The future of freeware

[RSderek]

Well the IOW is up and above that number...

regards
Derek

[jamesh]

Well the IOW is up and above that number...

regards
Derek

I'm sure it is and that's something I was just thinking about while reading over some other comments. That's because it's a full install and go package, route, trains, scenario's ect. I always found that there were a lot of people who wanted everything ready to go on a new route. They didn't want to have to get asset A and then asset B, combine and then make a scenario for route C.

James.

[petermakosch]

What does get my goat, is the complete lack of loyalty to previous customers when products are transferred to steam. I have a growing list of items that I need to repurchase via steam.

This is my problem with the whole Rail Works scene.

The sim is still in it's infantsy, I can accept this. Until there are a lot of freeware items, it will stop me subscribing to this site (I was a premium for many years with MSTS). At the moment, I don't see the extra money will help, when I see many alternates (like having large items from UKTS on torrents (although this wouldn't help subscriber numbers, but then maybe make the tracker a premium only feature?)); But this is another story.

What I don't understand is why the current owners/developers, can't make it easy for everyone. Even here, on UKTS, there is a guide for transferring assets from RailSimulator to RailWorks. However, having a licence (or authority) to download and add via steam would make things a lot easier for customers. It would mean a fair bit of work from the company side - perhaps this is why people are having to re-purchase items?

I myself do not wish to re-purchase items. It sort of makes me think of re-purchasing Windows when it comes bundled with a new service pack; Not exactly the right way to go.

Steam is a good idea, fudging people into re-purchasing items wasn't. But what's done is done and now the RailWorks guys can't go back on their ruling as those who have re-purchased items will all need refunding - what a mess!

While there are people willing to buy, payware will continue. Simple as.
As BIGVERN has said, a lot of the loco's and such are entering the market with no scenarios, which makes them even less appealing. I struggle to stay on the legal side of things when I don't think my money is being well spent.

like that gorgeous Class 390 - zero scenarios included so is useless to me as a standalone product.

Again, it suprises me how this even happened.

Maybe I spent too much time away from the Train Simulation scene to notice. MSTS was easier to release trains with no scenerios, but I know when I PAID for a train, it came with some activities. I don't understand why with RailWorks, this has not continued. I do not mean to get at this at any developer individually, the 390 is a sterling piece of work, but I have not purchased it - no default scenarios means no buy for me currently as I know better than to wait in a queue of over 800Mb for a free slot here and there isn't enough content to warrant a premium sub yet.

. . .it is clear that while most of the MSTS fanbase stays with MSTS, they are not putting their effort into RW content. When and if they change over, they will bring their content along.

This I do find interesting, and to be the truth. I sort of expect amazing things from some companies who gave MSTS a new lease of life. But I wonder why these developers are still not intent on having a go at RailWorks. Is MSTS safer? A well-known system to work with? Perhaps. Perhaps that pretty much everything costs money is another deciding factor. To have a decent play around with the Sim, you will need to spend well over the £50 mark to have a few items to play around with, and for someone who isn't keen to leave MSTS, it's not very "inviting".

The other big deciding factor is I simply do not use the game enough to warrent spending a lot more money on it, but unfortunately, there isn't very much around that is encouraging this either. Saying that, I am gettign more and more interested and know certainly this year, I will resume my premium membership here. It's all a matter of time.

Some interesting thoughts here.

[RSderek]

HI,
I'd say 90% of products for RS work just fine crossing over into RWs. There were some issues with 1 or 2 products due to Pathing issues, but on a whole we worked hard to aviod the problem.
We certainly did not expect users to buy the products again if they already had them.

regards

Derek

[BadWhippet]

Well the IOW is up and above that number...

regards
Derek

I confess I purchased it again, so I wonder how many of these are people just buying it over again? I spent £100s on RS, but soon realised that RS.com were going to make me buy them all over again with NO discount. I tried to get my head around 'how to make content work in RW' but in the end repurchased my Class 158, Class 08, Class 66 and the IOW pack on the assumption that they would have been revamped (I didn't believe they would have the audacity to charge for an identical product and the blurb does indeed suggest enhancements. Admittedly, I'm not noticing massive improvements, and so I feel as though I may have paid twice for the exact same product and that disappoints me. But it installed as expected so at least I paid for that reassurance.

[RSderek]

Hi Sue, I did let users know that the products would be pretty much identical. It was discussed at length on these forums too.
regards

Derek

[BadWhippet]

Hi Sue, I did let users know that the products would be pretty much identical. It was discussed at length on these forums too.
regards

Derek

I admit I never noticed (sorry) - I just read up at the main site, together with information on how to get this stuff working in RW. I took a gamble on the official site's mention of enhancements (I think in the IOW pack) together with the frightening 'how to' info here, and made a bad judgement call. The price of being a n00b.

[Sly401]

Hi Guys

A couple of thoughts, firstly I would never expect available freeware to reach the levels acheived by MSTS. by that standard I expect the total numbers will only be a fraction..
The main reason is the standard that is required/ expected... nothing to do with the difficulty, although there is a lot to do it is straightforward and the tools to get your models into the game are included.

This also means you won't see many models from other platforms be ported across.. it is more work to alter one than it is to create an entirely new model. I have had a look at a couple of MSTS loco's and sorry but I could build a new one in a fraction of the time it would take me to alter it to suit RW.

Commercial developers fall into two camps.... those that do it as a profession and those that see it as a supplementary income. I may be wrong but my guess is the majority fall into the second catagory on all platforms.. those guys still developing for MSTS probably cut their teeth as most of us did by producing freeware as a hobby... it gets well received and demand is high so put a bit more time in than what you really planned.... but charge something for your efforts.
They are stuck between a rock and a hard place it will take them a long time to produce their first model in RW when they could be churning out stuff on familiar ground.

The truth is though that they are no longer doing this .. I havn't counted but I can be pretty sure that more new loco's were built last year for RS / RW than MSTS yep a lot were payware and that is the way it is most likely to stay for the forseeable future.

Where does this leave community freeware ?
There are areas of RW that are easier and quicker to develop in than other platforms (pro rata will detail level )
The world editor for routes
The scenario editor ........ yes ( but I have had the chance to test fly the new one )
Reskins.. (developers could do more to help in this area)

These are areas that I see as likely to see the biggest involvement by the community, there will probably be a few locos and rolling stock for a while , rolling stock may well then increase and a few go on further to create loco's that sit comfortably alongside commercial offerings.

This of course raise the issues of the more complex stuff being payware and the cost involved.. there is only one reason why the prices are where they are and that is the small user base at the moment.. the prices will only fall but it will be as the user base grows..

Here's hoping that within a year or two prices will be around the £3-£5 mark and and active user base of 10, 000 or so .. quite realistic targets , which will of course mean that there are 10, 000 potential contributors to the community freeware scene.

The sad part is that many on the other side keep digging an ever deeper hole for themselves in an attempt to stave of the inevitable..... by badmouthing progress, and it is a worry that loss of face will prevent some that could be of real benefit from crossing over..

The history of MSTS is not a prerequisite model for success.. success can be acheived in many ways and as I said before RW will find its own path

The future is bright

Sly

[erikkr]

" and active user base of 10, 000 or so .. "
Thats certainly possible , if the core is further developed and a, b and c are added .
But atm i read on german and french forums the members talking that it is dead ( because of lack of core development ).
I was giving RW another try today , after looking at pictures of the very nice route build by SAD ( a dutch guy )
I picked a scenario where i had to load coal . Is that boring ; stopping 15 times to load by pressing T ; no way to load automaticly and driving slow ( i am used to Trainz ) ; even no sound ; you see the coal but you hear nothing .
In 1,5 month , when the german version becomes available , we will see what the future of RW is .

[Sly401]

Hi Erik

Actually you touch on a serious point, the localization aspect.. the same extensive workload for producing complex items applys just the same and it is perhaps that the lack of "official " expansion for these countries is the reason that it is seen to be "Dead"
it isn't dead because the plattform is being developed and expanded its more of a case that it is embroyonic for those countries concerned .. commercial developers will obviously be attracted to the larger markets .. really what each local market needs is a local commercial developer to decide to take the bull by the horns... much as what seems to be happening for the German market.

For a developer to take on a foreign market involves many extra costs (travel \ research, lack of familiarity etc) then you can get as my own experience .......a practically racialist reaction... who is this guy coming over here and telling (showing ) us

Possibly one really strong market ( likely UK) will demonstrate that for countries with a strong ralilfan base there is considerable potential for a localized commercial developer.. then it becomes a worldwide market and users reaching six figures......... but its a step at a time and the need for continual development to keep the platform "Current"

Have fun

Sly

[petermakosch]

HI,
I'd say 90% of products for RS work just fine crossing over into RWs. There were some issues with 1 or 2 products due to Pathing issues, but on a whole we worked hard to aviod the problem.
We certainly did not expect users to buy the products again if they already had them.

That is good then.
However, let's suggest something is updated in the IOW route. This update is rolled out through Steam, but I guess my ported version won't get the update as it wasn't officially added through Steam?

[spikeyorks]

The sad part is that many on the other side keep digging an ever deeper hole for themselves in an attempt to stave of the inevitable..... by badmouthing progress, and it is a worry that loss of face will prevent some that could be of real benefit from crossing over..

I think you will find that it is actually comments like the above which put off many MSTS people from trying Railworks. Phrases like "the other side", "digging an ever deeper hole", badmouthing progress", "loss of face" hardly bring people together (and in a thread that the original author asked to keep friendly).

Personally I have not bought Railworks yet because I cannot justify the £120-£150 that I would have to spend to get the system that I would like to buy. (That would be the Tornado base pack, the IOW route for the foliage, the ECML Modern, half a dozen locos, the newest carriages and some modern wagons). Ironically I can actually afford this and yet, perhaps worryingly for the manufacturers, so far I haven't bought anything even though I am very interested in Train Sims.

So why have I bothered to post? Well I wanted to highlight the Route Building Challenge again. In my mind that one scheme really upped my interest in Railworks. It showed what can be done with the original RW package (for free) and I think was probably the most positive RW thing that has occurred within the community. Personally I think I would like to build a route (and I know that I wouldn't be doing this in MSTS) and this challenge showed me what could be done far more than any commercial development has done. I believe that if there were more Geoff Potters (and that his Route Building Challenge could somehow be extended across to a couple of loco building schemes) and less "Here's a new loco the only option open to us is to charge £10 for it" people then you may find that RW would benefit by hoovering up the rest of the community and that, as a result, the commercial market would probably end up gaining too.

Whether you like it or not if every class of diesel is going to be sold at £10 per pop (then what about DMUs, EMUs etc etc) you are going to end up with quite an expensive sim. Maybe not so dear when compared to X-Boxes and Nintendo DS game equivalents I suppose, but quite different to what has gone on before in Train Simming. That doesn't meant to say that it is wrong, just that some people won't like it and, more importantly, some people won't be able to afford it. If these two groups are large in numbers then that could be a large percentage of a relatively small market that RW is missing out on.

I hope the above isn't classified as "badmouthing" and I also hope that, if I do eventually build a route in RW, I can live with the subsequent "loss of face".

Regards

[mjoliver1]

I agree that there are probably too many payware locos and stock now for the available routes in RW. I must also admit, that I am not really tempted to buy stock just to run a freeware route, which is why I can only thank John, Keith and Jamie, in particular (but not exclusively), for not forcing the purchase of items just so that one has the chance to enjoy their wonderful productions.
I was happy to buy the original RS version of IOW as it came bundled with the necessary stock and some extra track and foliage. I will also be very happy to purchase SWL from RSC when and if it is released assuming, of course, that it comes with some 3rd rail stock.
As you can probably discern, I'm keen on electrics which seem to be quite neglected - whether freeware or payware - in favour of steam and diesel. Consequently, I probably spend more time messing around with MSTS (since 2001), Trainz and OpenBve at this time. Notwithstanding, Thank you to the modelers of some great steam locos such as Kevin Martin.

My appreciation to all freeware contributors to this hobby.


Mike

[Bullet399]

The sad part is that many on the other side keep digging an ever deeper hole for themselves in an attempt to stave of the inevitable..... by badmouthing progress, and it is a worry that loss of face will prevent some that could be of real benefit from crossing over..

I think you will find that it is actually comments like the above which put off many MSTS people from trying Railworks. Phrases like "the other side", "digging an ever deeper hole", badmouthing progress", "loss of face" hardly bring people together (and in a thread that the original author asked to keep friendly).

hear hear

[Darpor]

I think you will find that it is actually comments like the above which put off many MSTS people from trying Railworks. Phrases like "the other side", "digging an ever deeper hole", badmouthing progress", "loss of face" hardly bring people together (and in a thread that the original author asked to keep friendly).

Hi David, very valid and something I would like to see not happen, it has been said many times before that the two programs can peacefully co-exist together. There are far too many problems in the world that hold a much greater importance than users of Rail Simulation having a bicker.

The only problem I find when approaching this subject is double standards. Far too many times have threads been started by MSTS users to "flame" the situation even further, even to the point that in the past, the odd person has popped on to the RS/RW forum to specifically leave a post which is obviously to bait users of this program. Of course, everyone is entitled to an opinion, there is no doubt about that but it seems at times that it is allowed on this forum to pass critiscism one way and then not the other.