New Class 150 Model

buffy500 · Post by **buffy500** » Thu May 13, 2004 8:53 am

Whats wrong with the current 158 ?

ghawk2005 · Post by **ghawk2005** » Thu May 13, 2004 12:07 pm

well, steven wellers model is pretty good, with the photo texture for the front it aint too bad, but its a bit 'box' like around the edges, all the corners need to be rounded and smoohed etc, part from that it isnt too bad, but for some reason, when on the external view, if you're on track cam and it goes past v close it crashes, have no idea why tho. just think a model from scratch like this 150 project would be good.

gary

miller2002 · Post by **miller2002** » Thu May 13, 2004 1:19 pm

i have to agree with buffy the current 158 is fine
ok maybe everyone wants an absolutly perfect one but in my view and other im sure steven wellers is brillant
thanks
mark

petermakosch · Post by **petermakosch** » Thu May 13, 2004 1:29 pm

well, i think of it as "to be put at the back of the "Update" list". Its an okay Model to be using, as I can think of others that need re-doing )PacerS!!)

ghawk2005 · Post by **ghawk2005** » Thu May 13, 2004 9:41 pm

yeh, true enough the 158 prolly isn't a high priority, i just wouldn't mind seeing an improvement, likewise, another model/texture i think desperately needs improving/updating is the Voyager, in real life its a cool train, but i've never liked the MSTS version of the model, and would never use it in MSTS. I think someone should either vastly improve it, or better still, build from scratch. There are many incredibly talented modelers out there, especially the person responsible for the latest Class 180 model, its fantastic. that said however, still looking forward to this 150

Gary

buffy500 · Post by **buffy500** » Fri May 14, 2004 7:54 am

Yay another positive comment about someone's modelling.
I trust you will get what you deserve.

ghawk2005 · Post by **ghawk2005** » Fri May 14, 2004 8:51 am

excuse me, it was a positive comment, i just gave 2 very strong compliments, if not 3 about the new 150, and the Class 180, they're very high quality models, full credit must go to the model/texture creators.

I sense the fact that for the simple reason *your* models weren't complimented is why you're getting a bit uptight. When you build something i feel deserves as much praise then i'd be quite happy to say so. But quite frankly the only model i've used of yours is that HST, but only after it was improved by that other guy who painted it into ICexec/Swallow etc, i wouldn't use the original model ya created, sorry but i just wouldn't. (likewise with your 158)

anyway, enough with the insults, yes that was harsh but i don't like selfish people who are only governed by compliments to their work and noone elses.

Gary

arabiandisco · Post by **arabiandisco** » Fri May 14, 2004 9:23 am

I would suggest that if you want to offer up compliments then the best way is not to say "Let's have an xxx that's as good as that", as you'll end up annoying more people than you please.

It doesn't strike me as a great way to encourage people to give up their time and energy to learn these things, and then offer the fruits of their labour to you for free. If you want a better 158, then I'm sure the process of building one is very rewarding. Perhaps you should try it?

Backfoot2002 · Post by **Backfoot2002** » Fri May 14, 2004 12:48 pm

You guys really need to cool it down. The current 158 is good, yes, but older models in MSTS could do with some update (im not naming any names). if people are willing to update models, and create a new version i suggest they, if its going to better.

Now im not saying that the 158 modl is urgent need of an update, but if someone does decided to do it, then thumbs up to them for trying.

Finally, to ghawk2005, i dont think sniping at people about there models will get you anywhere. credit should go to all model makers for what they have done. as most people will know, its not an easy task, and i certainly can't do it.

buffy500 · Post by **buffy500** » Fri May 14, 2004 1:19 pm

ghawk2005 wrote:excuse me, it was a positive comment, i just gave 2 very strong compliments, if not 3 about the new 150, and the Class 180, they're very high quality models, full credit must go to the model/texture creators.

I sense the fact that for the simple reason *your* models weren't complimented is why you're getting a bit uptight. When you build something i feel deserves as much praise then i'd be quite happy to say so. But quite frankly the only model i've used of yours is that HST, but only after it was improved by that other guy who painted it into ICexec/Swallow etc, i wouldn't use the original model ya created, sorry but i just wouldn't. (likewise with your 158)

anyway, enough with the insults, yes that was harsh but i don't like selfish people who are only governed by compliments to their work and noone elses.

Gary

Erm, Pardon me. I have often defended people who have been the subject of unjustified comments by people who are all talk and no finished projects. Its got very little to with the fact you were 'dissing' my voyager. Which I have known for a long time was actually not as good as it looked when I finished it.
Its still a damn sight better than any one elses MSTS Voyager attempt, (he trainz one is bloody good though)
If you look well enough, I think you will probably find me admitting as much on another thread.

You can be as rude as you like about my 158, it was about the second UK multiple unit for MSTS, and is about 3 1/2 years old, so I'm not going to defend it in the slightest. Likewise the old 166/465's. (In fact if you look at the upload screen for the 166 it says "***This is an old horrible model, and now only here for reference of how things have changed, now part of the 'Virtual National Railway Museum'.**** ", do you think that needs to be made any clearer that I am more than capable of coming to my own conclusions about how good or bad my own work is.

The point I am making, (and the point I have made every month for about 3 years) is the way you are saying it that is offensive, not the fact it might be possible to improove it. If you have downloaded something for free, you do not have the right to just say its cack. You have the right to say "That Voyager, its not really the right shape, look at it from the front, its far to wide at the bottom. Heres a photo that might help you make it better". "It's . and I'd never run it on my installation" is not the way to encourage people to do things. Trust me.
If you don't like the . I do, thats entirely your perogative, you don't need to bitch to everyone about it though.

but only after it was improved by that other guy who painted it into ICexec/Swallow etc, i wouldn't use the original model ya created, sorry but i just wouldn't

You won't be the same Gary Hawk who used to talk to me about HST's on MSN 18 months ago then when the beta version came out ? Thats not exactly the same attitude as I *think* I remember then. I'm sure you wanted a certain version (FGW?), Bruce had not done anything to them at that point. I don't remember you finding the HST repulsive and unusable then. And a good texture needs a half decent model to make it anything, just a like a good model nees a half decent texture to make it anything.

anyway, enough with the insults, yes that was harsh but i don't like selfish people who are only governed by compliments to their work and noone elses.

Anyway, there were no insults from me, (until this post maybe) but , I don't like people who are full of bad mouth unconstructive critisim when they should be at least polite (if not greatful) to the people that are happy to feed their greed for free models. Even more so when these people have not shown anyone else the talent they may have. Its real easy to slag people off for . work when you have no idea whats involved in doing something thats even only 'average'.

Cobos · Post by **Cobos** » Wed May 19, 2004 1:12 am

All that's needed for Dave's 158 is better looking textures I think. I was looking at this just last night after seeing a newer 158 in production. The front end on Dave's 158, I feel, is a much closer likeness. It thins out better at the top. Poly count is also a tenth compared to the others available. Ok, there's no pass view, but it's not essential.

Dave, it's maybe over 3 years old, but I think it's still the best shape around.

Click the image to zoom in

Kerr

buffy500 · Post by **buffy500** » Wed May 19, 2004 7:59 am

Cobos wrote:All that's needed for Dave's 158 is better looking textures I think. I was looking at this just last night after seeing a newer 158 in production. The front end on Dave's 158, I feel, is a much closer likeness. It thins out better at the top. Poly count is also a tenth compared to the others available. Ok, there's no pass view, but it's not essential.

Dave, it's maybe over 3 years old, but I think it's still the best shape around.

Click the image to zoom in

Kerr

I think you are being far to kind ! Although I've not looked at it for years. The trouble is that non interior equiped models tend to look much worse than something with even a bad interior modelled. I did start a new 158 for EB but nothing came of it due to other developments around that time.

ash888 · Post by **ash888** » Wed May 19, 2004 3:23 pm

I fail to see any point in slagging off peoples models when they themselves can't do nothing

. I admit myself that some of the early trains on msts are starting to "age" now that newer and more accurate trains are coming out

. But still that don't give people the right to say they are . (well not on the forums in public anyway). All that is doing is just making the model authors think "why bother ?"

. I certainly would be "ahem" browned off if the authors decide they are not making anymore trains because of "knit-picking" prats whom say so-so's trains are . and i'm not downloading them

. My word is to those is: "If you do a better job at making the train more accurate - then do it yourself". I think i may as well unsubsribe from this forum as all it has now is trolls and ungrateful people

.

Regards

buffy500 · Post by **buffy500** » Wed May 19, 2004 4:47 pm

ash888 wrote:I fail to see any point in slagging off peoples models when they themselves can't do nothing . I admit myself that some of the early trains on msts are starting to "age" now that newer and more accurate trains are coming out . But still that don't give people the right to say they are . (well not on the forums in public anyway). All that is doing is just making the model authors think "why bother ?" . I certainly would be "ahem" browned off if the authors decide they are not making anymore trains because of "knit-picking" prats whom say so-so's trains are . and i'm not downloading them . My word is to those is: "If you do a better job at making the train more accurate - then do it yourself". I think i may as well unsubsribe from this forum as all it has now is trolls and ungrateful people .

Regards

I can't say such a thing, because then you get told you think you are better than someone else because I've released more models. But well said !