With all my respect to your opinion i have to admit graphics are not fantastic..... Lfs is a good sim not an eyecandy game. Dunno what kind of experts U have there but try showing them NFS-MW and asking bout graphics. No offence. I just couldnt agree the graphics were fantastic. Anyway , good to hear will have a sound update.
With all my respect to your opinion i have to admit graphics are not fantastic..... Lfs is a good sim not an eyecandy game. Dunno what kind of experts U have there but try showing them NFS-MW and asking bout graphics. No offence. I just couldnt agree the graphics were fantastic. Anyway , good to hear will have a sound update.
But some non-simmer doesn't give a crap is it sampled or not, he only cares does it sound like a car and that's why showing LFS with CSR is making it only better.
It was 'fantastic' as in ' finally no oversaturated candy colors and silly special effects'.
Having truckloads of DX9/10 shaders do not equal good graphics.
As spankmeyer pointed out, it all depends on the scope of the game. LFS is one of the few games that has a pretty natural look to it, which is very rare in games. Sure it is relatively simple compared to other games, but the point is that they don't scream "LOOK AT THESE FANCY SHADERS AND OVERSATURATED COLOURS" in your face. The look of NFS-MW is the exact opposite of what LFS tries to achieve, and of what it is about. 'Fantastic' doesn't necessarily mean effect-overladen.
I just hope Scawen takes all the time he can possibly use on LFS sounds because the base he is building on is quite low. Don't hurry it for christmas 
Yay!!
Im not talking bout saturation level or not, when mentioning about NFS. Sorry guys - yes i dont like NFS - but graphics there (even tho you ll get rid of oversaturation and tons of special effects) are BETTER. Look at the car models for example.... Overall image quality is better. Sorry guys but dont let your love to lfs blind your sight. Thats it.
What you re saying about effects equals to situation when sum1 would state nfs1(first game from this series) has better graphics then lfs s2, but lfs s2 uses special effects like "reflection maps" and "trilinear filtering"... ....hellooo...
Lfs has "ok" graphics for now and had good graphics for the time s2 just gone up. But "fantastic" is, with all my sympathy to lfs, a simple overreacting. If im wrong then check bhmotorsports - pick new relases and tell me few words about graphics there. What will u say ? "super hyper mega fantastic"?? or just "super fantastic".
The fact is it would be qood to see some graphic improvements in lfs. Im not the right person to make requests-im not licensed, but u are. ive just written whats my opinion in this matter.
ps. Ok im prepared for flaming me
"damn u little demo racer!! LFS has best graphics in the world !! how dare u !!"
greetings
What you re saying about effects equals to situation when sum1 would state nfs1(first game from this series) has better graphics then lfs s2, but lfs s2 uses special effects like "reflection maps" and "trilinear filtering"... ....hellooo...
Lfs has "ok" graphics for now and had good graphics for the time s2 just gone up. But "fantastic" is, with all my sympathy to lfs, a simple overreacting. If im wrong then check bhmotorsports - pick new relases and tell me few words about graphics there. What will u say ? "super hyper mega fantastic"?? or just "super fantastic".
The fact is it would be qood to see some graphic improvements in lfs. Im not the right person to make requests-im not licensed, but u are. ive just written whats my opinion in this matter.
ps. Ok im prepared for flaming me
"damn u little demo racer!! LFS has best graphics in the world !! how dare u !!"
greetings
Dupson, I don't think anyone's thinking the graphics in LFS are better than in any other game.. that would be silly.
For me, LFS is perfectly adequate, graphically. It's not got stupid effects that slow down my framerate so much that I can't play it. I can play LFS on a MODERATE spec PC, with a high framerate, and that means that more of my friends can play LFS too. It's what we'd call "accessible". To me, this is more important than having a visual "fest", but getting headaches from watching 16-24fps go by
For me, LFS is perfectly adequate, graphically. It's not got stupid effects that slow down my framerate so much that I can't play it. I can play LFS on a MODERATE spec PC, with a high framerate, and that means that more of my friends can play LFS too. It's what we'd call "accessible". To me, this is more important than having a visual "fest", but getting headaches from watching 16-24fps go by
LFS graphics are OK. Not the state of art, but OK.
ISI games take ages to load track and cars (my computer is 1 year old) and LFS loads up in seconds! I click LFS icon in desktop and in few seconds im online! Do you want better that this??!
ISI games take ages to load track and cars (my computer is 1 year old) and LFS loads up in seconds! I click LFS icon in desktop and in few seconds im online! Do you want better that this??!
Same for me, and mine's now 2 years old!
LFS is, to me, the best and most welcome compromise between graphics and action. If LFS did what other games do, with graphical effects, it would NOT be able to do the more IMPORTANT things like dynamically generated physics, unless we ALL upgraded to the VERY latest (and most expensive) hardware
My pc just turned 5 years, and it's still great for running LFS!
You miss a point Mister !
We are not talking about eyecandy - We are talking about realism. This is a simulator and not a game.
Lfs beats, every, and I say again, EVERY other sim, in that subjective thing, called feeling. YES ! All the games have got a lot better graphic, and a lot better sound - But they look like FAKE cartoons.
So, in a game like NFS, the car looks stunning, but the feeling dies here. In Lfs, realism beats the hell outta every game I`ve seen. That`s the difference, and that`s a BIG difference
Even, if there was only one car, and one track, and I had to choose between, Lfs and the rest of the pack, I would choose Lfs again. Better one quality product, than 20 mediocre games.
So try to understand - Lfs is a process, and everybody who wants to take part in it, is invited. Nfs, Gtr2, Rfactor etc are "just" finished commercial products
OK - Lfs maby is commercial, in a way, too - But this is grassroot development, where the quality and feel for the "game" is the most important thing, than the eye candy you like so much.here is where it gets wierd - people say LFS looks rubbish, but i really don't see how! i run LFS with AA/AF and some custom textures (i have a 255 Mb DDS Folder!) and it really can look VERY good!
Look at these pics (here, here and here), excuse the JPEG compression and i think they're fairly good quality!
These (here, here, here, here and here) pics are also quite good quality wise, its just the trees that are a bit crap.
Look at these pics (here, here and here), excuse the JPEG compression and i think they're fairly good quality!
These (here, here, here, here and here) pics are also quite good quality wise, its just the trees that are a bit crap.
As an artist with over two decades of practical and theoretical experience, I can confidently say this debate will go nowhere. Whenever anyone uses the R word (realism), you can guarantee hours of circular arguments - because none of it is real. It is all imagery, representation.
Immersion comes from the appropriate form of representation being used in the most appropriate way. LFS does that very well for people who require the game to respond to input in a believably naturalistic manner. It is not more real (it is still a 2d image being updated so many times a second), and if you're in the mood for something a bit less cerebral there are other places to go. Its a choice, but I don't see there is any moral value in choosing 'realism' over any other 'ism'.
And it is a game. Simulators are a subset of the category called games. (that's my buttons pushed and released for today )
Immersion comes from the appropriate form of representation being used in the most appropriate way. LFS does that very well for people who require the game to respond to input in a believably naturalistic manner. It is not more real (it is still a 2d image being updated so many times a second), and if you're in the mood for something a bit less cerebral there are other places to go. Its a choice, but I don't see there is any moral value in choosing 'realism' over any other 'ism'.
And it is a game. Simulators are a subset of the category called games. (that's my buttons pushed and released for today
)Off course this is very subjective inputs, we are talking about - Every thing you experience is subjective
If I experience Lfs, as a really good and realistic simulator, who are you, to tell me that it isn`t !? If you are dreaming lively, then the dream becomes real, for the time beeing. No one can tell, if you are dreaming, or it is the real deal
So the application runs on my pc, and makes vivid images in my brain. When driving the Lfs simulator, it is easy to forget that this is not the real deal ! Driving Nfs, Gtr2 and games like that, never puts me in the same state of mind.
And the most important imputs, you get through the eyes. I think it is 80%. 15% through the ears and 5 % through taste and olfactory impressions. (There is people which vary from this - This is the common percentage, for ordinary people)
So a good game, experienced through eyes and ears are often, much to real
I saw an article in a danish newspaper. They said that game addiction, is simular to drug addiction. So !
Are you for real
EDIT :
Sorry if something i wrote, is wrong, in a linguistic manner. This is hard to express one self, on this technical level, in a foreign language
@ Jakg's pictures (and during gameplay), to everyone. The thing that stands out the most for me with LFS visually is, the cars look planted on the road. They don't look like a fancy pretty looking car shaped box sliding around the road. In still screenshots and during the gameplay, the coloring of the tracks and the way the cars move makes it look "real". Just looking at Jakg's 2nd picture, you see a GTi planted in a sideways slide. You can tell just from the static picture how much force is exerting by the visual of it. Other sims would look like a bunch of cars parked randomly around the corner there. The tire deflection on the GTi says it all and gives the visualization of action. Same with the 3rd pic. Two cars are doing endo's. The noses are not buried into the track surface and all car's tires are well planted on the track, not hovering above or buried into it.
The only thing missing from those shots shown are a bit of wheel blur. And I'd say LFS's graphics could be brightened up just a very very little bit. But compared to everything else I've seen from others, LFS is the most natural looking. LFS gives an excellent graphical immersion factor to simulate that feeling that you are actually driving a car.
The only thing missing from those shots shown are a bit of wheel blur. And I'd say LFS's graphics could be brightened up just a very very little bit. But compared to everything else I've seen from others, LFS is the most natural looking. LFS gives an excellent graphical immersion factor to simulate that feeling that you are actually driving a car.
It's the wheels. The wheels don't look a lot like real life wheels do. When I look at a render, I think by myself "I wish LFS has such awesome wheels". Wheels can actually make a big difference.
Subtle tyre deformation and body roll do amazing things for understanding a picture!
to be picky also - undercar shadow is ALWAYS darker than any shadow around - sometimes cars seem to float in shadow area.
But in fact - overall, LFS graphics is sooo far away from "super hyper magnificent" candy cartoonish games. Just imagine TV style broadcast
from NFS :eek:Well, thou I dont use CSR I think you can say its samplastic when you drive and you hear the response, not when you spectate which is obviously better with CSR.
Talking about graphics of LFS i only have a crappy gfx card that came with my comp (some random nvidia 128mb cant remember anymore) and with no AA and no AF (it looks quite bad) but i can get an average of around 50 - 60 fps and im so glad that lfs is so graphics intensive so it rules out people on lower spec machines.
As been said also other games over saturate colours but also the make everything to reflective and shiney. Take the nfs-u series the cars have such strong reflections which no one IRL car would have. I admit i like the nfs series as its good for a pick up and play game u they do mess up the gfx.
Looking at jakg's screenshots you can obviously tell its a game picture not a real life picture but colours, reflections, motion (with tyre deflection etc) all lead IMO to the most convincing graphics in any game.
As been said also other games over saturate colours but also the make everything to reflective and shiney. Take the nfs-u series the cars have such strong reflections which no one IRL car would have. I admit i like the nfs series as its good for a pick up and play game u they do mess up the gfx.
Looking at jakg's screenshots you can obviously tell its a game picture not a real life picture but colours, reflections, motion (with tyre deflection etc) all lead IMO to the most convincing graphics in any game.
Dear Mr Aland44
Just for a record. I replied to posts of mr. AndroidXp and mr Spankmeyer which disagreed with my opinion "the graphics are not fantastic" pointing out that the phenomenon of good graphics in NFS is because of special effects, oversaturation etc. My only point was <<graphics are not fantastic in lfs+ nfs has better graphics then lfs>>.
I was not writing bout realism and feeling which is a different story.
Thank U Mister
Just for a record. I replied to posts of mr. AndroidXp and mr Spankmeyer which disagreed with my opinion "the graphics are not fantastic" pointing out that the phenomenon of good graphics in NFS is because of special effects, oversaturation etc. My only point was <<graphics are not fantastic in lfs+ nfs has better graphics then lfs>>.
I was not writing bout realism and feeling which is a different story.
Thank U Mister
Hey! That's a nice skin! (I'll assume you meant the res
) Where's the rest of the pics your were hunting for?
That RF shot doesn't look bad to me
... Probably the most decent looking RF shot I've seen actually. I could stand the LFS models to use blurring on the wheels/tires and actually have the susp / brake / steering components modelled like that.I'm not telling you any such thing - just saying that arguments about realism lead nowhere and that 'realism' itself is not a virtue - just one of many, many modes of representation.
And when you drive in real life, you don't view the world through the limited aspect ratio and single-point perspective of a camera lens. This is why LFS is a 'simulator' and why any aspiration to being 'real', or looking 'real' is really besides the point.
Ignore me - I'm just being pedantic.... But in some way I think it matters. I don't care about graphics, or screen shots. I enjoy LFS because of the feedback it gives me in-game and as long as that feedback is legible, in a way that runs on my slowish computer, then great.....
Once people start worrying if the 'grass' actually looks like grass, then things can only end badly.
Good find JakG. IMO that rFactor pic looks awful!! It made my eyes bleed. Since when have tyres been that shiny!
Comments on LFS
(59 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG