racing legends update - 3 years, 1 week and counting

oops - forgot to mention that last week was the 3rd anniversary of the infamous 'Lotus Transporter' update at the racing legends web site. We have been waiting more than 3 years for the next update... Its weird how this more than anything makes me think "has it really been that 3 years have passed since then?" Cheers, Tim

"Tim Epstein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xhu0h.42543$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> oops - forgot to mention that last week was the 3rd anniversary of the > infamous 'Lotus Transporter' update at the racing legends web site. We > have been waiting more than 3 years for the next update... > > Its weird how this more than anything makes me think "has it really been > that 3 years have passed since then?" > > Cheers, > Tim > > >

Are you serious???? I have been away from sim racing for 3 years and i am just finding my feet again with whats on the market...rFactor was an idea when i last heard now it seems established...but oh my god has that West Brothers concept not happend at all..? They took money donations and all sorts didnt they ? Im quite speechless !! They surely havent done the same things twice and still retained any standing with people? Wow...thats shocked me Aid

Wow! Can't believe their site is still up! They even have a chat on it lol. Last update still 2003. http://gabbly.com/www.racing-legends.com/news.htm "Tim Epstein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xhu0h.42543$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> oops - forgot to mention that last week was the 3rd anniversary of the > infamous 'Lotus Transporter' update at the racing legends web site. We > have been waiting more than 3 years for the next update... > > Its weird how this more than anything makes me think "has it really been > that 3 years have passed since then?" > > Cheers, > Tim > > >

[email hidden] (Tim Epstein) wrote: > "has it really been that 3 years have passed since then?" It's funny how, as you get older, you start to look at history in a different way. When you're a kid, 1000 years seems like forever. But once you can look back 20 or 30 years (or more :-) history seems like a much smaller place. 1000 years is only about 12.5 average lifespans laid end to end, and 3 years is nothing; gone in the blink of an eye (if you blink slowly, anyway). I wonder if the Wests have had to get a proper job yet? I hope not. Proper jobs are bad for the creative soul. Andrew McP

On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:49:33 GMT, Tim Epstein wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> oops - forgot to mention that last week was the 3rd anniversary of the > infamous 'Lotus Transporter' update at the racing legends web site. We have > been waiting more than 3 years for the next update... > > Its weird how this more than anything makes me think "has it really been > that 3 years have passed since then?" > > Cheers, > Tim

What have the West brothers done with Gregor Veble?!

"Tim Epstein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xhu0h.42543$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> oops - forgot to mention that last week was the 3rd anniversary of the > infamous 'Lotus Transporter' update at the racing legends web site. We > have been waiting more than 3 years for the next update... > > Its weird how this more than anything makes me think "has it really been > that 3 years have passed since then?" > > Cheers, > Tim > > >

I thought this was long gone and dead..?

RL is not dead, folks. It's been in development all along. They just stopped updating the web site with news, that's all. I spent four days at Gregor Veble's house a few weeks ago and we spent quite a bit of time driving the physics engine from RL. Chris sends me little bits and pieces now and then to look at and all of us chat on a nearly daily basis. A little something I'm working on will be used in it as well, so I'm counting on it :-) Three years is nothing in sim development for a group of two or three guys, by the way. I spent over four years on the physics and AI for Virtual RC Racing alone. Had I had to write the graphics engine, online aspect, game engine, GUI, etc., etc., it easily could have added another couple of years. Wasn't LFS in development for 5 years or something before the first demo came out? Todd Wasson

"Todd Wasson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> RL is not dead, folks. It's been in development all along. They just > stopped updating the web site with news, that's all. > > I spent four days at Gregor Veble's house a few weeks ago and we spent > quite a bit of time driving the physics engine from RL. Chris sends me > little bits and pieces now and then to look at and all of us chat on a > nearly daily basis. A little something I'm working on will be used in > it as well, so I'm counting on it :-) > > Three years is nothing in sim development for a group of two or three > guys, by the way. I spent over four years on the physics and AI for > Virtual RC Racing alone. Had I had to write the graphics engine, > online aspect, game engine, GUI, etc., etc., it easily could have added > another couple of years. Wasn't LFS in development for 5 years or > something before the first demo came out? > > Todd Wasson

Interesting. Did he also mention something about release of RL? Martin Knud

Interesting. Did he also mention something about release of RL? Martin Knud No, but he did mention that t-shirts are available and donations are welcome. "Marni" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4545c380$0$14018$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> > "Todd Wasson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> RL is not dead, folks. It's been in development all along. They just >> stopped updating the web site with news, that's all. >> >> I spent four days at Gregor Veble's house a few weeks ago and we spent >> quite a bit of time driving the physics engine from RL. Chris sends me >> little bits and pieces now and then to look at and all of us chat on a >> nearly daily basis. A little something I'm working on will be used in >> it as well, so I'm counting on it :-) >> >> Three years is nothing in sim development for a group of two or three >> guys, by the way. I spent over four years on the physics and AI for >> Virtual RC Racing alone. Had I had to write the graphics engine, >> online aspect, game engine, GUI, etc., etc., it easily could have added >> another couple of years. Wasn't LFS in development for 5 years or >> something before the first demo came out? >> >> Todd Wasson > > Interesting. Did he also mention something about release of RL? > > Martin Knud

"Tim Epstein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xhu0h.42543$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> oops - forgot to mention that last week was the 3rd anniversary of the > infamous 'Lotus Transporter' update at the racing legends web site. We > have been waiting more than 3 years for the next update... > > Its weird how this more than anything makes me think "has it really been > that 3 years have passed since then?" > > Cheers, > Tim > > >

classic !!!

Todd Wasson wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

> RL is not dead, folks. It's been in development all along. They just > stopped updating the web site with news, that's all. > > I spent four days at Gregor Veble's house a few weeks ago and we spent > quite a bit of time driving the physics engine from RL. Chris sends me > little bits and pieces now and then to look at and all of us chat on a > nearly daily basis. A little something I'm working on will be used in > it as well, so I'm counting on it :-) > > Three years is nothing in sim development for a group of two or three > guys, by the way. I spent over four years on the physics and AI for > Virtual RC Racing alone. Had I had to write the graphics engine, > online aspect, game engine, GUI, etc., etc., it easily could have added > another couple of years. Wasn't LFS in development for 5 years or > something before the first demo came out? > > Todd Wasson

Three years is actually a long time in sim development. With the development of hardware (processors, gpu's, physics cards, etc) always evolving, it's very difficult to create a sim today that will still be considered "state of the art" three years from now. Besides, RL has supposedly "been in development" for more than three years -- it's simply been three years since the transport was "showcased" on the website. I would have assumed that the sim was pretty close to completion three years ago if the developers had time for details such as that! I would hope that most everyone gave up hope for RL and moved on a long long time ago... I know that GTR, GTR2, rF, GTL and LFS has kept me plenty busy during that time!

<[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > Three years is actually a long time in sim development. > I think you missed the rest of the statement which was pretty pertinent: >> >> Three years is nothing in sim development for a group of two or three >> guys, by the way. >> Three years might be long for a company that employs a lot of programmers and has a lot of money, but for a couple/few hobbyists, it's not long at all. With the plethora of driving sims out over the past few years though, it might be questioned whether it is worth those two/three guys spending their time on RL.

[email hidden] wrote: > Three years is actually a long time in sim development. For a company like Simbin or ISI that is using a ready made engine and has a team of nearly 50 people involved, yes. RL is a three man show and they use no existing engines at all. Like I said, I spent a lot longer than three years just on my physics engine. In fact, I'm at the six and a half year mark right now and am still working on things. IIRC, LFS was in development for 5 years before they put out the very first demo, and it didn't go on sale for some time after that. If S3 is their "final, finished product" that they set out to make, well, you're looking at something like 10 years total. It cracks me up when folks that have never written a sim before argue with me over how long development tasks should take <bg> With the > development of hardware (processors, gpu's, physics cards, etc) always > evolving, it's very difficult to create a sim today that will still be > considered "state of the art" three years from now. Your own development experience backs this up? Anyway, I disagree. A system I wrote recently won't be able to run on PC's in a game environment for many years to come. But it's sitting there ready to go when the CPU horsepower arrives. In game development you ALWAYS plan things for future hardware that will be out when you think the project will be finished. Just par for the course and very routine. Besides, RL has > supposedly "been in development" for more than three years -- it's > simply been three years since the transport was "showcased" on the > website. I would have assumed that the sim was pretty close to > completion three years ago if the developers had time for details such > as that! The transporter took Tony probably a week or two to model. This delayed RL absolutely zero. You need to code the engine to a certain point before you need to worry about artwork at all. The artist can not go into any serious production mode during this period. If I recall correctly, in Virtual RC Racing we were coding for four or five years before Tony came along and did all our models. He did the artwork so fast we were still coding when he was finished with all the game content. We have ten or twelve tracks included in VRC that were done in no time. By the time we released it he had another ten or so ready to go for expansion packs and so on. I think he's got something like 25 or 30 tracks finished for us now. He could have done 100 transporters in that time and it would not have effected our release date (or RL's for that matter) one minute. Argue with me if you want. Let's see what you've personally done in sim development first though ;-) I know that GTR, GTR2, rF, GTL and LFS has > kept me plenty busy during that time! Me too :-) Fun stuff for sure. My personal favorites are LFS and GTL :-)

