The online racing simulator
Any news about Live for Speed supporting the iVibe Racing Seat?

Last time I heard about it LFS does not support the iVibe seat ? I'm going to get one soon so I'm wondering if there is any new Patch or Update in the making for this? Or whats the latest about this matter?

May the Grip be with you
Im not knowing, that seat looks a bit .... dunno .
As I have never heard of it, i would say i doubt it, but you never know, do a poll of who has / getting one of these iVibe seats and see what the outcome is. Maybe an unnoofficial on patch for it will come out
Heheh, the guy that markets this seat wont stop spamming RSC and other forums... it's kind of funny. They seem kind of desperate to make some money (hint hint). I am not sure if it is such a great product to have. I'd rather have a chair that has a water pack fed to my mouth, and arms to wipe sweat off my forhead. I'll call it the iSweat
Well one has to hear the Opionions of those Race Simmers and Flight Simmers who already HAVE this thing. They are praising it to be an amazing addition that raises the immersion very much.

The seat costs € 220, its technique is not a "Rumble Pack", it is to simulate the vibrations you feel in the cars seat when you are accelerating, braking, switching gears, G forces, every car or plane feels different and as I sayed everybody who already got one says he wouldnt drive without it ever again.

S14, the Racing seat needs information from the Game such as RPM, Asphalt, bumps or Gras, Grip level, weight transfer and some parameters like this one to simulate the forces and vibrations to the driver.
I wish Scawen could find some time somewhere to give the iVibe Programmer the information he needs to get this thing working properly with Life for Speed.

People who already got a seat are falling all over themselfs in excitement in Games such as rFactor, NR2003 because driving those Sims with the Racing Seat is a very awesome experience.
Unfortunately you cannot fully simulate the Racing seat in Life for Speed because the seat doesnt get the full amount of information about the car as it was the last time I heard about it. The Programmer of the seat says on his website that a Programmer would just need a half hour to get the Racing Seat fully supported by the Sim.

However, the Seat is an amazing experience in Flight Simulator, rFactor, NR2003 and even Grand Prix 4 gets exciting with it. I also know somebody in my league who recently got one and is very excited about it, he took his original SPARCO Racing Seat, which costs about € 200, and cut it open to put the minimotors of the iVibe into it and he loves it. This is his Racing Rig:

(The ivibe Vibrations seat motors, which covers vibrations to the drivers back, ass and legs, have been put INSIDE the SPARCO Seat)

I'm going to get one too and report on it. I hope there is a chance by Scawen to get its functions fully supported by a LFS car.
Quote from George Kuyumji :Life for Speed.

I hope scawen does .. i may even buy one Eventually

Also that rig looks F“^&%ing amazing!!! OMFG I Soooo want it please!!! 50p im poor!
#6 - Woz
All the information required for the seat should come from outsim and outguage. The 301 platform is a FULL MOTION platform and these uses these interfaces to drive the sim.

It is the responsibility of the makers to provide the software to interface as there is no common DX based API for motion platforms yet. Its pointless the devs trying to support every minority product with a different set of API's when LFS already provides all the data.
What exactly would you need to make a vibration seat so nice? If you think data outputted for full motion chairs isn't enough, I don't see how something couldn't be done for a vibration seat?

Reason I ask is because if you think something isn't possible, a lot of programmers on here might be able to help you out with it.
#8 - Woz
Quote from craigth :Hello all... We do not get the information we need to support LFS with intellivibe!!! We need more information than what they have deemed relevant to full motion platforms. I could write the intellivibe module now, but it would not be very good and everyone would want to know why it pales in comparison, for example, to rFactor, F199-02, or NR2003. I've talked to the LFS developers in the past about this on several occasions and to date nothing has come from it, despite making it clear that supporting us poses no technical challenge whatsoever and puts no burden on any of their code, in terms of CPU hit, FPS, or instability, or any other reason that might give pause to them supporting us.

