New update here!

[bigvern]

I wouldn't spam the devs but it does get a little perplexing when some of the longstanding "wish list" such as super-elevation, seem to fall off the grid. Or more terrain textures as I posted on Flame-sim earlier today, sure Derek asked a few weeks back for examples of additional types but now we are told there's no plans to increase the number or combine the UK/US set (as I'm sure was the original intention for RW) unless these are as part of a route pack.

[RSderek]

Indeed Vern.
Rather than do the textures myself I am going to give the source files out so you and others can do it yourself.
Is this not better?
If I did it all how would you learn to make your own?

Increasing the list will just increase loading times, what you want to do is have a more focused list for the route you are creating.

Super elevation has not fallen off the list and nor is it the most requested.

regards
d

[Bullet399]

Indeed Vern.
Rather than do the textures myself I am going to give the source files out so you and others can do it yourself.
Is this not better?
d

much appreciated

[theokus]

Indeed Vern.
Rather than do the textures myself I am going to give the source files out so you and others can do it yourself.
Is this not better?
d

much appreciated

Hahaha, sorry he
Sad27 did solve some of my "desires"

[bigvern]

Re textures...not quite the answer I was hoping for, but thanks for responding anyway.

It will be interesting to see what the uptake is on this, I have my suspicions but probably better not to speculate. Not the ideal analogy, but just because one can drive a car doesn't mean you're qualified to strip down the engine. (And some of us are a bit too old to learn). Presumably there are still no plans to combine the UK/US set as originally envisaged either?

In the meantime I'll continue with my TRS route which has about 250 in Surveyor by default, let alone those that can be added seamlessly from the DLS.

Re superelevation - I would say this is a priority in terms of the overall simulation experience, along with a saner re-implementation of dynamic cab and train suspension movement/sway.

[hertsbob]

Hi

One comment/criticism I've heard in the past is that RW users are waiting to be 'spoon fed' with additional content and/or fixes from RS.com.

Whilst I agree that think Derek's response isn't going to immediately increase the pool of textures, surely it's a preferable way forward as it will allow countless others to develop their own? Or am I missing something?

Cheers

Bob

[AndiS]

I think there is a perception problem here.

Route builders feel that their job is just to combine what is there. Sound logical.

Kuju/RSDL/RSC find it natural to start a route by creating a set of textures (maybe with a lot of reusing). Besides the image editing, which becomes zero effort if you stick to reusing, this means messing with blueprints and maybe image format conversion. It really is not rocket science at all, but it is definitely more than taking what is there.

After reading Dereks comments about loading time and seeing his offer to publish the sources, I guess the road clearly leads to a few people combining these to 3 or 5 different texture sets and uploading that so route builders who do now want to get in touch with the blueprint editor can help themselves to one of these sets (which will have different foci, hopefully).

While I used the blueprint editor a lot and it did not kill me, I can clearly see the point in not using it: Using the world editor is mostly fun, the blueprint editor is definitely not.

[RSderek]

Hi,

To be fair Vern you are right it is not the ideal analogy, now if I was on the steam forum talking to new users then you'd be right. After all what would they do with source files? But I am talking to seasoned people who want to get more out of RWs.

So, if a creative route builder (and there are a few here) had the source files they can (if motivated) put together a list of textures they want in the order they want.
They can also (if motivated) look at the source files and make variations with ease, then from that (if motivated) create completely new ones and not be restricted.
If I create the textures, route builders will be stuck with what textures I think they might like, and if they are not right you will want more and so on.

Of course I understand that is not for everyone and in the short term it might feel painful, but in the long term it will be better for all.
This is also why we will be releasing all the source material for 3 core locos, giving the creative types the tools and knowledge to do better things.

Vern, everyone has their 'priority' thing, all are important in their own way.
We listen and and act as best we can within our means along with our own list of priorities and goals.
And you know what, I'm very proud of what we have done and that 2 years on we are still here doing what we said we would do.

regards
Derek

[bigvern]

Hi

One comment/criticism I've heard in the past is that RW users are waiting to be 'spoon fed' with additional content and/or fixes from RS.com.

Whilst I agree that think Derek's response isn't going to immediately increase the pool of textures, surely it's a preferable way forward as it will allow countless others to develop their own? Or am I missing something?

Cheers

Bob

I don't think anyone is waiting to be spoon fed, but we are back to the same old argument over freeware vs payware rolling stock and the "do it yourself" sentiments so often expressed. Maybe my analogy wasn't particularly clear but what I'm trying to say is that just because I have the ability to sit down and create a route, does not mean I have the technical know how (and let's face it, RW is a fairly technical sim if you want to get down and dirty) to create 3D models or textures and set these up in the xml file. As Andi notes, to those who do this for a living they can't perhaps see what the problem is but they are in a far better position to maybe sit an artist and coder down for an afternoon or two and knock out an extended texture pack. The bottom line for RS.com is that there's really not that many people building routes for RW, my attention has already wandered back to Trainz and at least one of the reasons for that is the same old tired terrain textures. Of those people actively developing even fewer have the knowledge or skill to set up texture packs in the way RW requires. The ultimate lifeblood of this sim is going to be new routes, doesn't matter how many £10 payware locos they try and sell if it's the same old routes, people will lose interest. By all means release the source files with instructions and those knowledgeable about such things can visit the Mayang site to collect some terrain images and see if they can get them in the sim, but also consider as the publisher of the sim that a few afternoons work yourselves combining the UK/US sets and adding a few more shades of green/scrub/rock might not be a waste of time for the overall future of your product.

[SaMa1]

I don't know if it is a violation of forum rules but I have included my top 3 wishlist to my signature. With every update we are little bit closer to the perfect simulator of trains!

[hertsbob]

(One of my top three was visible wheel-slip for steam locos. Can't wait!!)

I wasn't trying to imply that any one person was waiting to be 'spoon-fed', merely that it was a perception that was mentioned a couple of months ago...

I fully appreciate your comments regarding the necessary skills and inclination/motivation to create new textures, although I don't have the faintest idea how this would be achieved. What I would say is that there are definitely folks who frequent the forums who do have the artistic talent and flair, whilst there are others who are happy to get their hands dirty with a spot of blueprint work. Certainly if the fruits of these labours resulted in a payware texture set then I'd wholeheartedly agree with you regarding the freeware/payware debate, but otherwise I think there's a distinction between the two at the moment.

From my own point of view, I'm happy with what's available (I'm not very fussy!), and whether additional content is produced by a talented amateur or a talented professional I'm not massively bothered. Looking forward to whatever comes my way!

Cheers

Bob

[paulz6]

The problem here is one of fundamental product design. RW will load up all textures according with a given blueprint set even if they are not used. It would be better if route builders could select from a larger global pallet and then RW only load up those which are used. This is probably more complicated given the jump into editor and out into run-time mode design of RW.

Nice list of product updates BTW.

[TransportSteve]

As a noob on here, and having viewed the list of bug fixes, etc, there are some that I don't understand as I probably haven't experienced them personally yet, but a few of them have me a little puzzled and I wondered if a fuller more comprehensive explanation is available please for these. As a non-creator, things such as the Localisation and Offset tools I may never use, but, some of the other listings I find perplexing....I've chosen 2 at random for example....

Increased performance on derailment - Will this make the bangs louder, or, will the coaches, wagons and locomotive be dispersed over a wider area ?? LOL

New On-Screen Icons to indicate Wheelsliping and AWS warnings - we already have warning lights in the cab for wheelslip on some of the diesels, and you can hear and feel the wheels slipping anyway, we have the AWS bells also, is this purely for the steam locomotives ??

My other thought is that you've fixed some issues that I don't experience, headlight issues when switching cabs, crashing when using TAB to pass signals, after downloading the upgrade patch, or whatever it is, is there a possibility that these fixes may damage my game and work in reverse and therefore give me problems in the future ??

Thanks and regards.

Transport Steve.

[AndiS]

I also wondered about the improved performance in crashes. But I simply don't care.

The bit with the warning for AWS and wheel slip certainly refers to the HUD, which is that text that is shown on top of everything when you press F5. There are a few bits of information which are shown in MSTS and which are missing in RW and wheel slip is one of them. Most engines don't have such indicators in the cab, at least most steam engines.

The visual warning for the AWS is good for crazy ones like me who drive engines in outside view, expert modes, and without sound switched on. In the past, I always had to be on the watch for distants and press Q a few times but if the route builder did not place the track link where you guessed it, you still loose out, so this indication is a good thing -- for me at least!

I would not be worried about problems you did not experience in the past. It is highly unlikely that the patch will make them appear on your machine. Every patch brings along some new issues, but if you keep Steam switched off for a week or two, you can read in the forums which issue the most recent patch brought along. If you did not experience much in the past, then chances are fine that you will not experience new issues yourself. E.g., there was one point in history where boats would come in hoards instead of singles. Without any boats where I was driving, I did not care at all about this problem. But if your favourite route runs along a canal and if that canal features boats then you will consider the issue important. So it all depends on what you are doing with the game.

[Trainguy76]

Regarding textures, I would recomend RS.com does them that way the textures become default, and everybody has them.

Or people could create textures, submit them to RS.com, and maybe the textures get released in an update.