so..i was talking with some friends of mine about live for speed..they played too..but the demo.and i sayd that i have s2 and its lovely..and the sayd something like this : O.o .. did you payd for an ALPHA game? the alpha , beta should be free and when there will be a final version then you should pay.. what do you think about this? i dont think he was right ..because i love s2

Usually they would be right, because alpha games are usually in horrible condition, full of bugs and many mssing features. LFS on the other hand is a very complete and playable game and almost completely bug free. I think the "alpha" label turns many people away from the game because they may not think it's playable, or worth playing. Maybe the devs ought to reconsider this...

Surely there is no rule that say comprehensivly that alpha games shoud be free, or even beta games. If people are willing to pay for your alpha game then surely you can charge people to play it. Although LFS is an alpha it runs and plays better than any other aplha I have ever seen, most beta's too and even some 'complete' games.

As all the updates and patches are free, you are paying for the final game, you just get to play while your waiting for the final game to be released.

Edit: I don't know whether you could drop the alpha from LFS because it has been said that there are things that still need to be done before S2 final, like the AI.

This was covered in Ben Keough's (DeadWolfBones) article in ASS.

http://www.lfsforum.net/attach ... id=36743&d=1186662847

Your not buying Alpha, your pre-ordering S2 - as "gratitude" you get to try S2 Alpha, and then Beta, and then Final.

Of course, in the case of most PC games it's by far and away the best decision to hold off until the program is released. In the case of many PC games, they'd be right to wait until after the first 3 months of release, when the price has dropped and everybody's got sick of playing it.

The LFS simulator development doesn't work like most games.. the ALPHA designation is used strictly and correctly, and a great many people around here will also point out.. we just don't get sick of playing it!

It's designated ALPHA because more features and/or content than already exists is planned for it. This is the *correct* usage of the suffix "ALPHA". Not because it doesn't work, or because it works badly.. as everyone who uses LFS, demo or S2 licenced, knows.. it's one of the most stable applications out there.

If someone doesn't want to pay for an ALPHA game because it's ALPHA, they're right to choose not to, because it's a personal decision. However, we know that the truth is that anyone who is waiting for LFS to go "GM" is just missing out on the fun in the meantime.

I like Jakg's answer myself, makes a lot of sense.

And obviously, which nobody has mentioned, by buying (pre-ordering?) S2 you are also helping to find an indie software production undertaking a project that would have normal humans quaking in their boots

Stupid Alpha tag, I REALLY wish the dev's would drop the Alpha tag in favour of something a bit less derogatory.........

In fact you aren't buying alpha software, you are buying an S2 license which gives you access to the S2 content in all stages of development. The S2 license you buy isn't alpha, it's just a license which lasts as long as the development team continues to support the software.

We don't actually sell software, that is a free download - we sell licenses to use all features of that software.

Anyway, we're working to remove the alpha tag as soon as possible by fixing the blatantly incomplete features (such as AI who keep crashing and GTR cars with road car interiors). Then S2 (not alpha or beta) can be released. There will still be updates and improvements after that point. We realise we'll get more sales when the software is not labelled alpha, so it's best to remove that as soon as possible, even though there will still be further improvements after that time.

after that, you can call them patches :P. Rather then alpha updates :P.

How much more will S2 licence holders have to pay, once S3 is out?

£12

Each stage is £12,
S1 = £12
S2 = £24 (S1+S2)
S3 = £36 (S1+S2+S3)

S3 price isn't set yet.

Danowat's guess is the best guess available but we don't know for sure how the pricing will work.

Most likely, S2 users will pay the S3 price minus £24 because they already paid that for their S2 license.

As a software developer and being well connected in the indie scene I have played more alpha versions of software than most, in fact I have probably played more alpha versions of various software titles than I have played finished games.

I've been waiting for some guy you dont know called Simon (also an LFS racer) to finish his zombie game for years, the gibblet explosions are awesome and the level I have played is very playable and atmospheric. I guess he's either given up or is working on some higher level that most of us will never reach. The point is, if he gave me a new demo version right now i'd be well happy.

If you gave it to a kid with an xBox controller dangling out of his hand then he'd dribble with joy up to the point the game stopped working, then it would be " shit ", rather than "awesome work, I cant wait". Therein lies the difference of mindset.

In the UK a badly decorated house will not sell, even if all it needs is an afternoon with a paint brush. Some people dont have any imagination.

I tend not to hang on promises, i've been let down by indie developers before. I paid my £24 because I am happy with what LFS offers right now, i've had my moneys worth too and I do not regret the purchase. If I was asked to pay £24 for the most awesome game called LFS S2 which may or may not be available for me to try in the next 3 or 4 years then i'd have told them to foxtrot oscar and take their lousy haircuts with them.

A lot of people are not able to see LFS as a finished game because for them issues which we've accepted hinder their play experience: One of the first things people find is how rubbish the crashes are. Then they notice that the AI are more A than I. Then they descover that the other tracks they dont recognise either, and maybe even realise that Blackwood isnt real, and that the generic XFG is then replaced by other generic cars, then ... to cap it off ... they have not yet got a wheel and miss the fine rambrandt of work that is the physics engine.

Well actually, i'm less impressed with physics since the tyres where fixed because now the bits that aren't done are more noticeable. If I played LFS physics now for the first time i'd probably not have purchased.

This is another point, currently the physics arent as great as we've historically claimed and there is a reason for this. The tyres have improved massively but are still not perfect, they slide too much. Meanwhile aerodynamics have not been touched and this is now really noticeable because there is so little aerodynamic effect on the cars by comparison to the mechanical grip. ie: Under patch Q you felt the loss of front downforce when you followed another downforce car, now you barely notice it, this is because you are getting so much grip from your tyres and not enough from your aerodynamics.

Good post that

LFS isn't, never has been, and probably never will be, perfect, but for £24 it's top notch, Alpha tag or not.

Quote from danowat :

Good post that

LFS isn't, never has been, and probably never will be, perfect, but for £24 it's top notch, Alpha tag or not.

+1
Perfection is unaccessible...
but for a racing simulator it's the best money can buy (and not very much money let me say...)
plus we have stuff like no other game I know of has - the free look camera (shift+U) which allows movie making scene in LFS be one of the best in PC games, and the autocross editor (I dont know another sim which lets you build your own track so easily)

^ Racer, Trackmania have simple track making engines. And there are more that I don't remember

Quote from Scawen :

S3 price isn't set yet.

Danowat's guess is the best guess available but we don't know for sure how the pricing will work.

Most likely, S2 users will pay the S3 price minus £24 because they already paid that for their S2 license.

Yeah, why do you guys (danowat et al) think that things will cost the same every year? There is a little thing called inflation and wage increases Few things today cost the same as they did two or three years ago. In my country inflation is at ~5% per annum that is roughly 10% over two years. Granted, it is lower in other EU countries, but wage increases must also be considered. As workforce is a major factor in LFS costs I'd say that wage increases should actually be used to get a fair price. It might even be that Scavier thinks that their work was under priced and a more appropriate sum should be charged. Whatever happens, an upper limit to make it not so costly for new purchases must also not be forgotten. I'm betting the cost structure after S3 becomes available as Alpha will be smth similar:

S1 - not available
S2 - £18
S3 - £36

S2->S3 = £18

Quote from Becky Rose :

This is another point, currently the physics arent as great as we've historically claimed and there is a reason for this. The tyres have improved massively but are still not perfect, they slide too much. Meanwhile aerodynamics have not been touched and this is now really noticeable because there is so little aerodynamic effect on the cars by comparison to the mechanical grip. ie: Under patch Q you felt the loss of front downforce when you followed another downforce car, now you barely notice it, this is because you are getting so much grip from your tyres and not enough from your aerodynamics.

I remember reading that the effect from following another car through corners was changed by Scawen to make it more real - you lose less downforce. I think that was after patch Q.

It was too strong, now its too week, in my personal opinion. However I accept I have had limited track time in single seaters. I didnt know hed changed the strength of it, but actually I was using that to highlight a point - bad choice of thing to highlight I guess

Actually, it kind of seems to me that it's still a bit too strong. You see real F1 drivers following each other much more closely than you do in LFS with the BF1.

Having still not really driven the BF1 I couldnt express an opinion, but then, i've not driven a real F1 either. My point though was that since the tyres where improved (although not perfected) I feel the aerodynamics are now out of balance in their ommission. I feel the absense of aerodynamics much more strongly since patch S. Maybe it's a psychological thing, but it just feels to me like the car is not reacting right to the airflow around it.

Quote from Becky Rose :

Well actually, i'm less impressed with physics since the tyres where fixed because now the bits that aren't done are more noticeable. If I played LFS physics now for the first time i'd probably not have purchased.

So... Since the tyres are better than they were, you'd be less likely to purchase, even though nothing else has changed? Interesting.

Quote :

The tyres have improved massively but are still not perfect, they slide too much..... this is because you are getting so much grip from your tyres ...

There is a lot of aero effect as far as downforce is concerned, I'm not sure what you're on about with that bit TBH. Not long ago I was racing the FO8, which I don't do often. I ran a number of laps alone before someone joined, and we started racing. I came out of a turn like normal, applying full power which previously had been fine. My fellow racer had come up right behind me through that turn, and while my right foot was planted, he came up right behind me and the rear lit up like crazy... Really caught me off gaurd actually since I don't race the open wheelers much. Subsequent to this, I fishtailed a tiny bit before letting off a little and reacting, and he had gone off from understeer.

LFS is the most involving Online driving experience I have had since GPL.. Its a bargain for me, I don't care if its alpha beta or Omega, its a bit good.

End of the commercial .. back to your regular program

Quote from Becky Rose :

This is another point, currently the physics arent as great as we've historically claimed and there is a reason for this. The tyres have improved massively but are still not perfect, they slide too much. Meanwhile aerodynamics have not been touched and this is now really noticeable because there is so little aerodynamic effect on the cars by comparison to the mechanical grip. ie: Under patch Q you felt the loss of front downforce when you followed another downforce car, now you barely notice it, this is because you are getting so much grip from your tyres and not enough from your aerodynamics.

Scawen changed the aero after Q to loose less on the rear, stopping the old completely unrealistic sudden oversteer that made close racing hard. It's been replaced with a more realistic loss of front downforce resulting in understeer, it's not a pronounced but it definatley does make some difference. The real issue though is LFS runs far too sticky compounds on the FOX. Real life Formula Renaults run tires that would be more like R3s maybe R4s, requiring a much higher dependency on aerodynamic grip. In my real life experience of working on single seaters the issue has always been getting heat into the tires, not trying to keep them cool.

Quote :

So... Since the tyres are better than they were, you'd be less likely to purchase, even though nothing else has changed? Interesting.

Yes, and in my original post there is a 'because' too It's about balance. I've not noticed the effect on my airflow with a car chasing me - neither have I noticed it with a car or wall beside me - it's quite easy to test too. Drive the oval flat out near the wall or in the middle of the track - it's the same deal and it shouldnt be. This lack of interaction with the environment, and the comparative weeknesses of the aerodynamics against the tyres, to me at least are more noticeable. This is one reason why since patch S i've barely touched the downforce cars, when they used to be all I raced.

Quote from Becky Rose :

Yes, and in my original post there is a 'because' too It's about balance. I've not noticed the effect on my airflow with a car chasing me - neither have I noticed it with a car or wall beside me - it's quite easy to test too. Drive the oval flat out near the wall or in the middle of the track - it's the same deal and it shouldnt be. This lack of interaction with the environment, and the comparative weeknesses of the aerodynamics against the tyres, to me at least are more noticeable. This is one reason why since patch S i've barely touched the downforce cars, when they used to be all I raced.

Yes, good point about the walls for sure.

Balance seems like a strange idea when you're talking about flaws though. Less flaws is inherantly better in my world! With your way of looking at it, everything would have to fixed at once to make it more enjoyable than a previous, more flawed iteration. To each their own I guess