Faults with ECE

General MSTS related discussion that doesn't really fit into any of the other specific forums.

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
User avatar
simont
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 2486
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2001 12:00 am
Location: North London

Post by simont »

saddletank wrote:
simont wrote:How are they not objective?
Because they are people's opinions. Opinions are never objective. A reviewer must be objective. Laurie has a fair point here.

Martin
I guess you're right. I suppose by objective I was thinking more in terms of being unbiased. I guess a review can never be truly objective (less still a forum post, which is essentially conversation), unless it's just a dispassionate list of screenshots and stats. Even formal reviews are, by their nature, someone's opinion, and people will take that into account when reading it, although the reviewer would have to rein their opinions in to some extent, and consider the overall view. You don't have to do that so much on a forum.

I guess the important thing is that people are coming to their opinions based on their actual experiences of the routes, there's no ulterior motive here at all.
<- 87012 "Coeur de Lion"
Backfoot2002
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 2806
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2002 9:39 pm
Location: Sheffield

Post by Backfoot2002 »

bdy26 wrote:
buffy500 wrote:
bdy26 wrote: It would seem something fundamental if it won't load the game at all, as opposed to not loading the scenario once the game is running.
Try a new tsection.dat, mine would not play 1st time around, but the latest tsection.dat sorted that out.
Thanks Dave, turned out to be a tsection issue, though the EB installed one claims to be build 32. Eh? Also a learning curve for me in that the tsection.dat in the route folder shouldn't also be changed, just the one in the global folder.

Route riter did eventually make me a ref file without error messages after another install. But route riter also made my tea and got me a cold beer from the fridge so shouldn't complain.

Now I've actually driven it, here's some constructive criticsim:

Good points:

317 - excellent model
91 - excellent model, if slightly too light a shade of blue
Sounds - excellent, esp the HST and the horn on the 91
Route - it's good, better than expected having bought LBE, stations look realistic, hertfordshire is, to quote General Melchet, a "barren featureless desert" but that is probably fairly accurate *ducks*
Physics - good, 91 a touch overpowered but about right when propelling
Cabs - good, though slight shame there isn't a separate DVT cab as the controls are different to the 91, but that's being anal.

Bad points:

Mk4s - the shape isn't right, they don't lean in enough (the 91 looks like it's pulling mk3s), they're too wide, the buffet car is a different height to the rest, Mk4s don't have buffers!!!! (except the front TSO, which doesn't have a corridor either, but hasn't been modelled)

DVT - looks about right shapewise, but again it's different to the mk4s, it's
too high off the rails, the wheels are bigger than those on the mk4s ( and a different colour), the textures on the IC don't match the Mk4s ( same with the 91), the swallow logos are the wrong size and position.


HST / Mk3s - they seem too high or too short, the power cars are swallow yet the coaches have executive "intercity" but without the "125" ( if a mix and match was intended), the restaurant markings are inaccurate, the cab numbers are too large ( okay now I'm getting picky). They haven't bothered to model a TGS either, which just seems a bit lazy. Trouble is, unlike the 91s, there is no contest as to whether the commercial stock is better than the swallow HST in the UKTS library - I can't be the only one to have swapped them over and kept the sounds and the cab...

Overall, it's worth it, though I am slightly disappointed with the mk4s more than anything.
You say its an execellent model? How can an 'excellent model' have so many faults? From what you have stated, its very poor. What actually do you like about the model? Just the fact that its new?

Im my opinion, its very poor. The freeware standard is higher than that. The only decent thing about the 91 in general are the sounds and the cabview.
User avatar
salopiangrowler
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 7796
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Shrewsbury
Contact:

Post by salopiangrowler »

Definition of a perfect model is Mark Shipmans Deltics or Locos off the ELR pack.

Definition of bad models
mostly EB's Stuff.
Anything made the year MSTS was released.
Image
User avatar
rwaceyw
LMS Guru
Posts: 11524
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Lancashire, England

Post by rwaceyw »

Anything made the year MSTS was released.
I beg to differ.

