I Kinda like the big one, but no one has these in graphical working form, we need to make them ourselves!
I could make that one without much trouble, but it takes time you know and I ain't being paid :P.
The big Shiftlight will work correctly and the internal fuel gauge should work.
I recently made something up by myself, just to check out what's possible with this program. I tend to prefer fictional stuff, no known brands etc. This is where u can let your mind go crazy on ideas :P
To give an idea on time, I spent about 40 hours on this one, but that's probably because I had to figure things out first. This is my very first gauge ever and also my first graphics seen in motion. Very satisfiing, i can watch the thing move whole day long
Learned a lot on this project. Pure Photoshop only, not that vector designs are not my thing, but I have lots of experience with PS.
It's nearly finished, I still need to change the gear-dial but the supplied one doesn't look that bad. It's just that everything should be made from scratch anyway.
I primarily made this dial for the XRR, don't know why actually. Maybe because it utilizes amost every aspect of the dashboard. This makes the dash suitable for the FXR too since it's basically the same. A 300KM/H Speedo coupled with 9000RPM Tacho, Turbo and Fuel gauge included. Working LED's etc.
I have to admit it's not very likely to have such a dash in a GTR car, but i do not give a shit :P
Anyway, since this is the first one it can't be the last one. So who knows what comes next
http://home.wanadoo.nl/stefank ... LFS/GAUGE/CUSTOMGAUGE.jpg
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
OMG this is nice
tsss....
Why haven't i seen this thread before... I found out about it just one day ago. But i'm blown away by it's wickedness :P
This is serious fun man, I photoshopped whole day long to make something beautiful (guess 12 hours into it now, but still not totally finished). Had to figure some things out like the alpha channel etc, but all works perfectly now and actually It's all pretty straight-forward, but little details take forever as always.
I'll try to post my stuff tomorrow (if it's finished)
Heads up for the creator of this tool!
Why haven't i seen this thread before... I found out about it just one day ago. But i'm blown away by it's wickedness :P
This is serious fun man, I photoshopped whole day long to make something beautiful (guess 12 hours into it now, but still not totally finished). Had to figure some things out like the alpha channel etc, but all works perfectly now and actually It's all pretty straight-forward, but little details take forever as always.
I'll try to post my stuff tomorrow (if it's finished)
Heads up for the creator of this tool!
Lol nice 16bit ingame screenshot. Damn that looks awful :P
Apart from the interior, which ain't that bad for a first timer, but i can't see any real texture details due to the lack of resolution and 16 bit image.
I dislike the fancy LCD though, that's just too much.
Keep on going, maybe it's a good idea to increase the resolution of the interior image.
Apart from the interior, which ain't that bad for a first timer, but i can't see any real texture details due to the lack of resolution and 16 bit image.
I dislike the fancy LCD though, that's just too much.
Keep on going, maybe it's a good idea to increase the resolution of the interior image.
lol ok did not notice that LFS explained anything about that, but i still guess some ppl may not have noticed the MIP sliders before, so it's still worth mentioning i guess.
Also it's just crap saying to not use it with AF, otherwise it's ok? That's just insane lol, it's never OK!, without AF quality is even worse, when i put on 32X AA and 16X AF the distortion of negative MIP-bias is somewhat less noticed. So I don't get the whole point actually. ppl need to know what it does for real, not to just be told "not to use when AF is turned on", that's no real information. Anyway, it bugged me when these settings turned to negative MIPS by default. That's absolutely disgusting and wrong. And when i read comments related to this and a person does not know what causes it or blames his videodrivers, I like to explain a bit more so these ppl will understand. Just by saying not to use AF in conjunction with it is not my style.
About female/male drivers position, could be that a female driver is positioned a little bit different, but it does not explain the big difference in view. That's just too big of a diff to just to be the position of a driver. Also the 'male' person is too much positioned forward, this can't be a Zero-Z with 125 FOV. So there obviously is more going on then just different driver posititions famale/male wise.
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
I think that has something to do with the way he set up his view. It's best to use the 'custom' mode somehow. By changing things at the 'in-car' panel it seems to only work for your car somehow, or custom and incar view are not reported correctly and we are actually looking at an 'in-car' and a 'custom' mode screenshot.
I guess your own car has an adjusted 'in-car' view, with wider FOV etc. while the Female driver just uses the default 'in-car' configuration at the same fov as you use but with natural 'eye' positioning of the viewpoint.
It also seems the view from your car has it's seat positioned forward (Z axis).
It simply can't be 0 while at FOV 125. The steering wheel should be miles away as seen in the other picture!
I do not beleave female and male drivers are positioned differently, although their model may differ in height, everything else stays just the same.
Also i do not think this has anything to do with this testpatch, because i've seen and experienced it myself a while ago.
/edit
And on the AA/AF note, i read something about grainy or noisy road texture. Make sure you have all MIP-bias settings put back to 0. Negative MIP values are not recommanded as they create distortions like moire-effects. It basically has to do with the amount of filtering applied to a texture over distance. At 0 this is well-belanced, but at negative values a texture in the distance is not 'blurred' enough to merge all pixels together to form a uniform surface. This will result in a very grainy roadsurface. But it's not only the road if you watch carefully.
Some ppl may prefer negative MIP though, some video drivers force a 0 MIP filter so there can't be any visual difference noticed.
I can't understand why you ever would want negative values tough, maybe on very old videocards which tend to lose sharpness over distence very quickly because of lack of Triliniair or Anisotropic Filtering. In that case a negative MIP could make things a bit cripser looking. Still not my taste though and it's a fact that it's not an ideal way of rendering, so it should be 0 by default.
I guess your own car has an adjusted 'in-car' view, with wider FOV etc. while the Female driver just uses the default 'in-car' configuration at the same fov as you use but with natural 'eye' positioning of the viewpoint.
It also seems the view from your car has it's seat positioned forward (Z axis).
It simply can't be 0 while at FOV 125. The steering wheel should be miles away as seen in the other picture!
I do not beleave female and male drivers are positioned differently, although their model may differ in height, everything else stays just the same.
Also i do not think this has anything to do with this testpatch, because i've seen and experienced it myself a while ago.
/edit
And on the AA/AF note, i read something about grainy or noisy road texture. Make sure you have all MIP-bias settings put back to 0. Negative MIP values are not recommanded as they create distortions like moire-effects. It basically has to do with the amount of filtering applied to a texture over distance. At 0 this is well-belanced, but at negative values a texture in the distance is not 'blurred' enough to merge all pixels together to form a uniform surface. This will result in a very grainy roadsurface. But it's not only the road if you watch carefully.
Some ppl may prefer negative MIP though, some video drivers force a 0 MIP filter so there can't be any visual difference noticed.
I can't understand why you ever would want negative values tough, maybe on very old videocards which tend to lose sharpness over distence very quickly because of lack of Triliniair or Anisotropic Filtering. In that case a negative MIP could make things a bit cripser looking. Still not my taste though and it's a fact that it's not an ideal way of rendering, so it should be 0 by default.
