Quote from sinbad :

So one second you're saying it's dead, the next you're saying that a release of content would revive interest.
Dead has to be dead. If a car or track release would increase the numbers playing, it's not dead any more than Gran Turismo was dead between 4 and 5.

If you're saying they will never release anything else, then okay, but however long it takes it is still only Scawen that can really make that statement.

Splitting hair much. If your logic defines 1 player playing the game, means it's not all over/dead for LFS and that helps you maintain the blind optimism, great.


GT is a perfect example of what to do in respect to maintaining interest in the franchise/series. They actually release concept/updated games between major releases to keep the community engaged/interested in the game. Something LFS has failed to do.


Personally I wish LFS could return to it's greatness, but it's not IMO. Personally I think the devs are blinded by the those that still buy into the blind optimism and are over represented on this forum. As attrition takes it's course on those that have lost faith in the devs/game and leave, the remaining reinforce each others belief everything is sweet and dandy.

The reality is that the kettle has been allowed to boil dry for too long and the kettles F'd. It's the end of an era for LFS. Hypothetical a release of some sort would revive it for the few still interested, but it would take a series of releases and concerted effort by the devs to restore confidence, in the games future.

Quote from Mountaindewzilla :

It certainly seems that way, doesn't it?
You've made some interesting and valid points.

I wanted to buy into blind optimism, but I have to read the writing on the wall and stop expecting anything.

Also, http://hitboxteam.com/dustforce-sales-figures

Interesting article. You'd probably expect similar sales pattern for LFS. Many parallels, but they also had the steam platform and the Humble bundle, which is a trade off. Cut on the sales for more exposure/marketing. I don't think LFS devs would subscribe to such a concept/model ever. They like to do everything independant.

Last edited by Macfox, Fri, 19 Apr 2013 02:11.

You do know is 2013 right? Classic fanboi lines from 08. LOL

That's pretty much the case now. Ignore the cruise server and competition servers, it pretty hard to find a race you can join casually. Especially outside the EU. People might snub the need to casual servers, but it's an important entry point to new players.

If they'd release a content pack (paid even) it would provide a much needed injection to revive the community.

Quote from CarlLefrancois :

you have a point.

do we agree that modelling the tire to 98% of reality is already accomplished and exists for a long time? I believe your statement about race teams is talking about getting that last bit of behaviour exactly like real life.

my point is that Scawen is trying to do something completely different. he also has a tire model that already works and is much better than what S2 offers today. the problem with that model is that it takes too long to give a calculation. maybe it takes a second instead of .01 seconds.

Scawen's challenge with the tire modelling -- I'm just assuming here -- is strictly about making an approximation to the more complicated calculation that is fast enough to finish in .01 seconds but doesn't give up as much precision as the current model.


btw since you didn't respond to my last question, I take it you agree . in my mind there is no doubt, he manages to accomplish his goal, you fire up Live For Speed S3 "just to see"

Scawen hasn't ever stated the exact issue, but I'd imagine they've formed their own or sourced a model and the implementation doesn't match RL due as additional considerations/factors/influences are required.

I think it does matter how long it takes as ultimately it's sales maintain development and probably motivation.

Quote from sinbad :

I still think you're missing something here though.
Let's say LFS is no more, and Scawen just says "I'm moving on to the next thing", and a year or two later he releases a racing game "Thrill Of Racing" or whatever, and it's brilliant. The sim community love it, everyone buys it, big online community. Great. Who here would say such a thing is impossible? Not me. We know what Scawen is capable of.
So now instead of it being called "Thrill of Racing", let's call it "Live for Speed S3". Do you really think it would be less likely to become popular?

The point is that only Scawen can decide when LFS has run its course. Until we hear that he has ceased development and intends to shut down the master server, nobody can say LFS is dead. As far as we know he is going to release an update and if not at that time, at a later time S3 with new content. When that happens the community will judge what he releases on its merits, although if we don't see a massive polarisation of opinions too I'll be flabbergasted. Rest assured, though, that if it's decent this "dead" game will become seriously popular again.

I don't share that sentiment. It's not a matter of capability or determination. It's a resource vs time issue. At some point a project outgrows it's resource requirements. IMO I think history shows us that passed a few years back.

Quote from TehKill3r :

Call a few proper simulators where you can configure as much as in LFS (or even more), and doesn't have a horrible force-feedback (referring to rFactor)

A game doesn't need flashy graphics to be good. I don't, on a low-regular base, still play the older Need for Speed games just for its graphics, I mean, back then, woo, awesome. Right now, still great, but its the gameplay that does the job in a game.

All sims have their short comings and LFS has it's fair share. It's not just slick gfx, but additional tracks and cars. It's easy to appreciate new cars should come after the tyre/physics update, but there's no reason tracks can't be developed/released in parallel. Users will wait for tyre physics, as any reasonable person can appreciate the difficulty of it. However the poorly understood/illogical decision to withhold other content, has ultimately killed off any chance LFS being popular again in the short to medium term.

Seriously WTF for? Users would pay for the extra content. More money in the devs pockets. Hard to see a downside, yet we continue down this endless path.

Quote from Mountaindewzilla :

I don't think that extrapolating from recent years is fair to Scawen and Eric. If you look at LFS's history, it becomes clear that Scawen is very capable, and can produce excellent stuff in a reasonable amount of time.
Eric's work is subject to the limitations of LFS. Would you want to publish your shiny new assets in an old looking game to make a bunch if ingrates happy for a couple of days?
I certainly wouldn't.

Scawen and Eric are professionals that can produce professional results. Whenever Scawen focuses on something achievable, he produces really good results.
As long as Scawen is working on stuff that enables Eric to produce and publish quality assets, LFS's "resurrection" is a matter of time.

I appreciate what you are trying to say, however what is on the records from the devs doesn't lend credibility to that.

There's been video/photo's of a few bits of new content, so clearly no barrier exist. Even if it did, would it make sense to release a bit bit of new content considering how long it been.

Scawen on numerous times dodged the question of why we haven't seen any new content. First it was waiting for physics updates, then after many questions why there hasn't been any other updates to content unrelated to Tyre physic, it was up to Eric. Historically Eric does read these forums and post rarely (usually unflattering), so it's very unlikely we'll ever get an answer, which is sad as it only creates more speculation and distaste about progress LFS, and very much undermines Scawen efforts.

IMO there's more to it.

Quote from Mountaindewzilla :

All it will take is a major release to turn it around.
If it's shiny, fun and new, people will build a community around it.
The assumption that people around here seem to make is that LFS won't be shiny or new enough to get anyone's attention. To that I say: maybe.

Current development doesn't lend any credibility to a major release shiny or not. The reality is the game now looks dated and does it a great disservice. It would take a massive undertaking to get the game to current levels needed to resurrect the game. That's a big "maybe". Seeing the easter bunny probably has better odds.

Quote from CarlLefrancois :

sorry just to clarify, this quote suggests racing teams and tyre manufacturers are investing in creating an algorithm for simulating how a tire responds under racing conditions... on a home computer. usable for publishing a video game.

did I read that right?

just theoretically assuming such a model can be made, and surpasses the current LFS model as much as it does the previous iteration... does it really, really matter how long it takes to make?

Obviously twisting the context. The point is modelling and understanding the dynamics of tyre behaviour is the difficult part. That's largely a scientific/engineering/testing/data collection challenge and I doubt it's openly available given the massive cost. Implementing a known model in software is a challenge, but much less so.

Quote from CodeLyoko1 :

might be a tiny infraction that is still around, but it's still not dead

I guess by that definition, it's like saying Margaret Thatcher could rise from the grave.

Quote from sinbad :

Anybody that ever liked LFS would still be very interested in whatever Scawen releases in the future, regardless of how long ago they actually stopped playing LFS. So whilst it's in a period of development hibernation (from an end user point of view), as a title it's far from dead.
In fact, how could you call a title dead, when they're still selling licenses and the developers would immediately make a lot more money just from releasing 4 or 5 cars and 3 track environments with an S3 badge attached? They could do that, lots of people would buy, even without tyre improvements. Maybe not as many as a few years ago, but still a lot.
I agree with you that its peak is long ago, and they never took advantage of their dominance of the niche, before rfactor, nkpro , iracing etc were even twinkles in their respective devs' eyes, but it's not dead.

Yes very true, but they've chosen not too and sacrificed the community.

Couple of reason I think why LFS is unlike to bounce back.

• Years of missed opportunity to release content to simulate the game.
  
• The trend of development speed doesn't lend any credibility to further stages.
  
• There are numerous other games that didn't exist leading up to 06. LFS now has a lot more competition.
  
• Once bitten twice shy. Community buy into the game isn't going to be the same.
  
• Average online racers are trending down. Even worse if you cut out the cruise servers.
  
• Physics aren't visual and the cosmetics don't do the game justice. Looking at it from a fresh pair of eyes, it looks very dated (circa 2003) and it's hard to appreciate the games mechanics, that are (IMO) well ahead of it time. It will take a massive overhaul of the games cosmetic side to get current. At the current rate of content release, it doubtful that's on the cards.
  

Quote from Intrepid :

I think some of you morons get some 'enjoyment' out of saying the same old 'LFS is dead... tired old horse'. You only do it to make yourself feel better because you haven't achieved anywhere near as much as Scawan and co and want to revel in their demise (well imagined demise)

LFS can take 5 years or 10 years for all I care. Still an amazing sim. Formula Xr online still provides some of the best racing you'll find anywhere.

Good for you. The point being made was about being realistic about the state LFS.

It's a matter of perspective. Those that have been around long enough know. It's hard for newcomers to appreciate / experience what LFS was at it's peak. What you see now was only a tiny fraction of what it was. A flogged tired horse. The days of a great community and excitement/hype are long gone, along with those that promoted it and help build the community. The devs let the game stagnate for way too long and they stopped listening to the "whiny" community. It was inevitable and a great loss to indie development philosophy.

Last edited by Macfox, Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:06.

Hate to burst you bubble. But it has already. The high point of LFS's popularity was before you joined the forum (06). The game for most part been stagnant longer than it's last major update. Development still continues, but it's just maintenance.

No disrespect to Scawen, but his goal to redevelop the tyre physics was a massive undertaking. I don't think it was obvious to him and the community at the time, who were largely blinded by the rising success of the game and it's physics achievements thus far. It's quite obvious now the task is beyond his resources and ability to develop in the necessary time frame, with respect to the millions of dollars and 1000 of hours have been spent by racing teams and tyre manufactures world wide doing the same thing. It's quite possible he will get there, given his past achievements, but sadly it will be too late to matter.

More time could have been bought, had there been content released to fill the gap, but nothing ever eventuated. Reasons for not doing over the years have largely remain the same, despite lacking less and less credibility as time passes waiting for the tyre physics to be finished.

If you like LFS and are still playing, accept that this is pretty much it. If you are looking for something better, then look at long list of alternatives (many inspired by LFS) and have active development and growing communities.

Yes admittedly I was using 3 screens and a bigger one probably would have improved it. But I'm still of the opinion that moving your head to move the pov isn't intuitive. It's great for flight sims where dog fights require 360 view, but close racing it takes too much to get used too.

Had a trackIR with the DoF addon and it was a big handicap in LFS. Concept seems good, but in practice it was horrible IMO. Moving you head, but then looking at fixed point was disorientating and unnatural.

The OR shouldn't have these issues, as long at the tracking doesn't shift over time.

Quote from Flame CZE :

Also, from the 0.6E news article:

I didn't read too much in to that. I can't see how a delay in content was related to the hack/updates. AFAIK, the updates included no new content.

Last edited by Macfox, Fri, 7 Dec 2012 03:05.

Quote from IsaacPrice :

I think most people can see understanding a tyre is something that can take a long time to sort out, F1 teams struggle with that. The thing which doesnt make sense is the lack of content because that makes you guys money, which in turn means you can spend more on LFS development. I'm not an expert but surely you're the one doing the physics, which leaves the rest of the team to do that side of things? I don't know if you've answered it before, because its not like I read every page of questions

This isn't "begging" for content or wanting to know when we're going to get some content or whatever. I can see why you dont want to commit to that, but knowing why the only proper content we have had is open configs in recent history doesn't make much sense for anyone? Is there some obvious reason I can't see?

That's the million dollar question my friend. 2-3 years ago players were screaming for content then and it didn't occur to the team to develop other content to release in the mid term as a contingency. Especially in light of the setbacks and difficulties in the physics. 4 years ago, S2 content was already getting a bit stale, most likely prompting the VW/ROC announcement. Yet here we are now, still asking this very question?

The issue that is most baffling is there has been mixed/conflicting representations over the years to why this is the case. From , we're sticking to the plan, it's Eric's decision, to dependence on the physics updates. Who knows what the story is. All we know is the games reputation and following is looking terminal, with no real fix in sight.

Quote from Scawen :

I'm not sure if you read a post I made in September.

This is about what I have been working on :
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1742781#post1742781

Maybe you'll believe what I say, maybe not. Though what other motives and hidden agendas I might have, I can't imagine.

Thank you for taking the time to read this thread, though it must pain you to see the negativity. Admittedly I had not seen that post, but I do endeavor to catch up on your posts every few months or so.

I'm not suggesting yourself, Eric or Victor have agendas and deliberately taken this path, but there comes a time where one should reconsider what has conspired and do what needs to be done to reinvigorate LFS.

Quote from Scawen :

Quite separately from that, on the content side, we will not announce any new tracks or cars. If we mentioned something we were working on, then changed plans later and did not release it, we would be punished for decades to come.

Really? As apposed to the current situation?

Plenty would argue the time has past for announcements, it's time to seriously consider releasing some new content after 4 years. I hate to be negative, but unless there is other unannounced content with S3 or following shortly, increased interest/activity will (IMO) not be sustained and that will be disappointing to see your significant efforts less appreciated, than they definitely deserve.

You guys have the hard facts in front of you and no doubt aware of the obvious decline in activity (racing). From our side looking at just the server list is disturbing.

I know this appeal may not mean much, but please for the sake of LFS future, change course, give the community the content it's screaming for 4+ years. You'll be praised, not punished for giving LFS a much need injection of life.

Quote from Greboth :

Ofcourse it is about patience, I agree that the game does become stagnant with things staying the same however everything else you mention is basically summed up by people wanting updates (even if smaller ones) more regularly - how can that not be taken as people don't have the patience to wait for a bigger update?

As I said I agree about the stagnation if things stay the same but then when you consider that:
- We are spoilt really as a forum that we do have as much direct contact with the devs as we do. I am sure you will disagree with this but just compare to other game developers of indie games nevermind mainstream ones.
- You bought the game and since then have received updates and new content. I agree not much but it was still free, we don't have a right to demand more content.
- We are simply players of a game, the customer. You can argue as much as you like about good business practice, dwindling player numbers etc. they know this and maybe the devs read the comments and don't reply or simply don't read them but, like above, we don't have right to be answered.
- Smaller content updates often instead of bigger ones sporadically? Again not our game, not our choice.

I suppose it comes down to that you have expressed your opinion on how the devs should of been working and how they should proceed. It is your opinion though, personally I would rather wait 4 years (maybe 5, 6 etc.) for a big physics update (and anything else we don't know about) instead of some smaller updates that might add content but don't actually improve the game.

You make some great points and sure this my personal PoV. Others have their experience and take on it too.

The issues about free updates moved on long ago. Players will pay for content. Players want to put money behind the game to support it. They want full servers again.

What it boils down to is honest frank communication and it's reasonable to expect that. This whole dangling the carrot fiasco only breeding scepticism. We might not have the right to demand updates or plans, but when representation are made to the community/players, dodging fair questions, being vague or loose with the facts is counter productive.

Patience is gullibility without honesty and trust. That's the real problem LFS faces now and into the future.

Last edited by Macfox, Wed, 5 Dec 2012 02:46. Reason : Spelling

Quote from NotAnIllusion :

You sound butthurt.

No quite the contrary. Humoured by the irrelevance of the post and how you made it about yourself.

Quote from Greboth :

Has no one got any patience anymore?

Really? It's not about patience, rather being honest and open. There are many who have waited and wait and heard the various reasons, PoV, explanations and speculation over the lack of content. It really is beyond a joke and as I said a couple of years ago, the devs show a lot of contempt for the community. About 2 years ago there was significant unrest in the forum after several members pointed out the growing divide between the devs and players. IMO it stemmed from a moderation spree by Eric and to his credit Scawen did respond to try to stem the unrest in the forum, but he failed to answer any questions around the content situation. Instead choosing to conveniently say, that's Eric department and nothing more. Since then not much has changed. A few bored hackers have prompted a patch to the multi-playing code, but still no word on content.

To put things into perspective. It took approximately 6 years to develop the vast majority of current content and in that same time we've seen a few screen shots/videos of 1 car and a track. What many forget (those around long enough) is the stagnation began well before the VW/ROC announcement. At the time there were many calls for smaller content releases, but these went unanswered as has happened so many time since.

The only thing to change is the number of players online "racing", heading south. And the devs seem to be content on letting that continue, ignorant of the implications it will have on S3 sales and the future popularity of the game (development funding).

Quote from NotAnIllusion :

There's nothing to swallow. It was unfortunate (and fortunate) that the VWS/ROC delay happened, but I don't feel let down, cheated, mislead or lied to. Does this mean can't be part of the community because I don't fit in to some pointless generalisation?

Wooosh....:tit:

Being frank about the content situation is essential if LFS is to have any success in the future.

LFS players have now gone 4 years without any content updates and suffered this steadfast refusal release/develop any intimidatory content. The ignorance and/or stubbornness that continues to cause the community to loose faith in the game is astounding and it begs belief that something is seriously wrong between the developers. Spending 1000's of hours making a game for the enjoyment of players, only to then disappoint them and have them give up on LFS, just doesn't add up. What the situation is, we can only speculate.

What is certain is, the games audience has lost a lot of faith and it's gone on so long, that it's hard to imagine a S3 release resurrecting LFS popularity in any meaningful way. The faith lost with the community will not be regained with a simple single milestone release, that much is obvious. The post S2 releases have only generated peaks in activity that have faded away after a few weeks. What many fail to understand is LFS's popularity is intrinsically linked to community engagement and evolution of the game. The game was at it's pinnacle when it had regular releases and content updates. The community thrived and developed addons and enhancements and ran a huge number of wildly popular highly competitions.

It will take years to restore this, probably more than it ever took originally. LFS now has more credible competition, older players have moved on and the newer generation are more interested in cruising / drifting.

If they do decide to swallow their pride and be frank now, then at least some faith can be restored and hopefully realistic expectations and enthusiasm will prevail.

Quote from Flotch :

I still wait too ... and physics update too ...

I can admit that some screenshots/vids of S3 could interest me if by chance Eric would like to share any in these Christmas days ... agood reason to stay close to the forum ...

I put money on seeing Santa 1st.

Quote from Forbin :

.004W was released in August 2002, IIRC. It was the first demo release of LFS. Of course, RSC was also around before then.

From what I found on a quick search .004K (18.08.2002) was the first public version that was played widely. It's been a while since we've seen that level of enthusiasm in a thread.

http://www.west-racing.com/for ... ;f=1&t=958&st=125

Being frank about why there hasn't been any content up dates, would restore a lot of faith in LFS.

Scawen has skirted around it several times, but there's not been a real explanation that would satisfy the majority IMO. Eric rarely posts, so there's little to be positive about new info coming from that avenue.

It will be great once the tyre physics get released and I'm sure they'll get there at some stage, but this whole can't release content until, just looks worse as time goes on. It's strangling LFS and it will get a to a point where there will be to much expectation. The community aren't going to wait another 4 years for a track and car, that's for sure.

It's time to be frank. Kick the monkey off their back. They'll get far more credit and loyalty in the long run and no doubt a weight off their shoulders.