Quote from JO53PHS :

As he said, efficiency does not equal speed.

It certainly helps though.

Quote from JO53PHS :

As he said, efficiency does not equal speed. I think what he is trying to say is: Sure, they would code faster overall, but as for the amount of actual work done per person, one person coding is quicker, because he can just get on with it.

(click me)

Tyre model updates are great. Realism, realistic behaviour of tyres and therefore cars are what we're all here for ultimately. I don't care how long they take, better is better but it's "good enough" already.

Additional content is what seems to take an unfathomably long time to come along. 4 years into S2 and we've seen a couple of "new" circuit configurations and a couple of cars.
7 circuit environments total. Since 2002. I'm sure there's a reason, but it's not because nobody wants more and certainly it's not because they cannot be produced any quicker. No doubt they have some ready for the next license sale (S3), but they're not exactly eager to please or satisfy their customers in that regard. It's their perogative, they are the creators and all credit to them, but for me this is the biggest frustration of long term LFS use, and as much as they refuse to say when things will be released, they're also just as reluctant to say when things won't be released. "It will be years, 3, maybe 4 or 5 before we release another new track environment, we're in no hurry".

Can i ask some thing, this goes out to everyone who moans about the game.. Don't you play any thing else other then LFS? I'm thinking no! It seems you don't have lifes other then check LFS front page to see if they updated anything. Well look at the release dates for the front page, you see they months apart. So when you look at the front page and nothing new is there.. Then don't ask or moan about new releases. The people behind LFS will update it when it's done!

Quote from sinbad :

4 years into S2 and we've seen a couple of "new" circuit configurations and a couple of cars.

Slightly OT but I wasn't here when S2 was introduced, what new circuit configurations have been introduced? I'd guess maybe AS7/SO6 because they are the highest numbered track from their environment, but I'm not really sure. I also remember hearing someone saying that one of the Aston (I think) turns got re-done at some point in time, what turn was that?

Quote from Electrik Kar :

So yeah, will be curious to see how it all goes. Are physics still LFS's big drawcard? Are the hardcore that hardcore that a new physics model is all they need to feel the renewel of the sim? Will the update generate enough excitement among the newest players to carry things forward? Or will it just get nasty again?

Stay tuned!

Well, for me, the Physics were the big initial draw. I didn't care too much that the tracks or cars were fictional. The community was great and I had some really good, white-knuckle races online. I liked the tracks, and the rally-x variations too, I did a lot of hotlapping as well. I also especially liked the autocorss layout feature, as there isn't a sim out there that can match that. Auto-x is a very real form of motorsport that virtually anyone with a drivers license can do. It's truly "grassroots" racing at it's best, and I am really glad that it is possible in LFS. Though I will admit, I never had the patience to do a layout myself. :P

I'm kinda on the fence about new content. I don't really think there needs to be new cars except for a couple key slots to fill, the only additional tracks that I would like to see would be a couple real ones, or nordschleife. (if it was in the game I'd probably never leave the house again!) Some Hillclimb and Point-to Point (aka rally) tracks would be exactly what the game needs though, we have enough road courses and variations of those road courses.

Since the online community of LFS has degraded, (any old-timer would agree with that) I found myself hotlapping a lot. Which brings to attention some of the minor annoyances of the physics. Instead of hotlapping on LFS, I switched to RBR and GTL, both games have their issues as well, but RBR is by far the best solo racing there is, playing LFS afterwards feels pretty bland. I like GTL for the real tracks (and some good add-on tracks) and the unique mix of cars. If you could combine RBR, LFS, and GTL together, you'd have the perfect sim.

I'll keep waiting though. I haven't gone anywhere yet.

Brendan

Quote from sinbad :

It will be years, 3, maybe 4 or 5 before we release another new track environment, we're in no hurry".

It's been discussed over and over... The number of racers at pickup races is number of currently racing divided by popular combos... So if we have more combos we will have less racers at each server... untill more ppl will race overall which might be but not must be resulting from existence of the new tracks.

What I would rather see is new cars fitting existing classes - there are options to make them different althought wide setup possibilities would make similar layouts (drive/engine placement) the same. Maybe when we will have different torque curves for different engines... (knowing Scawen I dont think he will introduce them before proper engine response on throttle simulation).
By the way I am pretty disapointed by the way community balances existing cars - balancing them for every combo and race lenght is a neverending story so I hoped that we will have verified balancing propositions here on the forum... But recently I've been racing at R2R (usually great combos) FeBlack GT2 server - with FXR heavily dominant... even at server that balances cars for GT2 class

This whole thread is the reason the devs rarely post news! God damn if you people can't stop complaining, it's better simply writing nothing!

Quote from AndRand :

It's been discussed over and over... The number of racers at pickup races is number of currently racing divided by popular combos... So if we have more combos we will have less racers at each server... untill more ppl will race overall which might be but not must be resulting from existence of the new tracks.

What I would rather see is new cars fitting existing classes

Don't tell me what has been discussed already, I've been around long enough to have an informed opinion of my own.

Besides which maybe more people would continue to race if there were more circuits regularly (like 1 every 2 years if that's not crazily frequent) introduced. Your point is irrelevant and wrong, the devs add extra combos without worry, but do not add environments.

And I could not disagree less with the second point.

Quote from Jason1984 :

Can i ask some thing, this goes out to everyone who moans about the game.. Don't you play any thing else other then LFS? I'm thinking no! It seems you don't have lifes other then check LFS front page to see if they updated anything. Well look at the release dates for the front page, you see they months apart. So when you look at the front page and nothing new is there.. Then don't ask or moan about new releases. The people behind LFS will update it when it's done!