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
well.. "mick" in both of them, so seems obvious enough to me :P
but then again, it's not 100% proof, but the most logical thing to guess on first sight imho
Also he never stated he pointed towards a reaction of someone named "mickchap22", you just brought that one up by yourself, how hilarious.
but then again, it's not 100% proof, but the most logical thing to guess on first sight imho
Also he never stated he pointed towards a reaction of someone named "mickchap22", you just brought that one up by yourself, how hilarious.
GOD man u got the weirdest settings ever. How the hell are you ever gonna like combined paddles and a 330 degree of steering anywayz? You at least should be able to break and accellerate at the same time, even if it's not the best thing to do, it definately should work this way.
I got the feeling u need some serious "how to configure a controller" and maybe also some basic computer knowledge since lacking the experience of taking a screenshot of your desktop says much about someones experience with PC's.
And if I were you, I would learn to cope with at least 450 degrees of wheelturn as soon as possible. Just using 330 degrees because you are used to a previous wheel is not done. Sweat u must :P
Force yourself to learn these things, they could feel weird. But after a straight 3 hour play everything get's used to and you need the precission handling for sure to become anything good. And the most importent thing of all, it's more realistic that way. That's why you buy a G25 in the first place. To take advantage of its far more realistic abilities.
I got the feeling u need some serious "how to configure a controller" and maybe also some basic computer knowledge since lacking the experience of taking a screenshot of your desktop says much about someones experience with PC's.
And if I were you, I would learn to cope with at least 450 degrees of wheelturn as soon as possible. Just using 330 degrees because you are used to a previous wheel is not done. Sweat u must :P
Force yourself to learn these things, they could feel weird. But after a straight 3 hour play everything get's used to and you need the precission handling for sure to become anything good. And the most importent thing of all, it's more realistic that way. That's why you buy a G25 in the first place. To take advantage of its far more realistic abilities.
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
Why does it seem so damn hard to configure a graphics card. The whole topic does not point to LFS nessesarily, but is all about the basic configurations of a videocard. It should be the first things you need to learn about graphics.
I also never had any difficulties to get Antialias ingame, or the right Anisotropic filtering. Why does is seem so much pain in the ass to get this right? Never configured these settings for any of the other games you have played? This is nothing new at all.
Btw, an SLI setup can draw really nice pictures when set to antialias-SLI modes. With 2x 8800GT i can set SLI32xQ, 16XAF and Supersampling all toghether without dropping out of a 60Hz framesync 1680x1050. Framedrops still happen though, but thats due to high amount of cars on track which necks my CPU. Only LOD ajustments could make that better, vid @ 640x480 results in same framedrops. Not really a big issue, a 5GHz C2D still suffers from the same drops, it has more to do with how LFS handles LOD and the fact cars are not evenly detailed. A track full of BF1's are quite the load on a CPU.
Anyway, i began playing LFS on a Radeon 9700 @ 1600x1200 2x AA 4X AF, that time no ploblems at all configuring this. After that i went to a 7800GS AGP, still no trouble at all. For one month i got a 7800GT PCI-e, still no hassle to get LFS running with AA/AF. Then a X2900XT, again no problem. 2x 3870, no problem. And now i got 2x 8800GT, and you'll figure, no problem whatsoever. The recent geforces render LFS at its best, certainly when using the SLI AA modes. It's quite overkill, but the card can handle it with ease and looks much better then ATi's wide/narrow tent and box filters and looks like it suffers much less from a performance hit.
LOD bias adjustments on the texture front could be somewhat personal, but i like the lod to be ZERO'ed cause in that case textures on road, far buildings etc. wont suffer from Moire and Aliasing effects.
Only when using a card that can't do AF or AA very well and has terrible MIP filters an option would be to lower the LOD to a negative value in order to get somewhat crisp textures. The downside though is mayor aliasing and moire as i explained before.
BTW, i do not prefer 3rd party graphics setting tools, although they seem quite helpful, i tend to miss full control of what is happening and i can't live with that idea. I change videosettings for each games manually every time i fire them up to be absolutely sure of it. But these called 'presets' I got in my head for every game i have. And for many games they are the same anyway. So changing some things now and then ain't very frustrating at all. Also when u do so, you are very aware of current settings and it's difference to performance impact. This could also help alot determing bugs or driver failures corresponding to certain AA or AF settings which do occur quite a lot on SLI set's. All in all, it gives u more insight of the whole settings tab thing. When changing drivers regulairly there is no other way than to know your settings very well, also the same settings could mean trouble on newer/older drivers. PC users should be all about trial and error. this gives u lots of insight. It's still ashame too many users just read stuff on how to do something and actually never understand what they did. That's the main flaw of so many users and probably why so many can't figure out how to set up their game the right way. Be eager to learn something for a change and you'll be proud of yourself for finally getting the hang of it.
I also never had any difficulties to get Antialias ingame, or the right Anisotropic filtering. Why does is seem so much pain in the ass to get this right? Never configured these settings for any of the other games you have played? This is nothing new at all.
Btw, an SLI setup can draw really nice pictures when set to antialias-SLI modes. With 2x 8800GT i can set SLI32xQ, 16XAF and Supersampling all toghether without dropping out of a 60Hz framesync 1680x1050. Framedrops still happen though, but thats due to high amount of cars on track which necks my CPU. Only LOD ajustments could make that better, vid @ 640x480 results in same framedrops. Not really a big issue, a 5GHz C2D still suffers from the same drops, it has more to do with how LFS handles LOD and the fact cars are not evenly detailed. A track full of BF1's are quite the load on a CPU.
Anyway, i began playing LFS on a Radeon 9700 @ 1600x1200 2x AA 4X AF, that time no ploblems at all configuring this. After that i went to a 7800GS AGP, still no trouble at all. For one month i got a 7800GT PCI-e, still no hassle to get LFS running with AA/AF. Then a X2900XT, again no problem. 2x 3870, no problem. And now i got 2x 8800GT, and you'll figure, no problem whatsoever. The recent geforces render LFS at its best, certainly when using the SLI AA modes. It's quite overkill, but the card can handle it with ease and looks much better then ATi's wide/narrow tent and box filters and looks like it suffers much less from a performance hit.
LOD bias adjustments on the texture front could be somewhat personal, but i like the lod to be ZERO'ed cause in that case textures on road, far buildings etc. wont suffer from Moire and Aliasing effects.
Only when using a card that can't do AF or AA very well and has terrible MIP filters an option would be to lower the LOD to a negative value in order to get somewhat crisp textures. The downside though is mayor aliasing and moire as i explained before.
BTW, i do not prefer 3rd party graphics setting tools, although they seem quite helpful, i tend to miss full control of what is happening and i can't live with that idea. I change videosettings for each games manually every time i fire them up to be absolutely sure of it. But these called 'presets' I got in my head for every game i have. And for many games they are the same anyway. So changing some things now and then ain't very frustrating at all. Also when u do so, you are very aware of current settings and it's difference to performance impact. This could also help alot determing bugs or driver failures corresponding to certain AA or AF settings which do occur quite a lot on SLI set's. All in all, it gives u more insight of the whole settings tab thing. When changing drivers regulairly there is no other way than to know your settings very well, also the same settings could mean trouble on newer/older drivers. PC users should be all about trial and error. this gives u lots of insight. It's still ashame too many users just read stuff on how to do something and actually never understand what they did. That's the main flaw of so many users and probably why so many can't figure out how to set up their game the right way. Be eager to learn something for a change and you'll be proud of yourself for finally getting the hang of it.
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
Try smoking a joint, could help to give some insight
Thats excellent information, did not know that!
I see you both have high profiler force and lower ingame force. I always find it more logical the other way around. I like to use 100 ingame and from there you turn the "volume knob", play with the profiler. Just as a cd-player (LFS) thats best-off playing at it's full native potential (100) to the Amplifier (profiler) to prevent signal loss.
In the case of FF wheels i doubt theres any loss of signal, but it could be it's different in some ways. Don't know what the whole point is though, but i find it interesting afterall.
Interesting stuff
I think there is quite a logical explanation to the crisp feel at 128 vs 256 FF levels. Look at it as audio as 8bit vs 16bit. A sinewave would be more smooth at a higher bitrate but becomes more like a sawtooth when lowering the bitrate and eventually turns into a squarewave when going even further. The rattle you get from a sawtooth is much more noticable then a perfect sinewave, though the sinewave is more accurate. I don't know if the curb's tiles are moddled defined enough to generate something similar to real life, maybe it IS too smooth thus causing a numb feel while the sawtooth effect would feel more like a real curb. But also those are quite different from each other in RL, maybe LFS get's it quite right and you just prefer the more raw feel of 128 levels.
I think there is quite a logical explanation to the crisp feel at 128 vs 256 FF levels. Look at it as audio as 8bit vs 16bit. A sinewave would be more smooth at a higher bitrate but becomes more like a sawtooth when lowering the bitrate and eventually turns into a squarewave when going even further. The rattle you get from a sawtooth is much more noticable then a perfect sinewave, though the sinewave is more accurate. I don't know if the curb's tiles are moddled defined enough to generate something similar to real life, maybe it IS too smooth thus causing a numb feel while the sawtooth effect would feel more like a real curb. But also those are quite different from each other in RL, maybe LFS get's it quite right and you just prefer the more raw feel of 128 levels.
But those are just samples, you can just use CarSoundRemixer for LFS to get those type of sounds. You can let it sound exactly like GTR so your wish is already fulfilled, for quite some time already.
The best approach to get somewhere real is to generate sounds on synthizised basis like LFS does now. It can only get better by adding more complex algorithems to it. And i really like this approach. The main downside to LFS is that progression goes so damn slow it almost got down to a standstill. My solution to this problem is making my own samples for CarSoundRemixer in a way they blend in with the sounds from LFS. Not blasting away all the informative sound LFS gives you, but to give you some little extra sounds like the brake squeel, rattling, low-fuel alarm etc. The main engine power/release samples I changed to more lower rumble and higher frequencies to add some range to the default sound.
So in the end LFS is not so bad really, it's the only game where i can fiddle around with samples and sliders/buttons to get exactly what I want. It's GREAT to be able to create something unique for yourself specially made for my audio setup. I even use special surround enhancers to generate surround effects from stereo material. Often this is due to polarisation of sound, when left is exactly the opposite of right the sounds get merged to one signal and transferred to the back. This way extremely cool effects can be created and it's like the car you're driving surrounds you.
But in the end all this stuff is just some workaround to the lack of LFS. And it also shows how much i like the game and want to improve upon it. It's really a shame the devs never seek ways to improve developing this game any faster. They are just so damn arogant in that way, they want to do everything themselves and killing the progress in the end by doing so. And all this effort the whole community put into this 'game' by showing ideas and making stuff, improving stuff etc, all go to waste. It's the only thing i HATE about LFS. Not that we need to do anything for this game, or that we need modding, no we don't need that at all, the team behind LFS just needs to grow, get some more people to work for you, it's nothing to be ashamed about to be recognized one day and become a real company who created the best racing sim ever. It's not that once getting commercial we think of you as being EA or something. Why not have a box on the shelves that says 'Live For Speed'? Be a real company for gods sake. And if the heart behind this game is not seeking for great amounts of money but to just enjoy creating a game for a small community, this attitude will show and we all respect that very much. But still, a game that can't make it one day because of this naive bahaviour would probably make me cry. Do something please. Or at least let me know if there are plans to grow?
A totally different request like what's going to happen in the next patch release, or what is S3 about... I just want to know if it's all worth the wait or am I wasting my time.
Converting Lateral amplitudes to audio?
Since i build my own simulator with a subwoofer positioned underneath the seat i came up with the following ideas...
First i fiddled around with the sounds of LFS, I put some LFE into them. Now, when i hear the tyre scrub sound i can actually feel it grinding underneath. I did this in different ways so you get slightly other feel to different situations.
But all this is very artificial and not corresponding to information you get from the cars suspension which would be possible i guess with the use of outgauge.
Lateral movements of suspension and the body could be transferred to soundwaves which could be heard when played thru speakers, but more importantly could be felt through the seat in my case, or anyone with a decent subwoofer would benefit from this. Things like curbstones would feel very realistic this way and probably make a quite realistic curb rattling sound too.
My problem is, i can't program at all, but I am very much into audio and graphics. Would it be possible for someone to create some program, like a simplistic version of CarSoundRemixer, but to only generate a low frequency sound with suspensionbehaviour as input? A soundgenerator like a VST instrument, or some free synthesis generators for BuzzTracker (www.buzzmachines.com) are likely to handle such inputs quite well i guess. Different sorts of modulation could raise the output to more realistic levels.
This idea is probably not the most common thing, and not many people would die for it i think, but it's on my mind for quite some time now and haven't read much about it so i thought what the hell... lets post it. I hope i'm able to find someone interested in programming and interested in audio at the same time AND is able to see the need of this to be realised. When done properly, it could make it into the game itself as an LFE option.
Also, LFS really needs surroundsound, but thats something offtopic and nothing we are able to realize, thats for the devs to decide. It would make positioning of other drivers around you so much easier. I actually find it very strange it's not build into the game already. Also the synthisized sound of the car is actually 3D already but put out to only two speakers. There are different sounds mixed together, but they could all have their own position in a depth matrix, can't be that hard to do. Now we only got the reflection of sound against walls, which sounds absolutely awesome from time to time bacause it creates a wider soundfield, somewhat like flanger. Shame the sound of the cars itself are so damn narrow. Would be great to hear the gearbox slightly right from you in the middle, the engine in the front and exhaust from right/back. The car has to surround you as a whole, not as if it comes from without your PC screen.
Enough of this, i always seem to have ideas no one is interested in anywayz... Let's have some grass sigarette
First i fiddled around with the sounds of LFS, I put some LFE into them. Now, when i hear the tyre scrub sound i can actually feel it grinding underneath. I did this in different ways so you get slightly other feel to different situations.
But all this is very artificial and not corresponding to information you get from the cars suspension which would be possible i guess with the use of outgauge.
Lateral movements of suspension and the body could be transferred to soundwaves which could be heard when played thru speakers, but more importantly could be felt through the seat in my case, or anyone with a decent subwoofer would benefit from this. Things like curbstones would feel very realistic this way and probably make a quite realistic curb rattling sound too.
My problem is, i can't program at all, but I am very much into audio and graphics. Would it be possible for someone to create some program, like a simplistic version of CarSoundRemixer, but to only generate a low frequency sound with suspensionbehaviour as input? A soundgenerator like a VST instrument, or some free synthesis generators for BuzzTracker (www.buzzmachines.com) are likely to handle such inputs quite well i guess. Different sorts of modulation could raise the output to more realistic levels.
This idea is probably not the most common thing, and not many people would die for it i think, but it's on my mind for quite some time now and haven't read much about it so i thought what the hell... lets post it. I hope i'm able to find someone interested in programming and interested in audio at the same time AND is able to see the need of this to be realised. When done properly, it could make it into the game itself as an LFE option.
Also, LFS really needs surroundsound, but thats something offtopic and nothing we are able to realize, thats for the devs to decide. It would make positioning of other drivers around you so much easier. I actually find it very strange it's not build into the game already. Also the synthisized sound of the car is actually 3D already but put out to only two speakers. There are different sounds mixed together, but they could all have their own position in a depth matrix, can't be that hard to do. Now we only got the reflection of sound against walls, which sounds absolutely awesome from time to time bacause it creates a wider soundfield, somewhat like flanger. Shame the sound of the cars itself are so damn narrow. Would be great to hear the gearbox slightly right from you in the middle, the engine in the front and exhaust from right/back. The car has to surround you as a whole, not as if it comes from without your PC screen.
Enough of this, i always seem to have ideas no one is interested in anywayz... Let's have some grass sigarette
Shouldn't everyone use these high-res textures by now? How could someone do without
Aren't them defs putting those in by default anytime soon, or is it the usual urge to be oversupportive to those with 8 year old pc's? I'm getting a bit bored by that... No offence to those with older pc's, but it clearly is not very good for the overall graphic improvement and development of a game. Stagnation awaits death of LFS, i can start crying right away as this wonderful peace of software will bleed to death anytime soon, i just feel it... and the bad thing is my intuition has never been wrong... or is that a good thing? :P
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
V-Sync means vertical synchronisation and is used to draw frames at the same rate as your monitor builds up the screen. In general this is the best way to draw motion on a screen without tearing the image. A Cathode Ray Tube (glass tube monitor) builds up a picture with a single dot going blazingly fast from left to right, drawing line after line until it reaches bottom right and starts all over again at top-left. Just explained how a single frame is drawn. Usually this will happen at least 60 times in one second. To the naked eye this is 'almost' impossible to notice. At 60Hz a noticable flickering will make you tired very fast though since your brain has to deal with that phenomenon. That's why we like to use higher refreshrates like 75/85/100 Hz etc.
When not synching frames, it occasionally happens a frame is put out a bit earlier/later than your screen starts building up the image resulting in chopped pictures. This is hardly noticable to someone not familiar with these basics but this tearing of frames is very noticable when seeing horizontal motions. The top half of the screen could be seen out of alignment compared to the bottom half of the screen. The faster the horizontal movement of ingame graphics, the greater the difference between top/bottom parts of the picture and the more noticable the tearing gets. It also won't tear exacly in the middle of the screen, but will roll up or down depending on the difference the framerate has to the refreshrate.
To make my statement more clear, V-sync ON gives a better result to the eye by drawing frames the way they are supposed to be drawn. Synced frames also seem more smooth then unsynced frames, dispite the fact less frames are drawn. Squeezing 200 frames per second into 60 frames seems wrong. So why bother just 60 frames are drawn if your screen does not write more frames in the first place? Maybe to someone things are starting to make more sense now.
For benchmarking etc. you don't want to use any syncronisation since you don't want your monitor to interfere with the outcome of a score.
But after all this explaining, there are some tiny disatvantages of v-sync after all. It takes a little bit of time to syncronize, this is done by pre-rendering some frames before they are actually drawn. A hardly noticable lag occurs by this and the amount of frames being drawn ahead is configurable. Common options are double-buffer / tripple-buffer.
Also, what to do when the framerate in-game drops below 60fps when having a 60Hz refreshrate? The only solution is to drop to 30fps instantly when using double buffer since it only takes measures of two. Tripple buffer allows for synched frames at all sorts of framerates but gives more lag.
When a game runs at 200+fps constantly, the best thing to have would be something like 100hz refreshrate with a double buffered v-Sync. Very close to the most smoothest framerate you will ever experience in a game, a real treat to the eye. If you haven't experienced this once you really missed something It's so much better then having no v-sync at all. I used to play games like Quake2 with Voodoo2's at such settings, it's almost surreal how smooth things went. IMHO, the time of the smoothest gameplay ever, nowadays a lot of new games suffer from absurd loads/peaks/stalls becouse of inefficient use of recourses and bad programming. Anyway, things always seem better in the past
When not synching frames, it occasionally happens a frame is put out a bit earlier/later than your screen starts building up the image resulting in chopped pictures. This is hardly noticable to someone not familiar with these basics but this tearing of frames is very noticable when seeing horizontal motions. The top half of the screen could be seen out of alignment compared to the bottom half of the screen. The faster the horizontal movement of ingame graphics, the greater the difference between top/bottom parts of the picture and the more noticable the tearing gets. It also won't tear exacly in the middle of the screen, but will roll up or down depending on the difference the framerate has to the refreshrate.
To make my statement more clear, V-sync ON gives a better result to the eye by drawing frames the way they are supposed to be drawn. Synced frames also seem more smooth then unsynced frames, dispite the fact less frames are drawn. Squeezing 200 frames per second into 60 frames seems wrong. So why bother just 60 frames are drawn if your screen does not write more frames in the first place? Maybe to someone things are starting to make more sense now.
For benchmarking etc. you don't want to use any syncronisation since you don't want your monitor to interfere with the outcome of a score.
But after all this explaining, there are some tiny disatvantages of v-sync after all. It takes a little bit of time to syncronize, this is done by pre-rendering some frames before they are actually drawn. A hardly noticable lag occurs by this and the amount of frames being drawn ahead is configurable. Common options are double-buffer / tripple-buffer.
