MSTS is only a game, or is it?

[johny]

I find the attitude of some of the persons concerned with the development and building of the new Severn Valley Railway (SVR) route amazing with regard to the faults in the route, either it is a Just Trains problem or the errors are dismissed as being minor.

Publicly, I seem to be one of the few to have commented on some of the things wrong with this route, although I know others have done so privately. It’s almost as if, that because this route is payware, it should not be criticised. We have all paid good money for the route, and, with all the hype and threads that appeared on this site preceding its release, I expected to see a route without the faults that may be present in freeware routes. The rolling stock alone, however, is worth the money paid for this route.

With the freeware routes most of us admire the work put in, time taken, and patience shown by all the various freeware builders and do not mind seeing the glitches, generally they do not spoil one’s enjoyment of a route that has been painstakingly put together using methods and skills that I know I can never get to grips with. I found it difficult enough with my own puny attempts at building signal kits.

With the SVR and other payware routes, I submit, it is a different matter altogether. One does not expect to get gaps in fences and walling, missing road sections, pyramid-like banking, buried track, missing files, extra folders, all noticed by others, and, my bête noir, incorrectly placed signal interactives.

I have privately submitted an itemised list of what I think is wrong with the signalling, but to date have not received an acknowledgement, other than one from Neutronic reference my initial comments. The attitude seems to be, that as long as the activities work, incorrect signalling is a very minor matter.

After all, MSTS is only a game, or is it?

John

[buffy500]

Obviously it would be better for me to not get to involved in this as there is a link to commercial routes and me. But out of interest, the issues with the signalling, are they not restrictions in MSTS ? (I don't have SVR and wouldn't know if there were signalling things wrong anyway), but the MSTS signal system is not really very flexible, and theres not much anyone other than MS/Kuju can do about it, so *possibly* this is causing some of the things you don't like ?

(and if it isn't and I'm talking rubbish then 'disregard')

[Stooopidperson]

But out of interest, the issues with the signalling, are they not restrictions in MSTS ?

I head that the new LU District Line has realistic signalling, along with shunt signals and stuff.

[lateagain]

Hi John

Some thoughts on your message.

Ist it a Game? ......well in a sort of "Class A drug", "obssessive behaviour sort of way", yes. Er that's only me then....?

"We paid good money for it"

I actually welcome this comment. As I said in MSTS for Germany forum

and when I look at the "TLC" (Tender Loving Care) lavished on some "freeware" routes I do question the "validity" of some reviews of Payware Routes.

Paying for this stuff, for me, is not the problem that it is for many younger fans. I have to say that I'd like to see a slightly more critical revue of "payware" in some areas of the community.

I do take your point.

Having said that, I'm surprised that you choose SVR as a "target"?

If you look at the Bluearrow TS Support Forum, in which I recently raised a problem, I have to say that I was "Gobsmacked" at the speed and depth of support I got. So much so that the DIY advice beat the "official fix" so closely that I'd been able to implement it only just before the latter arrived!

I have to say I'm far more confused about the enthusiasm for LBE on which I'm still to complete an activity without derailing!

Sorry Guy's. I followed the development of this route avidly and thought it a massive challenge to replicate the likes of Clapham junction.... but to derail within the speed limit in mid route on a comparitively straight piece of track? I look forward to the stock add-on. The loco's look really good..... but the "playability" of the route has been a big disappointment.

All who've become "hooked" on MSTS have their own reason. Personally it represents to me a realisation, through current technology, of idea's that were fantasies or dreams as a child. My Peter Pan side I guess. All in all I suppose what really attracted me was that all this inventiveness and talent went towards something creative, imaginative and for a change in, an era where technology has become better at destroying things, non aggressive and non destructive. I was a great "Quake" fan. After awhile I got to thinking "great graphics", "shame about the concept".

You have the advantage of me on signalling technicalities, but missing fences and road sections? Guess I'm to old. we had to use our imagination for any of this. In a few years time when we're a few quantum leaps in hardware and software development I'll back you 100%, but for now let's celebrate "the best illusions of reality".

I think it's staggering what's been built on such "shaky foundations".

SVR is probably "as good as it gets" so far.

"Canton" is a short route and from what I've seen Richard Garber is the only US developer "pushing the envelope" to the same degree as Bluearrow. (Most of his best output to date has been "downloadable" and support for his stuff excellent)

Personally I love making Screengrabs. Used to be a photographic technician. I look for the bits that make the routes and stock look best. Not the bits that are missing. Many beautiful models, who's photographs have covered publications worldwide, are far from "perfect". The creators of the published image just dwell upon the fabulous bits and hide the less perfect.

I must reiterate that I totally agree that commercial developers have a duty to "support" their product. Some are better than others.

Geoff

[JohnKendrick]

The excuse "It's a limitation of MSTS" seems all to common in response to flaws advised to the producers of commercial routes.

Signalling is a complex thing, and as I haven't obtained SVR following disappointments with the previous payware offerings I've purchased from several companies compared to some of the excellent freeware routes that are available, I am unable to comment on that route. It is to be expected that the producers will 'hype it up' as that happens with most PC games. The best ever.... It's never been seen before... and so on.

That said, the scripts used for signalling obtainable here on UKTS perform really well, so if there is a limitation with the signalling in MSTS, hats off to the creators of he LSWR signals etc. who have certainly overcome them. If in doubt, try them!

John

[Zackybong1]

Someone, at some point, is bound to give the authors of these comments a personal attack, the likes of which we've seen before.

If you are going to follow the above posts, please use valid points of view on the subject. I am following this thread with interest, I would hate to see it spoiled by childish comments.

[saddletank]

I need to chip in here and mention that the ground signals in certain locations (e.g. Bridgnorth) are placed on the wrong side of the track in the SVR route. The interactive is on your track but the ground disc is displaying it's signal to a train on the adjacent track. The converse of this is that as you drive around the yard you meet ground discs beside your track that have no corresponding light showing in the track monitor (since they are in fact on the "track monitor" of the line next to you).

A ground signal should also never be used on trackage that is run along by loaded passenger coaches, all such movements should be signalled by full size semaphores or colour lights. This was a GWR rule, I believe it's a BR and RailTrack rule also, so would apply to preserved lines.

I have found a few bridges without snow textures and gaps behind station platforms where the intent seems to have been to lift the ground level up to platform height but which wasn't done. The level of support in the BA forum is of course, excellent and I hear there is talk of a patch so I hope many of these issues will be addressed.

[kimdurose]

The excuse "It's a limitation of MSTS" seems all to common in response to flaws advised to the producers of commercial routes.

Fair point, but it happens to be true in alot of cases.

Signalling is a complex thing, and as I haven't obtained SVR following disappointments with the previous payware offerings I've purchased from several companies compared to some of the excellent freeware routes that are available, I am unable to comment on that route. It is to be expected that the producers will 'hype it up' as that happens with most PC games. The best ever.... It's never been seen before... and so on.

I can't remember any of the developers of SVR saying that its the best ever or that it has never been seen before, but if you care to point me in the right direction I'll gladly admit I'm wrong.
The old freeware vs payware debate will always keep coming around and around over and over again i'm afraid. I could get out my dusty old copy of "responses to such comments" but most of them are well aired by now and wouldn't add anything that hasn't been said a hundred times before.
The contributors to SVR have given numerous freeware models to the MSTS community prior to and during working on SVR, but this gets quickly and conveniently forgotten.
Its a shame you won't consider trying SVR John. You obviously know your stuff and I think you might enjoy it if you could forget your preconceptions of it being hyped up.

[JohnKendrick]

I can't remember any of the developers of SVR saying that its the best ever or that it has never been seen before, but if you care to point me in the right direction I'll gladly admit I'm wrong.

I don't suppose the developers have, that is the marketing folk's job!

The contributors to SVR have given numerous freeware models to the MSTS community prior to and during working on SVR, but this gets quickly and conveniently forgotten.

No that isn't forgotten, but the constraints of a commercial project can mean corners are cut to get the product on the shelves rather than cross all the t's and dot all the i's. I cannot comment on the SVR, as I said I haven't seen it, though I understand it isn't perfect. Other payware offerings I have have been pretty disappointing compared to what the builders concerned have given to the freeware community. It isn't the builders fault - it is the commercial pressures. Look what appears to have happened to Kuju.

That is my view which I am perfectly entitled to. I am not having a go at anybody (but if the cap fits....)

Its a shame you won't consider trying SVR John. You obviously know your stuff and I think you might enjoy it if you could forget your preconceptions of it being hyped up.

Maybe once the wrinkles are sorted out , but bear in mind I do want to finish my own offering which grows larger by the day. It already comprises one main line and five branches and I'm sure you know how long each branch takes to do. Further to the above - if it was a commercial project I'd be under pressure 'from management' to get it released. As an 'amateur' I do not have those pressures. Ideally I'd like my route to be far better than anything that money can buy even though I'm doing it for myself (and anyone who would like it). Consequently it doesn't leave much time for running routes, so if I do run any I have big expectations that buildings are textured, landscaping has been done sensibly and so on. Did you see that poll about how much time folk spend running trains? I'm not alone in that I'd rather concentrate on model/ route building than spending a couple of hours completing an activity.

Those involved with payware routes (generally) seem very touchy about any criticism rather than accept it and vow to try to improve next time.

One let down about the SVR was the promise for two versions of the route which wasn't delivered. And I haven't forgotten an early forum comment to someone who wished to model the route which left a sour taste for me.

A plus side of payware is that it gets into the shops and promotes the base product. That costs money to set up and is somewhat of a gamble. That is also why the product needs to be as perfect as possible or it will disappoint purchasers who know nothing about UKTS or route building. I'm sure there is no one who will argue that all payware routes released so far have been brilliant.


John

[Lad491]

I have to say I'm far more confused about the enthusiasm for LBE on which I'm still to complete an activity without derailing!

This quote puzzles me as I have driven the line with default stock on all the activities supplied and those I have written myself for many, many hours, and the only derailments i have had have been when ive been exceeding the speed limits. You do have to keep one mile per hour below the speed limit on some stretches - but that was a bug in MSTS well advertised by Microsoft when it first came out. Other than that Ive not had a single problems with derailments.

Are you using stock downloaded from elsewhere? If so that might explain it since durability of non supplied stock varies enormously.

[buffy500]

No that isn't forgotten, but the constraints of a commercial project can mean corners are cut to get the product on the shelves rather than cross all the t's and dot all the i's. I cannot comment on the SVR, as I said I haven't seen it, though I understand it isn't perfect.
<snip>
It isn't the builders fault - it is the commercial pressures. Look what appears to have happened to Kuju.

That is my view which I am perfectly entitled to. I am not having a go at anybody (but if the cap fits....)

I think that the above is point is a pretty good 'sum up' of the situation, like it or not, there will be a publisher somewhere who wants to get the thing out at a certain date, (they are the ones putting in a tidy sum of money into its production and expect a certain return in that, don't forget, MSTS2 is 'just around the corner' which is very likely to seriously impact MSTS1 product sales, or thats certainly their concern) there is only so far they can pushed before you risk the whole thing being 'binned'.
Whereas, someone doing it on their own as freeware can take literally 'forever' (highworth )and if they ever chose to not finish it the only person they need to anwer is themselves.
Also something else to remember is that the people of this forum make up a very very small part of the market place (<10%), but are probably the most hardcore trainsim fans there are, there are lots of people who will buy SVR and be over the moon with it. Not everone is an out and out 'railway anorak', who will count the number of rivots in a station sign and know if its correct or not (and would care if it weren't). And lots of people don't care as long as it looks 'about right', and as a commercial product the people that will make it a sucess (and presumably create demand for a follow up) are the non rivot counting public who pick it up in PC World or Game etc....

I can't find a way to say without making it sound like an attack on anyone specifically, so please take my word that this is a general statement, but the truth is 'you cannot please everyone all the time', and in a market where some people know so much about the subject you will NEVER make something that everyone considers perfect. (and if you did try to, you'd never ever ever get it released, because there is no such thing as perfection)

[NeutronIC]

Well put Dave.

The only thing I'd add here is that SVR was pushed back several times and it is because they spent so long on the modern day SVR route fine tuning it, adding in lots of extra things and putting in the effort that they did do that the second version of the route just wasn't practical. If I recall the product was already delayed about 6 months because they didn't want to release it as it was and yes, the publisher I believe was starting to get a bit upset that what with MSTS 2 being bandied around you might not ever have seen SVR on the shelf if Mike had gone back to them and said they needed another couple of months.

Somebody will always find things that are wrong with any commercial offering based on their own expertise levels and as many of you know, John Yelland is probably one of, if not, the, best people on the site as regards his knowledge of Signalling.

What I would suggest is that rather than being destructive and making the whole Bluearrow team feel quite sick after 18 months of high pressure hell, perhaps this could be more constructive in terms of "next time, here's some pointers on getting things right..."

Remember, freeware routes are probably only seen by about 5% of the UK owners of MSTS because a HUGE number of them don't have Internet access or those that do have no clue about sites like this (that's what our roadshow is trying to fix) - seeing products like SVR on the shelf is what keeps MSTS alive and keeps stores like Game selling it.

Even though i'm a very tiny part of Bluearrow myself, I have nothing but admiration and respect for these gents, they have toiled blood and sweat to get this product out, it is without doubt the highest quality and best value add-on for MSTS on the shelf to date and I am not expecting anything to surpass it for quite some time.

I am confident that 99.5% of the people who purchase this product will feel extremely happy with their purchase.

I just do not see that this attack on Bluearrow is warranted in any way, they have gone far above and beyond the call of service with their support and interaction with the community - so you can tell they are not throwing the product over the wall and ducking so to speak like some commercial developers do.

Disappointed.

Matt.

[saddletank]

Somebody will always find things that are wrong with any commercial offering based on their own expertise levels and as many of you know, John Yelland is probably one of, if not, the, best people on the site as regards his knowledge of Signalling.

What I would suggest is that rather than being destructive and making the whole Bluearrow team feel quite sick after 18 months of high pressure hell, perhaps this could be more constructive in terms of "next time, here's some pointers on getting things right..."

I had hopes that one of the things the BA forum would achieve when it first appeared would be a vehicle to get feedback from those in the know on this site as the produect was being built. There is an immense pool of general railway knowledge on this forum and specific steam era knowledge, signalling knowledge, etc in abundance.

I tried to be helpful in my posts on the BA forum a number of times but generally criticism wasn't wanted. In the end I helped out privately in a couple of emails.

If BA had opened up and used the forum more as a beta test environment many more things might have been identified in time. Even if fixes were not possible the limitations of MSTS point could have been made in advance of the products release instead of afterwards.

I feel sure that the freeware people here would willingly give their advice and knowledge to improve a product as it was being built. Perhaps next time?

[johny]

Just in case the wrong impression has been given, for the most part the signal combinations and siting of the same are correct to the signal box diagrams. It is the implementation within MSTS that is at fault, not MSTS or the majority of the signals and signal combinations.

I have no doubt that for most people, if they can complete an activity using just the track monitor, then they are happy. Others, myself included, like to see the ground signals change in their favour in addition to the indications given in the track monitor.

John

[johndibben]

I saw this thread and thought 'flamer' but no, valid points made by everyone in my opinion, for what it's worth.

The saddest point was Matt's description of the creation of a 16 mile route as '18 months of high pressure hell'. If that's true, what on Earth has happened to our hobby? The point was further made by talk of pressures and conflicts of interest, time versus quality, with developers and publishers. It makes me look at the CD packs in front of me in a sort of 'how they suffered for their art' sort of way.

The point about UKTS members being only a small percentage of purchasers is true. Their views are obviously regarded as important though. Most of the 'public' probably wouldn't notice if the stations were in the wrong order. The 'experts' notice every single flaw. The developers probably hear more from the 'experts' than the 'public'. They also probably hear a great deal from the publishers and that accounts for a lot of what's been described as 'touchy' behaviour.

It would be wrong to place this only in in a commercial context. Freeware developers get plenty of 'stick' about mistakes made. They're more vulnerable and often acting on their own. Leeway given to freeware developers is probably balanced by a reluctance to criticise a whole team of people.

MSTS limitations are a factor. LBE will run smoothly but is criticised for being 'thin'. The SVR was constructed as faithfully as possible to the real thing and pushed MSTS to it's limits. It's not difficult to make a route or a model look better. The art is in making them so they play well within the game.

I regard the SVR as well worth it but I accept that some freeware is also worth it as well. The commercial world doesn't come across as a very happy place and so a decent reward is quite understandable.

Cheer up folks .... it's only a game .... or is it?

Edited for grammar ....