Supporting us would quite literally take the LFS developers about 1 hour, probably less, and would be just about the easiest thing they have ever done in the history of their code base... SERIOUSLY.

We support our own hardware, all they do is allow us to do it.

Unfortunately there's been no response from to developers as of yet even though in the past they have seemed to be open to giving me what I need. Can anyone suggest a good contact to finally make this happen? Perhaps I've never gotten in touch with the right people or person?

I am open to suggestions!!!

Thanks all... and yes, be warned, once you drive a few laps with intellivibe, there's no going back to the old way. We're the only company in history with a no fault, no questions asked, no time limit open return policy. And that's not something you see anywhere...

Please email with any suggestions as to how to get the LFS developers to work with me on intellivibe and I'll get on it right away... Thanks again all!

I am serious, have your looked through the in/outsim interfaces. There is enough information to power a whole raft of software add-ons for lfs from pit spotters, new engine sounds based on samples linked to engine revs through to motion platforms.

Exactly what information do you feel is missing? Have you seen a 301 platform in action as that manages all the info it needs from LFS and its a very fast platform.

I assume its more the information you want is not in the format you expect and you don't know how to derive it from the data?
Just poking around your forums, I see threads like these which strongly suggest that your passive-aggressive method of getting support from developers does not work. In fact, it probably just pisses them off.

Looks like a great product, otherwise.
Things that you already have directly from Outgauge:
  • current gear
  • the name of the car that's being used, and/or the track name (track name actually comes from Insim)
  • the user's current throttle and brake inputs.
Things that you could possibly calculate by approximation from the data given by Outsim:
  • rotational speed of each tire
  • shock travel
Things that aren't trasmitted anywhere currently:
  • road surface at each tire
#11 - Jakg
you know, InSim and OutGauge do most of what you want - instead of pestering the devs you could help yourself...
Quote from craigth :I'll take a look at InSim and Outgage, but last time I looked we could not get what we needed.

If "last time" was indeed 6 months ago or so, OutGauge wasn't implemented yet at the time. See the list I put up 2-3 posts above.

The only thing not returned from LFS is the surface type each wheel is on (if you really really want you can actually get that too yourself though using the car dimensions [since the car name is given], orientation and position on track [since the track name is given you can make a look-up map of sorts]).

Quote from craigth :Given that the developers can support us easily and in 1 hour and then be done literally *forever*, and that they need to do nothing else, that may just have to be where it gets left permanently.

So you keep on saying, but I guess each person has different priorities for their projects.

All the best in getting your interesting-looking product to hook up with this awesome sim!
I doubt they'd be ignoring something you've requested, when they've already explained to you most likely (or provided something of use)? Again, like others have said, OutSim & OutGauge was made specifically for the output of information for everything from vibration, motion, lights, sounds, you name it. And it's been about 6 months or so since OutSim really was finalized for use with multiple things, maybe the developers just let it sit there because it is left for you to experiment with?

Take all the programmers here for example, they've taken in so much with just a readme and general know-how in making their OutSim applications and code. Not to mention that there is a programmers forum specifically for help on these kinds of matters. The developers will not be doing custom made code for the interests of one single company or person... unless they are paid a large sum of money, or get a free ticket to outer space. However, when companies of products such as yours wanted to integrate with LFS, the developers answered by making something that is a very 'universal' language to control just about anything to get feedback from LFS, OutSim & InSim.

Still, I just don't understand what exactly you need for vibration feedback. There isn't much else to it.
Quote from craigth :I don't constantly pester the developers. Last time I contacted them must have been 6 months ago.

I'm not suggesting you pester them directly. Taking them to task in public for not supporting your product, hoping that community support will prompt them into action, is what I was referring to as 'passive-aggressive'. That may not even be what you are doing, consciously anyway -- I'm just letting you know what it looks like to me (and apparently to the users on your forum, who are saying, literally, "Why are you putting this on us?")

Suggestions? If it was my business, I would learn LFS's InSim interface inside and out and get everything I could from it, then come up with a minimal list of remaining values that I need added for my product to work, and send that list to the developers. You said they left off knowing you didn't have "enough", but that's not really actionable, is it? They need to know your specific requirements as succinctly as possible.

