I think this is a real subject, thanks Scawen for creating the separate thread.
As a graphics programmer in the industry, I wouldn't have as much work if that was the case for the vast majority of people. LFS Forums is actually the only place where I see such an argument being made.
I can agree on the fact that with relatively little on the visual, LFS achieve a really impressive amount of immersion, but the current graphics are still out of the public standard for 2023. Without talking about ray tracing or that kind of cutting edge stuff, the looks actively contribute to the "old game" feeling for the general audience, despite still being updated and worked on.
At best people seems think the devs maintain the game with small stuffs to please the community but no major stuff.
IMO, after tyre physics are done, graphics should be a real priority to change the public perception of the game.
My humble opinion on what would be the most important/influential on final image starting from what I see from latest screenshots of the next update, sorted by priority:
And on the subject of name change, I would totally be down to have a name change along with a new logo and slight revisit of the game UI to break the public perception of the game being the same since 2002.
totally agree, though as a design improvement, it would be nice to be able to change repair times on the server, maybe on a per user basis, to reduce them (or even make them instantaneous) for very short races, or make them longer for endurance or cruise servers which aim to be more "roleplay" and immersive, maybe allow servers to create things like "fast repairs bonus" for players on the back of the field or with higher experience, that kind of stuff.
I have to admit I got part of your point wrong and got unnecessary frustrated about it, sorry about that, I'll edit some of it out.
Though I still stand to my point that looking for older hardware when it's still relevant (like HDD and low bandwidth connections in this case) is still necessary, even if you use newer hardware for ease of development.
You personally feel like every one got a SSD now, I don't. A lot of people don't have access to SSD and use some crappy 5400 RPM 2.5" HDD to play, and so far nothing really justify the game asking for SSD as a requirement, especially not big engine files included in mods.
Something I suggested some time ago that could clear this debate easily is having analytics. Just having LFS send the DXDiag when sending the master server request (if the player consents) for example is light and would allow Scawen to truly see the specs of the currently active player base, and have a better idea of what is worth chasing and what is not.
You don't know what are their objectives in terms of game scope, target demographic, target hardware, etc.
LFS doesn't aim to be the shiniest on the market, nor it will ever be. It's a niche product, that the devs try to maintain and evolve with their own resources, without entering a tech race that is lost in advance and quite useless for the game scope and objective. They aren't EA DICE or Epic Games.
If a game like GTA V can runs without too much hassle on the 5400 RPM HDD of the PS4, LFS, even with the new higher resolutions tracks and without any dynamic streaming system can easily live without SSD requirement. What's the point of requiring higher minimum specs if you don't exploit them ? You'll only loose part of your player base for no added value on your product.
@Scawen: Those dev logs are really cool I really enjoy it, thank you and keep it up I wouldn't mind removing the "per day diary" and instead have a weekly resume of the development instead, sometimes I feel like we are monitoring you on your personal life
Last edited by nacim, .
Reason : removed some off topic crap
Happy birthday to and thank you for your hard work, it definitly contributed to a lot of hour/day/years of enjoyment and learning on my side!
I still remember me at 10 years old starting on 0.5V back in 2006, not understanding a single thing of what I was doing yet spending hours trying.
This game follwed me though a good portion of my life, helped me get my drivers license to learning how to drift or drive hard (before doing it in real life), from keyboard to gamepad, to shitty 20€ wheel to a full blown simrig.
Nowadays it's still one of the first thing I install on a fresh OS install, even before my browser of choice
Thing is with that you'll spend a lot of time moderating the thread rather than doing what you enjoy.
Unless someone else is doing the moderation, and even like that it might create a cat and mouse game where people create throwaway accounts to troll, using VPNs/proxies if IP banned, etc. People do have a lot of time to waste to mess with others, yet no time to do their own things.
Does LFS forum has a feature where only accounts with a certain age are allowed to reply ? That would make the banning a bit more robust maybe if only accounts that are only 6 months/1 year old are allowed to post on theses threads ?
Just saw that you closed the thread where you posted regular updates on the progress you are making. It actually saddens me that some people can really spoil it for the majority of us looking silenty at the progress you made and appreciating it.
I think a solution to this problem would be to create a thread where no one exept you could post, just so we could read it like a dev blog or some kind of diary. It's not as good as a fully opened thread where we can interact with you to try and help you on your quest, but I think it's still better than staying silent far from us.
Tell me what you think.
Another idea I have would be to have a curated list of people in some private threads to discuss with you on certains subjects, like physics, graphics etc, as some of us are also programmer, game developers, etc.
As you might know already I'm a Graphics Programmer at Eden Games for example, and I would be gladly try to help you.
Physics wise I feel like the car is way too powerful and grippy for what I'm thinking it should be.
As Flotch said, I think the redline should be toned down to 7000 rpm, and max power to 130/140 bhp. I played with the car with a 12-14% power restriction and it felt more fun and realistic to drive.