Also, what to do when the framerate in-game drops below 60fps when having a 60Hz refreshrate? The only solution is to drop to 30fps instantly when using double buffer since it only takes measures of two. Tripple buffer allows for synched frames at all sorts of framerates but gives more lag.
When a game runs at 200+fps constantly, the best thing to have would be something like 100hz refreshrate with a double buffered v-Sync. Very close to the most smoothest framerate you will ever experience in a game, a real treat to the eye. If you haven't experienced this once you really missed something
It's so much better then having no v-sync at all. I used to play games like Quake2 with Voodoo2's at such settings, it's almost surreal how smooth things went. IMHO, the time of the smoothest gameplay ever, nowadays a lot of new games suffer from absurd loads/peaks/stalls becouse of inefficient use of recourses and bad programming. Anyway, things always seem better in the past
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
To me this is a general ATi vs. nVidia graphics related difference. ATi has much higher level of precision as it comes to rendering distant textures, very noticable under extreme angles. I have tested tons of nVidia/ATi GC's , even a much older ATi Radeon 9700 looks better compared to that nVidia card. I also hate the way how white lines are drawn on the track, they fade away very blurry in the distance with a very noticable distant levels compared to ATi.
When i got rid of my old ATi r9700 and replaced it with a much faster nVidia card i experienced the same crap. Over time you will get used to it and it wont bother you that much anymore. Still it's a fact ATi looks better. It shows up very clearly when comparing AA/AF levels, ATi has already very good distant anisotropic filtering at 4x, whilst nVidia still lacks behind at 16x AF. In general 4x AF is enough on an ATi GC since 16x will slow it down too much to be really useful.
This made me think totally different about benchmarks where ATi's 16x AF is compared to nVidia's 16X AF on performance only. It's very clear here that nVidia has less framerate slowdown on such high settings. But the reality is that 16X AF on nVidia is way less precise. I think 64x AF would suffice for nVidia to make a good comparison between both brands. Obviously this is not possible and to the big crowd this precision difference is nothing they complain about. What i can say about it, is that nVidia plays it the smart way with it's "Higher settings, less framedrop" compared to ATi's so they seem a better choice. And moire related isseus are much clearer and irritating when seeing them in motion. Things you don't see very well on all the comparison screenshots all over the web.
In the end both brands have there pro's and con's and not all games make this look as noticable as LFS does. LFS really looks completely different on ATI/nVidia to a trained eye.
You can try to give your video settings a slight positive LOD bias to get rid of moire. I also noticed the moire effect differs from which driver you use. But still, in the end it will never be the same as an ATi card rendered the game so you might as well just take it for granted.
When i got rid of my old ATi r9700 and replaced it with a much faster nVidia card i experienced the same crap. Over time you will get used to it and it wont bother you that much anymore. Still it's a fact ATi looks better. It shows up very clearly when comparing AA/AF levels, ATi has already very good distant anisotropic filtering at 4x, whilst nVidia still lacks behind at 16x AF. In general 4x AF is enough on an ATi GC since 16x will slow it down too much to be really useful.
This made me think totally different about benchmarks where ATi's 16x AF is compared to nVidia's 16X AF on performance only. It's very clear here that nVidia has less framerate slowdown on such high settings. But the reality is that 16X AF on nVidia is way less precise. I think 64x AF would suffice for nVidia to make a good comparison between both brands. Obviously this is not possible and to the big crowd this precision difference is nothing they complain about. What i can say about it, is that nVidia plays it the smart way with it's "Higher settings, less framedrop" compared to ATi's so they seem a better choice. And moire related isseus are much clearer and irritating when seeing them in motion. Things you don't see very well on all the comparison screenshots all over the web.
In the end both brands have there pro's and con's and not all games make this look as noticable as LFS does. LFS really looks completely different on ATI/nVidia to a trained eye.
You can try to give your video settings a slight positive LOD bias to get rid of moire. I also noticed the moire effect differs from which driver you use. But still, in the end it will never be the same as an ATi card rendered the game so you might as well just take it for granted.
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
for me it's LX6/RAC/XRT for a bit of fun with clutch and gearshifter etc., but the FOX I drive as a real racing car with 100% dedication. and it feels so damn good and predictable all the time. It's just that i understand the FOX so very well, i can adjust settings to suit every track, it's just not very hard to drive this car on it's limits, but that's what makes it also very enjoyable.
It basically feels like i own that car so it won't take that much time to get used to new tracks, almost instantly drive 1sec from WR times. There are often lot's of drivers to drive with and I like the challenge of playing with so many beginners and moderate drivers around who make it sometimes impossible to finish a race without a scratch. It often seems very frustrating, yet enjoyable to go around a bunch of people crashing everywhere and being blocked at every turn but still managing to make it around them at high speeds doing insane laptimes. Those things make me feel very good and I can't stand to lose, I hate myself for it. That's basically the reason to play it safe and go with the FOX, i injured myself quite a lot playing FPS games like quake1/2 so I told myself to quit, or just let the frustration go... I tried but the mouse's i bought still died occationally from smashing into a wall. That's when i thought, i'm sick, stop playing this game. It needs to be played for fun, not to make me so angry all the time. But then again, i tend to take competition very seriously, being a PC game or not, does not matter, to me it's very serious business and you could say life is at stake. call it Life for Speed :P
But in the end, i kinda like every car and they all should stay in the game, the feeling of them all are very well done i think. I think i dislike the BF1 the most for its hidious sound and technological advancements. It also doesn't look nice, F1 cars don't look nice nowadays anyway with all the little wings in search for that tiny extra bit of downforce. years ago they sat lower on the track, had front wings almost touching the ground, wider wheels without grooves etc. Much more like the FO8 with a V10/12 in it. The FO8 to me would be the fastest car to drive in LFS, and it feels very good too. They look a bit like Champcars, which i also tend to like more then F1 nowadays. This is also the case with Formula Renault / Formula 2k (FOX) type cars and races I watch on TV, those are so much more FUN! Mainly becouse the cars are more equal to each other making it a real drivers competition intead of competition on technological basis where lot's of money is involved and where smaller teams have no chances of winning.
The GTR type cars are just nice but I can't seem to like them as much as open seaters. I could drive them if i wanted to, but it won't make my heart beat any faster. it's the type of car i have something against, don't know what exactly. it's just some carbon body with the looks of a streetcar, hugely overpowered, insane tyres and all in all far too heavy. They feel like boats not really ment to be used on water. Lot's will hugely disagree with me, but i can't change my feelings about it
nuf talk
It basically feels like i own that car so it won't take that much time to get used to new tracks, almost instantly drive 1sec from WR times. There are often lot's of drivers to drive with and I like the challenge of playing with so many beginners and moderate drivers around who make it sometimes impossible to finish a race without a scratch. It often seems very frustrating, yet enjoyable to go around a bunch of people crashing everywhere and being blocked at every turn but still managing to make it around them at high speeds doing insane laptimes. Those things make me feel very good and I can't stand to lose, I hate myself for it. That's basically the reason to play it safe and go with the FOX, i injured myself quite a lot playing FPS games like quake1/2 so I told myself to quit, or just let the frustration go... I tried but the mouse's i bought still died occationally from smashing into a wall. That's when i thought, i'm sick, stop playing this game. It needs to be played for fun, not to make me so angry all the time. But then again, i tend to take competition very seriously, being a PC game or not, does not matter, to me it's very serious business and you could say life is at stake. call it Life for Speed :P
But in the end, i kinda like every car and they all should stay in the game, the feeling of them all are very well done i think. I think i dislike the BF1 the most for its hidious sound and technological advancements. It also doesn't look nice, F1 cars don't look nice nowadays anyway with all the little wings in search for that tiny extra bit of downforce. years ago they sat lower on the track, had front wings almost touching the ground, wider wheels without grooves etc. Much more like the FO8 with a V10/12 in it. The FO8 to me would be the fastest car to drive in LFS, and it feels very good too. They look a bit like Champcars, which i also tend to like more then F1 nowadays. This is also the case with Formula Renault / Formula 2k (FOX) type cars and races I watch on TV, those are so much more FUN! Mainly becouse the cars are more equal to each other making it a real drivers competition intead of competition on technological basis where lot's of money is involved and where smaller teams have no chances of winning.
The GTR type cars are just nice but I can't seem to like them as much as open seaters. I could drive them if i wanted to, but it won't make my heart beat any faster. it's the type of car i have something against, don't know what exactly. it's just some carbon body with the looks of a streetcar, hugely overpowered, insane tyres and all in all far too heavy. They feel like boats not really ment to be used on water. Lot's will hugely disagree with me, but i can't change my feelings about it
nuf talk
I dont have a widescreen, but i use a widescreen resolution with black bars on 21" Trinitron. 1600x900 resolution because it gives u more information left/right. And I use fov 105, but this will position you very far from the stearing wheel which seems very weird, so i repositioned the custom view to look more natural. under fov 90 there's no way i can play, lower than that gives u way too less information and feel of speed, as if you look thru your camera with the lens fully expanded that just scary to drive with. Also fov 90 is the default angle in which u play much FPS games like quake. 90 degrees seems to be very natural point of view, everything below is like a telelens and evenything higher seems distorted. But i played quake at fov 130, so you figure :P
But then again, wide angle lenses are often used to give more awareness of a room. Well, that is what you want in a game like this so a higher fov, to ME seems very logical.
To some who just can't stand wide angles because it seems weird, that is just because you are used to something different. Everything seems weird to what you are used to. But if you play like a day on fov 100 when used to 70, you can't go back to 70 anymore. You will feel like someone trapped in a box with one little hole in it.
this is what it looks like:
http://members.home.nl/stefankoopmans/LFS/fov105.jpg
But then again, wide angle lenses are often used to give more awareness of a room. Well, that is what you want in a game like this so a higher fov, to ME seems very logical.
To some who just can't stand wide angles because it seems weird, that is just because you are used to something different. Everything seems weird to what you are used to. But if you play like a day on fov 100 when used to 70, you can't go back to 70 anymore. You will feel like someone trapped in a box with one little hole in it.
this is what it looks like:
http://members.home.nl/stefankoopmans/LFS/fov105.jpg
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
OMG, I can't believe this!, Parents without credit card? thats very strange, never seen that. Also the whole point about currency and paying too much for a game, spoken of the 'cheap' dutch... i can't stand this. Don't you have a friend who has got a credit card? i got loads of em who are willing to pay in advance. I did not have any credit card either, and i also got the game. In this case my nephew payed in advance. Whats the problem at all? Why making such a hassle about the way you need to pay. If you are not willing to find a solution at ALL and are just bugging us with your silly complaints i don't understand your point anymore. It's all common sense br0. Just find a good chap who wants to buy this game for you. I personally think you making the 'parents have no CC' up, it ought to do something with paying over the internet 'which is soooo scary'... uhum... But what pisses me off is you neglect every suggestion posted. So what's your goal now anyway...
If you want something that bad you will get it no matter or what. That's what you need to do. things around you are not gonna change in favor of you by complaining on a forum.
Btw, i also did pay 35 euro's almost two years ago.
If you want something that bad you will get it no matter or what. That's what you need to do. things around you are not gonna change in favor of you by complaining on a forum.
Btw, i also did pay 35 euro's almost two years ago.
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
I look at this in terms of dynamic range. What DaveWS did is make some louder then others, which is basically a good thing, but you can approach this in different ways. Making the heavy engines sound louder in comparison to the weaker engines (clipping occurs easily), or making the weaker engines sound lighter in comparison to heavy engines (less clipping). The best thing to do is to start from a mid-type engine, and level it at a realistic presure level when using a decent audioset or monitors at full level. Then match the rest of the engines around this sound. The most loudest engine may NOT clip at ANY time but certainly will make you deaf over a long period of time. This is basically the best way if you have serious sound equipment and don't want to hear any distortion when mixing 20+ of these engines together. The disadvantage of this is that every sound of the game needs tweaking to get everything right and it seems like everything sounds very weak when using 'normal' pc audio set's. When using outputlevels that max out at 100dB it will sound very good and wont destroy your ears. The result is perfectly balanced, only way less powerfull to real life measured over the whole range. When upping the output to 130db+ it all becomes very real. Don't forget you won't get blasted away by 130db's of soundpressure the whole time, this will not happen. You basically don't get past 90db's at all, but when things get really serious it is ABLE to output such force.
The same thing is done with well mixed audio in Movies, voice levels should just sound like normal voices, while an explosion should output the same pressure as an explosion would do in real life, which basically is groundshaking. Disadvantage is you need high output levels to hear all the low presure sounds. This is why they came up with dynamic range COMPRESSION, so at low amplification levels you are still able to hear voices while explosions wont wake your neighbours.
LFS as it is now, is none of these at all, but is mostly like the compressed version to suit common soundsets and is a logical choice to go by. But, the main thing that desturbs me the most, is that most people who edit the sounds are making them louder and heavier compared to what they started with, while if you want to make it louder, just turn up the volume of your soundset and lower the volume of every other sound, and if you want to give it more low frequency pressure, just lower the mid/higher frequency sounds. Since almost every engine sound is already clipping on it's own, imagine what it sounds like with 20 of them on the startgrid. This can't be right, and THAT's why a BF1 sounds like it's destroying your ears, while it actually destroys your audio equipment. In this case, when sound clips, it can't make a nice sine-curve anymore, instead it reaches the output barrier of the integrated synthisizer and becomes flat at the top, often refered to as a square wave. This distorts the originally ment sound. To some this might sound like a heavy roaring sound which might even be noticed as sounding very 'cool'. Well, it isn't and you really want to avoid this by any means possible.
But anyway, i'm currently working an a full range soundset for LFS + CSR combined. This will take loads of time and since i'm mainly a FOX driver, that one will be finished first while the rest will be leveled and tuned from there. The pack won't be very suitable for everyone and even people with high powered soundsets could experience something totally different and wrong. This is often the case with audio, it's all made at one place with it's own characteristics and accoustics. Which concludes it will sound best where it's been made. A shame really, but the pack will be placed online eventually so people can judge themselves.
The biggest problem i encounter though, is that it seems the audio levels of LFS or CSR have just 8 bit's of precision, meaning just 256 levels. Extending audio levels to high range makes this noticable and you start to hear rough changes in amplitude while it should be a smooth curve. 16bits of precision will suffice though. It could be a CSR only related issue, which will force me to drop CSR, and that's a shame though bacause although it's digitally recorded sound, it allows for very cool layers of sound that could expand the synthisized sound of LFS in a way it totally blends together. This also keeps the most important dynamic feel of the synthisized sound which makes LFS more real then it's counterparts. Combined sound is the way to go from my standpoint, still hope an application like CSR will be integrated in the future, it also get's rid of the soundlag that way. ...Such a shame i can't program, allways need to depend on others to fulfill my dreams. Guess the only solution is to be able to do EVERYTHING myself. Maybe i will at one day
Enough talk now, back to business.
The same thing is done with well mixed audio in Movies, voice levels should just sound like normal voices, while an explosion should output the same pressure as an explosion would do in real life, which basically is groundshaking. Disadvantage is you need high output levels to hear all the low presure sounds. This is why they came up with dynamic range COMPRESSION, so at low amplification levels you are still able to hear voices while explosions wont wake your neighbours.
LFS as it is now, is none of these at all, but is mostly like the compressed version to suit common soundsets and is a logical choice to go by. But, the main thing that desturbs me the most, is that most people who edit the sounds are making them louder and heavier compared to what they started with, while if you want to make it louder, just turn up the volume of your soundset and lower the volume of every other sound, and if you want to give it more low frequency pressure, just lower the mid/higher frequency sounds. Since almost every engine sound is already clipping on it's own, imagine what it sounds like with 20 of them on the startgrid. This can't be right, and THAT's why a BF1 sounds like it's destroying your ears, while it actually destroys your audio equipment. In this case, when sound clips, it can't make a nice sine-curve anymore, instead it reaches the output barrier of the integrated synthisizer and becomes flat at the top, often refered to as a square wave. This distorts the originally ment sound. To some this might sound like a heavy roaring sound which might even be noticed as sounding very 'cool'. Well, it isn't and you really want to avoid this by any means possible.
But anyway, i'm currently working an a full range soundset for LFS + CSR combined. This will take loads of time and since i'm mainly a FOX driver, that one will be finished first
while the rest will be leveled and tuned from there. The pack won't be very suitable for everyone and even people with high powered soundsets could experience something totally different and wrong. This is often the case with audio, it's all made at one place with it's own characteristics and accoustics. Which concludes it will sound best where it's been made. A shame really, but the pack will be placed online eventually so people can judge themselves.The biggest problem i encounter though, is that it seems the audio levels of LFS or CSR have just 8 bit's of precision, meaning just 256 levels. Extending audio levels to high range makes this noticable and you start to hear rough changes in amplitude while it should be a smooth curve. 16bits of precision will suffice though. It could be a CSR only related issue, which will force me to drop CSR, and that's a shame though bacause although it's digitally recorded sound, it allows for very cool layers of sound that could expand the synthisized sound of LFS in a way it totally blends together. This also keeps the most important dynamic feel of the synthisized sound which makes LFS more real then it's counterparts. Combined sound is the way to go from my standpoint, still hope an application like CSR will be integrated in the future, it also get's rid of the soundlag that way. ...Such a shame i can't program, allways need to depend on others to fulfill my dreams. Guess the only solution is to be able to do EVERYTHING myself. Maybe i will at one day
Enough talk now, back to business.
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
Proof
Left - Lots of drivers, all different style
Right - Only 4 AI driving the same line (about 12 laps)
Top 5 racers
1 - Live For Speed (Win)
2 - Motorhead (Win)
3 - Papyrus Nascar Racing 2 (DOS)
4 - Screamer 2 (DOS)
5 - Stunts (DOS)
I'll admit i really like Arcade style games, but i was totally shocked when i encountered LFS (far too late btw, about 2 years ago).
I never got anywhere good with a Sim game, the only sim i played lots was Nascar, and we played it just for fun, with 'we', i mean the same teammate [ACR]147-GTA i started the LFS-team 'ACR' with. But we were total shite at it, we managed not much more then 3 laps until we crashed somewhere but we laughed our asses off. Oh man that seems so long ago... Got my first wheel in the time of Screamer2, a Thrustmaster T2.
Now to my surprise I got very good at driving in LFS, the first game where i really thought the physics got anywhere realistic and i could handle all cars in no-time, never ever felt that before, i absolutely LOVE it. Tried all GTR, GTR2, GTL, GPL, rF, WTCC, netKar ... just don't like them at ALL.
But... I always liked the somewhat impossible unrealistic games, they give u something that's impossible in Real Life, i don't need realistic games for that matter, i adore fantasy, so my personal top 5 list of games would be more like this:
1 - LFS
2 - Any good RPG (Two Worlds atmo)
3 - Quake 2
4 - Doom
5 - Sierra Adventures
I grew up with Sierra adventures like Larry, Spacequest, Kingsquest etc. Still a bit weird that i could like those games so damn much at the age of 5 not even understanding a single word on screen, but i did because my dad gave me hints (guess he printed out the walkthrough). Also I started to make pencil drawings of ingame scenes, even more when the new 256 colour games came out. Wonderful time that was, i really felt in heaven when i think about it now :P
Guess i'm not really a simracer at all, but i knew every carbrand when i was very young and i had strong intentions to draw cars. I don't know where this all came from, i just love cars. The more futuristic the better though. That's why i liked arcadegames like 'MegaRace' very much at the time. All rendered scenes, weird looking cars, i think in the end it all has to do with the evolution of graphics, give me pixels anytime. How things are drawn with less pixels and less colours is just beautiful and imagination can fill up the lack of detail. Anyway... I could love ANY game if the concept is right, LFS is one of them and i adore any Trackmania too.
1 - Live For Speed (Win)
2 - Motorhead (Win)
3 - Papyrus Nascar Racing 2 (DOS)
4 - Screamer 2 (DOS)
5 - Stunts (DOS)
I'll admit i really like Arcade style games, but i was totally shocked when i encountered LFS (far too late btw, about 2 years ago).
I never got anywhere good with a Sim game, the only sim i played lots was Nascar, and we played it just for fun, with 'we', i mean the same teammate [ACR]147-GTA i started the LFS-team 'ACR' with. But we were total shite at it, we managed not much more then 3 laps until we crashed somewhere but we laughed our asses off. Oh man that seems so long ago... Got my first wheel in the time of Screamer2, a Thrustmaster T2.
Now to my surprise I got very good at driving in LFS, the first game where i really thought the physics got anywhere realistic and i could handle all cars in no-time, never ever felt that before, i absolutely LOVE it. Tried all GTR, GTR2, GTL, GPL, rF, WTCC, netKar ... just don't like them at ALL.
But... I always liked the somewhat impossible unrealistic games, they give u something that's impossible in Real Life, i don't need realistic games for that matter, i adore fantasy, so my personal top 5 list of games would be more like this:
1 - LFS
2 - Any good RPG (Two Worlds atmo)
3 - Quake 2
4 - Doom
5 - Sierra Adventures
I grew up with Sierra adventures like Larry, Spacequest, Kingsquest etc. Still a bit weird that i could like those games so damn much at the age of 5 not even understanding a single word on screen, but i did because my dad gave me hints (guess he printed out the walkthrough). Also I started to make pencil drawings of ingame scenes, even more when the new 256 colour games came out. Wonderful time that was, i really felt in heaven when i think about it now :P
Guess i'm not really a simracer at all, but i knew every carbrand when i was very young and i had strong intentions to draw cars. I don't know where this all came from, i just love cars. The more futuristic the better though. That's why i liked arcadegames like 'MegaRace' very much at the time. All rendered scenes, weird looking cars, i think in the end it all has to do with the evolution of graphics, give me pixels anytime. How things are drawn with less pixels and less colours is just beautiful and imagination can fill up the lack of detail. Anyway... I could love ANY game if the concept is right, LFS is one of them and i adore any Trackmania too.
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
OMG, amazing, i never noticed the racing groove changed over time and got any darker! I read the whole thread carefully and I'm astonished by the fact that the raceline is not hardcoded at all, or the fact that the raceline was hardly noticable at the first times i played LFS. I could kill myself for not noticing this, i'm far too much into details fot that :P
I never removed my game installation over time, only added lots of stuff and made duplicates, but that 'groove' information remained untouched. I's just a bit strange that when racing over 15000 laps on Aston Club with a FormulaXR (online at Redline, loads of players) the line is still not very dark at all. Could there be some possible explanation for this?
Oh and btw, why are people so scared of changing their LFS installation? You can easily make more copies of them since LFS is not an 'installation' integrated into the System's registry. The term 'installing LFS' is thereby impossible. Also people who lose all their game information on reinstalling the OS makes me *sigh* ,definately when they keep asking for setups over and over again because of their silly actions. Is it that much to ask to understand the basics of your filesystem? It's the least you should know when using a computer IMHO. (This came up when i read WIGGA's post, your reasons for not "re-installing" are hilarious)
@felplacerad
Tnx for giving the solution to the main question, at last
I never removed my game installation over time, only added lots of stuff and made duplicates, but that 'groove' information remained untouched. I's just a bit strange that when racing over 15000 laps on Aston Club with a FormulaXR (online at Redline, loads of players) the line is still not very dark at all. Could there be some possible explanation for this?
Oh and btw, why are people so scared of changing their LFS installation? You can easily make more copies of them since LFS is not an 'installation' integrated into the System's registry. The term 'installing LFS' is thereby impossible. Also people who lose all their game information on reinstalling the OS makes me *sigh* ,definately when they keep asking for setups over and over again because of their silly actions. Is it that much to ask to understand the basics of your filesystem? It's the least you should know when using a computer IMHO. (This came up when i read WIGGA's post, your reasons for not "re-installing" are hilarious)
@felplacerad
Tnx for giving the solution to the main question, at last
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
Great idea only the word 'mod' is not apropriate. I'm still against modding btw, because modding is all about extra content which can be downloaded as an expension to the current content. Servers having different 'mods' running is absolutely NOT gonna happen. Downloadeble cars, NOT gonna happen. I hate that idea, and i also think the dev's do.
We don't want to make 'modifications' to the game, we want to help making content and maybe even improve the current . This is what we do now, check the high-res tracks, skys and the better carsounds from DaveWS wich are actually implemented! I would suggest to implement all the highres textures too, but since they are not completely done yet i guess that's what holding them back. On the texture-memory front, it does not take that much extra.
This is a possible solution for all the creative freaks out there who want to help making this game. I won't care to make textures for free, i'd love to somehow work on a game which i enjoy so much. The work i would have made get's his place in my portfolio, which will be good for future presentation.
Lot's of people only think about 'mods' in the wrong way, they want to make a car-hopping game, LFS pinpall, and busdriving. Get real...
We just want to help the dev's, they need to come up with some houserules and participates need to get screened. Models and textures have to pass tests and the Dev's do with them whatever they want to. Seriously, some of us are really good at this stuff, devs can't ignore that. Please let us help a hand. We have to make progression on this front, it's going on for about ages already. We can't sit still waiting for LFS to get beaten one day. I care for this game... What's the problem with getting flooded with all kinds of content for a game and to check this box out full of potential stuff. Are they really so selfish they want to do EVERYTHING by themselves? They are mad!, and this game will stagnate at a certain moment because it get's to complicated to handle. They may not be business men, but this is not the right way... they need to look in to the future once more, what do they want in the end. It's not possible to do this by such a small team, it's as if they think they got all the time in the world to finish this game, that's not true.
We don't want to make 'modifications' to the game, we want to help making content and maybe even improve the current . This is what we do now, check the high-res tracks, skys and the better carsounds from DaveWS wich are actually implemented! I would suggest to implement all the highres textures too, but since they are not completely done yet i guess that's what holding them back. On the texture-memory front, it does not take that much extra.
This is a possible solution for all the creative freaks out there who want to help making this game. I won't care to make textures for free, i'd love to somehow work on a game which i enjoy so much. The work i would have made get's his place in my portfolio, which will be good for future presentation.
Lot's of people only think about 'mods' in the wrong way, they want to make a car-hopping game, LFS pinpall, and busdriving. Get real...
We just want to help the dev's, they need to come up with some houserules and participates need to get screened. Models and textures have to pass tests and the Dev's do with them whatever they want to. Seriously, some of us are really good at this stuff, devs can't ignore that. Please let us help a hand. We have to make progression on this front, it's going on for about ages already. We can't sit still waiting for LFS to get beaten one day. I care for this game... What's the problem with getting flooded with all kinds of content for a game and to check this box out full of potential stuff. Are they really so selfish they want to do EVERYTHING by themselves? They are mad!, and this game will stagnate at a certain moment because it get's to complicated to handle. They may not be business men, but this is not the right way... they need to look in to the future once more, what do they want in the end. It's not possible to do this by such a small team, it's as if they think they got all the time in the world to finish this game, that's not true.
Last edited by BruTaLysT, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG