Atomic Systems

Don't normally visit this forum but was pointed towards it.

Loads of threads with [KRS] suffix.

Wondered on what basis they were being made and whether I'd missed something regarding information about modelling programs and conversion to KRS?

Not messing about and genuinely interested as I used to dabble as a modeller at one time.

Cheers

John

A few, including myself, have decided to start creating for KRS. The topics beginning with [KRS] are just simply to say, that's what they'll be for. All we know is that KRS are making their models in 3D Studio Max, but no really knows what other modeling programs will be supported.

Was wondering whether more was known about modelling programs required, texturing, polygon limits and the like, for KRS.

John

I believe i was the first to use it, and it sort of caught on, it just meant people could know it was a Kuju Rail Simulator model, rather than an MSTS model.

The modelling programs so far are 3DS Max and another i forget the name of, seeing as 3DS Max is my home turf it's all good. Polygon limits are roughly 20-25k as the Black 5 uses 24k. It also uses 3 1024x1024 maps with a few smaller ones too, so we've got that info.

Kuju have already said that 3D Canvas is the package they will be providing 3rd party support for (i.e. the one that most people will use to create freeware with). I expect that 3DS Max is supported as that is the package that most of the default content was made in.

I'll just stick to gMax and wait for TSX myself

Regards,

Dan

BR7MT wrote:I'll just stick to gMax and wait for TSX myself

Regards,

Dan

You do know Gmax has been discontinued now right?

As in, TSX couldn't have Gmax support because Autodesk have discontinued anything to do with it.

Your choice.

A cloud of uncertainty has been cast on a gmax exporter for MSTSX.

I certainly hope that is not the case and seeing as a gmax exporter has been written for FSX I fail to see the logic (on technical grounds) in not writing one for MSTSX.

Read tdragger’s post in the following thread.

http://forums.flightsim.com/ts/dcboard. ... &page=#116

I do not agree with the argument that because gmax is no longer supported by its developer that an export tool may not be written for it. Many models have been created for MSTS despite the level of support that’s available for gmax.

Gmax is a proven and stable modelling program with little (if any) need for support. As it’s basically 3D Studio Max V4 writing an export script for it should not tax the programmers at Kuju or Microsoft to any great degree.

Gmax modellers don’t require support. All they require is an export tool that works.

Am I correct in my understanding that Microsoft had to pay a royalty to Autodesk in order to them to be allowed to create an export tool for MSTS1? If so is anyone aware if Turbosquid imposes royalty payments on development houses?

Interestingly they stopped providing gMax with the latest version of the FSX SDK (SP1a), it was included as part of the original SDK.

3D canvas is confirmed as having a KRS export, it will also have a direct export to FSX shortly - once I have all the 49 extra material parameters working!

I'm a bit unsure about the use of [KRS] titles as my "NextGen" models will probably work in several simulators. I'm certainly not restricting myself.
I've also got a 15,000+ poly model working perfectly in MSTS1, it should probably also be considered "NextGen"
(Also bearing in mind TRS can already easily handle 30,000+ poly models)

I think the tag probably has more to do with modeller ego stroking.
- I know I used something similar in the screenshot forum, I was being ironic after people started using [KRS] there a while ago

Modellers often need to be told how good they are. That's what screenshots are for

decapod wrote:I think the tag probably has more to do with modeller ego stroking.

MSTS runs into problems when you have more than 10k in one .s file, whereas we already have confirmation that KRS can handle over 25k in one loco file, heaven only knows how much further that can be pushed.

You can't create a model that pushes the boundaries on a 6 year old simulator and simultaneously a brand new one, hence why i label my work with the [KRS] tag, because you couldn't get my models to run in MSTS (texture resolutions, normal maps and poly count).

Oh dear - a closed mind

decapod wrote:Oh dear - a closed mind

I tend to call it "common sense", or occasionally "logic".

decapod wrote:
I think the tag probably has more to do with modeller ego stroking.
- I know I used something similar in the screenshot forum, I was being ironic after people started using [KRS] there a while ago :

Seem to remember doing a similar thing, myself, in the NG forum!

decapod wrote: Modellers often need to be told how good they are. That's what screenshots are for

How very, very true!

Kevin

Haha, not entirely

I tend to like the idea that people enjoy using what I've created as much as I enjoy making it... You know, the satisfaction of seeing your hard work put to use.

Also, bear in mind that many modelers release their stuff for free, and get nothing back for it. Screenshots are a way of making sure people are happy with the way it is... I'd quite happily make changes to models during development if requested.

SteelixB wrote: I'd quite happily make changes to models during development if requested.

Stuff the 158 and start a 37?


Seriously - the 158 is probably one of the best looking units and you have done a absolutely pukka job capturing the shape and textual details.

SteelixB wrote: Also, bear in mind that many modelers release their stuff for free, and get nothing back for it. Screenshots are a way of making sure people are happy with the way it is... I'd quite happily make changes to models during development if requested.

I know, I've probably released more than the average number of freeware models over the last six years

Kevin