EDIT2: Curiously while I had the pedals selected I didn't see the brake being activated when not pressed but when all controls are active the brake was on fully when not pressed. I'm not sure if I had set the brake accidentally inverted so just selecting the brake axis as "invert 0" fixed the problem.

Now if I could only shift with the H-shifter.
If I select the Fanatec shifter and assign "wheel buttons" these are then listed from 1-8.
And now if I select other controllers so that all are active the shifter wheel buttons are shown as "none" but when selecting gears I can see buttons 65-72 activating...


* * *
I'm not able to get rid of the second y-axis on my Simucube 2 DD wheel that acts as "always on" brake pedal.

I'm also a bit confused about the new(ish?) controller layout that is showing three controllers:
Wheel (Simucube 2 Pro) as a "first person controller"
Pedals (HE Sim Pedals) as a "joystick"
Shifter (Fanatec ClubSport usb adapter (shifter mode)) as an "unknown controller"

I've tried to set the axes by selecting each controller individually but I haven't been able to deselect/deactivate the wheel Y axis (defaults to "middle" 50% joystick value) as it's tied to the pedal axes where the y axis controls the brake.
Also the wheel x-axis might be acting as a secondary clutch...

Although the axes are placed on their own axis number I still can't accelerate in game, it bogs down immediately.

And lastly even though I have set the H-shifter gears the shifter does not work while driving, I can only select gears from the keyboard (not sure if the wheel x-axis prevents the gears from activating).

EDIT: In Assetto Corsa my setup works without problems so the current problem is how LFS reads the settings.

Last edited by aaltomar, Sun, 27 Sep 2020 15:21.

I would hazard to guess that the problem with Steam is that they take a 20%(?) cut on the sales price. I don't know if Steam keys cost something extra for already existing customers with S1/S2/S3. Also as LFS has never been discounted I guess the full price might be something not many would pull the trigger on and the devs are not too keen to make discounts. Although the Steam platform would bring a lot more potential customers than what word of mouth can achieve.

Quote from Scawen :

All right, you don't understand that the human eye (due to the shape of its socket) has more lateral FOV that vertical, and you don't understand that the experience in the Rift CV1 will suffer from lack of peripheral vision.

And yet our stereoscopic view is higher vertically (eyes fixed forward), the wider horizontal view is largely monoscopic. Of course when you detect something in your peripheral view you tend to turn in towards it and if the horizontal view is limited you can feel constrained. I guess it would be really hard optically to make a setup that would allow you to rotate your eyes to the extremes and still not be restricted.

The whole thing is to see in "3D" and maybe they are optimizing for that. It's still going to be a bag of compromises.

http://vision.arc.nasa.gov/personnel/al/papers/64vision/17.htm

Quote from nacim :

I seriously hope Oculus Rift will be completely destroyed by the Vive on the marketshare, and that HTC will make their VR headset more affordable (300€ will be acceptable, 200€ would be even better but we know it's just a dream for now).

Considering that Oculus is saying they're selling at cost the 300€ mark is quite a few years away. There's a lot of custom tech in Oculus in addition to the cost of the xbox controller and games (and headphones). We have gotten used to getting a lot for our money, but the Rift is still very much a custom project with high end components. It'll take time to trickle down to lower pricepoint (quality might suffer as well).

I'm still waiting to jump the gun as I was expecting the price to be at max 499 eur. With the shipping 742 eur is a bit too much as my expectation was for so much lower. Will wait for the end user reviews and interested to see direct comparison to Vive.

Quote from Flame CZE :

Well, every time they told us an estimated time of release, it took longer than expected and they got negative feedback from some people for not keeping the "promises". So that's why Scawen seems to be more hesitant now.

Scawen can be a bit grumpy at times but they also do not care that much what the customer base wants. For example a quote from Scawen:

Quote :

I know the Scirocco is held up as the holy grail of cars by many people in the LFS community, but it's really just another front wheel drive car, although a nice sporty one. -snip- You might as well forget about the Scirocco for the time being. That will be released when the new tyre physics is complete.

And one from October 2013 when the development started again:

Quote :

LFS income has gradually gone down as it always does between updates. That that has increased the urgency of finishing the tyre physics. So I plan to get down to it, make the appropriate approximations and sort out a good physically based system, with enough assumptions to make it workable, accepting that total realism is an unachievable goal.

So if the original update to tyre model drove Scawen to the brink of 'insanity' and lost the spark (my interpretation I wonder how the re-imagining is going to go as it sure sounds like a moro trivial thing from the post above (and I'm sure it isn't). I just wonder whether Scawen has the enthusiasm to really dig in deep again.

Tyre model is a really complicated, even in iRacing (or iceRacing as some like to call it) Dave has been working years upon years (6). And they are making progress and not trying to approximate too much even when there are a lot of unknowns. The way iRacing is doing it is something called "first principles model, not an empirical model" and what makes is doubly hard is that they are trying to recreate the actual real life race-car and not a fictional one where you can fudge a lot of things.

Racetech magazine article, starting from page 30
http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?pbid=b515eee0-42a6-4eec-9cf0-72e1fc49f47f

Wiki:
In physics and other sciences, theoretical work is said to be from first principles, or ab initio, if it starts directly at the level of established science and does not make assumptions such as empirical model and fitting parameters.

Not going to affect LFS one bit.

In my opinion iRacing is a very well balanced packet although arguably a little expensive compared to your average simcade. Fortunately or unfortunately it's the only sim that has the best fit for me.

Catching slides is hard (easier with a direct drive wheel) and I guess in this department iR is lacking a bit. Hard to say whether it's the tire model or the insufficient hardware dealing with the realistic tire model.

AC doesn't run high enough FPS in triplescreen, I have to to drop almost everything to low/off to afford AA and AF. In iRacing I'm using 4xAA/16xAF 5760x1200 with locked @83fps (i7-965 extreme and a R9 270x). In comparison AC looks horrid and the sounds are horrid also and I have to admit I don't like the physics/FFB either, I think it felt better in the first few releases...

rFactor is a slidefest on easymode especially with the highly praised Honda NSX.

LFS was my first love, the cars were actually affected by physics in realtime. Replays were excellent and online racing a good match. But it's showing its age. I guess the biggest minus was when they added more code to the cockpit view, started shaking and made it hard to look at the screen with more realistic FOV since your eyes tired. Haven't really been able to dial it out. Again something where iRacing shines. Also the track surface is lifeless, can't really compare to laser scanned tracks.

A couple topics below you shall find exactly what you're looking for:
https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/81431-Any-%27oldskool%27%28lol%29-racers-still-visit-these-forums

I would mostly prefer a new track surface as the current 'too smooth to be real' surface is killing any interest to drive more than a lap or two. And as for sounds you can get use to them and derive a lot of detailed info on the engine, but coming from other sims the 'angry bee' sound is a bit off putting.

New content with the current tech does not make me covet the S3 license. The laser scanned tracks are spoiling me and I'm mostly at home in iRacing.

Enterprise as in server software etc is not included in the $19bil figure for Windows, it's another $20bil in revenue.

The Win 8 Pro licence costs around 80 eur when an OEM includes it on a PC. When you buy the OEM licence from say a distributor it costs now around 120 eur and again around 120 eur when you buy it with a new comp from a shop where you buy components separately (not much margin left for the reseller . (prices did not include VAT which is another 20+% or so on top)

The Win 10 will not be free if you're not upgrading. It will most likely cost the same as the Win 8 licenses currently. The pricing didn't change when Win 8 came out compared to Win 7... The Win 7&8 licences will be phased out by the end of this year. With Win 10 licence you will be able to install Win 8 still. The same way you are able to install Win XP if you have a Win 7 Pro licence.

Then there are exeptions that M$ might give to schools etc, but businesses and consumers pay the normal rate.

Last edited by aaltomar, Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:48.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

You clearly did not pay attention. Within the first year (and my prediction is it will stay), if you "upgrade" your licence to Win 10, it's yours to keep for good.

There's no subscription model. Windows is actually becoming free.
.
.
Eh.. I think when push comes to shove, they'll jsut let anyone install Win 10.

M$ is not going to be giving Windows OS for free that's for sure. They get a lot of revenue and income from each PC that's being sold. They would be giving away billions if they'd give Windows for free.

They have such an overwhelming market share (especially in businesses) that there's really no need to give Windows for free as Linux is not a threat and Mac OS will not gain significant market share from what it currently enjoys for the foreseeable future.

For each new PC you need a new licence. They just want to make the adoption of Win10 faster to create a good buzz. They already got the licence income from the earlier versions so offering it as a free upgrade will not be a huge factor in lost revenue as when you upgrade your hardware sufficiently, like a new PC, you need a new license. Win 7/8/10 version doesn't matter as they usually cost the same. (and the faster they bring new versions the faster they can drop support from old versions and create the need to upgrade again...)

2013 figures:
http://www.tannerhelland.com/4993/microsoft-money-updated-2013/

"Windows (including Surface tablets and other hardware)
Revenue: $19,239,000,000 (+5%)
Operating Income: $9,504,000,000 (-18%)

65% of Windows Division revenue comes from OEM sales of Windows."

Quote from Scawen :

The Oculus Rift DK2 came out and that was seriously worth supporting. I don't want to hear what a waste of time that was, from anyone who hasn't tried it, because they can't imagine something better than looking at a monitor.

I have tried the DK1 for a few minutes on a motion platform (poorly optimized) running LFS with XFR and it wasn't the most immersive experience as they didn't set up the Rift for each individual trying the sim. That being said I absolutely agree that DK2 support and future CV1 support is something that was definately the right thing to do. Can't wait to get the CV1, hopefully Oculus will not postpone the release too far into 2015 or even further...

Quote from Scawen :

Hope that explains why we are doing a Westhill update, until the next person asks the same question!

The problem is that most forum visitors do not read and remember each comment made by the devs (me included), the answers are buried under myriad of posts and topics. Some kind of FAQ could be usefull regarding the current and future status of LFS. Otherwise the same questions keep coming up from time to time.

https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/1830424#post1830424

Quote Scawen:
"Not a possibilty because LFS must still work on XP and I will not budge on this point. Millions of people use XP and it's a perfectly good operating system, still the best in many ways. I don't have to be part of Microsoft's efforts to move everyone off it. They are only doing that to try and screw more money out of existing customers."

So maybe I read to much into this I guess. And sorry for the off topic, going to bed now

Quote from Scawen :

I actually think you are just trying to annoy me with that comment. What on earth are you really talking about? Is this something to do with the fact that we still use DirectX 9?

You read to much in to that comment of mine. It was meant more as an encouragement to push LFS graphically and otherwise since I remember you saying something along the lines that there are still a lot of XP users and we can't go forward because of this (and I also remember the troubles you had when transitioning your development to Windows 7). This is the impression I've gotten, so I'm not quoting here.

No need to get condescending on me on the last part, not appreciated even if I understand where it's coming from.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

Quote from Scawen :

I'm not jealous of them or something like that.

It's hard to be jealous of people who are paying a sum of money to fundementally play NR2003 with the 800th failed iteration of Kaermer physics.

Off topic, times change also in the Kaemmerland. The recent NTM iterations feel really good even if overdring (drifting) comfortably is still nigh impossible. I just like the overall package, sounds, graphics, performance and content. And as I commented already the track surface of laser scanned track which I'm sure could also be simulated in LFS.

And thanks Scawen for the comment on the past tyre model challenges.

Quote from Scawen :

In my opinion the community wants firstly new tracks and secondly the new tyre physics. Actually loads of people want the "holy grail" Scirocco. But it's just a medium powered front wheel drive road car...

Just curious whether you still have the licence to release Scirocco or is it purely held back because you felt it didn't drive good enough with the latest (at the time) iteration of the tyre model?

I'm not quite following the logic if holding back the Scirocco was just a personal decision from the devs (Scawen). If the then newly developed tyre model drove nice but in some instances were not behaving as intended, was the new tyre model eventually worse than the current tyre model? If so, why not just release the Scirocco as it would have been no worse than the FXO and people would have whined less and had something new to enjoy for a while.

Personally I would be more happy with a more lively track surface than anything else. The silky smooth tracks feel really artificial now that I've grown used to the laser scanned tracks in iRacing. I'm sure you could code a program that would liven up the track surface with dips and bumps. Sure it takes a bit more horsepower but in ten years the computing power has gone up too. And oh yeah, Steam user statistics say that only 4% of Steam users have XP as their OS so time to move on

Quote from Scawen :

Options - View...
Acceleration shifts viewpoint :
1g head tilt

The problem with this is that the bump reaction is too fast in the viewport. Normally your eyes would be able to track the road smoothly even running over cobblestone but in LFS the whole worldview shakes in high frequency, very quickly leads to tired eyes (especially when using triplescreens and fairly low FOV and sitting close to monitors).

Even with the 1g head tilt set to zero the viewport reacts way too quickly to inertia changes, the dashboard will do this faster than light jump around when you hit a bigger hump and rattles around.

Compared to iRacing where the cockpit movement is much more dampened I'm enjoying driving much more. Plus the "real road" is a much more preferred solution than adding artificial shakes that have nothing to do with the driving surface.

I don't think the OP meant "open platform" as in "open source", more like open the platform for modding new cars and tracks like in AC.

Quote from bishtop :

based on steams stats, which how many % dont and have never used steam so not a real comparision on actual total number ooutside steam.

Anyone know if Origin have stats for similar things

You know when they take polls, they usually ask around say 1500 people and give an error margin +-3% when they measure how the political parties are divided.

So when Steam has a userbase of over 65 million gamers, I'd say the stats are a very good indicator of the overall specs people game with.

Quote from Live For Kill :

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

The hardware configurations of some of the Steam users. Older computers are still not dead yet! Even we use some ~10 years old machines.

Single core ~3%
dual core ~48%
triple core(?) ~3%
Quad core ~44%
Hexa core ~2%

So 97% of Windows based Steam users have better than a single core CPU.

Windows XP 32/64bit users ~5%
Vista users ~3%
Windows 7 ~62%
Windows 8 ~25%

So XP is almost dead at 5% and Linux is still around 5% amongst gamers.

Thanks for the update!

And I think it would be helpful if Scawen could get some assistance in 3D engine overhaul, it seems that we are not going to see major improvements using the current engine. Maybe take the offer of help a few posts earlier and strike a deal? I know, it sounds easy

For some odd reason I didn't think Scawen was an Englishman and even though I've tried to keep in touch on LFS I don't think I've seen that video before... or forgotten about it. Good memories, hoping the future wasn't already "finished" when they were about to release the Scirocco. Sort of intriguing what happened there, can't just be that the driving model wasn't perfect...

Quote from Bigbob1993 :

I wish roads in Slovakia would be that smooth.

lol, our roads are probably not much better either. On the more busy roads a winter wrecks havoc as it's mandatory to use studded tires. The large variation of temperatures and mechanical wear really takes a toll fast.

Quote from giannhsgr1 :

so iracing doesnt force you? they do giveaway freely tracks and cars?
and so if iracing doesnt force you to buy overpriced piece of s^$^%$% who does? your self? what twisted logic is that?

The subscription includes seven 'free" cars and ten 'free' tracks. 'Free' being that you still need to pay the monthly subscription fee.

The comparison that everyone missed was that for me hotlapping and time trials is my cup of coffee, quick in and out. Compared to LFS where you can't get new quality content even if you wanted to, I don't absolutely have to buy anything else than the subscription which can be had relatively cheap when you buy half price like in Black Friday deals. Or even cheaper when you combine iRacing dollars and participant credits for racing regulary.

Nowadays people expect to have massive content for $49.95 (or preferably less), but to combine massive content with low price you need to sell hundreds of thousands to millions. iRacing being a 'hardcore' sim without much gameplay doesn't attract the casual racer who wants best bang for the buck.

For me the content is fairly priced. Compared to how much I get done in my work and how much the company pays me, iRacing content is actually a bargain for the effort it takes to create the content. It's very far from being shitty/half assed effort and those who claim it to be so I really can't take seriously.

Here's a 15 minute video of creating the Circuit of the Americas track:
http://youtu.be/mq0MK6aXaV0
It's a lot of work.

Again, personally I feel I get a fair return for my Euros. If you're happier with other titles, more power to you.

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

You missed what I was referring to. I was more referring to how iRacing requires you to continue buying things as if it were a spoilt jobless girlfriend. Every day it's "buy me car, buy my track".

I'm a fan of iRacing.

iRacing doesn't force you to buy, but rather you wan't to buy (some) of those shiny things (couldn't care less for oval content). I went to play some snooker with a friend and after three beers and two hours of play it cost a total 37 euros each. iRacing is dirt cheap compared to this. Of course, as it is an online racing series it is quite difficult to race a full season if you don't have all the track content the schedule determines. Luckily I'm not too bothered to race against real people, too much "work" involved, I mostly just hotlap and race against myself.

So how does this compare to LFS where you can't purchase new content even if you would like to?

I just think it's quite one sided view saying that iRacing does everything half assed as you seem to claim. Conversely I do like the latest NTM5 and with the latest patch you can enable "friction" in ini settings to make you feel more connected with your FFB wheel. I do think that the cars aren't always as controllable as I would like to, regaining grip is sometimes quite difficult. But overall it's quite enjoyable once you've familiarized yourself with the handling, you need to get into to the zone.

I guess the biggest thing for me is the laser scanned tracks with all the bumps and camber changes. LFS surface feels very dull and uninspiring being almost perfectly smooth. Also I think iRacing has nailed the cockpit movement, my eyes are at rest when consentrating on the horizon while still having a good sense what the car is doing. Especially with triplescreen and FOV around 140. I haven't been able to achieve the same in LFS or in AC either. In LFS the car chassis seem to react too fast to bumbs, very distracting. Just these two issues make iRacing worth it to me personally. Plus it looks quite nice, very practical and realistic. I don't care for 'effects' (of course I wouldn't mind having dynamic weather and track surfaces).

Most angst seem to come from the fact that 'some' think it's too expensive. "I'd like to have that shiny thing but it's too expensive for me so I'll bash it to hell saying it's the worst ever to make myself feel better for not having the shiny thing that some for some odd reason seem to like despite it's totally not worth it. Yeah thats it, iRacing sucks"

Quote from dawesdust_12 :

The fanboys would descend from the heavens, and try to come up with all kinds of reasons why I'm doing it wrong. They'd claim my wheel is setup incorrectly or that I'm driving it wrong or some other kind of nonsense. They're able to somehow convince themselves that iRacing has decent physics, is it a stretch to think that they wouldn't also fabricate some kind of rationale as to why my correct opinion is wrong.

Also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyMNBHGO_zw

Yes the Star Mazda footage looks very strange. Some say this is because of the open diff and low gearing (mouse driven?). I haven't put many laps into the new build and I tend to drive more realistically with a wheel. Some members like it and say it's fun and some say its' a total fail.

So, when was the last time you tried it? Simple question really. Or is it just the Star Mazda that made you think your opinion is valid for the rest of the cars? But I guess your reasons are valid to you, I just don't share your views.

In comparison the new BMW (obviously edited but nevertheless shows normal fast driving):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIVbQS_qEE8