 Click to view more informationMidland Johnson Single [641716 bytes] - mrsingle.ZIP
File ID: 67 Date: 08 Dec 2001 - 1621 Downloads

 Click to view more informationBR Class 24 number 24005 [1913004 bytes] - 24005_v1.zip
File ID: 37 Date: 07 Dec 2001 - 1963 Downloads

 Click to view more informationBR and ExGWR Conflat A wagons and Containers [2501058 bytes] - ConflatsCombined.zip
File ID: 88 Date: 09 Dec 2001 - 6400 Downloads


For just some examples of some good stuff from 2001.

David
Been here long enough to know better...
User avatar
salopiangrowler
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 7796
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Shrewsbury
Contact:

Post by salopiangrowler »

that johnson singles pretty rateable, the wagons are good, ok there are some good models out there but there were lots of bad stuff aswell.
Image
User avatar
bdy26
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 3854
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 8:34 pm
Location: Manchester, rain.

Post by bdy26 »

Backfoot2002 wrote:
bdy26 wrote:
buffy500 wrote: Try a new tsection.dat, mine would not play 1st time around, but the latest tsection.dat sorted that out.
Thanks Dave, turned out to be a tsection issue, though the EB installed one claims to be build 32. Eh? Also a learning curve for me in that the tsection.dat in the route folder shouldn't also be changed, just the one in the global folder.

Route riter did eventually make me a ref file without error messages after another install. But route riter also made my tea and got me a cold beer from the fridge so shouldn't complain.

Now I've actually driven it, here's some constructive criticsim:

Good points:

317 - excellent model
91 - excellent model, if slightly too light a shade of blue
Sounds - excellent, esp the HST and the horn on the 91
Route - it's good, better than expected having bought LBE, stations look realistic, hertfordshire is, to quote General Melchet, a "barren featureless desert" but that is probably fairly accurate *ducks*
Physics - good, 91 a touch overpowered but about right when propelling
Cabs - good, though slight shame there isn't a separate DVT cab as the controls are different to the 91, but that's being anal.

Bad points:

Mk4s - the shape isn't right, they don't lean in enough (the 91 looks like it's pulling mk3s), they're too wide, the buffet car is a different height to the rest, Mk4s don't have buffers!!!! (except the front TSO, which doesn't have a corridor either, but hasn't been modelled)

DVT - looks about right shapewise, but again it's different to the mk4s, it's
too high off the rails, the wheels are bigger than those on the mk4s ( and a different colour), the textures on the IC don't match the Mk4s ( same with the 91), the swallow logos are the wrong size and position.


HST / Mk3s - they seem too high or too short, the power cars are swallow yet the coaches have executive "intercity" but without the "125" ( if a mix and match was intended), the restaurant markings are inaccurate, the cab numbers are too large ( okay now I'm getting picky). They haven't bothered to model a TGS either, which just seems a bit lazy. Trouble is, unlike the 91s, there is no contest as to whether the commercial stock is better than the swallow HST in the UKTS library - I can't be the only one to have swapped them over and kept the sounds and the cab...

Overall, it's worth it, though I am slightly disappointed with the mk4s more than anything.
You say its an execellent model? How can an 'excellent model' have so many faults? From what you have stated, its very poor. What actually do you like about the model? Just the fact that its new?

Im my opinion, its very poor. The freeware standard is higher than that. The only decent thing about the 91 in general are the sounds and the cabview.
I think the 91 is fine, it's much better than the mk4s and the DVT - the only real fault with it is the colour is slightly out, though that is consistent with the rest of the 225 set - overall I agree, as a 225 set I'm not impressed but the 91 is not the biggest problem by any means. It captures the shape of a 91 well, and if you put the 2 models together they do look quite different. I don't think the freeware versions are significantly better IMHO, though a new set of textures will work wonders - I'm hoping Anton will upload his. Then I will agree with you :wink:
Backfoot2002
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 2806
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2002 9:39 pm
Location: Sheffield

Post by Backfoot2002 »

bdy26 wrote:I'm hoping Anton will upload his. Then I will agree with you :wink:
I am Anton... :wink:
[album 70528 acm_paintworks_sig.jpg]
| Intel Core i5 2500K (Overclocked to 4.0Ghz) | Gigabyte GA-Z77-D3H | 8GB Corsair Vengeance Memory | ATI Radeon HD5770 1GB |120GB OCZ SSD (OS & RW) | 2x1TB 7200rpm HDD (Storage) |
User avatar
bdy26
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 3854
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 8:34 pm
Location: Manchester, rain.

Post by bdy26 »

I know... and I'm still hoping :wink:
User avatar
chrispierce
Established Forum Member
Posts: 362
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 10:49 am
Location: Notching up to full power!

Post by chrispierce »

Has anyone actually asked for there money back yet, rather than filling forum pages with an endless list of 'faults'?
Backfoot2002
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 2806
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2002 9:39 pm
Location: Sheffield

Post by Backfoot2002 »

It will be uploaded at some point in the week, commercial work to attend to first.

Plus im lining up something else. :wink:
[album 70528 acm_paintworks_sig.jpg]
| Intel Core i5 2500K (Overclocked to 4.0Ghz) | Gigabyte GA-Z77-D3H | 8GB Corsair Vengeance Memory | ATI Radeon HD5770 1GB |120GB OCZ SSD (OS & RW) | 2x1TB 7200rpm HDD (Storage) |
User avatar
bdy26
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 3854
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 8:34 pm
Location: Manchester, rain.

Post by bdy26 »

Excellent news, thanks :D
User avatar
petethetim
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 4599
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:27 pm
Location: a Secret Location in Belfast
Contact:

Post by petethetim »

I Notice that since I installed This MSTS has a tendency to crash especially if I would nip back to the desk top this has only happened since I installed ECE & It has been happening even when its not ECE I'm using & it is tucked away in train store

--
Regards

Pete
Regards & Best Wishes

Peter
PETETHETIM
User avatar
salopiangrowler
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 7796
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Shrewsbury
Contact:

Post by salopiangrowler »

chrispierce wrote:Has anyone actually asked for there money back yet, rather than filling forum pages with an endless list of 'faults'?
Whats the point, i doubt theres refunds with EB anyway, they'd spend it the minute they get there profits to make sure theres no refund.

Better off flogging it on ebay you'd get more for it.
Image
NeutronIC
Atomic Systems Team
Atomic Systems Team
Posts: 11085
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2001 12:00 am
Location: E11, London, England
Contact:

Post by NeutronIC »

Whats the point, i doubt theres refunds with EB anyway, they'd spend it the minute they get there profits to make sure theres no refund.
A comment from someone who knows zip about the way the commercial world works *sigh*

If a customer wants a refund they are entitled to it within a certain period, simply return the product from where you got it and they should give you a refund. There may be time limits on when you can do this so make sure you do anything within those times.

Matt.
NorthallertonN
New to the Forums
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 9:20 am

Post by NorthallertonN »

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, so here is mine:

I am horrified to see some people jump on the bandwagon and criticise ECE within a few days of it's release, I haven't even got mine yet (that is not a dig). Were you really expecting it to be perfect down to every last detail? I very much doubt that most of you, if not all of you could do any better and if you can, then why don't you try and release a "perfect" version? I doubt if you had spent hours, days, weeks and months creating a product to MSTS you would be very pleased if people started criticising you for minor details. It's not perfect, so build a bridge and get over it!!!

RANT OVER!

PS - I am not employed by EB nor have I helped create the route in any way, shape or form. I just like driving trains and am greatful for any route that is released so I can drive on it!!!
Locked

Return to “[MSTS1] General MSTS Discussion”