Marni wrote:> > Interesting. Did he also mention something about release of RL? > > Martin Knud Nobody knows when it'll be released, not even Gregor or Chris. Chris is enjoying the process of coding it (especially in peace and quiet now without the incessant bashing). It'll be released when they're happy with it. That being said, it could be a couple more years yet for all I know. They're in no hurry.

Todd Wasson wrote:

Quoted text (60 lines)

> [email hidden] wrote: > > > Three years is actually a long time in sim development. > > For a company like Simbin or ISI that is using a ready made engine and > has a team of nearly 50 people involved, yes. RL is a three man show > and they use no existing engines at all. Like I said, I spent a lot > longer than three years just on my physics engine. In fact, I'm at the > six and a half year mark right now and am still working on things. > IIRC, LFS was in development for 5 years before they put out the very > first demo, and it didn't go on sale for some time after that. If S3 > is their "final, finished product" that they set out to make, well, > you're looking at something like 10 years total. It cracks me up when > folks that have never written a sim before argue with me over how long > development tasks should take <bg> > > With the > > development of hardware (processors, gpu's, physics cards, etc) always > > evolving, it's very difficult to create a sim today that will still be > > considered "state of the art" three years from now. > > Your own development experience backs this up? > > Anyway, I disagree. A system I wrote recently won't be able to run on > PC's in a game environment for many years to come. But it's sitting > there ready to go when the CPU horsepower arrives. In game development > you ALWAYS plan things for future hardware that will be out when you > think the project will be finished. Just par for the course and very > routine. > > Besides, RL has > > supposedly "been in development" for more than three years -- it's > > simply been three years since the transport was "showcased" on the > > website. I would have assumed that the sim was pretty close to > > completion three years ago if the developers had time for details such > > as that! > > The transporter took Tony probably a week or two to model. This > delayed RL absolutely zero. You need to code the engine to a certain > point before you need to worry about artwork at all. The artist can > not go into any serious production mode during this period. > > If I recall correctly, in Virtual RC Racing we were coding for four or > five years before Tony came along and did all our models. He did the > artwork so fast we were still coding when he was finished with all the > game content. We have ten or twelve tracks included in VRC that were > done in no time. By the time we released it he had another ten or so > ready to go for expansion packs and so on. I think he's got something > like 25 or 30 tracks finished for us now. He could have done 100 > transporters in that time and it would not have effected our release > date (or RL's for that matter) one minute. > > Argue with me if you want. Let's see what you've personally done in > sim development first though ;-) > > I know that GTR, GTR2, rF, GTL and LFS has > > kept me plenty busy during that time! > > Me too :-) Fun stuff for sure. My personal favorites are LFS and GTL > :-)

Todd, Most of what you write is true, but I still have seen no evidence that RL will ever actually be completed and available to the public. I'd love to be proven wrong though... I agree that developers have to code for "future" hardware, but there is a practical limit to that, since it would be difficult to predict what hardware advances will be available 5-10 years from now. Should you code for faster processors or multi-multi-core? How many poly's will our graphics cards be pushing in 5-10 years? What new physics card technology will be available? etc... Anyway, I'm not saying a 3 man team "should" be able to create a state-of-the-art sim in three years or less. I believe it could take many more years than that. I just don't think it is a wise business move for the reasons I stated above. Now if they are doing it just for fun or a learning experience, then I say more power to em! Regards, CK

Good heavens, who dug up this dead horse :) -Larry <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (86 lines)

> > Todd Wasson wrote: >> [email hidden] wrote: >> >> > Three years is actually a long time in sim development. >> >> For a company like Simbin or ISI that is using a ready made engine and >> has a team of nearly 50 people involved, yes. RL is a three man show >> and they use no existing engines at all. Like I said, I spent a lot >> longer than three years just on my physics engine. In fact, I'm at the >> six and a half year mark right now and am still working on things. >> IIRC, LFS was in development for 5 years before they put out the very >> first demo, and it didn't go on sale for some time after that. If S3 >> is their "final, finished product" that they set out to make, well, >> you're looking at something like 10 years total. It cracks me up when >> folks that have never written a sim before argue with me over how long >> development tasks should take <bg> >> >> With the >> > development of hardware (processors, gpu's, physics cards, etc) always >> > evolving, it's very difficult to create a sim today that will still be >> > considered "state of the art" three years from now. >> >> Your own development experience backs this up? >> >> Anyway, I disagree. A system I wrote recently won't be able to run on >> PC's in a game environment for many years to come. But it's sitting >> there ready to go when the CPU horsepower arrives. In game development >> you ALWAYS plan things for future hardware that will be out when you >> think the project will be finished. Just par for the course and very >> routine. >> >> Besides, RL has >> > supposedly "been in development" for more than three years -- it's >> > simply been three years since the transport was "showcased" on the >> > website. I would have assumed that the sim was pretty close to >> > completion three years ago if the developers had time for details such >> > as that! >> >> The transporter took Tony probably a week or two to model. This >> delayed RL absolutely zero. You need to code the engine to a certain >> point before you need to worry about artwork at all. The artist can >> not go into any serious production mode during this period. >> >> If I recall correctly, in Virtual RC Racing we were coding for four or >> five years before Tony came along and did all our models. He did the >> artwork so fast we were still coding when he was finished with all the >> game content. We have ten or twelve tracks included in VRC that were >> done in no time. By the time we released it he had another ten or so >> ready to go for expansion packs and so on. I think he's got something >> like 25 or 30 tracks finished for us now. He could have done 100 >> transporters in that time and it would not have effected our release >> date (or RL's for that matter) one minute. >> >> Argue with me if you want. Let's see what you've personally done in >> sim development first though ;-) >> >> I know that GTR, GTR2, rF, GTL and LFS has >> > kept me plenty busy during that time! >> >> Me too :-) Fun stuff for sure. My personal favorites are LFS and GTL >> :-) > > > Todd, > > Most of what you write is true, but I still have seen no evidence that > RL will ever actually be completed and available to the public. I'd > love to be proven wrong though... > > I agree that developers have to code for "future" hardware, but there > is a practical limit to that, since it would be difficult to predict > what hardware advances will be available 5-10 years from now. Should > you code for faster processors or multi-multi-core? How many poly's > will our graphics cards be pushing in 5-10 years? What new physics > card technology will be available? etc... > > Anyway, I'm not saying a 3 man team "should" be able to create a > state-of-the-art sim in three years or less. I believe it could take > many more years than that. I just don't think it is a wise business > move for the reasons I stated above. Now if they are doing it just for > fun or a learning experience, then I say more power to em! > > Regards, > CK >

The initial reaction to RL was just about universal praise and hope (at that time frame GPL was in serious need of a replacement). By year 2 that enthusiasm all but disappeared based on the reality of what we saw of RL or rather the Hauler. As this thread points out the fault was on the West's (purposefully misleading or not). Then as now everyone involved should just be quiet about it (NDA quiet) until you actually have something to show the world. I hope we get something like RL but till then GTR2 rocks the house! Mitch

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Marni wrote:> > Nobody knows when it'll be released, not even Gregor or Chris. Chris > is enjoying the process of coding it (especially in peace and quiet now > without the incessant bashing). It'll be released when they're happy > with it. >

We're on what, year 6 now :) -Larry "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:C452h.1395$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (23 lines)

> The initial reaction to RL was just about universal praise and hope (at > that time frame GPL was in serious need of a replacement). By year 2 that > enthusiasm all but disappeared based on the reality of what we saw of RL > or rather the Hauler. As this thread points out the fault was on the > West's (purposefully misleading or not). Then as now everyone involved > should just be quiet about it (NDA quiet) until you actually have > something to show the world. > > I hope we get something like RL but till then GTR2 rocks the house! > > Mitch > > >> Marni wrote:> > >> Nobody knows when it'll be released, not even Gregor or Chris. Chris >> is enjoying the process of coding it (especially in peace and quiet now >> without the incessant bashing). It'll be released when they're happy >> with it. > >> > >

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Rz62h.27606$[email hidden]... > We're on what, year 6 now :) > LOL Hey it takes a long time to develope a sim. Make a donation, buy a mug or T-shirt and help the effort!

Quoted text (29 lines)

> -Larry > > "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:C452h.1395$[email hidden]... >> The initial reaction to RL was just about universal praise and hope (at >> that time frame GPL was in serious need of a replacement). By year 2 >> that enthusiasm all but disappeared based on the reality of what we saw >> of RL or rather the Hauler. As this thread points out the fault was on >> the West's (purposefully misleading or not). Then as now everyone >> involved should just be quiet about it (NDA quiet) until you actually >> have something to show the world. >> >> I hope we get something like RL but till then GTR2 rocks the house! >> >> Mitch >> >> >>> Marni wrote:> >> >>> Nobody knows when it'll be released, not even Gregor or Chris. Chris >>> is enjoying the process of coding it (especially in peace and quiet now >>> without the incessant bashing). It'll be released when they're happy >>> with it. >> >>> >> >> > >

I would, but it would take them 10 years to paint the damned thing. -Larry "Lancelot" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (44 lines)

> > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Rz62h.27606$[email hidden]... >> We're on what, year 6 now :) >> > > LOL Hey it takes a long time to develope a sim. Make a donation, buy a mug > or T-shirt and help the effort! > > > > > >> -Larry >> >> "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:C452h.1395$[email hidden]... >>> The initial reaction to RL was just about universal praise and hope (at >>> that time frame GPL was in serious need of a replacement). By year 2 >>> that enthusiasm all but disappeared based on the reality of what we saw >>> of RL or rather the Hauler. As this thread points out the fault was on >>> the West's (purposefully misleading or not). Then as now everyone >>> involved should just be quiet about it (NDA quiet) until you actually >>> have something to show the world. >>> >>> I hope we get something like RL but till then GTR2 rocks the house! >>> >>> Mitch >>> >>> >>>> Marni wrote:> >>> >>>> Nobody knows when it'll be released, not even Gregor or Chris. Chris >>>> is enjoying the process of coding it (especially in peace and quiet now >>>> without the incessant bashing). It'll be released when they're happy >>>> with it. >>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >

Todd Wasson wrote: > Chris > is enjoying the process of coding it (especially in peace and quiet now > without the incessant bashing). If they had gotten some decent people to moderate their forums, I don't see why Tony couldn't have kept posting renders to keep people interested in the product. Having a big "here we are, this is what we're working on" announcement and not releasing a product for a long time is probably not a big deal to most people, the complete disappearance of information on the other hand... Granted, they might not care, but I certainly would check in on them every month or so to see what Tony's been modelling or to read a bit from Gregor or Chris on the engine side of things.

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:hi82h.9210$[email hidden]... >I would, but it would take them 10 years to paint the damned thing. > Oh comon now with 3 guys painting it I wouldn't think more than a couple years. Unless you keep changing the design?

Quoted text (50 lines)

> > > "Lancelot" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> >> "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:Rz62h.27606$[email hidden]... >>> We're on what, year 6 now :) >>> >> >> LOL Hey it takes a long time to develope a sim. Make a donation, buy a >> mug or T-shirt and help the effort! >> >> >> >> >> >>> -Larry >>> >>> "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >>> news:C452h.1395$[email hidden]... >>>> The initial reaction to RL was just about universal praise and hope (at >>>> that time frame GPL was in serious need of a replacement). By year 2 >>>> that enthusiasm all but disappeared based on the reality of what we saw >>>> of RL or rather the Hauler. As this thread points out the fault was on >>>> the West's (purposefully misleading or not). Then as now everyone >>>> involved should just be quiet about it (NDA quiet) until you actually >>>> have something to show the world. >>>> >>>> I hope we get something like RL but till then GTR2 rocks the house! >>>> >>>> Mitch >>>> >>>> >>>>> Marni wrote:> >>>> >>>>> Nobody knows when it'll be released, not even Gregor or Chris. Chris >>>>> is enjoying the process of coding it (especially in peace and quiet >>>>> now >>>>> without the incessant bashing). It'll be released when they're happy >>>>> with it. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >