We don't know who it is although we were contacted by someone who claimed to know the attacker and be able to control them. They know they can't get anything from us so really it's just for the fun of it. It seems to me they just want to stop other people doing what they want to do and I suppose they think it's funny that they can do that. There's nothing else to be gained so that's the only explanation. It's probably best not to give them the attention they crave.
If the DDOS attacker has a problem with one segment of the LFS community, could they please discuss it with the people involved, and not take it out on the entire LFS community? We have a discussion forum to help. You can often solve a problem by talking about it.
I have moved this thread to the programmer section and I have deleted the 3 duplicates.
I doubt that you will be able to convert a program if you don't know how to code InSim or Java. I think you should try to read up on them if you are interested, otherwise you are really just asking other people to do it for you.
I don't expect we will do that until nearer the time when we have some idea of when it will be ready. Otherwise we will be heavily attacked for hype and it will not be fun at all. I know that most people don't do this but some do and then there is bad feeling and it all gets ugly and demoralising. At the moment we are working very hard and that is the main thing.
EDIT: If you'd like to imagine what it looks like, it's the same LFS but with better lighting, shadows and nice subtle shine effects and updated textures on the roads and many other surfaces. Eric can now add specular effects and he is making good use of that.
I am still working on graphics code (mainly optimisations at the moment) and need to get onto the tyre physics code and then the packet encryption. Eric still has more tracks to update. So it's still quite some time yet.
Here is a function to check user names for validity in LFS. It is based on the restrictions applied by the website but modified to allow some characters that were previously allowed. Note that there must be be a terminating zero in the user_name passed to this function and it can only have up to 23 characters plus the terminating zero.
Yes, because the indirect lighting has "amount of sky visible" and "artificial light colour" stored separately. So the sky colour / brightness can be varied and the ambient lighting can vary in real time.
I have tried to design it to be able to handle changing lighting (day / night transition) although that is complicated and seems lower priority than the physics updates and a lot of other things I need to do and finish, so I don't know when that will appear.
Yes, inside the cars too, cars do cast shadows on themselves.
Yes, there is also a component of ambient lighting contribution from light reflected on nearby objects.
The ambient vertex lighting consists of: sky light, artificial light, light from nearby objects.
I use D3DSAMP_SRGBTEXTURE so we can use standard sRGB textures without needing to convert them in the pixel shader. Then all the processing internally is linear and finally the output is converted to sRGB using D3DRS_SRGBWRITEENABLE.
Yes there is still an offline render for the ambient lighting, but now it is a single offline ambient render shared between all lighting configurations. For anyone who doesn't know what I am talking about, this is the thing mainly concerned with sky lighting, so for example you can have two different places that are not lit by the sun, but one of them might be a lot darker than another because the sky is obscured.
See in the attached images, the first two have all direct (sun) lighting switched off. The first one is simply default ambient lighting without the offline render. The second one has the offline ambient render applied. Finally the realtime direct lighting and shadows are applied in the third image.
NOTE: This is the original South City track with the old textures and no specular lighting added. This is simply a plain conversion of the old South City into the new system and Eric hasn't had a go at it yet.
At the time, I believed the new tyre physics was about to be released and had done a significant amount of work in the new version. It was difficult to avoid clashes in the code because of the number of changes so I deleted the old code out, thinking it was finished other than any emergency patches.
If I had known at the time I would be going for over a decade with two versions, I would have taken a different approach.
Well, since you ask about the physics, I might as well say, although I am very well aware and should point out that plans may change.
I'm really working as hard as I can on the graphics but taking care not to go into mental fatigue. The reason is that Eric should have the best version to work with, so his work looks the same as it will end up.
To explain what I mean... for example, right now he doesn't have the new shadow code because really it needs to look right in the track editor, and the old shadows have disappeared at this point. But currently the shadows only work in game because it uses a special draw mode. So I need to make that draw mode work in the track editor. So there's the work for the week, as each time he moves an object it needs to update the object on the GPU so the shadows can appear.
What point am I making... well every graphical change has lead to repercussions, other things that should be updated to make the most of the new stuff. It's quite exciting and that's why I've been very motivated to do a lot of work recently.
Anyway, as some of you know, due to a separation in the code when the new tyre physics was to be released may years ago, there are two separate versions of LFS, the development version with the new tyre physics and the public version with the old tyre physics. The trouble is that updates (to graphics, interface, etc.) in each version need to be merged into the other version. It has been like a chain around my neck attached to an iron ball and one that I want to get rid of. At the moment there are just so many changes for the new graphics, it would be a bit of a nightmare to try and merge that into the public version. The only way to avoid that tedious merge now is to get the physics complete to a point where it is good enough to release. So the development version can be finally released to you and LFS will be back to a single version again.
So my intention is to keep on this graphics stuff as much as Eric needs right now, then get that physics suitable for release while he is finishing the remaining tracks.
That's how I see it right now, it's an exciting thought that LFS development could be kind of back on track again and that's why I am hoping to be able to do. But in reality as we have seen, there are sometimes unforeseen things that come up and change the plans. I hope it will all go as planned!
Hi, thanks for the support in this thread and your patience.
I confirm this is a full time job for Eric and me. There were some quiet years due to life changes but I can tell you we are really on the case now.
In the past year I have made a lot of updates to the graphical systems and there is much better support for different types of specular reflection including the shine on the road. The shaders are completely rewritten and structured better now as over the past few years I have got to grips with shaders (that was first stimulated by the VR support).
The lighting system is now done in a "gamma correct" way, i.e. processed linearly within the graphics system and only converted to sRGB at the output. Gamma correct rendering is an interesting subject if you are interested in that kind of thing and want to read up about it.
The specular reflections don't just appear automatically. Eric must visit each track and do an update to take full advantage of the new shaders. He is working hard updating the existing tracks and the results are very nice.
I've also recently been working on a new shadow system based on cascaded shadow maps.
So you should see a much better looking Live for Speed within a reasonable time frame. I won't speculate on how long it will be but Eric and I still have quite a few things to do, so don't hold your breath!
But I don't know any more than that. I guess it depends how complete the Steam VR support is through Trinus. Can it run all OpenVR games that run on a Vive? If so then LFS should work, but I really don't know what snags there may be.
I'd be interested to know though as so far I've only heard of LFS running with full VR support on Rift and Vive.
I will lock the thread now as you suggest now that the license giveaway is finished.
We are continuing to develop Live for Speed and are working hard on a graphical update at the moment. As always, everyone who has a license and also demo racers will benefit from the updates, on whichever content is accessible by their license.
We can't comment on when things will be ready but we obviously want it to be ready as soon as possible. There is quite a bit to be done by Eric to take advantage of the recent graphical updates and plenty more for me to continue working on. So we are working hard on that.
For a while, licenses were not available at BRCruse but now they are again, which can be useful as local payment methods are available for Brazilian people. http://lfsbrasil.com/loja/en/
As stated many times recently, I am interested in making it harder for crackers to crack LFS. But there isn't really much point releasing the same current version with new crack protection, as the old one is still around. So crackers could say:
"Ah, I can have this version or that version of Live for Speed, which are exactly the same except one is easier to crack and one is harder... hmm, hmm, oh what a dilemma, hmm... what a difficult decision, hmm... what will I do?"
I think you get my point. What we need is a new and updated LFS that people do want to have, that also comes with better crack protection. Better not give up all actual development right now in order to work on crack protection. Eric will be able to use the new graphical tools that I am currently developing, while I get on with some crack protection, packet encryption and so on.
EDIT: No more points to be made here. Thread closed.
Skinzinho, I think these continual sarcastic comments create an unpleasant atmosphere without bringing any benefit. As you have made the same point over and over again, there isn't any need to say the same thing again. Please could you stop it?
Reason : Asked you too many times, stop repeating the same stuff, swearing and being generally unpleasant.
It looks like you think we are sitting here with a release, ready to go, that we are holding back just to annoy you.
You believe you know so much better than us how to make a racing simulator. If it's so incredibly easy to do, why don't you go and do one yourself? Maybe you can do it during your three month break from the LFS forum?
I don't agree. Everyone else will appear to lag, as seen on your computer, if there is a long time delay between the server and your computer.
Your PC's time clock should become synchronised quite well with the server. Then if there is half a second delay between the packets being sent from the server and arriving at your PC then the cars will seem to lag a bit every frame before they are updated to where your computer thinks they should be.
The delay could be due to simply distance from the server, but could be made worse by poor connections. Specially if packets start being dropped...
The solution, in these times of lesser online activity, must be to try and arrange for some people in your own time zone to get online and have a race, on a server in your time zone.