Maybe you should just send them the hardware. When I worked in games, we used to get stuff in the office all the time, usually unsolicited. If we had been asked in advance if we could take a look at it, we probably would have said no in most cases, just because we were so freakin' busy. But once we actually had the stuff there in the office, it would sometimes inspire investigation. I bet if they had an iVibe in the office, they couldn't help themselves. It has way too much geek appeal.
Quote from Tweaker :The developers will not be doing custom made code for the interests of one single company or person... unless they are paid a large sum of money, or get a free ticket to outer space.

Meh, they do it all the time. They do it for us, but it helps when the gadget they are supporting has some kind of critical mass.

Quote from xaotik :if you really really want you can actually get that too yourself though using the car dimensions [since the car name is given], orientation and position on track [since the track name is given you can make a look-up map of sorts]).

Oh god, what a nightmare that would be! Even if you could get it to work in S2 (huge amount of work), it would not work in S3, which will presumably support user made content.
Quote from Eric Tetz :Oh god, what a nightmare that would be! Even if you could get it to work in S2 (huge amount of work) it not work in S3, which will presumably support user made content.

No shit - it's an amusing mental picture though.

Quote from craigth :Let me follow up there and I will keep you all posted. I certainly deem LFS a high priority and have hearn nothing but good things about it.

If you haven't then you certainly should play it with a FFB wheel. It's simply one of the best to date on actual FFB (as opposed to canned effects). See, that's the reason alot of the stuff you ask for (like predetermined surfaces for canned "rumble", etc) isn't provided: LFS calculates bumps transmitted through FFB and everything of the sort, it doesn't look them up on tables, if there IS a bump on the road you will feel it and it won't feel the same if you run over it at any angle.
Quote from craigth :Here's to intellivibe in LFS if there's any way to accomplish it, even with the tools as given More info soon hopefully!

Hey, if it supported LFS I might get one. Looks like a fun device.

BTW: All the testimonials currently on your site are from flight sim users. Might wanna get a sim racing testimonial on there. it Crash Dummy's setup?
I still cannot understand what information you need for your vibration seat. OutSim (don't confuse it with InSim or OutGauge, these are different interfaces) is used for motion simulators like the 301 and outputs all forces that act on the car. So if you want to simulate g-forces, just take the real g-forces LFS gives you.

You can find more infos about OutSim here:

Or do you want to fake the g-forces by just taking presets for each surface type? If that's the case I can understand why Scawen doesn't want to support it.

Here's what I found:
The current gear: ok through outgauge
Car name: ok through outgauge
The track name: ok through Insim
Road surface at each tire: not available
The rotational speed of each tire: Not available
User's current throttle and brake inputs: ok through outgauge
The shock travel: not available

I guess this is what he needs.
Quote from craigth :Also, let me tell you that we can render things that a force feedback steering wheel can not.

As far as I know, very few owners of force feedback wheels sit on them.
(wheel4hummer) DELETED by wheel4hummer
@Craig, All of the things you ask for are available with the possible exception of track surface under each wheel but I think even that I can possibly calculate by using the track smx files and insims positional and angular placement information. Everything you need is there.

"We need to know the current gear."

"We need to know the road surface at each tire."
I think calculable from smx files and insim position and angular velocity.

"We need to know the rotational speed of each tire."
Not readily available, but aside from wheelspin is calculable.

"We'd like to know the name of the car that's being used"
insim gives this

", and/or the track name,"
insim gives this

"We need to know the user's current throttle and brake inputs."
I may be wrong and would have to double check but I believe outuage gives this.

"We'd like to know the shock travel."
outsim gives this

"Thoughts, questions, suggestions? I'll help and participate in any way possible to get intellivibe active in LFS. I'll even give free hardware to the developers."
I would consider developing the software, but financial remuneration would be required for me to get involved in a commercial project.