The physics on old good Lfs is still the best. I test every sim and go back every time. Rf2 is on the second place. RBR on third and then on fours place i see Assetto corsa.....
LFS looks, sounds and most importantly FEELS so much better! I've owned it for 14 years and I still go back for more. If you're fast in LFS you're probably pretty quick IRL. with other games, I'm not so sure!
I played a lot of LFS during my teenage years before getting a license. Had top ~24 iirc lap in the FBM around Blackwood at the time (1:12:forgot) with a kb+mouse. I strongly believe it made me a much better driver in real life, even using those peripherals.
@@LaggerSVK Yup, that's around when I played, maybe 2006-2011ish.We probably unknowingly fought for those leaderboard spots lol. I remember trying to match bawbag's lap time (I think it was 1:12:08 and the record at the time). Did you play on that one server with black&yellow name? I think it was [AA] or something like that.
@@dodoz44 yes, i played a lot of AirAttack server. I remember EQWorry and his developed Airio system. And yes also wanted to beat bawbag and thought that his lap is optimal until someone done 1:11:7x
@@LaggerSVK Ahh, AirAttack indeed! Good days. Wonder if we raced in the same lobby at one point. And I remember before I stopped playing that somebody did beat bawbag, but I think it was a 1:11:9x. Was the :7x still before changes to the track? Also I remember getting banned there for a while, as somehow the single player, un-verified times that I achieved by modding/tuning with cheatengine got transfered over to the server. It was a 0:46ish FBM lap...
@@dodoz44 after a year I got back to see LFS progress and as now youtube changed I see your username, offcourse we were racing each other at times. Its now quite a long time ago.
at 0:59 you can see why LFS has most realistic physics in racing game. In real driving if you are using the path like in LFS is very critic for your final lap time.
Love how the graphics in LFS are simple yet realistic, and I can play on my 2004 laptop. Not to mention that from this video alone, Assetto feels arcadish in comparison.
The important difference between assetto and lfs is physics simulation. LFS: 2000HZ physics frequency (100hz with 20 substeps) Assetto: 600hz physics frequency (wouldn't be enough to do the simulations LFS do) Suspension and steering: LFS: actual unsprung mass, with physics constraints. Assetto: Cheap raycast fake physics Driveline: LFS: actual driveline simulation, with individual mass components such as flywheel, input shaft, propshaft, diff core, wheels Assetto: Cheap, non physically accurate, non reactive, non energy conserving driveline programming breaking newtons first second and third law in various ways. This is especially evident if you try to dump the cluch, the fakery is revealed as the potential energy of the spinning flywheel is lost into nothingness. If you've ever tried programming a driveline of your own and is scratching your head because you have no idea what you're doing, you're gonna end up with something like assetto corsa. If however you understand physics, action, reaction, inertia etc you realize you need a higher physics frequency than what assetto use to even have a chance to make an actual stable simulation.
2000hz in LFS is only the suspensions. And that's because otherwise there'd be a bug. LFS physics work at 100hz. Driving any car in both sims can tell enough about how simplistic LFS is compared to AC. In LFS, the only way to go quick is drifting. Including Formula cars. LFS' tyre heating is completely broken as well. You get tyre up to 200c and stop the car, it takes minutes for it to cool back down. In real life it'd take few seconds to go back to 50-80c. In LFS, tyres are so broken that, you set the fastest laps with the most worn tyres. 99% worn tyre is faster than a completely fresh tyre. Rest of his comment is typical fanboy mumbling about stuff he doesn't understand.
@@marble25 Yes, it's true that LFS suspension physics would be unstable running lower than 2000hz. That is because you need a higher simulation frequency if you're not cutting corners. It's certainly not something Assetto can brag about. The whole thing about newtons third law is ignored in several aspects of Assettos "simulation" I will agree that tires is pretty much the only thing Assetto have going for it, and that the tire thermals is indeed unrealistic in LFS. All in all the simulation is better though, and Assetto is over rated. Calling valid points "fanboy mumbling" doesn't help you prove any points.
@@batman3698 So you concede that, the most important thing in a sim, tyres, are wrong in LFS, and somehow LFS is "better"? This is nothing more than a fanboy opinion. LFS physics run at 100hz. Saying that they run at 2000hz because devs had to do sub updates in suspension to prevent cars from jumping on the road is mumbling. Tyres are literally the only contact with the road and in LFS they are utterly wrong. That's why Scawen doesn't allow tyre data modding in LFS. Because god knows what's in there. Take a look at the level of detail in tyre parameters of AC and modding in general and you'll understand & appreciate the difference in complexity of the model. LFS doesn't calculate yaw angles properly either, otherwise high speed drifting with Formula cars would never work out. LFS devs literally gave up when they couldn't correctly simulate Scirocco due to underlying engine not being good enough. LFS' FFB is also very basic, while AC FFB tells you where the car is at any time on the road, where the load is, where the intertia is, and where suspensions are, just like irl driving. Even Netkar Pro was light years of LFS. AC is a universe ahead. That's why Verstappen says "AC is one of the best if not the best" and not LFS.
@@marble25 Your manners leaves much to be desired. You'll notice that I have yet to call you a fanboy as you continue to praise AC over anything else, and dismiss all opposing facts as "mumbling" Your conclusion about the substeps is incorrect. The reason why assetto doesn't need to use substeps is because it's a super basic massless system. The suspension is only there to add some camber curves. The whole strut leg is composed of a single raycast, like what you would find in a need for speed game. The tires in assetto works great, but only over a certain speed. That's because assetto corsa is based on the pacejka magic formula which breaks down in low speeds. But it has other benefits, such as being a method which is better at interpreting measured tire data. LFS have a more ambitious approach for its tires, and I admit it has not yet come into full fruition. But the point is, for Assetto to call itself a sim, it simulates very few components of the car in a physical manner. It's lazy. It's designed around the subjective experience, much like an arcade game. I just find LFS more impressive from a technological standpoint, and that's it.
@@batman3698 You are truly an obsessed fanboy. That's not "calling names" that's just what you are. I didn't praise AC over anything else, I said its infinitely better than LFS, and that one of the best F1 drivers of all time, who also happens to be very experienced in simracing, who also have obviously, access to professional F1 team simulator confirms this. Jimmy Broadbent also confirms especially after irl experience that the way cars move is most realistic in AC. I actually don't even see the point in replying to your obsessed fanaticsm but I also don't like when people find one random video and attempt to circlejerk. Compare real GT3 onboard to AC GT3 onboard. How the cars move about, it is literall the same. All GT3 cars in LFS feel exactly the same because physics are not detailed enough to make a difference. That F1 car in LFS feels completely weightless. Physics run at a laughably low 100hz. Tyre heating cooling cycles are completely wrong. Tyre wear and grip levels are utterly wrong. There are no yaw and downforce calculations. FFB is no better than spring load and bit of vibration. You don't know what tyre model AC is using, since its source codes are closed. Are you ambiguously trying to say that LFS is using "ambitious" aka physical tyre model? No. LFS is using an extremely basic tyre model. The devs attempted to create a different physically based tyre model and that was 15 years ago and it didn't come to fruition and probably never will, and even if it does come out, while it may make LFS handle closer to AC and have bit more detail, it won't even be anywhere close to AC tyre model.
Asseto is a great looking arcade ish sim game, sad but true/ LFS is a not that great looking, but its hella more fun and more realistic in every aspect of driving.
Is people exaggerating about lfs being better sim than any sim or other sims are really trash? I don't get it, when I had driven Alpha Romeo sports car on public track (under supervision of trained driver of course 😂) I find automobilista, assetto Corsa more realistic and LFS feels hard tyres and hard ground, I found lfs lacks only in feel of car to driver, lfs is as good as other sims too....
Is people exaggerating about lfs being better sim than any sim or other sims are really trash? I don't get it, when I had driven Alpha Romeo sports car on public track (under supervision of trained driver of course 😂) I find automobilista, assetto Corsa more realistic and LFS feels hard tyres and hard ground, I found lfs lacks only in feel of car to driver, lfs is as good as other sims too....
lfs is the best sim to get into simracing since its low requirements and its physics matching with other top sims, i think that's why people love it, and i included.
@@dou3r878 I doubt it's physics, they said they will give a new physics update in 22.... Autonibilista is waaayyyy better than LFS (I'm comparing ams bcoZ it's the only sim which is old and can be compared to LFS, newer sims are leagues ahead of LFS and AMS) There's a list of features LFS lacks, in simulation category(even rfactor has more simulation than LFS). I like it's graphics, rfactor 1 graphics were so bad that I stopped playing for worst graphics in history 😂.... I really wish they get fundings and more people on their team, only then they will compete with other sims....
@@dou3r878 PS I love the game too, I have no grudges ,against it. It's just people who think that it is better or similar to iracing and ams etc etc that's where I don't agree.... PS I had 1.11.86 in LFS with FBM car on BL2 Historic track....
@@gamingandtechnology6913 well, lfs is the second simulator i've tried in my life, so there still a world out there for me, but lfs really gets along with oversteery driving styles, that's why i like it, i just couldn't find myself in GTR2 wich i tried too, GTR2 just doesn't alow you to oversteer and that makes me awfully slow. But i think lfs is kind of easy because i matched 1.12 pace in BL with FBM in just month and a half and now i have 1.11.74 as PB. So i am not sure if lfs is the best sim but it surely gained a place in my hearth
@@dou3r878 gtr2 was worst, problem with gtr2 was that it is limited to the gt cars in game and some modders who have put a better model, open wheel cars in gtr2 is not possible. LFS still needs a LOT of work compared to rf2, ams, acc,ac, and iracing. As I said earlier I love the game and I don't hate it at all, it's just the ppl who make false claims about game being better than iracing and rf2 and even ac... Gtr2 has more simulation features than LFS, both gtr2 and rf1 was years ahead of LFS if we compare their today's game they are competing iracing and acc(rip gtr2) it's what bothers me.... Also if someone wants to become a good sim racer, we can't just play one car and some tracks .... So I switched to ams(for pure nostalgia) and rf2 sometimes ac(for mods) there are PPL who have done 10k - 50k laps on same track with same car..... That's not sim racing. I really wish ea or someone fund the devs, their cpu optimization is sort unparalleled imo, if they expand out that thing LFS can take place of ac, there are many low end pc users out there who will show intrrst...
LFS looks better when you actually play it, after the latest versions. Like, much better. In fact i'd say it's the best looking sim out there in terms of the road textures, details on the track, overall texture quality and sharpness.
The physics on old good Lfs is still the best. I test every sim and go back every time. Rf2 is on the second place. RBR on third and then on fours place i see Assetto corsa.....
I agree with you. Live for Speed, it feels like a real car would handle.....
rFactor 2 < lfs. Doubt.
LFS looks, sounds and most importantly FEELS so much better! I've owned it for 14 years and I still go back for more. If you're fast in LFS you're probably pretty quick IRL. with other games, I'm not so sure!
still better clouds in LFS
I played a lot of LFS during my teenage years before getting a license. Had top ~24 iirc lap in the FBM around Blackwood at the time (1:12:forgot) with a kb+mouse. I strongly believe it made me a much better driver in real life, even using those peripherals.
24 iirc? I had for some time fastest mouse time on FBM / Backwood . I mean it was 1:12:38 or similar. Played from 2008 to 2013.
@@LaggerSVK
Yup, that's around when I played, maybe 2006-2011ish.We probably unknowingly fought for those leaderboard spots lol. I remember trying to match bawbag's lap time (I think it was 1:12:08 and the record at the time).
Did you play on that one server with black&yellow name? I think it was [AA] or something like that.
@@dodoz44 yes, i played a lot of AirAttack server. I remember EQWorry and his developed Airio system. And yes also wanted to beat bawbag and thought that his lap is optimal until someone done 1:11:7x
@@LaggerSVK
Ahh, AirAttack indeed! Good days. Wonder if we raced in the same lobby at one point. And I remember before I stopped playing that somebody did beat bawbag, but I think it was a 1:11:9x. Was the :7x still before changes to the track?
Also I remember getting banned there for a while, as somehow the single player, un-verified times that I achieved by modding/tuning with cheatengine got transfered over to the server. It was a 0:46ish FBM lap...
@@dodoz44 after a year I got back to see LFS progress and as now youtube changed I see your username, offcourse we were racing each other at times. Its now quite a long time ago.
at 0:59 you can see why LFS has most realistic physics in racing game. In real driving if you are using the path like in LFS is very critic for your final lap time.
they are similar. the only thing that's vastly better in assetto is the sound.
LFS Ads on AC @ 1:10 Hahaha. That's rich.
Asseto Corsa is *BUSTED*
Lmao
The road texture is also far better in LFS.
No no no no, in Assetto Corsa tire marks appear after a few laps, but in LFS they are just as they were and will be.
LFS textures are vibrant and the track has contours and shadows. AC track looks like flat monochrome strip with no texture
Came from LFS, went to AC. AC just doesn’t feel right - have tried custom LUTs and everything.
Lfs is better game, just need one big update
its here
11years later
assetto corsa is better now unironically
Love how the graphics in LFS are simple yet realistic, and I can play on my 2004 laptop. Not to mention that from this video alone, Assetto feels arcadish in comparison.
How assetto corsa has that track in its game?
You can upload LFS tracks in AC but you can't upload AC in LFS 😊
I never had LFS, but I suppose that what made it less appetible than IS games is the impossibility to have real tracks
The important difference between assetto and lfs is physics simulation.
LFS: 2000HZ physics frequency (100hz with 20 substeps)
Assetto: 600hz physics frequency (wouldn't be enough to do the simulations LFS do)
Suspension and steering:
LFS: actual unsprung mass, with physics constraints.
Assetto: Cheap raycast fake physics
Driveline:
LFS: actual driveline simulation, with individual mass components such as flywheel, input shaft, propshaft, diff core, wheels
Assetto: Cheap, non physically accurate, non reactive, non energy conserving driveline programming breaking newtons first second and third law in various ways. This is especially evident if you try to dump the cluch, the fakery is revealed as the potential energy of the spinning flywheel is lost into nothingness. If you've ever tried programming a driveline of your own and is scratching your head because you have no idea what you're doing, you're gonna end up with something like assetto corsa. If however you understand physics, action, reaction, inertia etc you realize you need a higher physics frequency than what assetto use to even have a chance to make an actual stable simulation.
2000hz in LFS is only the suspensions. And that's because otherwise there'd be a bug. LFS physics work at 100hz.
Driving any car in both sims can tell enough about how simplistic LFS is compared to AC. In LFS, the only way to go quick is drifting. Including Formula cars. LFS' tyre heating is completely broken as well. You get tyre up to 200c and stop the car, it takes minutes for it to cool back down. In real life it'd take few seconds to go back to 50-80c.
In LFS, tyres are so broken that, you set the fastest laps with the most worn tyres. 99% worn tyre is faster than a completely fresh tyre.
Rest of his comment is typical fanboy mumbling about stuff he doesn't understand.
@@marble25 Yes, it's true that LFS suspension physics would be unstable running lower than 2000hz. That is because you need a higher simulation frequency if you're not cutting corners. It's certainly not something Assetto can brag about. The whole thing about newtons third law is ignored in several aspects of Assettos "simulation"
I will agree that tires is pretty much the only thing Assetto have going for it, and that the tire thermals is indeed unrealistic in LFS. All in all the simulation is better though, and Assetto is over rated.
Calling valid points "fanboy mumbling" doesn't help you prove any points.
@@batman3698 So you concede that, the most important thing in a sim, tyres, are wrong in LFS, and somehow LFS is "better"? This is nothing more than a fanboy opinion. LFS physics run at 100hz. Saying that they run at 2000hz because devs had to do sub updates in suspension to prevent cars from jumping on the road is mumbling.
Tyres are literally the only contact with the road and in LFS they are utterly wrong. That's why Scawen doesn't allow tyre data modding in LFS. Because god knows what's in there. Take a look at the level of detail in tyre parameters of AC and modding in general and you'll understand & appreciate the difference in complexity of the model.
LFS doesn't calculate yaw angles properly either, otherwise high speed drifting with Formula cars would never work out.
LFS devs literally gave up when they couldn't correctly simulate Scirocco due to underlying engine not being good enough.
LFS' FFB is also very basic, while AC FFB tells you where the car is at any time on the road, where the load is, where the intertia is, and where suspensions are, just like irl driving.
Even Netkar Pro was light years of LFS. AC is a universe ahead.
That's why Verstappen says "AC is one of the best if not the best" and not LFS.
@@marble25 Your manners leaves much to be desired. You'll notice that I have yet to call you a fanboy as you continue to praise AC over anything else, and dismiss all opposing facts as "mumbling"
Your conclusion about the substeps is incorrect. The reason why assetto doesn't need to use substeps is because it's a super basic massless system. The suspension is only there to add some camber curves. The whole strut leg is composed of a single raycast, like what you would find in a need for speed game.
The tires in assetto works great, but only over a certain speed. That's because assetto corsa is based on the pacejka magic formula which breaks down in low speeds. But it has other benefits, such as being a method which is better at interpreting measured tire data. LFS have a more ambitious approach for its tires, and I admit it has not yet come into full fruition.
But the point is, for Assetto to call itself a sim, it simulates very few components of the car in a physical manner. It's lazy. It's designed around the subjective experience, much like an arcade game. I just find LFS more impressive from a technological standpoint, and that's it.
@@batman3698 You are truly an obsessed fanboy. That's not "calling names" that's just what you are. I didn't praise AC over anything else, I said its infinitely better than LFS, and that one of the best F1 drivers of all time, who also happens to be very experienced in simracing, who also have obviously, access to professional F1 team simulator confirms this. Jimmy Broadbent also confirms especially after irl experience that the way cars move is most realistic in AC. I actually don't even see the point in replying to your obsessed fanaticsm but I also don't like when people find one random video and attempt to circlejerk.
Compare real GT3 onboard to AC GT3 onboard. How the cars move about, it is literall the same. All GT3 cars in LFS feel exactly the same because physics are not detailed enough to make a difference. That F1 car in LFS feels completely weightless. Physics run at a laughably low 100hz. Tyre heating cooling cycles are completely wrong. Tyre wear and grip levels are utterly wrong. There are no yaw and downforce calculations. FFB is no better than spring load and bit of vibration.
You don't know what tyre model AC is using, since its source codes are closed. Are you ambiguously trying to say that LFS is using "ambitious" aka physical tyre model? No. LFS is using an extremely basic tyre model. The devs attempted to create a different physically based tyre model and that was 15 years ago and it didn't come to fruition and probably never will, and even if it does come out, while it may make LFS handle closer to AC and have bit more detail, it won't even be anywhere close to AC tyre model.
LFS = Organic
Other sims = Synthetic
Period!
P.S.
Eat LDS and try it yourself . Just kiddin jhust kiddin....
What Asetto Car is being driven in the video?
Asseto is a great looking arcade ish sim game, sad but true/ LFS is a not that great looking, but its hella more fun and more realistic in every aspect of driving.
I don't thing Assetto is an arcade
Lfs looks better in some aspects?!?!?!
If You like LfS, but want an update, go Project Cars 2.
AC does not feel right = I am very surprised why so many users playing it ? but ok whatever. I want to test iRacing vs LFS
Track variety is almosy everything in sim racing and Live For Speed lacks that
2020 version??
LFS ye alıştığım için asetto corsa bana grafik olarak biraz kötü
Assetto corsa's sound like driving Mustang
Does assetto corsa have FBM mod?
no, as far as I know
Is people exaggerating about lfs being better sim than any sim or other sims are really trash? I don't get it, when I had driven Alpha Romeo sports car on public track (under supervision of trained driver of course 😂) I find automobilista, assetto Corsa more realistic and LFS feels hard tyres and hard ground, I found lfs lacks only in feel of car to driver, lfs is as good as other sims too....
@@gamingandtechnology6913I think people exaggerate about lfs, I mean, it's a great sim, but there are some better sims for sure.
LFS graphics is just good as it is (i have a bad pc)
I play lfs but the othet looks better
Is people exaggerating about lfs being better sim than any sim or other sims are really trash? I don't get it, when I had driven Alpha Romeo sports car on public track (under supervision of trained driver of course 😂) I find automobilista, assetto Corsa more realistic and LFS feels hard tyres and hard ground, I found lfs lacks only in feel of car to driver, lfs is as good as other sims too....
lfs is the best sim to get into simracing since its low requirements and its physics matching with other top sims, i think that's why people love it, and i included.
@@dou3r878 I doubt it's physics, they said they will give a new physics update in 22.... Autonibilista is waaayyyy better than LFS (I'm comparing ams bcoZ it's the only sim which is old and can be compared to LFS, newer sims are leagues ahead of LFS and AMS)
There's a list of features LFS lacks, in simulation category(even rfactor has more simulation than LFS). I like it's graphics, rfactor 1 graphics were so bad that I stopped playing for worst graphics in history 😂....
I really wish they get fundings and more people on their team, only then they will compete with other sims....
@@dou3r878 PS I love the game too, I have no grudges ,against it. It's just people who think that it is better or similar to iracing and ams etc etc that's where I don't agree....
PS I had 1.11.86 in LFS with FBM car on BL2 Historic track....
@@gamingandtechnology6913 well, lfs is the second simulator i've tried in my life, so there still a world out there for me, but lfs really gets along with oversteery driving styles, that's why i like it, i just couldn't find myself in GTR2 wich i tried too, GTR2 just doesn't alow you to oversteer and that makes me awfully slow. But i think lfs is kind of easy because i matched 1.12 pace in BL with FBM in just month and a half and now i have 1.11.74 as PB. So i am not sure if lfs is the best sim but it surely gained a place in my hearth
@@dou3r878 gtr2 was worst, problem with gtr2 was that it is limited to the gt cars in game and some modders who have put a better model, open wheel cars in gtr2 is not possible.
LFS still needs a LOT of work compared to rf2, ams, acc,ac, and iracing. As I said earlier I love the game and I don't hate it at all, it's just the ppl who make false claims about game being better than iracing and rf2 and even ac... Gtr2 has more simulation features than LFS, both gtr2 and rf1 was years ahead of LFS if we compare their today's game they are competing iracing and acc(rip gtr2) it's what bothers me.... Also if someone wants to become a good sim racer, we can't just play one car and some tracks .... So I switched to ams(for pure nostalgia) and rf2 sometimes ac(for mods) there are PPL who have done 10k - 50k laps on same track with same car..... That's not sim racing. I really wish ea or someone fund the devs, their cpu optimization is sort unparalleled imo, if they expand out that thing LFS can take place of ac, there are many low end pc users out there who will show intrrst...
better shadoows in lfs
L coments
LFS looks better when you actually play it, after the latest versions. Like, much better. In fact i'd say it's the best looking sim out there in terms of the road textures, details on the track, overall texture quality and sharpness.