ok, i see this thread is starting to get a bit off topic and as usual with threads concerning
LFS vs rF i tend to ignore them since they're all filled with the same stuff but this being like
the 1005th thread i see comparing these 2 SIM's i figured i'd pitch in with my 2 cents.
I LOVE LFS for it's realistic feel and spot-free physics in general, the key-point lfs really does
well is making weight-transfers feel dynamic and it transfers through the wheel (wich itself isn't
very realistic but it adds to the feel when sitting infront of a computer and not in a car.)
you have time to react and when the car is on the limit you still have a chance to fix things
before it goes haywire.
The graphics is getting old and there's no visual effects worth mentioning not even compared
to the graphical standards a few years ago. -it's detailed model-wise but in terms of lightning
and atmospherical effects it's way behind most games out there.
The sound-engine in LFS is quite nice with all the variables taken into concidiration, this,
however, often makes for a very synthetic sound and to be honest, for us petrolheads the
SOUND the car makes is half the experience.. hitting that redline and a Vtec style engine
starts hissing and shouting at you to shift whilst it's humming along nicely on lower revs..
it just doesn't exist in LFS. it's too synthetic to feel as realistic as the rest of the game.
Now, i can go on forever about LFS but it would (as you probably understand) also take forever.
rFactor has an equally competent physicsengine as LFS, it focuses (roughly) on the same
variables and it does basicly the same calculations.
However what people seem to forget is that the latest version of ISI's physics-engine used
in rF is based on an engine originaly designed for F1 type physics
When ISI was hired by EA-Games to create SportsCarGT back in 98 it was a major hit! and
it was GREAT, weight transitions was calculated and it beat the crap out of the physics in
any race-game at the time, and all this with the physics jammed into one single VEH file for each car.
Now.. when SCGT became such a hit, EA wanted to release an F1 sim and so they did,
again they turn to ISI to create the game. they scrapped the simple physics-engine used
in SCGT and designed a heavier and more detailed physics engine suitable for F1 cars,
focusing mainly on downforce\drag and airflow in general, together with very stiff on\off
grip-levels used in their tyremodels and suspension-settings.
Since then, F1 2000, 2000C, 2001, 2002, 99-02C has all been revisions of this first F1
style physics-engine. This is the foundation of the ISI engine we're used to today in rF,
and mainly why most people (me included) feel that countersteer and drifting isn't something
modeled with the same dynamic smoothnes as in LFS does.
if we take some of the key points and put them head to head in general we get these results
Graphics: Both games are detailed (depending on mod ofcours) but when it comes to special
effects rF is far beyond LFS in basicly every way. bumpmapping and day-night racing, light's
on cars and in a decent mod the damage-modding is much better in rF than the sometimes
extreme examples of polygon-based damage in lfs, animated rims and glowing discs,
wet-reflections and the list goes on..
Sounds: Both games brings alot of sounds into the experience, LFS has a neat "generator"
based on variables and even tho it's a nifty way to create virtually any type of engine sound,
it does become a bit anoying listening to a very synthetic engine-sound.
rF´s sound engine is quite basic and uses samples and there's no variable-based generator
anywhere to be seen, however a well setup sample based engine sound in rF can deliver
ooohh such a massive sound-experience depending on how many samples and when and
where these samples have been recorded.
to sum it up it goes like this, LFS is great, and since it uses a generator you can "hear"
every little change in rpm, going over bumps and what not, but you cant create a sound
wich feels and sounds as realistic as the recorded sample based sound engine in rF, with
good samples and some effort put into matching the samples together in the sound-engine
file for each car it basicly beats the crap out of LFS. crap hitting the undercarrige of the
car and the wind-noise being much higher adding to the feel of speed, wining brakes and
the ambient sounds imbedded in the track-scenery, all this adds for a more immersive
sound-experience in rF even if it's only 2channels.
Layout and UI: This is where LFS beats rF in some areas and where LFS beats rF in some
other areas, The menus buttons and layout of the interface of LFS might look "a bit simple"
but it's incredibly powerfull and all the stuff you would wanna change or tinker with, it's there,
you can change it. just the ability to change the pov and fov live when you're in the car gives
you an ability to make the pov fit you and your taste perfectly for each car, while in rF you
are quite limited by being able to move yer chair around like 30cm here and there, here rF falls
in the shadow of LFS's incredible fast and easy-to-use menus, same goes with Track-loading
times and overall speed of the game. rF is slow compared to how the LFS UI is programmed.
Realism: This is a tricky area to cover, since (lets face it) most of us hasn't driven 600hp GT
cars around real racing tracks long enough to have a fresh memory both in yer head and in yer
body to even make a comparrision but in general i feel both games physics engines are just as potent,
i tend to feel that low-speed grip in LFS has allways been a problem whilst rF handles that quite good,
while in most mods (even some of the really good ones) the griplevels on the limit is way too on\off
and once you're going just a tad sideways you're screwed no matter how much you countersteer,
that's where LFS rocks, the dynamics in those areas are incredible in lfs.
Doesn't really matter what people say, LFS is great, and rF is great -they're 2 games approaching
the same venue from 2 different directions, if you are the type who loves drifting and cant think of
racing without pushing that tail out in every corner and you dont care much for graphical effects
then LFS is the way to go, if you're kinda picky about Graphics and sounds, and you're more into
gripracing like GT-wagons or F1 even, rF kicks LFS's but.
Sit down in the BMW F1 car in LFS and tell me you really feel you're sitting in an F1 car, judging
from the sound and the graphics and the fact that you're sitting in a real car on a fictional track....
(im not even gonna go into that) but LFS fails so bad..
whilst in a good F1 mod in rF it's a whole different story.
however, get yer arse into a turbo-charged rwd sportscar in LFS and just go nuts, steering with
yer throttle and going arse-first into every corner is a BLAST!! Whilst rF falls on it's belly in that area.
it's a pointless argument not far from the coffee or tea question, it's just 2 versions of the same concept,
a hot drink often shared with some company talking about pointless things and calling it socializing.
this whole "one game rocks and therefor the other game sucks" is just narrow minded and im getting sick of it.
If LFS was HALF as open for a community to add their own mods and tracks you'd see the same
ammount of complete CRAP for lfs as there is for rF but knowing there's a whole bunch of really really
good mods for rF the truth is rF has much more to offer in terms of online racing, series and leagues using
real cars and tracks.. so before saying "LFS is better and more realistic than rF" you might wanna take
some of that into yer calculations.. if you wanna drive the car you own in real life at some track nearby
in your country you're up for a dead end in LFS and as it seems that wont change..
while the odds of finding you're model of a honda civic or a skoda even, and drive it on a small
club-track somewhere in the world are quite high if you aim for rF..
Both games are top notch and i love them both, i see them as a typical married couple where
they are roughly alike as individuals but has differences and these differences are what them both running..
Rock on and thanks for reading..
if im wrong somewhere concerning ISI or anything else please correct me as im no journalist..
LFS vs rF i tend to ignore them since they're all filled with the same stuff but this being like
the 1005th thread i see comparing these 2 SIM's i figured i'd pitch in with my 2 cents.
I LOVE LFS for it's realistic feel and spot-free physics in general, the key-point lfs really does
well is making weight-transfers feel dynamic and it transfers through the wheel (wich itself isn't
very realistic but it adds to the feel when sitting infront of a computer and not in a car.)
you have time to react and when the car is on the limit you still have a chance to fix things
before it goes haywire.
The graphics is getting old and there's no visual effects worth mentioning not even compared
to the graphical standards a few years ago. -it's detailed model-wise but in terms of lightning
and atmospherical effects it's way behind most games out there.
The sound-engine in LFS is quite nice with all the variables taken into concidiration, this,
however, often makes for a very synthetic sound and to be honest, for us petrolheads the
SOUND the car makes is half the experience.. hitting that redline and a Vtec style engine
starts hissing and shouting at you to shift whilst it's humming along nicely on lower revs..
it just doesn't exist in LFS. it's too synthetic to feel as realistic as the rest of the game.
Now, i can go on forever about LFS but it would (as you probably understand) also take forever.
rFactor has an equally competent physicsengine as LFS, it focuses (roughly) on the same
variables and it does basicly the same calculations.
However what people seem to forget is that the latest version of ISI's physics-engine used
in rF is based on an engine originaly designed for F1 type physics
When ISI was hired by EA-Games to create SportsCarGT back in 98 it was a major hit! and
it was GREAT, weight transitions was calculated and it beat the crap out of the physics in
any race-game at the time, and all this with the physics jammed into one single VEH file for each car.
Now.. when SCGT became such a hit, EA wanted to release an F1 sim and so they did,
again they turn to ISI to create the game. they scrapped the simple physics-engine used
in SCGT and designed a heavier and more detailed physics engine suitable for F1 cars,
focusing mainly on downforce\drag and airflow in general, together with very stiff on\off
grip-levels used in their tyremodels and suspension-settings.
Since then, F1 2000, 2000C, 2001, 2002, 99-02C has all been revisions of this first F1
style physics-engine. This is the foundation of the ISI engine we're used to today in rF,
and mainly why most people (me included) feel that countersteer and drifting isn't something
modeled with the same dynamic smoothnes as in LFS does.
if we take some of the key points and put them head to head in general we get these results
Graphics: Both games are detailed (depending on mod ofcours) but when it comes to special
effects rF is far beyond LFS in basicly every way. bumpmapping and day-night racing, light's
on cars and in a decent mod the damage-modding is much better in rF than the sometimes
extreme examples of polygon-based damage in lfs, animated rims and glowing discs,
wet-reflections and the list goes on..
Sounds: Both games brings alot of sounds into the experience, LFS has a neat "generator"
based on variables and even tho it's a nifty way to create virtually any type of engine sound,
it does become a bit anoying listening to a very synthetic engine-sound.
rF´s sound engine is quite basic and uses samples and there's no variable-based generator
anywhere to be seen, however a well setup sample based engine sound in rF can deliver
ooohh such a massive sound-experience depending on how many samples and when and
where these samples have been recorded.
to sum it up it goes like this, LFS is great, and since it uses a generator you can "hear"
every little change in rpm, going over bumps and what not, but you cant create a sound
wich feels and sounds as realistic as the recorded sample based sound engine in rF, with
good samples and some effort put into matching the samples together in the sound-engine
file for each car it basicly beats the crap out of LFS. crap hitting the undercarrige of the
car and the wind-noise being much higher adding to the feel of speed, wining brakes and
the ambient sounds imbedded in the track-scenery, all this adds for a more immersive
sound-experience in rF even if it's only 2channels.
Layout and UI: This is where LFS beats rF in some areas and where LFS beats rF in some
other areas, The menus buttons and layout of the interface of LFS might look "a bit simple"
but it's incredibly powerfull and all the stuff you would wanna change or tinker with, it's there,
you can change it. just the ability to change the pov and fov live when you're in the car gives
you an ability to make the pov fit you and your taste perfectly for each car, while in rF you
are quite limited by being able to move yer chair around like 30cm here and there, here rF falls
in the shadow of LFS's incredible fast and easy-to-use menus, same goes with Track-loading
times and overall speed of the game. rF is slow compared to how the LFS UI is programmed.
Realism: This is a tricky area to cover, since (lets face it) most of us hasn't driven 600hp GT
cars around real racing tracks long enough to have a fresh memory both in yer head and in yer
body to even make a comparrision but in general i feel both games physics engines are just as potent,
i tend to feel that low-speed grip in LFS has allways been a problem whilst rF handles that quite good,
while in most mods (even some of the really good ones) the griplevels on the limit is way too on\off
and once you're going just a tad sideways you're screwed no matter how much you countersteer,
that's where LFS rocks, the dynamics in those areas are incredible in lfs.
Doesn't really matter what people say, LFS is great, and rF is great -they're 2 games approaching
the same venue from 2 different directions, if you are the type who loves drifting and cant think of
racing without pushing that tail out in every corner and you dont care much for graphical effects
then LFS is the way to go, if you're kinda picky about Graphics and sounds, and you're more into
gripracing like GT-wagons or F1 even, rF kicks LFS's but.
Sit down in the BMW F1 car in LFS and tell me you really feel you're sitting in an F1 car, judging
from the sound and the graphics and the fact that you're sitting in a real car on a fictional track....
(im not even gonna go into that) but LFS fails so bad..
whilst in a good F1 mod in rF it's a whole different story.
however, get yer arse into a turbo-charged rwd sportscar in LFS and just go nuts, steering with
yer throttle and going arse-first into every corner is a BLAST!! Whilst rF falls on it's belly in that area.
it's a pointless argument not far from the coffee or tea question, it's just 2 versions of the same concept,
a hot drink often shared with some company talking about pointless things and calling it socializing.
this whole "one game rocks and therefor the other game sucks" is just narrow minded and im getting sick of it.
If LFS was HALF as open for a community to add their own mods and tracks you'd see the same
ammount of complete CRAP for lfs as there is for rF but knowing there's a whole bunch of really really
good mods for rF the truth is rF has much more to offer in terms of online racing, series and leagues using
real cars and tracks.. so before saying "LFS is better and more realistic than rF" you might wanna take
some of that into yer calculations.. if you wanna drive the car you own in real life at some track nearby
in your country you're up for a dead end in LFS and as it seems that wont change..
while the odds of finding you're model of a honda civic or a skoda even, and drive it on a small
club-track somewhere in the world are quite high if you aim for rF..
Both games are top notch and i love them both, i see them as a typical married couple where
they are roughly alike as individuals but has differences and these differences are what them both running..
Rock on and thanks for reading..
if im wrong somewhere concerning ISI or anything else please correct me as im no journalist..
Last edited by HWX-Ronin, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG