Quote from AMB :

And how many work on NFS compared to LFS?

BOOM OWNED.

/thread

So? Yeah, it's hell great argument. You know what is the biggest problem? After earning cash on S1 and S2, developers of LFS should use it to employ some other developers into their team. Instead, contact with them gets worse and worse (remember S1 times?), people who even complain about very slow development of Live for Speed are treated... not very well, and so on.

Yes, Scawen & rest can always make next updated named as "Final" and stop working on project - but come on people, we all know how it "seemed" to be progessing when we bought our licences, and how it is now. And developers don't see any problem.

I'm not LFS fanatic, I have my own private life but i have to say that unfortunatly the sim doesn't seem to have a long future. They just didn't invested on it - it's quite obvius, that one programmer can't make that all things as fast, as 30 people teams can do.

Sorry for my english. Peace.

Quote from jrs_4500 :

Maybe the cars handle more realistically, but that's the only thing it has going for it.

That is what kills racing games for me ... LFS feel very realistic, in the force feedback, the way each car handles, other games fail to impress me like that, That's why i play only play LFS, and don't play any others.

Quote from jrs_4500 :

The next patch has been put off until further notice due to lack of testing.

This isn't correct either. Many bugs were found with the test patches (look at test patch forum). Since those bugs, there hasn't been anything to test.

LFS is very fun game because we have aswesome community and no other game dont have even similar community like ours.And just imagine NFS was creating by hundreds maybye even thousands peoples nad LFS is beeing created by 3 people also i like LFS that you can play it for year 2 three or more but you sitll like it

My 3D teacher at school, who used to work for Atari, recently said that he calculated that for one person to make a modern game it would take something like 85 years (he calculated from everyone at Atari involved in the production of the game being worked on at the time).

That LFS is at the stage it is at now, with 3 people working on it (you could probably discount Vic as he seems to be more of a web guy) - is impressive to say the least.

Quote from Electrik Kar :

(you could probably discount Vic as he seems to be more of a web guy)

For a couple of reasons, not least because I'm more of "a web guy" myself, I'm irresistibly drawn to comment.

Vic is a massive part of the LFS project. Vic's contribution, although massive, probably happens mostly in parallel with the linear delivery of LFS patches. But LFS as it is today is as much to do with Vic's LFSWorld as it is Scawen's physics or Eric's modeling.

Never underestimate the value of the "web guy"

Your back already Sam, good on you

It's Wednesday!

On Wednesdays I always take the afternoon off, no matter what work I'm doing. I get ordered out of my room when the cleaner turns up. No room, no computer.. no computer, no workies.. no workies, go take photos or (if it's peeing down, like today), find another PC and go surfing

I don't really get you guys. Yes, it's impressive that only 3 people (one programist) did such realistic and playable sim. But we want to play it, it's not work of art, wich we only want to look at. What's f***n diffrence for us, if LFS is made by 3 people, 100 people, or maybe half of a dog. If the team is enough big to make noticeable progress, then it's ok. But now it's quite obvious, that it isn't big enough for nowdays. So why don't they employ other people to their team, instead of writing about new haouses etc. and closing topics full of true words, with not even saying 'sorry'.

It's very funny to read conversations on this forum:

A: LFS is a nice game, but it's getting older and older and i don't see noticeable progress...
B: Shout up! Don't you understand that LFS is made by only 3 people?!?!?!?!??! Can u imagine it?!?!?!??! Go and buy it right now!!!! Only 3 people!!!! So what, that graphics isn't good enough? I repeat, only 3 people!!!!!! If u don't want to buy it then f*** of** !!!!111111

Quote from Kuba_m :

I don't really get you guys. Yes, it's impressive that only 3 people (one programist) did such realistic and playable sim. But we want to play it, it's not work of art, wich we only want to look at. What's f***n diffrence for us, if LFS is made by 3 people, 100 people, or maybe half of a dog. If the team is enough big to make noticeable progress, then it's ok. But now it's quite obvious, that it isn't big enough for nowdays. So why don't they employ other people to their team, instead of writing about new haouses etc. and closing topics full of true words, with not even saying 'sorry'.

6 years and 24 measly pounds later and that's your attitude???

Yes, because i like LFS very much and i would really don't want this project to crash.

LFS is what LFS is. The development process/progress is what it is. If it suits you and you enjoy playing LFS, weehee/yahoo/etc. If not, you are not in a trap.. there are other games to play, or other pastimes to pursue (like I enjoy photography etc), and LFS will still be here when you come back.

LFS is not going to crash. The project is still strong and it's still selling licences. And with good reason, too.. despite the fact that development isn't blisteringly fast, the product is fantastic, even when directly compared with other and newer products at many times the net cost of LFS. I don't know any iRacing fans that regard the £24 they paid for LFS as being anything short of fantastic value for money.

I don't see the big deal. You know when the patch comes, it will have the VWS and it will be stable, and there will be tons of online racing to enjoy.. it's all good.

Sorry Sam, I didn't mean for it to come across like that. I don't know what Vic is up to apart from the online stuff, which of course is an incredibly important part of what LFS is. I just assumed for the sake of strengthening my point that Vic doesn't have much to do with the production of the actual game. I don't really believe that myself (Vic seems quite a multi talented guy), although it makes sense to me that Scawen and Eric do most of that work.

Kuba_m

Your point is well understood by a lot of players here, but the fact is that the devs themselves feel they have a good working team. There are no deadlines for LFS and therefore the idea that it is falling behind is pretty much irrelevent. Scawen and the others don't need to say 'sorry' for anything because they've never promised anything. All they are doing is providing a game, that's currently in the stage of development that it's in.

hehe! Don't worry about me! I know what you mean, and I agree.. the LFSW side of things is unlikely to ever be one of the things that will hold up the release of a patch. In that sense, LFSW happens in parallel and Vic's side of things is probably less relevent to the application's development "sharp end" - the bit we find ourselves waiting for, a new patch.

My guess is that Vic's part in the physical LFS application code is probably minimal or even non-existent, although I'd be surprised if he had no input in it. He'll probably request features (bytes in packets etc) from Scawen and Scawen will deliver, and all we will ever see is the result of that interaction in seamless LFSW integration. It's all speculation, of course. I really have no clue at all, but in my mind's eye this is how it prolly is.

To be honest, I think LFS looks pretty damn good, even by modern day 'standards'.

At least it keeps a grip on reality, instead of the exaggerated neon colour blur fest that the NFS series is...

Quote from SamH :

It's Wednesday!

On Wednesdays I always take the afternoon off, no matter what work I'm doing. I get ordered out of my room when the cleaner turns up. No room, no computer.. no computer, no workies.. no workies, go take photos or (if it's peeing down, like today), find another PC and go surfing

That's a very cute dog you have there.

Quote from SilverArrows77 :

I tend to agree with you there, i quite like the fact that LFS's visuals arent over exaggerated. I also think that visually the tracks are quite hard to beat (they certainly leave rFactor wanting, but lets not go there...) A few more faces on one or two of the cars would be nice, but for most part even the cars still look quite beautifully modelled. And to think how efficent they are in game, with pc resources etc, is amazing i think. And remembering it all fits into around a 133mb(?) download, compared to others with similar amount of content that are nearer to 1gb as an initial download.

Exactly my thoughts, sir. Well said.

Well i am a proud owner of live for speed and i think the creators of this sim are all genius but the problem is that they can't really keep up anymore i think. They should really consider to expand their team big time or invest in new technology to compete against other racesims.
I have played for example iracing and there is just no comparison to be honoust, iracing is so much better when it's about physics and immersion.
I still prefer the online system of lfs 2 tho and its also alot cheaper but for obvious reasons.
I think that's basically the problem, even the formule 1 2009 codemasters wich will maybe be more arcade tho will use the laser scanned technique. And believe me that makes a huge difference. You literally feel the track way more.
So yeah i think to stay alive in the future they should really think about expanding in technology or expertise.

(srry for my broken english)

I personally think that we would have an at least 70% drop on complainings about next patches if the "alpha" tag of LFS was removed.

People are complaining that they paid for S2 and it is still alpha, but as far as I remember, we have the following point:

What we pay is content (cars and tracks), and the stages (S1, S2, S3 and so on) are just about content (at least it was the original purpose, and it was clear on LFS website on the old days; today things looks a bit more mixed). Those who paid for S2 content have full access for it, and even got more content than anounced first (Formula BMW, and Scirocco when it's launched).

So, technically, we received (even more) what we paid for, and we can't complain for additional content.

The LFS core (physics, graphics, multiplayer systems and etc) is "free". Although nothing in real life is for free, and the licences pays for the core development also indirectly, the core part is what everyone have access without paying for, and is not directly linked with the stages.

The LFS core is on it's second stage of development, and the core is on an alpha stage. And to be fair, Scawen's standards for a final product is way higher than most software houses', because I personally think that, it may be called a finished product the way it is today although some features originally planned are not fully implemented.


So, although I still think that LFS needs improvements and new features, the arguments saying "we didn't get what we paid for" are not valid.

Quote from oldnavy :

LFS is very fun game because we have aswesome community and no other game dont have even similar community like ours.And just imagine NFS was creating by hundreds maybye even thousands peoples nad LFS is beeing created by 3 people also i like LFS that you can play it for year 2 three or more but you sitll like it

i agree as i was thinking there maybe not many servers or people online in LFS but the community is great as everyone knows everybody almost and we all have fun and you never get that in EA forums or something. I almost don't want more people becuase the community will go down a bit but i do want more people so there more to race with.

Quote from swisscosmo :

i agree as i was thinking there maybe not many servers or people online in LFS but the community is great as everyone knows everybody almost and we all have fun and you never get that in EA forums or something. I almost don't want more people becuase the community will go down a bit but i do want more people so there more to race with.

I'm new to the community, and I love how much help I've gotten from everyone. I'll do what I can not to bring it down. I plan on being here for a long time. I have an S2 but I'm only driving the FX to get to know this sim from all sides. Look for me online, I'm the slow one. (for now)

Yasko

Quote from Yasko :

I'm new to the community, and I love how much help I've gotten from everyone. I'll do what I can not to bring it down. I plan on being here for a long time. I have an S2 but I'm only driving the FX to get to know this sim from all sides. Look for me online, I'm the slow one. (for now)

Yasko

Welcome to the Community and Welcome to LFS

Quote from Mogar :

I personally think that we would have an at least 70% drop on complainings about next patches if the "alpha" tag of LFS was removed.

People are complaining that they paid for S2 and it is still alpha, but as far as I remember, we have the following point:

What we pay is content (cars and tracks), and the stages (S1, S2, S3 and so on) are just about content (at least it was the original purpose, and it was clear on LFS website on the old days; today things looks a bit more mixed). Those who paid for S2 content have full access for it, and even got more content than anounced first (Formula BMW, and Scirocco when it's launched).

So, technically, we received (even more) what we paid for, and we can't complain for additional content.

The LFS core (physics, graphics, multiplayer systems and etc) is "free". Although nothing in real life is for free, and the licences pays for the core development also indirectly, the core part is what everyone have access without paying for, and is not directly linked with the stages.

The LFS core is on it's second stage of development, and the core is on an alpha stage. And to be fair, Scawen's standards for a final product is way higher than most software houses', because I personally think that, it may be called a finished product the way it is today although some features originally planned are not fully implemented.


So, although I still think that LFS needs improvements and new features, the arguments saying "we didn't get what we paid for" are not valid.

Sums up everything really well... I agree with this person!

i would really pay a extra 20-30$ to have a stock car and a couple more oval tracks.. but

Quote from mutt107 :

i would really pay a extra 20-30$ to have a stock car and a couple more oval tracks.. but

:rolleyes: