That looks great. But I think there already is Blackwood for rFactor. Correct me if I'm wrong.
[OLD] Tyre Physics Progress Report
(4434 posts, closed, started )
it is not converted, but simply an attempt to copy, is not very successful, rplli crossover version
Altough Scawen got 4000 posts, I can't find his latest post anywhere.
Maybe on a hidden section, where they are preparing the new test patch for next Friday?
Maybe on a hidden section, where they are preparing the new test patch for next Friday?
next Friday
I hope that Friday did'nt Fry
Next friday!? NO WAY! :O I thought it's going to be released tomorrow :O.
NEC
Even though Scawen would have over 9000, it would not change anything. I am pretty sure, he will inform something right here, when there is something to report. He have said this many times, other people have said this many times, I will say this 2nd time.
But @ rockclan
"they are preparing the new test patch for next Friday?"
Only god knows, I would like to see new test patch, but I am pretty sure, we will not have, or we have, but only beta testers.
BTW Why people says that LFS is dead, but you guys are still here asking and asking and whining and whining and whatever else about patch. I am pretty sure LFS is not dead.(Or actually, read my sig.)
We will have new patch, we will have VWS, we will have new physics, we will have Rockingham track environment, we will have something other good stuff, we will be happy... can't you see it, or are you just spiritually blind?
Let's stop this asking for at least 1 day, let's go to play LFS! If you do not play, play something else, or go out for living your life. Or maybe you would like to ask tonight your gf/bf. Or you can watch some football on tv.
Whatever you ask about anything which is meant on this thread, it will not help you but instead of that, you probably waste your minute or two from your life. As what I am writing this post. I just have anything else to do tonight, so I gladly write my post and have a good life.
LFS update is serious business
. Unfortunately, with that business, you win nothing but sad smile to your face.you are a homosexual.
just play LFS then nvm those whining what's going on LFS 
Hey hey heeey :icon23:
The car is decent I guess.. But it's a FWD car with 200 bhp
It's not bad, but it's not a car where you say I WANT IT.
Scawen never said that Rockingham is comming in the next patch. Threre is no single word about Roc in last progress report. Also:
So if Rockingham is going to be released in next patch it would mean that we will also get a new car, but since it's a "plan" it's not that sure.
http://www.lfsforum.net/infraction.php?do=view&p=1447823
Infraction = post.
Oh well, there is always post 5,000!
There is no excuse for 'the track part' because none is needed.
The next patch is (we hope) going to introduce improvements and bug fixes to various parts of the physics.
It would be crazy to release anything without testing thoroughly with the new physics. Any new track will need to be tested, and existing track will also need to be tested and probably tweaked and updated to fix issues introduced by the new physics.
It is also likely that some changes will need to be made to tracks as part of fixing the 'cars into orbit' collision problems.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if the format for track data is changed for the new version, possibly in ways that mean a lot of work for Eric in fixing up existing tracks. Why would the devs build new tracks to work with an old system that they expected to be obsolete? Unfortunately, the physics updates have taken longer than expected due - as explained by Scawen.
Of course, the simplest (and still completely valid) reason is that they don't want to release a new major update (new content) without much needed updates in the physics engine. Without the excitement and media coverage that is generated by new better physics, a new content update will not maximize it's sales potential. The physics updates have taken much longer than expected. That's all there is to it.
Seems to me that you just don't have a deep enough understanding of the development process to see how many possible valid reasons there could be for these delays.
Really? Shock horror....
We are really lucky to have someone here who does know...
I did ask my gf to go outside tonight =/ And i still had time to write here!
And will Scirocco come on a patch or a S3 License? Will there be a S3 license?
True that, I have no developer background, only personal opinions and other projects I compare with.
With all fairness, codes, physics and generally work with LFS is a never ending project, there is allways something that can be smoothened out here and there, and there is allways a code that could need a change. Beliving a patch could appear over night is at best - a very stupid though.
But, if we take away critism / positiv(ism?) and look on facts, and how things work. If you have one developer that refines and develop tracks, you know it will take time since making track is a lot of work. We also do know the developers don't work the usually 37.5hours each week.
But let's say this, if a developer work mere 1 hour each day, and it's 4 years since last track. That means the developer had over 1400 work hours. Again, I don't know much, but I do know that updating SO and BL possible canot take more time than 1400+ hours.
The statement over is rubbish, and not a valid point, but I feel an urge to make questions about the actually "STUFF" inside LFS. Updating the old material is good and all that, but BL and SO is still BL and SO, and after 4 years without anything new on the track front... well hey
I could start rambling BS about a certain rallypack and all that, but I think I perfectly can say this:
Chose what you want to belive of the statements below:
1: The developers (-Scawen) are lazy
2: The project have stopped
3: They work with some enormous difficoult work tools, since it takes 4 years to produce a new track (Rockinham, and it will be around 5 years when that is released).
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to start a whining campain, and I am very much pleased with the money spent on LFS. But we must be allowed to ask
- Eric, what have you done the last 4 years? Scawen open his mouth every now and then, tells us some information. The only information we have got from you is that basically we can go jump a cliff, LFS is done when it's done. As a supporter and fan of the game, I really want information about what has been done the last 4 years, and what you have in mind. I don't want "secret stuff we work on", I want teasers, pictures, sneak-peak text or something else. I / we don't demand much, just a honest answer, instead of misleading "we work on secret stuff" answers, or answers that asks us to go jump a cliff, to say it very nice.
i read that post, and i thought about pming him to prevent any of that, i failed lfs Dx
Nope. When we give an infraction, it sends a PM. This is separate to post count.
Hidden for normal users yes, but sadly nothing patch related. I can see all the forum here so the beta testing discussion must happen elsewhere.
From what I've heard, that was only ever an idea, no work ever started on it. This is why it was only ever mentioned once. The devs have had no doubt had many other ideas and tested other things out. I think if they talked about everything they thought about or toyed with, people would just be far more disappointed by the progress that does happen.
bob, if you have the whole forum visible, then can you tell us where his 4000'th post was? or were you saying it must have been in where the beta testers talk?
It was in the moderator forum. That's the only hidden area. It's really not very interesting. If you must know, the post was letting us (the other mods) know he'd given that infraction, and his reason(s).
well bob.. would u be kind enough to give us some secret info next time scawen give u mods a little info about next patch.. 
would light up the whole community i bet..
would light up the whole community i bet..@The Very End
+1
+1
Ok, since you are talking about 'facts'
How do you *know* how many hours the devs do or don't work?
How do you *know* how many hours it takes to update tracks?
How do you *know* what the devs have been working on that is not yet public?
Where do your get you 'facts' from?
hmmm...
three posibilities as I see it:
1. You are a close friend of one or more of the devs who tells you these facts knowing that you will spill them on the forum.
2. you are a telepath
3. you have a magic ass from which you regularly pull 'facts' which you then use as the basis of your arguments.
cheers
Col
I probably agree to col but the facts that finding is already been reasonably delayed or just a ghost preview
I can't believe that so many of you are still bitching and crying about this game and it's slow progress. It's a god dam small development team, they have created an amazing product that rivals any other software of its time for functionality (Circa 2008) and it still has an active community.
It was bound to happen that the rate of development would slow down to point where we no longer see the advancement for ages at a time and other products would start to catch and surpass it, but if you just want fun pickup races with fairly realistic physics then you still have that. If you want something more then go get it and quit polluting this forum and community by moving on.
LFS is still the best product on the market for what it is. If that is not what you want, then shove the (fill in color metaphor of your choice here) off.
It was bound to happen that the rate of development would slow down to point where we no longer see the advancement for ages at a time and other products would start to catch and surpass it, but if you just want fun pickup races with fairly realistic physics then you still have that. If you want something more then go get it and quit polluting this forum and community by moving on.
LFS is still the best product on the market for what it is. If that is not what you want, then shove the (fill in color metaphor of your choice here) off.
This thread is closed
[OLD] Tyre Physics Progress Report
(4434 posts, closed, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG