I've been thinking a lot about how future patches will work. Specifically, I'm curious because most of the future changes are going to require a patch that's incompatible with Patch V.

Quote from Scawen :

There are no physics updates. We know that a lot of people are waiting for them, but we always keep physics updates, track and car changes, multiplayer changes, to a single patch, because each time we do that, the online community is divided and the hotlaps must all be deleted.

So, the reasons for not releasing incompatible patches more often is because of the resetting of hotlaps and the possibility of dividing the community. We know that hotlaps are going to get reset multiple times between now and v1.0 anyway, so this would not seem to be a big deal. Especially since the game is still in Alpha and we should expect big changes. Now that LFS has auto-update I don't see that a test patch would really divide the community either. So, neither of these reasons makes much sense to me.

We all know that a LOT of changes are still coming for LFS (car models, clutch improvements, false starts, physics changes, etc.). I think that it would be preferable to release new features as they're ready instead of waiting for One Big Patch. That way we get improvements more quickly and features are able to be more thoroughly tested and tweaked before they're made "final" in a milestone patch.

So I'm just curious, would you rather wait, say, 6 months to get 12 new features or would you rather get 2 new features each month for the next 6 months, knowing that each one would reset your LFSW hotlaps and would cause a minor disruption in online racing as servers and racers upgrade to the new patch?

Note: I'm not suggesting that anything said here will change the way the devs do things. This is simply for my own curiosity and to see how other forum members feel about the patch process.

Personally, I couldn't care less if hotlaps would be resetted more often since I don't care about hotlapping at all. Other people would probably have more problems with it, but really, what's the point? You know they will be reset one day, so what's the big deal.

Quote from joen :

Personally, I couldn't care less if hotlaps would be resetted more often since I don't care about hotlapping at all. Other people would probably have more problems with it, but really, what's the point? You know they will be reset one day, so what's the big deal.

That's my thought as well. There may be other factors for not releasing incompatible patches, but as far as I'm concerned hotlaps aren't one of them.

I don't find anything wrong with the way test patches, compatible and incompatible patches have worked in the past. If incompatible patches were released frequently it would make it impossible to have any leagues, ladders competitions that span for over a week if they relied upon any existing times. Hence, I'd rather see compatible (and maybe even incompatible in some way) test patches be posted here as before, and major incompatible patches infrequently over the auto update when they have been tested. Furthermore, personally I wouldn't want the physics to change every other week. I would find it rather annoying.

The build up to incompatible patches creates quite a lot of hype and gains peoples interest again, you'd lose this instantly releasing a bit here and there.

As much as I'd love to get things as there done, personally I prefer the current system. There is usually some form of surprise or reason to look up LFS.net.

Keiran

Quote from NotAnIllusion :

If incompatible patches were released frequently it would make it impossible to have any leagues, ladders competitions that span for over a week if they relied upon any existing times.

Are there any such leagues? The leagues I've seen award points based on finishing position, then move on to the next race. I think it's important to note that even if a patch is incompatible that doesn't necessarily mean that the lap times would change. For instance, preventing Shift-S requires an incompatible patch but makes no change to the cars, physics, tracks, etc.

Also, it seems like leagues are the primary beneficiary of many of the updates that are coming down the pike as many of the requested improvements are to help leagues balance cars, even out the racing, and add realism. I would think that leagues would want the new changes even more than the average player.

Quote :

Furthermore, personally I wouldn't want the physics to change every other week. I would find it rather annoying.

I don't think that would happen, no matter how often test patches were released. The physics might change as far as how the sim performs calculations on a changed car model, but I highly doubt that the driving feel would change significantly from one patch to the next. Most of the stuff that Scawen has said are coming do not change physics at all, they change server options, transmission behavior, etc. I'd wager that 90% of what we'll see in the next Big Patch has nothing to do with physics, but is incompatible for other reasons.

Quote from keiran :

The build up to incompatible patches creates quite a lot of hype and gains peoples interest again, you'd lose this instantly releasing a bit here and there.

You really think so? I always thought quite the opposite. Getting a new feature every few weeks makes me constantly want to come back for more and gives me an immediate improvement without having to wait a long time for the next big patch. It seems like interest has been at an all time high over the last few months, and during that time we had over 30 test patches.

I find your perspective interesting. Thanks for the response.

Personally (being slow), losing hotlaps never bothers me, and I tend to fade away from playing LFS (if not just because I hate setting up my wheel), then grab a patch and get all hyped about it. Many online games I play release incompatible patches all the time, they change it from 1.1.0.1.0.0.1 to 1.1.0.1.0.0.2 and no one with .1 can play with .2 and visa versa. So it never really bothers me as I like smexy new features.

I think the current system is good. Incompatible patches usually improve one or two areas as a whole which takes a lot of time and some small also incompatible things get fixed at the same time. New incompatible stuff is always nice, but the excitement would be smaller if they would release stuff more often and the stuff would be things that aren't really that life changing anyway.

Quote from NotAnIllusion :

I don't find anything wrong with the way test patches, compatible and incompatible patches have worked in the past. If incompatible patches were released frequently it would make it impossible to have any leagues, ladders competitions that span for over a week if they relied upon any existing times. Hence, I'd rather see compatible (and maybe even incompatible in some way) test patches be posted here as before, and major incompatible patches infrequently over the auto update when they have been tested. Furthermore, personally I wouldn't want the physics to change every other week. I would find it rather annoying.

My thoughts to

Without an auto-updater releasing a new patch in a multiplayer game actually hurts your business in many ways, many users dont upgrade. The auto-updater is really a little overdue tbh, but it is finaly here and now we've got it, let's make the most of it !

Resetting records could be annoying for some, but a few times a year I think is reasonable, no?

Quote from Cue-Ball :

You really think so? I always thought quite the opposite. Getting a new feature every few weeks makes me constantly want to come back for more and gives me an immediate improvement without having to wait a long time for the next big patch. It seems like interest has been at an all time high over the last few months, and during that time we had over 30 test patches.

I find your perspective interesting. Thanks for the response.

I was thinking in the way of NotAnIllusion and keiran. But you, Cue-Ball, have a point. You are in the same boat I am, over here in the US where the servers are flooded during the first month or 2 of an incompatible patch, then they dwindle down to barely a server full for a good race, and that is always, as it is at this moment, Aston National and GTR's. More incompatible patches with big improvements might hold folks in the US for us a bit longer between those patches. That is, as long as it isn't something ridiculous like several patches in a weeks time because h-shifters were improved, then tire physics again, then downforce/aero......

Though, I think it just takes that long to create and code the incompatible patches. All this test stuff that was going on with U, with sometimes multiple patches within a single day was much different than the physics stuff. I'm imagining that incompatible stuff has been worked on since last April and for a change to rest the brain, Scawen jumped onto some easy stuff for the U/V patches.

As for hotlaps, reset them every hour patch or no patch, I care not. I don't even think I've ever clicked the Hotlap button, LOL.

I would gladly exchange resetting the hotlaps for more frequent updates. Biggie might get upset - but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few

id rather get everthing at once. sure the wait my be long, but there is NOTHING seriously wrong with the game and it just plays perfectly. Id rather wait until big patches are made, because its more of a shock and awe.

Quote from keiran :

The build up to incompatible patches creates quite a lot of hype and gains peoples interest again, you'd lose this instantly releasing a bit here and there.

As much as I'd love to get things as there done, personally I prefer the current system. There is usually some form of surprise or reason to look up LFS.net.

Keiran

Not true at all, i've lost interest in LFS ALOT over the past 6 months due to the fact theres been no new official content.

Back when i first started there used to be updates every month or so, and i used to play the game constantly, since the updates havn't come, or have come very, very slowly i've lost a huge amount of interest in the game.

Little and often is the way to go IMO!

If you gets lots of little patches you get used to what you've got, and don't appreciate all the changes. One big patch and you go "oh, that's new" all the time, and you understand the scale of the changes. Just look at U to V, for those of us that were following the test patches over many weeks (months even), the changes came slow, and some people didn't think much changed with V (apart from the 'last minute' changes of the sounds).

People who went from U to V have noticed lots of tiny new features and probably appreciated the patch than most of you reading this post.

Stealthy04 - I would agree the gap between patches (compatible or otherwise) was a bit too long. Just three patches this year, and the first two (T and U) were released just 8 days apart.

It'l give a bigger effect for sure, but don't expect to see me hanging around in the quiet period when the devs wont give details of future patches, or when it comes 4,5,6 months before another official patch rolls out.
With little and often i belive people will stick around for longer and over a longer period of time rarther than lots of players around patch time, then it slopes off afterwards.

Just my opinion.

That's too generalized Bob! I'm sure many people appreciate it either way. It's just more fun to get new things more often for some people. Seems like most so far, but not all.

Quote from stevewhite :

id rather get everthing at once. sure the wait my be long, but there is NOTHING seriously wrong with the game and it just plays perfectly.

I think quite a few of us would most definitely disagree with you on this. LFS is the best sim on the market, but it still has some pretty large flaws. If it didn't this thread would be moot as we wouldn't need any further patches or features.

Quote from Bob Smith :

If you gets lots of little patches you get used to what you've got, and don't appreciate all the changes. One big patch and you go "oh, that's new" all the time, and you understand the scale of the changes. Just look at U to V, for those of us that were following the test patches over many weeks (months even), the changes came slow, and some people didn't think much changed with V (apart from the 'last minute' changes of the sounds).

I think that all depends on what the changes are. The changes that seem to get noticed the most are big graphical changes (like the new menu system) or additional stuff (like the BF1 and new Aston layouts). Even so, the smaller stuff has received a lot of praise too. Things like renaming replays and setups are fairly small features that aren't "in your face" but can still have a big impact on enjoyment. I think that the majority of the changes that Scawen has said are in the oven are a lot more major than adding a clock or renaming some buttons - even though those are both features that I asked for and which have made a BIG difference in the overall polish of the game.

So far we're reasonably sure that we'll see GTR interiors, better clutch modeling (and hopefully stalling), the ability to jump the start, better server controls (no Shift-S), etc. Most of these things are very big, very prominent features that I don't think anyone is going to fail to notice.

i havent voted as there should of been an option of "the current method is fine" which would of got my vote. Im sure scavier work as much as they can to complete lfs and its them working which is really the limiting factor to how fast lfs develops but cant expect them to work any longer, harder etc.

Quote from Stealthy04 :

Not true at all, i've lost interest in LFS ALOT over the past 6 months due to the fact theres been no new official content.

Back when i first started there used to be updates every month or so, and i used to play the game constantly, since the updates havn't come, or have come very, very slowly i've lost a huge amount of interest in the game.

Little and often is the way to go IMO!

Me for example, I followed the test patches right through and when Patch V came out there was no rush to go get it. Now when patch U was released I had the mobile reminder set as I was at school and when I received the message I couldn't wait to get home to try it. How many people were waiting in anticipation for Patch V? Patch U created a huge fuss. How big of an article is LFS going to get on any of the news websites out there because there has been a slight improvement?

The problem with patches too often is it will cause problems for leagues, especially if things change that could cause problems for any of the programs used to run the league. Not to mention the drivers who have been developing setups all week long. I don't see any reason not to give compatible changes more often with the autopatch system but incompatible ones will most likely cause problems for someone out there. You may make some happy releasing incompatible changes every few weeks but you'll probably upset a lot of leagues that run all over the world.

Even if Scawen released things as they were done I still don't see us getting incompatible changes every few weeks. As has been mentioned by Scawen himself a lot of the physics changes take a lot of time just researching.

Another thing is we couldn't be the testers for incompatible patches like we can with compatible. They would have to be tested as releasing a buggy version into the public domain would cause huge issues online. Ever seen the problems rFactor faces everytime they release a beta patch? They don't do compatible patches so the community divides to those who patch to the beta and those who don't.

We should just be thankful that we get so many patches that we are having this debate. Personally I can't understand how you need patches to keep your interest in the game. If you need that then I'd be questioning whether you are actually interested in the game full stop? I still enjoy LFS as much as the day I first booted it up. IMO you can't `finish` a racing game, there is always someone faster than you in a car/track. I've still not even thought of or driven most of the combos in LFS and just that one time of trying something odd you find another great challenge.

Keiran

I'm happy to wait for bulk changes in incompatible patches. The hype surrounding these events is good for the game.

I don't expect it will be One Big Patch. I expect it will be a few biggish ones, in 2-4 month intervals and then beta. I hope S2 final will have (things that we know will be done are marked):

AI improvements, including pitstops (certain)
False starts (certain)
Improved clutch simulation (certain)
Interiors (certain)
Track improvements (certain)
Multiplayer features (certain)
More than 20 racer grids
Improved drivetrain simulation, including differentials and engine as well as support for better sounds
Torsen diffs
Chassis flex, jacking forces
Improved aerodynamics, including better undertray simulation and ground effect
A few more tweaks on the tyres (certain)
Independent suspension settings
More setup options for race cars

That's a pretty tall order. If that was one big patch... then expect it somewhere around November.

Quote from keiran :

The problem with patches too often is it will cause problems for leagues, especially if things change that could cause problems for any of the programs used to run the league. Not to mention the drivers who have been developing setups all week long.

You're the second person to say this and it's simply not true. Incompatible does not necessarily mean "physics changes". For instance, to make it so clients cannot Shift+S on a league server requires an incompatible patch. These types of changes require an incompatible patch but would have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the cars, setups, physics, etc. The only disrupt ion to leagues would be that everyone will need the patch, which they can now get automatically. Or the league could simply stay with the current release and not install the new test patch.

Quote :

Even if Scawen released things as they were done I still don't see us getting incompatible changes every few weeks. As has been mentioned by Scawen himself a lot of the physics changes take a lot of time just researching.

Most of the incompatible changes that we have been told are definitely on the way are not physics related at all, such as improved AI, false starts, server settings, etc. Many of them don't require any research, they only require time to complete the work.