Atomic Systems

Merging routes is already possible just not very easy to do

arabiandisco wrote:I don't really agree with this backwards compatibility business. It's not as though your MSTS discs will vapourise when you buy KRS/TMTS/TATS/whatever. We'll still be able to play the old games after the release of the new games. I think it's possible that any new sims will be hamstrung by the way it was done first time if they try to make it backwards compatible.

I think the point of backwards compatability is missed here, many of us have developed routes and enhanced the capabilities of the existing rolling stock way beyond the original out of the box MSTS version. Yes we are hamstrung by what came out of the box, but to some extent we have got it working.

Many of us are not "game players", in fact I don't own any other "games" beyond the card games included with Windows XP, I probably never will.

I prefer reality simulation and, unfortunatly one or other of the types of user would take preference in the minds of Kuju marketing to the detriment of the other.

For me, as I was scarily reminded last week, life is short and I'm not sure I want to do what I and a few others had to do with the out of the box M$T$ simulator again to get performance and consumptions where they should be.

Without some backward compatibility, for me, it wouldn't be worth buying and I would probably try to see out my days with the old version hoping that the next operating system after XP doesn't shut me down entirely.

arabiandisco wrote:I don't really agree with this backwards compatibility business. It's not as though your MSTS discs will vapourise when you buy KRS/TMTS/TATS/whatever. We'll still be able to play the old games after the release of the new games. I think it's possible that any new sims will be hamstrung by the way it was done first time if they try to make it backwards compatible.

I'm sure that programs like GMAX etc will be capable of creating models for the new sims, so provided the author hasn't thrown away the source files, it should be very easy for them to re-export into the correct format (perhaps with a plugin for the 3D modelling program of their choice...)

Or am I looking at it too simplistically?

While 5 years ago people were so happy that there was anything, I suspect that now people will not be too happy having to wait a long time until they can drive thier favorite bit of stock.


**ah the good old days etc.......*

I'm not saying that backwards compatibility is an absolute no-no, more the point at which backwards compatibility effects itself - I think the sim (game, call it whatever you want) will be unnecessarily hamstrung if it allows you to take your trainset folder, eng, wag and ace files etc and just run them. I think a lot more could be done if you go back a few stages so that the author of the item can export his (or her) work into the appropriate format without having to rebuild the model from scratch. I don't think there's much hope of retaining our current trainset folder anyhow.

I suppose it depends what "backwards compatible" means.

One thing I would like to see is 3D Cabs.

buffy500 wrote:

arabiandisco wrote:I don't really agree with this backwards compatibility business. It's not as though your MSTS discs will vapourise when you buy KRS/TMTS/TATS/whatever. We'll still be able to play the old games after the release of the new games. I think it's possible that any new sims will be hamstrung by the way it was done first time if they try to make it backwards compatible.

I'm sure that programs like GMAX etc will be capable of creating models for the new sims, so provided the author hasn't thrown away the source files, it should be very easy for them to re-export into the correct format (perhaps with a plugin for the 3D modelling program of their choice...)

Or am I looking at it too simplistically?

While 5 years ago people were so happy that there was anything, I suspect that now people will not be too happy having to wait a long time until they can drive thier favorite bit of stock.


**ah the good old days etc.......*

In the good old days we didn't have MSTS to play whilst we waited for the stuff to be moved over...

arabiandisco wrote:

buffy500 wrote:

arabiandisco wrote:I don't really agree with this backwards compatibility business. It's not as though your MSTS discs will vapourise when you buy KRS/TMTS/TATS/whatever. We'll still be able to play the old games after the release of the new games. I think it's possible that any new sims will be hamstrung by the way it was done first time if they try to make it backwards compatible.

I'm sure that programs like GMAX etc will be capable of creating models for the new sims, so provided the author hasn't thrown away the source files, it should be very easy for them to re-export into the correct format (perhaps with a plugin for the 3D modelling program of their choice...)

Or am I looking at it too simplistically?

While 5 years ago people were so happy that there was anything, I suspect that now people will not be too happy having to wait a long time until they can drive thier favorite bit of stock.


**ah the good old days etc.......*

In the good old days we didn't have MSTS to play whilst we waited for the stuff to be moved over...

We also had lower expectations, and higher patience
I think that even for the mature amoungst us, the wait will be significantly harder than it was before.
I know I can't wait for the 1st HST to be built for the new sim

But you are right, given the source files to the models and a half decent conversion tool it should be possible to rebuild models into the new format.

But do we want to have some potential limitations on it just because we want to play with these things 2 months earlier? Going on past performance, it might be 5 or 6 years between KRS and KRS2, and do we really want to be stuck with some of the MSTS limitations because we were too impatient to wait for KRS1 to do it properly?

I wouldn't be surprised if it came with a default HST - it is an iconic train...

arabiandisco wrote:But do we want to have some potential limitations on it just because we want to play with these things 2 months earlier? Going on past performance, it might be 5 or 6 years between KRS and KRS2, and do we really want to be stuck with some of the MSTS limitations because we were too impatient to wait for KRS1 to do it properly?

I wouldn't be surprised if it came with a default HST - it is an iconic train...

I dont think you are looking at 2 months, I'd reckon 12 months before you had everything there is now in MSTS.

I think it would be more than 2 months if it was just config file changes !

I didn't mean within 2 months! what I really meant was "that little bit quicker".

Either way there's likely to be some changes required to MSTS files before they'll work in the new thing, and the same testing business as needed in MSTS.

I doubt everything will need moving anyway, as a lot of files out there have been superseded...

a picture of an engine on the site would be good to wet our whistles

Let's have an alternative to 'game over' when a SPAD occurs! a 'time penalty' could be added to simulate what in real life would be the driver explaining away his lack of concentration or over enthisiastic driving. Either way, it's better than having to 'start all over again'.
Also, the ability to select an alternative starting point in an activity, handy for activity creators fine tuning!

justgeoff wrote:Let's have an alternative to 'game over' when a SPAD occurs! a 'time penalty' could be added to simulate what in real life would be the driver explaining away his lack of concentration or over enthisiastic driving. Either way, it's better than having to 'start all over again'.
Also, the ability to select an alternative starting point in an activity, handy for activity creators fine tuning!

I don't expect someone who's just had a spad will be going anywhere with that train.

supergoods wrote: Build on and rebuild, yes, completly rework, no, this makes all the excellent work that has been done so far a waste of time.

i am sorry but the work done so far is no way a waste of time.
are you saying that no-one ever uses this 'exellent work'



Oh and anyways i dont want any of that white boundary that you get on longer routes, the one that you have to stop in and save and then restart in.
Also a career mode would be good so that you could work upwards in ranking and access more powerful loco's


oh and F.Y.I kuju ,I would make a good beta tester

brocky wrote:Also a career mode would be good so that you could work upwards in ranking and access more powerful loco's

Does that mean you'd have to start as a cleaner?

What sort of .eng file would a bucket have?

Here are some suggestions from the other side of the pond:

http://forums.flightsim.com/ts/dcboard. ... 6484&page=

some of more of interest than others.

O t t o