Any developer around here? I expected this bug to be flagged as important right away. We are talking about ruining whole races for many people.
When I post a bug report I'd like to get some kind of feedback. Did you even see this thead?
And what about this other bug report? https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/88504-AntiAliasing-missing-while-lossing-connection
I don't ask for special treatment, I trully believe that any bug report that makes sense should have a dev answer as simple as "we'll look into it" or "not on the priority list, but noted for future fix".
When I post a bug report I'd like to get some kind of feedback. Did you even see this thead?
And what about this other bug report? https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/88504-AntiAliasing-missing-while-lossing-connection
I don't ask for special treatment, I trully believe that any bug report that makes sense should have a dev answer as simple as "we'll look into it" or "not on the priority list, but noted for future fix".
You don't have a clue of how internet works, right? (No ofence intended)
LFS can't protect anyone from a DDoS, not even themselves. All you can do is hire a company that protects you, buy the adecuate hardware and not leak your IP address if possible.
All LFS could do is not conecting you directly to the dedicated server, using a proxy throught the master server, but that would increase the latency hugely, so it is not that useful to make it work this way.
LFS can't protect anyone from a DDoS, not even themselves. All you can do is hire a company that protects you, buy the adecuate hardware and not leak your IP address if possible.
All LFS could do is not conecting you directly to the dedicated server, using a proxy throught the master server, but that would increase the latency hugely, so it is not that useful to make it work this way.
It does generate lift, but as it is agnostic of the shape, the result is way off of the expected value.
Qualifying laps not counting!
We just had a race at Aston Club (AS2), with the layout attached.
Default splits and finish line, but with a starting grid and starting positions for 40 drivers.
This track allows 32 cars on track/boxes, so we added the remaining 8 slots behind the boxes building.
The problem is:
People that started in those added slots was never able to end their first lap.
They crearly cross the finish line and all splits. They exit the boxes as all other drivers did.
We hope Scawen sees this in time to fix it before the upcoming patch, as our whole 2016 season is designed to have 40 slots grid in most races.
Default splits and finish line, but with a starting grid and starting positions for 40 drivers.
This track allows 32 cars on track/boxes, so we added the remaining 8 slots behind the boxes building.
The problem is:
People that started in those added slots was never able to end their first lap.
They crearly cross the finish line and all splits. They exit the boxes as all other drivers did.
We hope Scawen sees this in time to fix it before the upcoming patch, as our whole 2016 season is designed to have 40 slots grid in most races.
It's been 2 years since I watched this video, but IIRC it answers exactly all the questions you are asking
It explains why plane games were done before car games, and why Grand Prix Legends chose that era to simulate instead of more actual cars.
It explains why plane games were done before car games, and why Grand Prix Legends chose that era to simulate instead of more actual cars.
Thank you. IMO driving without g foces is an awful experience in every game. I've always liked best the driver view over some kind of magic camera based on the horizon but this is a matter of taste.
I was so pleased when someone told me how to disable it in Assetto Corsa, and I miss a lot the look ahead (steering turning the camera a bit) in most games, though I don't care much about it if missing.
I was so pleased when someone told me how to disable it in Assetto Corsa, and I miss a lot the look ahead (steering turning the camera a bit) in most games, though I don't care much about it if missing.
Press 4 if you don't know the circuit yet.
Do you guys remember that this track was what caused Scawen's quest in search of a better physics equation? He already did these test and saw that it did not match.
It would improve a lot if you didn't fixed the camera to the car... Letting the camera move with G forces is what gives you the inmersion.
I know some people like the horizont based view, but if I see a comparison video I want it to be real, not biased.
New reflections in both sims the same week.
"1080p resolution at 60 FPS"
http://store.steampowered.com/app/353380/?snr=1_5_1100__1100
VR needs 90+ fps at huge resolution. Technology isn't there yet as I said.
VR needs the minimum input/output lag possible. They tried to do it a year ago and technology wasn't there yet. I wouldn't expect it before the second version of theses things.
Not really a bug.
MPR files don't store the physics, just car positions, so the game can only count the KM when you are playing the game displaying the cars, hence calculating the physics.
SPR on the other hand do store the physics, so the game knows how many KM that car has done.
MPR files don't store the physics, just car positions, so the game can only count the KM when you are playing the game displaying the cars, hence calculating the physics.
SPR on the other hand do store the physics, so the game knows how many KM that car has done.
I'm not gonna fall in your tricks to start another endless useless posts.
But when someone is told over and over that he is not right and he is not able to get that fact, maybe there is some true in that statement...
That is what Scawen is telling you. You were not having a rational conversation. And it is very disturbing to see the forum flooded with nonsense and biased opinions, huge wall of texts posted again and again by the same people.
I don't see how he is a troll. He is the only one making sense in this argument.
The Vive is expected to be better on the specsheet, but as far as I know there are no CV1 official spec for either of the devices. The prices are still unknown, and laserzs!!1! aren't inherently better than a IR camera.
If anyone don't like VR it's fine, don't follow this thread.
If you prefer one over the other it's fine. At this point we are just speculating. Until the release of both devices (and probably after a few software updates) we can only state our personal opinion.
Does Scawen has to update LFS to support this technology? ABSOLUTELY YES. Maybe it is niche, but it is the future. Some people already see this reality, others will do in a few years. Maybe in CV3, after the technology is mature and the prices affordable for everyone, but everybody is gonna love VR.
https://www.lfs.net/account/details
Those are 2 separate fields for a reason. Don't think it allow them to be the same, but even if it did you should use different passwordss anyway.
If you are in the test patch thread, the least you can do is read the changelog, don't you think?
/autokick X :no / kick / ban / spec (wrong way drivers)The easiest way is just use this command in your server. No need for InSim.
It sends keypresses. Easy to do if you know any .Net programing language.
Yes. In fact there is an application called LFS Strobe that does exactly that. Though it is very old and may not work anymore or maybe there is a better application nowadays.
No, InSim is limited to a very limited set of sounds (new chat message, error, etc.) and can not use any user defined file to play on player computer.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG