Atomic Systems

What I would like is for AI services to stop in the middle of a platform. Its a bit unrealistic for a 2 car unit to stop right at the end of a platform

Here's a thought, how about a random inspector with a speed gun!

Working turntables if possible.
Compatability for 64 bit processes when Windows 64 is released

Its already been said earlier in the board but the most important aspect for me would be to be able to mix track power methods - ie. overhead on on elane with perhaps 3rd (and even 4th ?) rail on another and non powered on another - but all next to each other - not as with MSTS currently - unpowered or powered (with overhead or dummy (hidden) overhead for 3rd rail.
Also make the motive unit work accordingly - if you try to run an overhead unit over non powered track it stops !

A relatively simple modification that will help reskinners and those who like to change cabs and sounds will be to use the Flight Simulator apporach to aircraft files, of the core config file referring to other livery folders, which allow people to upload reskins without having to bother reloading the sounds, cockpit or the like. It also means that if you change a cockpit or sounds it's done for all colour schemes which relate to that file without the need for aliasing or common sound/cab folders. All that is needed to add a colour scheme is the livery folder and an additional piece of script for the config. file, usually supplied in the readme.

I think also if the new simulator could also learn from FS about loading scenery it would speed up the game and reduce processor load.

A great adition ould be a orking interactive industry, like we've seen in trainz 2004. Also banked curves would be a great thing, actually a first.

I note that there are a lot of requests for greater and greater details such as moving passengers, doors etc. My own and probably vain hope is that the new simulator will not require an expensive and state of the art computer to even run the thing.

Tonysmedley wrote:I note that there are a lot of requests for greater and greater details such as moving passengers, doors etc. My own and probably vain hope is that the new simulator will not require an expensive and state of the art computer to even run the thing.

Doubt you got much hope there mate! With PC's being released with speeds of 3.6ghz, disc drives with 15,000rpm, graphics cards of 256mb, Memory of 2meg+ - Kuju will want to take advantage of this I'm sure and bring the game onto the next level!!!

I was going to buy a new PC in September, but going to put it on hold now!!

I'd like to be able to uncouple by selecting the wagon and pressing a key and the stock to have a code and not simple numbers.

More realistic variable day/night times.

Variable times for lights to come on and off is scenery objects to enable houses dark by midnight but streetlamps to be alight all night.

Sounds that imitate the power generated by the engine more closely and not the engine speed.

Coaches and wagons to appear loaded or unloaded by pressing a key.

Hello folks,

Wouldn't it be good to have nice smooth-edged embankments and cuttings, not the saw-toothed effect we see in MSTS.
Also, super-elevation, and realistically-radiussed curved sections, suitable for yards and high-speed main lines.

Very Best Wishes,
Bob.

Tonysmedley wrote:I note that there are a lot of requests for greater and greater details such as moving passengers, doors etc. My own and probably vain hope is that the new simulator will not require an expensive and state of the art computer to even run the thing.

To be honest why bother ?

If you build something for what is a low spec machine now what is the point ? We want things improved, and that comes with a 'cost' in processing time, there needs a better PC.
Better physics is likely to need more processing, better graphics certainly do.

The way the sim handles night and darkness needs to be handled much better than MSTS did. The complete lack of light was a major failing where night driving was concerned, especially in large stations.

The inclusion of people is also a biggie, which I have already laboured.

As far as route editing goes, I'd like to see a modular approach that would allow several people to work on one route and combine their efforts somewhere in the middle. This should be as simple dropping files from one folder to another and then just smoothing the join.

Alternatively, different routes could remain separate, but be linked within the game/sim. You wouldn't notice the transition as the new route is loaded from a separate folder as if it were part of the same route. This might be a better system than merging routes as it would leave each creation independent whilst providing the illusion of a much bigger route or network. The join could be covered by a transition tile which tells the sim to unload the first route and begin loading 'tiles' from the next.

Just hope the TMTS team already thought of this.

Hello again,

I would really appreciate a more flexible approach to locomotive/unit sound configurations. How many times have people asked about the difficulties in trying to recreate 1st Generation DMU sounds? The characteristic rise in the gearbox whine in each gear is totally missing in MSTS, despite there having been vast improvements over the default Kiha sounds.

Very Best Wishes,
Bob.

buffy500 wrote:To be honest why bother ?

If you build something for what is a low spec machine now what is the point ? We want things improved, and that comes with a 'cost' in processing time, there needs a better PC.
Better physics is likely to need more processing, better graphics certainly do.

This has to be the trickiest part of building a new sim. You have to predict what PC specs will be in the future.

We all know 1998 to 2003 saw a quantum leap in PC specs to accommodate the gaming genre and that the past two years have seen a massive slowdown along with a drop in PC Gaming in favour of console games.

There's 64-bit processors on the horizon but 'non-gamers' are hanging onto PC's longer now which has produced a welcome drop in price.

To capture the widest audience, you have to aim at a little above the 'average' person's PC specs. Any lower would inhibit improvements. Much higher and you'd turn trainsimming into a rich man's hobby.

I might buy a new PC to accommodate new train sims alone but doubt huge numbers would without a resurgance of the PC gaming which we saw from 1998 to 2003.

That's why I like the idea of more sims to accommodate different needs.

For the consumer, hardware is the largest cost. A replacement part could easily cost more than the software.

The most enthusiastic and those with wodges of cash will always want the absolute best.

The main question is not what a new sim will contain as much as how many people you wish to cater for?

johndibben wrote:I'd like to be able to uncouple by selecting the wagon and pressing a key and the stock to have a code and not simple numbers.

You might accidentally hit the wrong button though and then... Like me confusing F6 & F7... and sometimes mixing the controls up with BVE...