Well if the devs really was concerned, they would comment........................wouldn't they?
This is their last comment in 2011;
Eric has been working on the S3 content. After the physics update and the VW Scirocco are released as a free update for all S1 and S2 license holders, we will work towards the S3 version which will provide more tracks and cars to S3 license holders. As usual for an upgrade, the cost of your existing license will be deducted from the full price.
We wish you a happy 2012, and we'll release the updates as soon as we can!
They probably figured out that in the long run, it will only generate negativity when they are open about additional content they plan on adding to the old S2 license for free. I don't blame them for that. Because we got everything we've paid for, which is the S2 released back in 2005.
the people self told me they only use 240 or 360 rotation.
back to topic...
I play over 10 "sims" and 100 acarde racing games in th last 10 years and i am more interessted on lfs as before. Nothing realy nothing can compare with LFS thats the reason why the people crying about slow progress.
But good things need time. Its better to get big updates (S1-S2-S3) as every week a small little tiny "search me" patch
Better for the sale, but this point dont interest the crying people. THEY only wont wont wont more more more.
In 10 years has LFS become familiar, and i hope they earn enough money, i love this Product and i like the DEVS and his Philosophy, they are an exception on this software market.
Rockingham have the LFS/Rockingham set up at their race track for various corporate customers to use. My best bet is it's a commercial product the developers created for Rockingham similar to the F BMW for Fortex/V1. I personally can not see the business case for LFS paying Rockingham for a laser scan considering their previous investments in circuits. This seems an unlikely option, and if you wanna bet money, pleas, name your price.
I know one thing that is 100% fact. Scawan and crew are better developers than you, or anyone else on this forum could ever dream of being.
Like most normal human beings I recognise that spending £24 on a product that more than delivers on value back doesn't give me the right to dictate about something I have no idea about. What experience do you have in simulator development to call them lousy? If you were in a position to say that, you wouldn't be wasting your time on this forum in the first place.
Internet trolls have such an absurd addiction to negativity and assuming that (despite getting substantial value from a modest cost) they know best. The customer is NOT always right!
Scawan and co couldn't be more clear about how they approach development, and really don't see why there's still so much bs from you guys.
Some people complain, some people make things better. Which one are you?
It's a free world and the knowledge to accomplish anything is within grasp for everyone around here. So why not spend all that energy on proving something; simply make a better sim than current LFS? I'd be happy to buy your product too.
The misconception about how the market works is obviously very widespread in this thread. If LFS is broken and does not work, you can file a complaint and claim/hope for a refund. However, LFS still works, so you cannot expect the product provider to devote one single jiffy at silly demands and comments.
Hey, I'd like to see progress and continuation too, don't get me wrong, but what is really the best possible way for us, the users, to help carry the development forward: a) complain?, b) inspire?
Hopefully Scawen will have the patience and interest to stick with us, the gaming community, and not go completely into industry and its huge sim-market business.
As you seem fairly misinformed about what we do, here's a summary :
-LFS is not a normal business. We are 3 people who went away from normal business to do things our way.
-We don't have deadlines. Things are finished when they are finished.
-This indeed leads to long development processes some times. This wasn't always the case - you should've been here in the earlier years ago when there was a stream of updates every year.
-But now LFS has developed and matured a lot - it has many many features that people asked for and honestly aside from modding, what is there you cannot do with LFS now? I'm just saying Scawen has worked his nuts off to accomodate everyone. (still feel like we owe you anything? What more does 24GBP buy you these days? Honestly?)
-Now we want to take LFS to the next level by upgrading the physics. I guarantee you, you have no idea of how difficult this is. Give everyone a giant CPU and GPU and sure it's fairly easy to develop a super accurate racing sim. But you know, it doesn't work like that. LFS needs to run on slower machines as well. So shortcuts to better physics need to be found, without producing weird side effects. You go and try that. I wish you all the luck in the world.
-Now the question remains, couldn't we have released the scirocco and rockingham anyway? I guess that was possible. In hindsight at least. If we would have known it would take so long in advance .. but we didn't. There still would have been a big delay in new releases then though, while physics were worked on, so the question remains : what would people be asking for now, if sci and rock where already released 4 years ago.
There is no use in releasing them sooner now though, because Scawen IS working on the new physics and him taking a break to work on releasing new content will only delay the physics .. again. That stuff needs to be done. It needs to get out of the way. Scawen needs to be able to tick that off his list. Then that incredibly difficult part of LFS development is done and "simple" stuff can be worked on again. We can't wait to get on with regular development. There are still so many things we want to do!
I might be being bold here and presumptious, but one of LFS's major selling points is its amazing ability to run on low-spec computers. Many a time has LFS come to the rescue when I have installed sims on people's computers.
Now, you may think it's business sense to basically narrow your customer base so much you might go out-of-business, but I don't think Scavier are that ... in your words.... 'dumb'.
The resolution got bigger too. 1024x768 is 1920x1080 now. Thats 2.5x screens.
I agree people need bigger systems, I still see a lot of people trying to play LFS with old hardware... But even with new.. You still have to learn how to write multi threaded CPU applications, use the special instruction sets some CPUs have ... Etcetc.
Thats not learned in a day and like Intrepid says in his brilliant post.... Try do it all by yourself and then come back when you have that experience. Progress is not always being made by hiring more people, it can even work counterproductive.
And.. I have the impression that even if everybody has new machines it still stays a challenge.
Not wanting to probe LFS's business model (but regrettably will just to prove a point), but the fact it runs on lower spec PCs has probably meant its very survival. Only a few gamer geeks concern themselves with upgrading their PCs every month.
Just because you are in to PC gaming doesn't mean the rest of the world is. There are thousands of people out there who only tech is iPod/iPads/Laptops. Desktops are a thing of the past, quite a few people just don't have them
Driving simulation games are only now really coming into fashion, mainly due to places like iZone & F1 teams utilising them as real tools for driving and development. But guess what? Now everyone has a super-duper desktop to take advantage. Most laptops are 300-400 bargain jobs and not many sims other than LFS work on a bargain laptop.
Purely from personal experience, most of my recommendations to drivers is to try LFS because I know 99 times out of a 100 it will work on their system. I can't say that for any other simulator. it's clearly a market that has been very lucrative and worthwhile for the developers as they see the numbers, and they can continue developing in that direction. I for one think it's FANTASTIC they concern themselves with a large proportion of the market that doesn't bother itself with Desktop Gamer Weekly.
Not every new simmer lives in this bubble of GB and TB and RAM blah blah.
So no, it isn't 'tough shit' for people wthout mega PCs. What complete and utter nonsense.
Is there any news about the tyre physics? Any video demonstrations? I personally do not see the need to wait to release S3 content seeing as the tyre physics will be for all stages of S1, would you care to elaborate on the current development of S3 content. Teasers would be nice.
No. The development is really not that interesting for most people. It's just maths, maths and more maths. Very dry. It's not like there are fancy graphics used or so. And a video would just show scawen banging his head into the desk trying to figure things out. (ok that might be fun to watch)
Yes YOU can build a 4gb/3zsjs/ram.dhewjd,jpg.exe computer, but quite a large chunk of people don't give a shit. MOST people just have a laptop which they use for work and maybe an iPhone or iPad. Their old PC might still be stuck in the attic.
I've spent many years working with drivers and I am telling you now, it is only in the past couple of years that simulators have become credible. However in that time period what has decreased in popularity is desktop computers. So not everyone has up-to-date desktops.
Now, I don't know the numbers exactly, but purely from my own anecdotal evidence, I can assure you LFS working on lower-spec is quite important, for me anyway. It's meant I have been able to get a lot of new people into sim racing.
You can think that's dumb but I happen to think it's very smart business and very considerate. I can't quite understand how making your product as available to the 'masses' is dumb.
I don't think anyone really cares about that VW car... Just saying... tracks are needed before cars :Pim sure the devs have more than rockingham , the vw scir. to show for... they can't be that slow can they?
Please let's not focus on the hardware issue too much. I was generalising a lot and not mentioning details like "what you need to run for single player" and "what you need for a full multiplayer grid". Of course you need a decent computer to run a full grid with high detail at a constant 60fps.
But there are many people who enjoy a little offline racing for which you don't need a big computer. I know people who still use a p5 for LFS. I'm surprised it still works there at all!
So the hardware thing is very broad. On the one hand you don't need a big computer (single player) but a big computer can get you more from the game (a full MP grid). It's like that in pretty much every game isn't it?