Quote from Fordman :

[..]
The three files in your zip file are the two DX files and a enbconvertor.ini file, there is no config file.

This is normal, the config file is created upon first launch.
Otherwise, I am kinda out of ideas.. are you able to find an old graphics card and plug-it into your computer, just to try connecting one of your monitors elsewhere ?

Quote from Fordman :

Here is my Config file for SoftTH
[..]
2nd screen doesn't work, only on main monitor

If you delete this config, put the 3 files I've sent you on the LFS folder, does it ask you to auto-create a config file the first time you launch it ?
If it does, it is a problem of config file.
If it doesn't, it is a problem of dx converter.

Also, make sure anti-aliasing is disabled form the graphic card's driver.
And last (just to be sure ), not all the views in LFS are rendered on multiple screens (cockpit is, of course).

Fordman,

Have a look here https://www.lfsforum.net/showt ... hp?p=1756487#post1756487.
SoftTH works very good with LFS, and in a lot of screen configurations.

@shimon:
Yes, I know it's quite difficult unfortunately to insert some cracks into the road without visible patterns. But I was not talking about the road itself. I am refering to road markings (the paint, is too white, too clean - look at the start checker for example). Also the side banners they are too clean. Why am I insisting on this: the LFS's graphic engine is not very up-to-date so you have no real shadows, or light variations on the objects and this makes it look blunt when too clean. The only solution is to "bake" these variations into the textures themselves. Now as of today we have some advantage on this point compared with the time Eric has made the original stuff. The memory limits are way more generous for us..

For the second part: I also know the problem with texture stretching on the circuit. I personally use reference maps (like http://www.duber.cz/dump/uv_map_reference.jpg this one) to help me understand what comes where. For the ROAD file, look carefully; you should be able to use different scale/stretch on the two halves of the file in order to obtain some uniformity. I have done this on some Aston road I have tried and the result was not so bad.

Good luck and keep it up

PS: if you wish to share texture files, of course I would be happy to have them. As we all know they are never enough .

The work itself is very good. The asphalt texture is ok, but the problem (imho) is with the road markings and side banners. They are too sharp, too clean, like they have just been painted. And on LFS's graphic engine this gives a slightly gamey/cartoonish/unrealistic look.
They have to look like part of the whole, like the track is weared out by time and races. So some dirt, scratches, and other imperfections are welcomed.

Side question: no intention of being disrespectful of your work, but are these textures created by you ? adapted from what you can find on the net ? from other games ? Kind of remind me of Lynce's work.

Anyway, good effort. Thank you

Will an update on client side be necessary also ? Or it is transparent for the player ? Thanks.

I quite liked rF2 feeling, and the FFB feeling. And this considering that in my book, I find LFS the absolute standard. Only AC could surpass both..but still.. rF2's not that bad, on the contrary

Anyways,
this T5 is for rF1 or rF2 ?

Indeed.

Don't own an OR (yet..), but I'll say thanks anyways. It's nice to see people still putting passion into LFS. Great stuff

For those interested, rFactor 2, build 240 has a Demo. That means anyone can try..

An interesting doc available at isiforums, about tyre modelling in rF2 (I suppose it is meant to give modders an idea..). Who knows who else could take a look at a (maybe) different approach. Good ideas can come from strange places

http://isiforums.net/f/attachm ... ntid=959&d=1328039718

I find Deko's post reasonable (opposed to other free-provocative ones), and I personally choose to position my self on the "happy with the services" user side.
In my case the support worked as claimed, meaning that I could get in touch with an admin within a resonable window of time, even outside "usual working hours". Giving the fact that we are not speaking about a "big business/corporation model" I would choose their services for my game server hosting over a more known solution/provider. If nothing for the flexibility they offer, and the willing to have a good start overall.

So, to resume, in my case all good 'till now.

A satisfied customer.

DISCLAIMER: I don't personally know any of you, and I don't wish to start an arguments war, but I think it's not really fair to simply discredit a good intention without a very strong reason. LFS hosting world is getting smaller anyways, unfortunately, no need to be rude between us..

This sounds almost unreal. Sad indeed

Hi Victor,

We have just rented a new server to use for our league races.
Could you please copy the CSS file from the old to the new one, so the host status information gets a nice integration into our site ?

OLD server: ! RLR - Racing League Romania
NEW server: Racing League Romania

Thank you,
Lucian

LE: NVM, seems that using the same code, works already.

Last edited by luchian, Sat, 25 May 2013 17:40. Reason : Me being dumb.

Quote from Flame CZE :

It’s from this thread from 2008. [..]

Didn't know about this. Would make a nice update indeed.

Thanks.

Quote from Scawen :

[..]By the way, your LFS can convert raw files into dds files. I don't think many people know this technique. If you delete the dds file and you put a raw file of the same name (but .raw instead of .dds) in the pic folder, then LFS will create the dds file for you.

That may be confusing so I'll describe it a different way :

you want a new version of a texture named xxx.dds
save xxx.raw in the pic folder
delete xxx.dds
run LFS - it will create a new file xxx.dds from xxx.raw[..]

Anyone knows if this still works in 0.6E ? And if yes, how ?
I have tried saving .raw from Photoshop ==> Resulting file wasn't auto-converted to dds, and in game I got the "unable to load x.dds file" error
I have tried saving .raw from Irfanview ==> Resulting file wasn't auto-converted to dds, and in game I got the "unable to load x.dds file" error

Thanks.

"For the record" (it has been clarified meanwhile via PM), I was asking about an existing "demo" server that I could connect to, in order to see how it "moves" (lag/ping mainly).

Greeteings,

Any demo service available ? We'll need to renew our service soon, so we have a look around also.

Thanks.

Same here in the last few days.
Now seems to be fine though.

LE: sorry, only now I have seen THIS. Sad

Last edited by luchian, Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:09.

Quote from Matrixi :

Some new stuff.

GTX 680 SLI -> Titan
Cosmos II -> 600T SE White
NH-D14 -> H100i

How's the jump from Noctua to H100i, noise wise ?
Does it worth it ? Quieter ? Noisier ? Same ?

Thanks.

PS: I love the clean looks of your build

Quote from Hahmo :

Jesus ****ing christ Ray just shut the hell up already on these forums as you clearly have no ****ing clue about anything that's being discussed.

Quote from seniecka :

Sorry, but are you seriously that stupid or just acting?[..]

Quote from Dennis93 :

You are so ****ing stupid man....

Quote from Dennis93 :

[..]You could say ; Well I'm going to stfu until I've seen the final Demo because obviously I'm too ****ing thick in the face to understand anything about everything[..]

I don't know any of you, neither Bmxtwins; I also don't know what history might exist between you, but would be nice not to see direct insults like these, on the forum.. even if we are in Off-topic section.
He made a statement you don't agree, or that seems uninformed. Ok, plenty of arguments for that alone, no need to go overboard.

Just giving you an idea of how it looks from the "outside".
I'm actually surprised that no mod reacted to this by now.. or is it allowed here and I'm the one uninformed ?

Back OT, it's really a pity to vote against AC on steam just to keep it away.. One would think that everybody understood by now that competition is GOOD for the end-user.. aka US.

My two cents.

Great post, Doctor

To all those still hesitating: go for it ! It looks good, it feels great, it is great !

And I judge ALL sims out there by comparing them to LFS, the "ultimate" standard. At least until now..
This is really the FIRST real competitor for LFS in my books. (I have tried iRacing, I am regularly following the progress on pCARS, just to name the current under-development sims). If AC net-code will have the similar quality LFS does, I'm thinking this will put serious problems even for the S3, when it comes out (please don't start a war on this, it is my right to believe ).

PS: Didn't try rF2 yet..

Quote from Whiskey :

Luchian, I tested those values, I feel a slight improvement, but it is still way too far from what I expect to be a correct FFB. I'm talking with a friend and he also sais that the feedback is very poor.

May it be the car setup that is too soft or something?

It might also be a matter of perception maybe.. I personally like the FFB more life-like type, meaning no added effects to compensate the fact that you don't really sit in the car..
However, you should be able to feel very well the vibration when riding kerbs..