We get a lot of unpleasant posters, scammers, spammers and trolls. More than you probably realise! And we've had to deal with racism, sexism, homophobia and so on. It's a pity that we have to deal with that, when all we are doing is working on a form of entertainment for people to have fun.
Anyway, our job as moderators is to keep this forum a place where you can have civilised discussions. Somewhere that people can come to talk about Live for Speed (and other things, a bit). The unmoderated places on the internet are not really a good place to be.
We try to be consistent, obviously it's not always possible. But the guy who got banned yesterday and couldn't make a post without insulting someone, has 11 accounts. You can probably understand what this means. It's a troll. So we remove that account. Simple as that. Like The-Great who posted above, with one of his 5 accounts. He used to be a good guy but gradually over the years has become nothing more than a troll.
If you want to know if you are a troll or not, try asking yourself this question: "Do I have multiple user accounts on a single site?". If the answer is yes, then most probably you are a troll.
I'm just going to take you at face value here in case you really don't understand.
The guy who got banned, it's not because he said something like "cracking isn't really all that bad". It's because, in his first post, he accused me of 'power tripping' and being 'retarded'. And that was using one of the several multiple accounts he has created (another sign of a troll).
I'm guessing it's someone from the USA by the choice of insult words in this and subsequent posts. I'm not certain how it is in the USA but over here in England, it's not considered to be polite, reasoned and acceptable speech to use the word 'retarded' really in any context.
It's obviously not power tripping to ban someone who advertises the use of a fake master server. So please, turbotron, if you are a thinking person, take a moment to consider what you are saying.
Any by the way I'm in no need of a holiday, thanks! Work is going well and I'm having a good time doing it. Having fun here in the snow though yesterday and today.
This is an insulting way of talking. We have many people here who have a different opinion from me or other developers but they can state their opinions in a civilised way.
This account of yours was banned because of your insulting and aggressive way of talking.
If you can't see how your posting style is aggressive, rude and unpleasant, you have a lot to learn and you need to become socially adjusted. You would get beaten up if you spoke this way in real life but you think it's OK to talk this way on the internet.
It's rude and unpleasant posting that gets people banned, not disagreeing with the developers.
It's just one of these aggressive fools who have many accounts to try and hide their identity, because they want to insult people instead of talking nicely. I think it shows some personal feelings of inadequacy. It's a pity because the person seems not entirely stupid, and people could listen if it talked reasonably. But it wants to insult other people, I guess it feels it has been insulted through its life so wants to take it out on others.
Eric does want to update the interiors. It's obviously important. It's not as high a priority as finishing the tracks, because they don't have any particular problems with shadows.
The existing tracks have issues with the new shadow system because some geometry needs to be rebuilt to cast shadows correctly. Basically if they can be viewed properly from above then the shadows cast properly. But some tracks are so old there are buildings without a roof, and single sided geometry that looks wrong in the new system. There's also the new lighting system and the tracks can be improved to take advantage of that, e.g. shine on surfaces.
That means we can't release the new graphics until all the tracks are updated. The cars don't have this problem so they aren't as high priority. It's not a matter of opinion, it's just logic.
We have been working on graphics for some time now. A new lighting system allows more varied and realistic surface properties and we have a new shadow system. All tracks must be updated to take advantage of the new features.
This month we have taken some screenshots at the Autocross track, featuring the large car park, skid pad and drag strip. In the open configuration you can now drive between all areas using connecting roads and there is an extended car park beside the original Autocross area.
The trouble is, you don't yet know the solutions or the correct way of working with the modified editor. Several very experienced layout editing people gave a lot of feedback during the development process. So all the points you mention have already been solved.
For the above point, you need to know the difference between O and CTRL+V.
O: Place a new object - it is not now selected.
CTRL+V (paste): Place a new object and keep it selected.
You can transition (toggle) between the above states by pressing CTRL+C (copy)
This is very useful because there is now a clear separation between the PGUP / PGDN keys either operating on the objects that have already been placed, or the objects in hand that have not yet been placed. Instead of both at the same time as it was in the old editor. Now you have the choice. It was very messy before, even if you got used to it.
Costa, I would really like to ban you from the master server. But in that case you would be forced to stay on the cracked version. That's not what we want. It would be good if you could put your efforts into making sure people leave the cracked version and get onto the proper version, so we can continue to develop Live for Speed.
Or maybe you don't want it to be developed any more, and you just want us to go and get another job?
