something will appear that will rival LFS' physics, but at the same time, will also be years ahead in other departments due to LFS' ultraslow progress.. don't need to paint a picture on where that could lead.
I don't think the business model will change and I think many will ultimately leave and find something else to do. I'm still hoping, but have been hoping for 2 years.. I can only hope for so long before I cut my losses.
Regards,
Ian
Maybe they do need someone watching over their shoulder to steer priorities into the actual _sim_, not gimmicky add-ons.
Patience wears thin, I've been patient for 2 years.. I even took an entire break from LFS as I was getting bored beforehand, now I come back and very little has changed. I supported the devs by pre-paying for S2, I had hoped LFS would have been "the one and only real sim".. but alas, while it feels quite nice to drive some of the cars.. it doesn't mean it's great.. progress isn't really "down to them".. they have an obligation which they're not meeting within a reasonable time frame.
I quit my job to do my own thing too. I make less than LFS has.. yet I can still work on projects and keep clients happy because I focus on what _needs_ to be done as priorities.. I can add fancy externals after the core is functioning properly (and LFS isn't.. diffs, aero, damage, collision.. as we've all been told, these are "temporary".. how temporary!? everything about LFS now seems to be "temporary".. it's a cheap excuse).
Maybe being different isn't always good.
There are ways to rectify those odds however............
Not always. I've just got back from a meeting with a client where I need to change a fair few things as they've changed their mind on it. I also have until the 5th of May at the absolute latest due to that being the launch party date (a big launch party too.. live PAs, DJs, restaurant etc). What should I say if I don't hit that deadline? that it's still currently WIP? That'll mean I'll be lucky if I get paid.
LFS haven't announced a final release date for S2, but c'mon, there's being WIP and there's being all but stationary, which is what the development cycle appears to be right now.
As they say, "can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen"
Good job, as the reputation would be sliding and already is amongst some.
No. My recent LFS Replay Manager is a hobby project, it's free. Say I released that at a cost of.... £5 that would include free updates until for arguments sake, version 3. If I don't update that for 2 years and it's full of bugs, how many do you think would be pissed off with me for not meeting a certain standard of progress? LFS is severely broken in some areas (others it does ok, others it does well, I'm really not saying everything about LFS is screwed or crap) so has bugs, but these aren't being worked on.. Scawen would sooner add toys like insim and scripting rather than removing the temporary collision detection that launches you to the moon at 5mph as one example.
Why does it have to be unique? Why can't it just be a good sim? LFS is nothing special.. it's a driving game
I'm also well away about being the "small guy" in a huge pond.. I was also in the hosting business.. don't think I need to explain how saturated that area is, especially for an individual
On the contrary.. I don't really think they're slacking, just misplaced priorities.
I love coding, coding's a major part of my life and has been since I was 8.. I code for the sake of coding sometimes.. but LFS is a race sim, not a coder's toolbox.. or at least it's supposed to be.
Of course, I'm sure there's a few that do, however, in a massive minority compared to people who just want a race sim. I don't think they should drop insim etc, just that it's hardly more important than aero or collision / damage physics, surely?
Why does it have to go that way? Scawen could still be the head honcho, just employ a couple of more people to help speed up progress. If he's decided that isn't going to happen, then that's his issue, but also our problem.
What's fresh about LFS? it's a driving game. I'm not saying either of the titles you mention would be worth buying (TOCA in particular), but there's only so much "being different" within a driving environment.
Very few. LFS was actually the first game I really played.. I've always been a coder / system person / geek. Everyone's just trying to say I'm an idiot pretty much and should STFU about their beloved sim, but maybe there's a reason? As you say, maybe I really do like LFS a lot. I do, at least in theory, else I wouldn't be wasting my time with these posts. I do want to see LFS succeed, but if it doesn't pull its finger out of its rear end, success will be hard to achieve as many will just move on as one day, something will appear that will rival LFS' physics, but at the same time, will also be years ahead in other departments due to LFS' ultraslow progress.. don't need to paint a picture on where that could lead.
I don't think the business model will change and I think many will ultimately leave and find something else to do. I'm still hoping, but have been hoping for 2 years.. I can only hope for so long before I cut my losses.
Regards,
Ian
There's no why Ian, it's just how they want it to be. Not every business works in perfect economical sense, indeed most of it are sidetracked by personal reference, why? well maybe there's something called personal goal and ambition, and also flaws in character. The smaller a company is, the more humanic it becomes - both good and bad, you get soul but you also get inconsistency.
just like I said, you, as a customer, in case you have any complaint to a commericial product, you should go to some sort of consumer's right whatever department. if there's actually any prove that they fail to provide what they promised in the end user agreement.
We are not their boss,not a share holder, then any criticism on their work ethics are going to be....just a criticism really, there are thousands of opinions, it is very unlikely that none of us has a expectation higher then what they are delivering, in fact it's more the opposite.
actually, why do you like the sim Ian? why do you want it to succeed?
That "why" is the same "why" you are asking about, I guess.
*i am off to race, see you in a bit*
just like I said, you, as a customer, in case you have any complaint to a commericial product, you should go to some sort of consumer's right whatever department. if there's actually any prove that they fail to provide what they promised in the end user agreement.
We are not their boss,not a share holder, then any criticism on their work ethics are going to be....just a criticism really, there are thousands of opinions, it is very unlikely that none of us has a expectation higher then what they are delivering, in fact it's more the opposite.
actually, why do you like the sim Ian? why do you want it to succeed?
That "why" is the same "why" you are asking about, I guess.
*i am off to race, see you in a bit*
And again, I didn't claim to. At least attempt to read the posts before typing, Sam.
I paid for "S2".. that didn't say S2 alpha, S2 beta, it said an S2 license. I'm still using a beta version of the software.. £24 is not the price of beta software.
Awww come on Sam, I expected more from you
Regards,
Ian
You just talked yourself around a complete circle. When I proposed that, deep down you weren't a troll and were actually a frustrated LFS fan, you took complete issue with it.
I think you need to sort yourself out, Ian, because if all this thread is about is blatant attention whoring, then it really is bloody pathetic.
There's a difference between liking something and being a "fan" of something.
I moved on for 2 years and hoped that now I tried again, it'd be different.. I wasn't sitting there everyday thinking about it.
Oh boy, is that really your best effort? You think I need to come to an online forum to get attention? You don't "know me" in the slightest
Regards,
Ian
More from me than what? I'm calling it as I see it, Ian. I don't shudder at being called names. I'm not one of the world's reactionaries.. I'm a fanboy. I don't see anything negative in the term. I'm a fanboy because I like the sim and everything about its development. I'm not a fanboy so THEREFORE I like[..]. It works the other way around, for me.
I'm also wholly disinterested by the whole debate, which JJ72 has totally bagged. For me, the answer is there. All of it.
You did say you'd bought four licenses. I consider myself something of an LFS evangelist (at least judging by the other night in the pub when I bumped into a motorsport fan / gamer who hadn't heard of LFS before), but I've only bought one license. You've certainly got more invested - financially - in the product than I have, so I would imagine you've got more emotional investment in it too.
Anyone expecting s2 final to be significantly different from s2 as it is now will be very disappointed.
Enjoy s2 for what it is.
Enjoy s2 for what it is.
I know that feeling too. Too many occasions I became "friendly" with clients.. to my own cost in the end.
That's far too OTT for me. I'm not a "legal person".. I'd far sooner discuss it.. whetever it is and resolve it without going to 3rd parties. This isn't just related to LFS.
We're not shareholders etc, true.. but they happily took our money and are now sitting on it doing practically nothing as far as progress goes.
I'll answer anyway.. as I've said, some things in LFS are good, the feeling of driving a car does feel like driving a car, compared to some others available. That's one reason I like it.
The general online community also seems pretty friendly. The few races I had online with rF for example I felt very much like being in an Inet Café.. an individual in a cubicle. LFS online has always felt more like an open-plan office.
Having been the small guy for the past 5 or so years, I know what it's like to do well and achieve something. It took balls for Scawen and Eric to walk out of their jobs and start LFS. Scawen now has a family too to support.. family life is very high on my list of priorities.. these points alone are reasons as to why I'd like to see it succeed. I'm all for the small guy.. but I'm also all for having some progress.
Regards,
Ian
Money isn't a matter really here. I bought my own S1 license back in April '04 and then bought a voucher for a close friend. I pre-paid for S2 for myself and also bought another voucher for the same friend.
I've mentioned money in a few posts here mainly related to business rather than I feel hard done by financially. I used to spend £300 a weekend in a nightclub when I was 16 / 17, £48 on licenses here isn't really a concern, just that normally when people pay you money for a product / service, they do expect something decent in return. By decent here I don't mean LFS is pure crap, it isn't.. but I do expect something more within 2 years of development.
Regards,
Ian
Our values must be quite different
from where I sit they are not doing it because they are earning alot of money, they are doing it because they enjoy it. The best estimations I've seen for their income once expenses etc have been taken out and then devided by time spent on the project is not that great.I'm sure they would have made a similar amount or more by staying with their old jobs, but they wouldn't have got the same level of satisfaction or freedom as they do now.
And while each has their own views on what should have priority in the development process, there is equally just as many that have different views to you about what the priorities should be.
Case in point is the insim features that people are siting frequently in this thread, I've seen numerous threads over the last year bemoning the fact that insim needed more features to help out the community enabling them to have richer public server environments and better league managing tools. This is being currently addressed and will make alot of people very happy. But not all.
I do recall similar threads questioning the development process at other points, even the tyre physics update if irc. So it is simply just not possible to please everyone or even the overwhelming majority all of the time with LFS's choosen development path.
This thread is closed
My, How Time Flies
(191 posts, closed, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG