Atomic Systems

Ive been wondering. Although i actually was much delighted to learn during the development of MSTS that trains would be 'crashable' as it were, becoming a commercial developer this has become a large issue.

OK its not like the physics are accurate during these instances, and the trains act more like toys rolling across the landscape, but still its an issue.

With MSFS the screen simply cracks, the word 'crash' appears and the plane is never seen to hit the ground in any large extend.


Were Kuju and Microsoft right to put the ability for the train to derail into the game? The ability to run buffers and hit other trains in a real time manner? Will this be the case in subsequent versions? or will this ability be removed in favour of the MSFS approach?

Thoughts appreciated

LucaZone wrote:With MSFS the screen simply cracks, the word 'crash' appears and the plane is never seen to hit the ground in any large extend.

Well I remember in FS2000, if you flew the Concorde and hit the ground, the nose and wings would break off!

LucaZone wrote:Ive been wondering. Although i actually was much delighted to learn during the development of MSTS that trains would be 'crashable' as it were, becoming a commercial developer this has become a large issue.

OK its not like the physics are accurate during these instances, and the trains act more like toys rolling across the landscape, but still its an issue.

With MSFS the screen simply cracks, the word 'crash' appears and the plane is never seen to hit the ground in any large extend.


Were Kuju and Microsoft right to put the ability for the train to derail into the game? The ability to run buffers and hit other trains in a real time manner? Will this be the case in subsequent versions? or will this ability be removed in favour of the MSFS approach?

Thoughts appreciated

The PC** brigade strike again!

I know exactly what you are talking about Adam, I've heard all about it. I think what they should have done is for specific locos you can turn the derail option on and off. My bet is MSTS 2 will have this option.

Were Kuju and Microsoft right to put the ability for the train to derail into the game? The ability to run buffers and hit other trains in a real time manner?

Totally in my view. Its supposed to be a simulation and trains crash in real life. If you didnt stand the risk of crashing and could drive London to Brighton in 32 minutes (as we did one day in Brighton) life would quickly become very boring.

Hmm. Interesting.

I feel that because the crashes are fairly unrealistic, and totally end the game/sim, it still is very undesirable to actually physically wreck a train. But you'll always get those people who's first question to you is "Can you crash it?"

I don't see where the PC bit comes in though... It seems to be that anyone who disagrees in some way with a conservative (note small c) person automatically gets tarred with a "PC" tag in some sort of insulting way. Why? Because it's easy, and doesn't require any thought put into a discussion or argument. There's not a lot wrong with political correctness, it's how and where it's applied that can cause the problems. I don't like the Tories or their policies but I don't go round labelling anything slightly right-wing as Nazi or Fascist. Think about it...

As for plane crashes in MSFS, I've seen some large fireballs when I've put a plane in the dirt rather roughly. The only thing I don't like about crashes in MSFS is the fact that the flight automatically restarts. Sometimes (because of VFR scenery and add-ons) it can take ages to pre-render and restart. Why can't it just dump me to the normal screens?

What about resulting reaction of Train Operating Companies and the possibilty of being able to display their train in disasterous situations?

MSTS is PC in the respect that during a crash, you don't see bodies being flung out of the windows, or tumbling around the coaches in '5' view mode..
God Forbid.... that would be one for the Psycho's!

Terry

bit harsh to brand 5-10 yr olds like that

On the question of 'political correctness' (and I so agree with Fodda about that term - I complained about a racist joke today at work and got that tiresome cliché back), what I would find peculiar would be the idea that modelling train crashes realistically is tasteless - this site:

http://www.daworm.co.uk/zone/mstscrash/

has had all sorts of odd complaints, I gather -

but high graphic resolution games 'simulating' campaigns from the Gulf Wars are perfectly OK!

The only crashes I want Microsh*t to remove are computer related ones!

when simulating acts of warfare, people can hardly complain that it is distasteful when the resulting actions are specifically what the game is designed to simulate, and these actions are simple recreations of real world events.

However, it is not a purposeful action for a train to crash, kill and injure in real life. Thus specifically designing such a program would constitute distasteful, objectional, offensive and particularly unpleasant experiences towards those in society. Especially those that may have suffered any such accident.

Does that sound brainy enough?

hmm interesting

the hardcore gamer inside me says that of course realistic crashing should be included in a sim that claims 'real as it gets'.

but on the other hand, judging by the msts crash site linked to above, we are but a few steps away from morbid people 'recreating' major railcrashes. Imaging a site that offered free download of crashes such as the ladbroke grove and southall disasters. Sick. I can imagine it now. "late_20th_century_crashes_bonus_pack.zip" "great_heck.act"

Maybe realistic crashes would be ok, but only if handled responsibly by the community. by that i mean no deliberate crash activities. But unfortunately it only takes 0.001% of the community to do this and we all get a bad name. imagine if the daily mail got a hold of it!

one to ponder

jon

Sad to say, MSTS Crash site does infact feature real life rail crashes. There is also a page dedicated to suppling Activities that are designed to crash trains.

All of which u said 0.001% of people would be all it takes to cause major grief is happening on MSTS Crash Site.

Ive contacted a number of Model and Route authors about the site, and suprisingly many of them already know about it, and in some cases company lawyers of the real life trains / stations / routes are involved, yet the site continues to operate.

I haven't noticed people sticking up crash photos and celebrating the glory of such things yet, most normal people don't. One guy did a suicide animation once and was vaporised for it. Nor have I noticed people being put off by train travel or trying to derail trains any more than they did in the past, most informed people do realise the risk is very small.

If you look for these things you will probably find it. But the reason your looking is because your that way inclined anyway.

Actually, this sort of thing, which is politically correct because it attempt to change perception because of perceived historical imbalances, is just the right way to go about getting simulation software banned altogether. Again, a case of adversely affecting the majority, to cater for tiny risks or skewed thinking of a minority.

It's the usual silly attempt to overreact and actually creates more bad publicity and fear.

Remember the storm over September 11th and flight sim?

Or spotters being banned from stations, laughably because of a risk of terrorism?

The perception of risks of things like: Air crashes, train crashes, murder, acts of terrorism, accidents is higher than the actual risk. It doesn't mean it doesn't happen of course, but there is a risk to every single thing you do from walking along the road, to brewing beer to putting the car through a car wash.

Everything you do has a cause and effect and I'm afraid such is life you will probably offend someone or damage something.

- Every time you go to the supermarket you are buying food that uses damaging factory farming methods. Or crops grown in fields that are irrigated by waters from large dam schemes, which floods valleys, causes a build of of silt and damaged the eco system.

- Every time you turn on a light your causing pollution and the countryside is blighted by pylons

- Every time you drive your car your adding to congestion and pollution

- Every time you buy cheap products (or even expensive labels) your probably exploiting working people.

Virtually everything you do effects someone else, and in modern living usually in an adverse way. That said, there are good things as well.

I'm going slightly off the point, but it's all part of the same thinking - papering over cracks. This stuff usually comes from the great and the good or academics that have little common sense or love making mountains out of molehills because they have ulterior motives, or wish to be seen to be doing good but actually don't think through what they are doing. It's effectively suppression, because it fails to recognise real risk, real life and real people.

Seemingly well meaning policies can actual have an adverse effect, and I do think this is one such case.