I reckon one of the prime obstacles to "understanding" Scavier is that most players are just kids.

Quote from dawguk :

This is just one aspect of why, in certain cases, it would be significantly less efficient to just throw more people at it.

While there is more overhead with more people you clearly have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to software development. There is no doubt that making the programming team 2 or 3 would would speed up development(ignoring the headache of finding/organizing a new developer at the beginning). The problem is that is simply not what Scawen wants to do, he wants to work on the program at his own pace by himself. This of course conflicts with most people who don't care about how Scawen wants to work and just want more LFS immediately.

Gosh darn it, we got so far through the thread without that discussion happening. I guess it was inevitable. I think I'll unsubscribe now.

Quote from dawguk :

You are making many many assumptions here.

First of all, you are assuming you know how Scawen and the guys run their business. I suspect that you actually don't, so you aren't qualified to suggest how to make it "better".



Couple of things here; "companies" that make other games might have a couple of dozen people writing actual code for various aspects of the game (level design, graphic design, physics, game concepts, story boarding, etc. the list is LONG). However, lots of their time is taken up not actually writing any code, but communicating with all of the other people. Make suggestions, offering solutions, discussing work flow, signing ideas and work off with managers, etc. When you work in this kind of environment, just because you work in that environment creates more work. Just the management overhead itself requires more people to be employed.

I imagine a game like GRID might be developed in a big environment like this.

Compare that to one man, he manages all his code, he writes it all, he knows where everything lives, he doesn't have to explain his code, he doesn't sit in long boring concept meetings with ten other people, all who want a piece of the pie.

Compare GRID with LFS; Don't care how you look at it, GRID is a much larger game, that has many more requirements set upon it by the production company, the development house, the sponsors, etc. Comparatively LFS is a much simpler model.

Why then, would anybody want to make the development process of LFS any more complicated? You wouldn't. You have a track record of making it work in the past, so if it aint broke, don't "fix it".

This is just one aspect of why, in certain cases, it would be significantly less efficient to just throw more people at it.

I for one, welcome our new rubbery overlords.

It just doesn't make sense to me that if there was more than one coder, things wouldn't get done any faster. Sure, it may not be as efficient, but that doesn't mean nothing would get done faster. The way I see it, it's like SLI/Crossfire... you don't have double the speed of one card, but there sure as hell is a difference in speed (game permitting).

And you're right, I don't understand how these things work to be honest. But your post did nothing to make me think I was wrong.

Once again, I am happy with the way LFS is developed, but people saying that adding more coders wouldn't make things faster just makes no sense to me. I'm not saying that the devs should get more people on the job, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with how things are at the moment, but yeah, I just don't understand that argument. Sorry for repeating myself, just wanted to make sure you understood that I don't think there should be any more devs.

I'm more than welcome for you to school me in why I'm wrong, I love learning and I'm sorry if this came across rude in any way.

Of course more coders could develop LFS faster.
That's completely irrelevant, though, since it's Scawen's wish to work alone. End of story.

The tire (tyre) model of any racing sim is _the_ single most important part of the whole application. The fact that the tire model is being worked on is just about the best possible news that can be (unless there were some other parts so underdeveloped to ruin the whole "sim" thing).. That given, it really seems some people just cannot be satisfied at the moment

Quote from AndroidXP :

Of course more coders could develop LFS faster.
That's completely irrelevant, though, since it's Scawen's wish to work alone. End of story.

Yep, I agree with this post. Pretty much sums up my entire point in two sentences.

Quote from AndRand :

It's been discussed over and over... The number of racers at pickup races is number of currently racing divided by popular combos... So if we have more combos we will have less racers at each server...

I disagree, tbh.

I'd say 90% of people would rather join a server with 15 people on it than with 5 people on it. I would if it's not a combo that I really hate.

That would mean that some cars/tracks would probably be used less but the amount of racers per server wouldn't decline that significantly, IMO.

Quote from zeugnimod :

I disagree, tbh.

I'd say 90% of people would rather join a server with 15 people on it than with 5 people on it. I would if it's not a combo that I really hate.

That would mean that some cars/tracks would probably be used less but the amount of racers per server wouldn't decline that significantly, IMO.

And for some great combos you can hardly find any occupied Sometime not one in TBO, few in GTRs (AsNat mostly) We'll see - maybe we'll get new configs at Westhill and it will reveal if they become popular (thou I'd prefere DX9 effects than new tracks). And maybe thats the point - some combos just not become popular, despite some "odd combos servers" show they can be really great

And pity VWS will be class for its own - I would like to race it with some RWD (like I miss one RWD small classic in ufr and xfr class). But I recognize FWD freaks welcomed it with arms open

looking at this thread

it's better the devs do not post news more often.

Quote from george_tsiros :

looking at this thread

it's better the devs do not post news more often.

So people wanted some progress reports and now you don't? So what should the devs do? It looks like whatever they do, it is wrong...

nope, not what i said.

Quote from george_tsiros :

nope, not what i said.

Oh, sorry man, I am blind. Now I know what you meant.

just try to imagine what would it be like in the forum, if there was a thread like this (and not only one) every time there is a newspost... and that there is a newspost every month (not even every week)

Weeeeeeeee, GO GO GO new tyre physic for XFR.

hey nesrulz

read the posts #607 to #611 then look at my avatar