I agree that the car should have the option to disable the TC, but I feel like the stock setup should have it enabled, with an agressive 5% max slip allowed, just like a car like this would have out of the factory.
As for the grip, I felt the car was more appropriate with the "NORMAL" tires suited on instead of the "SUPER"
Anyways, looking forward to try out the evolution, keep up the good work mate
EDIT: Small thing visually, I feel like the car is really large, but looking at the dimensions in game, it seems to be around 1.72/1.74m so same width as a 2012 Peugeot 208. Maybe it's the mirrors ? They seems really small
EDIT2: I also feel like having a trailing arm for the rear suspension (just like the original XFG has) would fit more the econobox hatchback from this era, and still used on this type of car to this day.
Very nice work, good job, it took shape really well
Can't wait to try it out
Flotch on engine choice, a 3 cylinders turbo would fit nicely for a 2014+ car, but it's supposed to be older than that (Euro 4 era), so a more in line with the 1.4/1.6 4 cylinders turbo at around 140/150 crank hp for hatchbacks.
Nice mod NENE87, it cool to follow the progression in the developpement of mods !
I have found a weird bug though, I think it's more for @Scawen though. With this vehicle, even when I'm at a complete stop, with handbrake enabled and engine turned off, display still shows me slight longitudinal acceleration (0.02G here, sometimes around 0.08G). I've attached a screenshot. I'm using the CROSS setup here, and version 8 of the mod.
BTW, nice update as always Scawen, very cool
I played with a controller for a while, for me the best settings are wheel turn compensation to 1 as redbot_ suggested, and "Analog steer smooth" in "Misc", tweak it as you like.
It will make the steering turn progressively when locking the joystick on one side, allowing you to do "taps" of the joystick to steer for example, much like any other racing game.
BC7 and DXT5 are two separate compression method, you only use one or the other. DXT is compatible with both DX9 and DX11, while BC7 is only available to DX11 hardware.
For 3D objects, always use mip mapping, but in the case of LFS, see below.
For DDS files, LFS re-save them with
After a discovery of DANIEL-CRO on the forum, he found out that texture loading when loading a new track could be greatly reduced by saving textures in the proper format, and made a tool to convert every textures to the proper format automatically. After that, Scawen implemented a simlar system into LFS for all DDS textures, that will automatically change the texture format to DXT1 for opaque objects, DXT5 for ALP objects, and generate mipmaps. So yeah, whatever the format you export it to, if you enable mips or not, LFS will change it if it doesn't match its needs (so mips always ON, alpha depending on "ALP" tag (for alpha blend or alpha test materials, which replaced "ATEST" and "ALPHA" on older textures) on the name).
TGA is uncompressed, so it's nice for the "source" files, but not really for use in the production game, while BC compression operate on a 4x4 pixels basis and can do 1/8th of the TGA size, for a similar resolution.
UV textures for some cars are squished, like the XRT, and the resolution to "unsquish" them it is 5120x4096 in the case of the XRT for a 4k resolution. Ideally this resolution should only be used for the creation of the texture, while the final export in DDS is resized to a power of two (so 4096x4096) to have proper compression.
I'm bumping up this topic as I took some time to try out the U12 patch today, with its improved detection for 32:9 screens, the result are in the attachements. LFS properly detects the screen as a single one and sets the menu in 16:9 as expected.
I'm a bit frustrated that the HUD is clamped in 16:9 though. @Scawen could it be possible to add an option to change the aspect ratio of the HUD from 16:9 to 21:9 to "unclamped" (so 32:9 or other) ? A bit like in VR mode.
It'll help the immersion having the HUD closer to the edges of the screen for me (21:9 mode, not 32:9 as I would need to turn my head to see it otherwise)
Nice type of update, feels like dev notes, really makes me discover the complexity of the engine and tool set, love it !
On a more artistic note, Eric you are rocking it ! Your texturing work is impressive !
I feel like you are using hard edges everywhere though, any reasons you don't have some nice bevels on the edges of buildings or sidewalks for example ? I feel like it would create a better surface for the lighting to "catch on", and create a smoother, less video gamey feeling
Also like three_jump said just above, I really feel like everything is just too clean, older building could benefit having some grime and dirt applied on them
I found two small things in a screenshot, see the attachements, it looks like the occlusion is a bit too strong, maybe it isn't aware that the mesh for the fence is transparent and creates and occlusion like an opaque mesh ?
And a small shadow light leak, like you already fixed tons of already
Yeah I though of this too, I think adding a SSAO (Call of Duty's GTAO for example) to the renderer would really improve the image in shadows, vertex ambient occlusion is ok for large scale AO, but can't grab the fine details.
But I think Scawen has enough things to worry about for this release not to worry about that for now, it can easily be added later on.
The big thing that is weird on the screenshot to me is the light leak under the roof of the entrance