If I see another report of you advertising on our genuine servers, I'll remove your access to LFS services.
The main problem is latency rather than bandwidth. In other words, the problem is the time delay between the server and the guest computers, not the frequency of the position packets.
Of course, we can't solve this latency problem by increasing bandwidth. In some cases the latency can be made worse by increasing bandwidth.
Each time a packet arrives on your computer, LFS runs that car through the physics system from the time it was sent, to the time it arrived, to try to predict where the car is now. It is always a bit wrong, of course, or sometimes a lot, depending on how long the delay was and how many driver input changes have been taking place.
Increasing the number of packets per second increases your CPU load (which can result in lower frame rates and worse latency - imagine this at T1 of a race) but will not get the cars into better positions than they already are, because that error is due to latency rather than bandwidth.
I think when you and other drivers are connected with good connections to a server with low latency, the other cars are not jumping around all over the place. Is that true? The problems begin when you or someone else has a laggy, high latency connection to the server. That problem wouldn't be helped by increased packets per second. In that case the lagging remote car would just flick more frequently into more of the wrong positions.
An interesting point on that is that although a correct calculation was used (in the current public version) the output effect is not fully realistic because the rendering is not done in a linear colour space. As the new graphics uses gamma correct rendering, the rendering takes place in a linear colour space, and is gamma corrected at the final output. Reflections come out brighter in the new correct version.
It seems to me he wants to keep telling people they are stupid for hanging around here, while he continues to hang around himself. He is telling people to accept reality, while using a fake account to post.
Why don't you use your real account too? Do you have something to hide?
It's always a danger if I actually tell people what I have been working on. So frequently it is some internal improvements, highly technical things that the average person has no concept of, or belief that's what coding could be about. We are just dealing with drawing pixels on a screen and vibrating your speakers, all with numbers. There is no car, no track, just triangles and code. People often cannot understand how vast the system is or how much time it takes to make improvements.
Anyway, I know that some people are interested in such seemingly small improvements, but was well aware of the 'danger' of people being unable to understand why I would work on them. Quite a few people now are using 4K screens and there were obvious flaws in the text rendering when drawing at larger screen sizes. So to someone like me, when I saw it that way, it comes across as a 'bug' or something that definitely needs improvement. Not a bad thing in any way to spend a week or two on those improvements, along with a massive graphical overhaul that has been taking place for years.
Technical explanation: For some characters, the Windows function GetCharWidth32W returns a width that is different from the width of the text drawn by DrawTextW, which is what I call to draw a single unicode character for a cache texture. I don't know why there is a width discrepancy but I've changed it to get the width by calling DrawTextW with the DT_CALCRECT option instead of GetCharWidth32W. It makes some sense because I'm now getting the width from the same function that is used to draw the text. This seems to work fine. Wide characters are still truncated on the right because these characters are copied into fixed size slots for efficiency as unicode characters need to appear and disappear on the cache textures and the slots are re-used. This is made a lot easier by all characters using the same size slot.
I am considering 4K displays now and the updated fonts do look better in 4K than they did before. They are generated using slightly higher resolution and more accurately. I don't have my own 4K display but I can use a special 4K screenshot mode so I can check how it looks by zooming in using a separate program.
I can reproduce this in Windows 7, which will be helpful for debugging.
The problem varies between fonts. MS PGothic doesn't seem to show the problem much but SimSun-ExtB does. That seemed the same here in a quick test in Windows 7 and Windows 10.
I would expect it to cut off characters that are too wide but don't know why it doesn't deal with narrow characters properly, so I'll have a look in the debugger.
They do use a common text drawing function but I changed the way that function was called. Now there is a standard text aspect ratio (which can be overwritten in some rare cases) instead of each caller deciding that for itself. So all the function calls needed to be adjusted and in some cases it was messed up where non-standard widths were used and had to be done a different way now.
It was already used in the Aston screenshots. The main change compared with the old system is that it can now deal with transparent objects properly. There will be a slight darkening near fences which the old system ignores. Of course in reality a fence does reduce the influence of sky lighting a bit. On the other hand the old system drew trees as the entire polygons without transparency, so in that case the sky was too occluded near trees. The hardware-based render takes account of transparency and includes all relevant objects so the brightness should be correct now.
Maybe you could remind me of this in a test patch stage, as I'd rather avoid looking at InSim for now.
Numbers have not been included in any of the kerning classes. And it was some years ago the '1' character had some invisible points added to make it the same width as the other characters.