Atomic Systems

Am I wrong, but it seems RSDerek has posted in the "IN MY OPINION ITS" topic and this is the first time a Kuju member has posted since pre-release....?

wow!!

Oh dear.

why oh dear?

Bit of a crazy post, that's all . It's not exactly the most exciting thing ever.

And they have both posted since release. (Of the sim, that is. Not to say they were in custody or something!). .

Very Best Wishes,
Bob.

tomtoon wrote:why oh dear?

If you look here, you will see that Derek hasn't stopped posting!
Both have been regular visitors to the forums since the release, though Adam hadn't posted until yesterday!

Well there were a few days........because I've been checking.
No real answers though.........and may be its just me, but a bit of an attitude.
Cheers
Jon

Sorry if it seems like we are not around, we are.
Jon, just playful banter.

With regards to answers we are trying to deal with those in our FAQ, this is your forum for you guys to chat, we join in and take part, however me being on here is not work, i'm here in my own time with my own views, doing it because I think it is the right thing to do.
How many of you guys would go on a forum about your work after hours and not get paid?

I must admit i have met some really good people on here, and i can see why it is so popular. My wife is worried about me tho. she thinks i know too much (which is nothing compared to some on here) about trains, my daughter on the other hand loves watching the trains go past.

regards

Derek

RSderek wrote:Sorry if it seems like we are not around, we are.
Jon, just playful banter.

With regards to answers we are trying to deal with those in our FAQ, this is your forum for you guys to chat, we join in and take part, however me being on here is not work, i'm here in my own time with my own views, doing it because I think it is the right thing to do.
How many of you guys would go on a forum about your work after hours and not get paid?

I must admit i have met some really good people on here, and i can see why it is so popular. My wife is worried about me tho. she thinks i know too much (which is nothing compared to some on here) about trains, my daughter on the other hand loves watching the trains go past.

regards

Derek

Hello Derek,

It's good to see you posting on here. Please continue

Very Best Wishes,
Bob.

RSderek wrote:Sorry if it seems like we are not around, we are.
Jon, just playful banter.

With regards to answers we are trying to deal with those in our FAQ, this is your forum for you guys to chat, we join in and take part, however me being on here is not work, i'm here in my own time with my own views, doing it because I think it is the right thing to do.
How many of you guys would go on a forum about your work after hours and not get paid?

I must admit i have met some really good people on here, and i can see why it is so popular. My wife is worried about me tho. she thinks i know too much (which is nothing compared to some on here) about trains, my daughter on the other hand loves watching the trains go past.

regards

Derek

Hi Derek
I think we can all easily appreciate that.
Nevertheless you will be seen as the 'official' spokesperson for KRS.
Members have posted that they can't always get answers from the Rail-simulator website.
Perhaps in hindsight it might have been better to have registered as Derek Siddle.
Or got another person to answer the 'official' questions.
To be frank, quite a few members have posted they are unhappy that they have paid good money for something that currently doesn't work.
They don't really know who to complain to, Kuju, EA, F4G or RDSL .
No one appears to want to take resposibility....which unfortunately is a disease of the 21st century.
Cheers
Jon

Jon - Hi Derek
I think we can all easily appreciate that.

Derek - Thank you.

Jon - Nevertheless you will be seen as the 'official' spokesperson for KRS.

Derek - I'm about official as you will get on this forum yes.

Jon - Members have posted that they can't always get answers from the Rail-simulator website.

Derek - Yes this is true, but we do state that it could take upto 10 days to get a response.

Jon - Perhaps in hindsight it might have been better to have registered as Derek Siddle.

Derek - maybe, not sure how that would help tho.

Jon - Or got another person to answer the 'official' questions.

Derek - what is an 'official' question?

Jon - To be frank, quite a few members have posted they are unhappy that they have paid good money for something that currently doesn't work.

Derek - I think you find it does work, just not how some people want it to work. There are many functionalities in there are many of you have not found yet, and because it does things slightly different to MSTS it does not mean it is broken... tho there are bugs in there, i grant you that.

Jon - They don't really know who to complain to, Kuju, EA, F4G or RDSL .

Derek - Well it all depends on what the complaint is. Most of the issues are trying to be dealt by RSDL.

Jon - No one appears to want to take resposibility....which unfortunately is a disease of the 21st century.

Derek - see above.

regards

Derek

RSderek wrote:I must admit i have met some really good people on here, and i can see why it is so popular. My wife is worried about me tho. she thinks i know too much (which is nothing compared to some on here) about trains, my daughter on the other hand loves watching the trains go past.

regards

Derek

*Group hugs*

Take a tip from me and act dumb.

It's worked for me over 17,000 times

jbilton wrote:Well there were a few days........because I've been checking.
No real answers though.........and may be its just me, but a bit of an attitude.

One can understand why developers who have worked on the project for two years or so might get a little defensive with some of the rather trenchant criticism posted in this forum.

As to answering questions, I should still like to see the developers write about some of the many signalling/pathing/routing/timetabling issues that have been raised many times. It is of real concern to those of us interested in realistic operations, not just realistic graphics, physics and routes, that the developers respond to posts about a new shunting locomotive, about ordinary bugs (crashes/unintended behaviour), about requests for improved documentation, about their plans in general to support RS into the future, but write very little about signalling/pathing/timetabling.

Indeed, unless I am missing something, the only messages about those issues that I remember ever being posted are: (1) some conflicting messages about timetables in the official forums, the net effect of which seems to be that it will be possible to create timetables for standard scenarios, but not create timetabled scenarios with the developer tools, and (2) a suggestion to move the track interactive in order to make the signals change to danger later after a train passes them.

For all we know, the developers might have some big announcement about improvements to signalling to make soon, but it is rather odd that they make no reference to it. We do (at least, I do) appreciate very much that the developers regularly read and post on the forums, and interact intelligently to bug reports and take note of feature suggestions: that is an infinitely better way of developing and supporting software than was prevalent only a few years ago. It is clear that, at least in some respects, the developers have taken on board the views of the railway simulation community in designing Rail Simulator. However, I do not understand why more effort has not yet been made to take on board people's views about signalling/pathing/timetabling, nor to interact as actively with the community on those issues as with almost every other important issue.

I should be extremely grateful for some word from the developers about their perspectives on the very important operational aspects, since, as things stand now, Rail Simulator has very great potential that is largely unfulfilled because of deficiencies in those areas that, because signalling is all about relatively simple logic, are not inherently difficult to solve programatically. Without more feedback/interaction from the developers on that particular issue (compared to the others), I, and no doubt others, such as AndiS, grow increasingly concerned that, for entirely inscrutable reasons, the developers have decided to provide ongoing support for every aspect but signalling/pathing/timetabling (or, at least, only minimal support/continued upgrades for those areas, which are most in need of upgrading). Having the signals scriptable is not enough without enough of the right sort of function calls in the API: even if the community is to fix signalling, it can only do so with the right tools.

RSderek wrote:Derek - I think you find it does work, just not how some people want it to work. There are many functionalities in there are many of you have not found yet, and because it does things slightly different to MSTS it does not mean it is broken... tho there are bugs in there, i grant you that.

1. Not working as we want it to work can be the equivalent of broken when "how we want it to work" is in a way that can realistically simulate railway operations, and "how it was designed to work" is in a way that cannot realistically simulate railway operations. If that is what is meant, then it can properly be described as "broken" even if it is working as designed. Not all flaws in software are bugs.

2. If there are features that we have not found yet, it is because they are undocumented. One of the complaints has been lack of documentation. I appreciate that further documentation is promised on the 12th of November - it may be that things become far better then. After all, if the game is only in a greatly problematic state, or badly underdocumented, for the first month of its life, that is not, in the grand scheme of things, too serious. We can but reserve judgment on how good that the tools/documentation will be. Until then, we can only experiment (as many of us have been doing) to learn about the undocumented features. So far, some of our experiments have lead us into concerns (some minor, some quite serious) about the way in which some aspects of the game work. Without any feedback from the developers about those concerns (if things were done that way on purpose because it's all part of a wider plan not all of which we know about yet but that, when implemented fully, will make everything better than it would be if it worked as we suggest it should, then at least provide us with some clue that this is the case), we worry that they are not taken seriously and that the things that really prevent Rail Simulator from being a truly excellent product will never go away and we will always be left with something far short of what we hoped for, and, in some respects, such as timetabled scenarios, what was expressly and repeatedly promised by the developers/publishers until quite recently. If these issues are acknowledged and definitely in line to be worked on soon, then our concerns about Rail Simulator will decrease, and our willingness to invest further time/energy into building things for Rail Simulator will increase, as will the likelihood that we will recommend it to friends (at present, I have to say, if anybody asked whether they should buy it, I'd suggest that they wait and see whether the important issues are fixed).

3. It is reassuring to see the bugs identified, and evidently worked on, so quickly. That is one of the many benefits of good community interaction. I've no doubt that most of us also appreciate the out-of-hours forum postings.

Was considering signalling/pathing/timetabling and wondered why they shouldn't be the trains in preset positions or set up in portals with a set of instructions and no points set.

It is tricky and I've found following an activity in MSTS requires driving to positions with little margin gor error. The same applies with timing. Slightly out and activity failed. This is surely playing a game with perameters more harsh than reality.

Then there stops for signals and a wait for other trains which may or may not arrive. The waiting time is wasted. If it's required then a fast forward would remove some of the boredom and uncertainty.

Given that we often manually operate some points and pass others on red with permission, we deviate from being simply a driver and reality. We could set them all.

It's been said a simple signalling system can be worked out on a 1960's computer but as a fan of sigsims, I've found reality to be far more complex.

Not excusing any bugs in KRS but wondering if a signalling system which fits all eventualities is a realstic goal?

There are wider issues of gameplay.

As I understand it we can still 'chase the yellows' and conduct any move but pre-programming all these moves with AI isn't possible.

However, we can jump from train to train like Trainz where the same programming is very difficult.

If we accept this is KRS and not MSTS then the issues appear less important although bugs would be better if fixed.