RW2 What should really be in it.

[bigvern]

If BVE is so amazingly awesome, why are you wasting your time with the pile of garbage (sic) that is RW?

The inevitable "FIFO" answer, it was only a matter of time before that came out.

Also worth pointing out at this stage, there is (or was) provision in the track rule blueprint system to specify superelevation so it seems in theory at least it *could* be implemented. Which brings us back nicely to the original purpose of this thread, before it got "footie fanned" was the reasonable expectation of what RW2 (as opposed to 1.5) ought to have included.

If BVE (or Zusi 2 for that matter) had better route building capabilities then I think you might find quite a few of us who make do with the current RW (or indeed TRS) limitations "FO'ing"...

[ashgray]

(to no-one in particular) You know what's going to happen if you carry on trying to score points off one another....

Ash

[train]

Hi
Having had the New Railworks 2 Installed last night,i prefer the original Railworks.They should have kept the F4 screen and now you have to go
into tthe new controiller when selecting a route,you even have to find a loco in order to use it,Perhaps it is as well i have backed everthing up
so much for progress.Why does mine Crash when going into Glasgow in WCML.i Think this is
another bug which hasn't been addressed overall disappointing,not much improvement in Railwaorks 2



warwick Hatton

[djt01]

Yes that’s one I should have mentioned

I thought you were an OpenRails fanboi?

R.

Rik I’m a fan of any realistic rail sim or those that have the potential to be.

[jimmyshand]

This is one of the most "passionate" threads I've ever seen on UKTS! People are clearly determined in their views and I think there are valid points on both sides of the divide. In my opinion railworks is currently the best train simulator in the world, however that said there are some gnawingly frustrating aspects that bigvern and co are quite right to point out. There is a freeware simulator out there that has all the features that RW lacks, superelevation, cab sway, darkened cabs in tunnels and tilt effects. This program has had these features for years, since before RS1 in fact. The saving grace of RW and the factor that gives it the throne is the superior graphics and models. In this department it wipes the floor with all competitors. The real next gen train sim however will be the one that can encompass all the best bits of what's currently available and then take it a step further. A combination of BVE physics and effects with the graphics of RW or better is what I think the so called 'protagonists' are really after and it's not an unreasonable request, if users don't demand better then the suppliers are under no pressure to deliver better.

[jimmyshand]

Further to my last I am also now coming to the conclusion that RSC are never going to do any significant changes to the game engine. 2-3 years on from RS1 and gameplay wise barely a thing has changed. That's not a critisism it just seems to be their choice to avoid key issues that have been raised since day one and focus instead on other areas of the game. What we have is what we have it seems and we just have to ignore the defects/deficiencies and get what we can from it until such time as a BVERW hybrid becomes available!! RW2 is really a bit of a swizz, it's not a new game as the title implies but simply the same game but with a new interface. All that said it is still the best presently available so let's crack on until someone new makes a breakthrough

[rabid]

I think for RW3 RSc should maybe think about starting from scratch and not try to keep RW2 content compatible.
That way they'll get a clean break and be able to create a game engine worthy of the excellent visuals.

Those who would howl in despair protesting about all the cash spent (me included) will still be able to use all their existing content in RW2 for many years to come, but the only way for RSc to advance the simulator things will be to rip out the guts and start again. A newer more efficient graphics engine, track system (super-elevation etc), and AI dispatcher / signalling system.

Keeping eternal backward compatibilty would only hinder RWs development in the long term (just look at Trainz).

Just a thought.

Edit: to cheer you up Jimmy, if you still want your 50 horn to sound like a 50 horn, pm me, I have some modded bin files for you.

[jimmyshand]

I think for RW3 RSc should maybe think about starting from scratch and not try to keep RW2 content compatible.
That way they'll get a clean break and be able to create a game engine worthy of the excellent visuals.

Those who would howl in despair protesting about all the cash spent (me included) will still be able to use all their existing content in RW2 for many years to come, but the only way for RSc to advance the simulator things will be to rip out the guts and start again. A newer more efficient graphics engine, track system (super-elevation etc), and AI dispatcher / signalling system.

Keeping eternal backward compatibilty would only hinder RWs development in the long term (just look at Trainz).

Just a thought.

Edit: to cheer you up Jimmy, if you still want your 50 horn to sound like a 50 horn, pm me, I have some modded bin files for you.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there mate, the only way to get to the true 'next gen' sim is to start again with a whole new program. Perhaps though it would be possible to port over exising loco's somehow but just update as you say the track system, signalling, AI dispatch and the underlying engine. That would be a great compromise to me. There's nothing wrong with the RW stock, it's the best we've ever seen in the world but it's the stuff it runs on that needs to be ripped out and re-built!
I would like to hope that this is something that RS.com are already planning. They seem to be the world leaders in train simulation and have a great core team of builders/developers that are now ultra-experienced. Maybe in 2-3 years time we might see RW3 unveiled but only this time it really will be a whole new game......................

I've sent a pm about the horn, thanks very much mate.

[bigvern]

Well said Jimmy. I think the other point to make to all those who are shouting this thread down is that it was meant to be constructive. Most of us posting accept that RW2 hasn't got superelevation, it would be nice if it had and really ought to have been a centrepiece of the RW2 re-release. However no one on this thread is saying or even implying that RW or RW2 is in any way useless because it doesn't have superelevation. Just that it would be a step forward in realism and pointing out that some older sims established long before RW or even RS *do* have this feature. My stance on s.e. in RW/2 is no different to it not being included in MSTS or TRS. The former no hope, the latter we also live in hope but also it appears not a commercial priority.

Some of the wilder statements about what RSC should include in a train sim are well, to be honest, a bit off the point - s.e. or cant is a direct function of railway infrastructure engineering, space aliens unfortunately are not.

[exshunter]

Its a nice thought, but if we are still waiting for improvements in the current game, some 3 years or so on, how long will it take them to make a whole new game?

[jimmyshand]

Going back to the theme of the thread, one of the biggest things missing from my wishlist is a stormtrooper stun gun or a Han Solo style carbonate freezing facility so that I can temporarily dispose of mrs jimmy to let me get some RW time in peace!!! More than any sbhh or mega-stutter, mrs jimmy is the greatest limiting factor in my RW experience!

[djt01]

the only way for RSc to advance the simulator things will be to rip out the guts and start again. A newer more efficient graphics engine

I completely agree and have said the same thing in various discussions for a long time now, the last time it was in one of the “stuttering” threads, but it always seems to get mixed reactions -

http://forums.uktrainsim.com/viewtopic. ... a&start=30

[zm4em]

The missing Class 86 run down notch??

Regards
Erik

[CosmicDebris]

PS: I don't blame RSC for not implementing superelevation as it must be a tough task.

It looks as though someone has already been able to accomplish this tough task -

http://railsimroutes.net/blog/?m=201009

Of course toughness is a very relative notion: OpenBVE and ZuSi managed to implement superelevation successfully, but their graphics engine lags behind RW and, above all, they lack true user-friendly/WYSIWYG editors, suck as the Route Editor in RW (or MSTS for that matter). And as tough as implementing superelevation might be, I guess it's nowhere near the amount of work needed for the development of easy to use editors able to attract a fairly large community of 3rd-party developers. One thing is sure: you'll never get me building a route by filling huge CSV files with raw data; that's why I'll stick to RW and lobby for the implementation of key simulation features.

What makes me insist on superelevation is that the French community of active railsimmers stick to MSTS because many of them don't see any key feature in RW that isn't available in MSTS or OpenRails. Like it or not, superelevation is the kind of key feature that's mentioned VERY often. Not that superelevation would be enough to make a majority of my fellow simmers take the plunge, though. The graphical improvements of RW vs MSTS alone decided me to buy and play RS/RW, but that's just me.

[djt01]

OpenBVE and ZuSi managed to implement superelevation successfully, but their graphics engine lags behind RW

I don’t know much about Zusi’s game engine but OpenBVE’s OpenGL graphics aren’t bad at all as the screen shots prove. In addition the developer is constantly making performance improvements and optimizations that have contributed to the fact that is virtually stutter free with a frame rate that never drops below the refresh rate of the monitor.