Are you suggesting he code an entire sim? He was suggesting that, should the developers announce they are no longer working on the game, he hopes tools be released to allow people to mod the game, or you know, make use of the class-leading physics engine that you are suggesting he make on his own.
I think only Scawen, can do this game, properly and correct, because thats why we love this game so much, his way, the correct way, he knows how he wants to see the phisics, the thing, is to write it and program it correctly - that everything behave corectly as was on the script or lets as as real as possible.
I hope very much, (and im gonna be very sad if not ) for the end of the 2012, to see some patch, or S3 the very first beta of the beta release, for me will be very important to see anything new, the sciroco, any other, RWD road cars, may be a BMW 5 series, or even M5, or something more hardcore such as Nissan GTR) new track (tracks), and some sweet little surprises, which S2 was full of, i remember first screenshots of ~FZR class cars, and i was so much waiting the final result! i was 101% convinced im gonna buy this game, and im gonna have so much fun !!! which i had all over these years
Of course for me there is some cars undrivable, because im with keyboard, (XFR, UFR) but mainly because i love the RWD cars ...
anyways, im confindent that LFS is still the best racing simulator existing at the moment, and im so much looking forward to try that S3 Release, at the end of the 2012
You know that most developers build a development tool kit to make it easier to modify their game, they don't just code in C++ all day, but use a specific code designed for their game (Think of Unreal Engine, or Quake Engine, they have SDK kits allowing for simple development of a game using that engine. LFS probably has something similar.) I also have not seen LFS source code posted. Its not just simple as use blender to make a 3d model and use notepad++ to write code for LFS. The way the code is writen in the game would take month if not years to decipher without having SDK or source code. So asking for those tools is not "demanding", if they are not released then there will be no further development of the game, regardless of how skilled you are in coding, modeling, etc. it will take years to backwards engineer the LFS engine and the game...and then start developing it...same as starting from scratch...
If the LFS team stops developing it would be nice if they "put" those tools up for others to use, as well as the source code ( or a list of programs they used). They already have those tools, and source code, so it won't be difficult for LFS developers to release them. If they do release them then LFS development can be continued by a community.
Also the reason people are demanding updates is because they paid money for the game, so knowing its fate would be nice. But the dev's don't need to release any info ether as most games have a life span of 2-4 years before being abandoned anyway. In that sense LFS will be dead in 3 years (since last update). Time will tell though.
P.S regarding the source code and SDK if there are patents involved with their physics engine then it will probably will never see public domain...
P.S.S before accusing people of demanding things, think about what they are asking. And very carefully make assumptions about what they want. Its quiet obvious you have no clue what goes into making a game, or a program...its not a simple process, hence why there are developer studies that work on developing only game engines, and then other studios take that engine and build a game powered by it...
Yes, I suggested people to make an entire sim. If Scavier decides to abandon LFS I could see the use of releasing an SDK or whatever people could use to improve (or hack to pieces) what LFS stands for today. I'm afraid though, that this would be the day LFS "dies". But I hope, if that happens, everything will prove me wrong. If it is an easy and smooth process to provide the physics engine along with some user-friendly tools for tracks and cars building, hey, I'll be surprised if I would not take back what I've just written .
First I apologize if I sounded a bit harsh on you s911, but I read your post as actually "demanding" a company to give you information on how they make their product! It is not going to happen if they do not see it beneficial. I mixed your post into several others that demands this and that because they think they have the right to it. You paid for what Scavier put into the game at the time you bought it. As a bonus you get any patches that "might" be released (afterwards) to improve gameplay. If the game is broken and does not work, you have a "right" to file a complaint to get your money back. That's it. Anything above that is just asking for favors.
On the other hand, I agree with you that it could be a good idea to release an SDK if Scawen decides to move away from LFS. If there even is such a thing as an SDK for LFS? I suspekt, with such a small dev team and its "long" history, it's all in their heads, sort of. And you are right: if patents apply, you will have to play by those rules. Even if the code is not patented (I haven't checked), it's still Scavens (first ) "baby" and if I were in his shoes I'd consider more than twice before I just gave it away...
I perhaps made a mistake on what you specifically demanded, sorry. Again, my point is that the tools you need are still in front of your eyes. What you are asking for is a shortcut. Yes, it could be reasonable to "ask" for tips and tricks in such that the wheel does not need a reinvention. This happens within research fields, but unfortunately not very often when it comes to business (hence patents). I could be wrong, but I believe LFS came alive through its own tools, hence Scavier wrote them as he went along to accomplish a full game title. LFS seems very "tailor-made" to me. What "game-engine" do you suggest Scaven has used? There may be "helpers" available today that facilitate the development further, but if I am not entirely mistaken, LFS is not an ordinary gameproduct of todays game-studio standards.
On the contrary, I am in fact a programmer, although not in the game-industry. That is why I said that all you need is available, the only thing hindering you is your current knowledgebase. It can be expanded since we (at least I) live in a world of flowing information and knowledge readily available (books, university, passion...). So do not make assumptions as you so rightfully suggested .
Just to round off on the right-foot here: I, like everybody else around here, wish to see further development of an already extraordinary product. Of course! I just do not see it can be accomplished by the LFS customers, even if there's a lot of talent around. At least not at the moment since focus is on tyre physics. Let it be that tracks and cars can be modded in the future with a careful and well thought through methodology. I'd probably not say no to that!
>Scawen tries to solve problem that has puzzled physicists for decades
>Product stagnates while devs float comfortably on revenue from stagnant product
>Devs have known that a show-stopping server exploit has been discovered and exploited for a couple of weeks
There are two main reasons why game engines such as quake and unreal have their own scripting. One is to allow level development to be streamlined - placement and control of NPC's and modifiable environment can be scripted by level designers who don't need or want access to the raw c++.
The other is to enable larger teams to work on games more efficiently - fewer problems with version control if individual level designers can script their work without needing access to the main code base.
Neither of these things apply to LFS where there is no story line, so no scripted NPC's are required, and the 'levels' are static. Not to mention the fact that there is only one programmer.
For LFS the devs will have coded their own development tools for sure, but I imagine these will be: track modelling tool, car modelling tool, and multiple small scale tools to aid in the development of physics, ai etc.
None of these tools will be in a 'release' state, as they will be updated as and when required for any number of reasons.
Scawen has already released fantastic community SDK tools years ago that allow the community amazing flexibility in what they can do with LFS. In-sim and out-sim make much more sense in the context of a racing sim than a quake style scripting system would. It's not Scawens fault that all the community has managed recently with this tech is endless copycat cruise server systems.