Question and Answer session with RailSimulator.com

[Ryosuke]

- are the issues surrounding multiple units being worked on? i.e. power calculation with different types of locomotives or with DVTs, sound and smoke effects.

- do you plan to correct the sheelslip issue?

- could you include a switchman's camera which would be on the head end of a pushed consist? that would make shunting a lot more realistic and fun.

- can we expect to see super-elevation one day?

- are there any plans for dynamic smoke effects without the need to use lua-script?

- is there any advance on the stuttering when loading scenery objects?

- could notched levers display their notches instead of percentages?

[theokus]

I expect a cake at May the 3th.

[Matroxxo]

Are there plans to make our own career scenarios?

Also, will it be possible to customize the sound level of the AWS independently from other ambient sounds?

Cheers

[Kromaatikse]

The major features I'm interested in are:

- Stability and performance improvements. At the moment my desktop PC can't run Portsmouth from end to end without an SBHH. Others still have trouble with WCML-N. My old MacBook Pro doesn't have the horsepower to overcome the current inefficiencies, yet somehow it can run Portsmouth without crashing.

- Fixing the physics so that making realistically-performing trains is much easier - and default stock updated to demonstrate this. Ditching PhysX might be a good idea too.

- Fixing the AI and dispatcher to be as flexible and capable (and as limited to real performance) as the player is. I want to see Derek's shunters at work in a yard as I go past, and I want to have AI trains slip to a stand on Beattock so that I can come in and rescue them. Ideally, I want to be able to watch from the cab as an AI driver demonstrates how to drive a scenario properly.

- Roadmaps, progress reports and patch notes posted where I can see them without having to sell my soul to Facebook. RSC has a website, after all. (EVE Online gets this part right.)

Are the above items at least in planning?

[CosmicDebris]

My two cents:

1. Is a more realistic default sound fading law being considered? That is, without invoking complicated volume curves depending on any ListenerDistanceSquared controller. (See http://ftp.uktrainsim.com/viewtopic.php?f=310&t=106552)
2. Is it possible to have a Lua-callable C function which returns the distance to the next signal (link 0) along the track, be it from the engine script or the signal script of the previous signal? (The value is already available at core level since it's displayed on the HUD.)

Cheers, and keep up the good work.

[alexedwin]

1. Collision boxes for assets other than what runs on the tracks.
For example: Doors of engine sheds that locos & rolling stock may be housed in and must be opened to avoid a collision with the door.

[malcolmholmes2]

I have a reasonably powerfull PC but frequently when running steam engines the sound of the "chuff-chuff" stutters, especially if the loco is working hard; even more if double banked. Can this be overcome to give a realistic sound?

Enjoy the Sim
Thanks

[ihavenonamenoreallyidont]

Mine are rather more general in scope:

1) Will you be introducing basic Windows-type functionality into the program? Eg, being able to move and resize windows, pressing escape to clear a pop-up etc.

2) Are hiccups with current scenarios going to be corrected and perhaps avoided in future (eg, requiring users to break speed limits, scenarios that are impossible to complete due to other errors, spelling and grammar mistakes)? Might I suggest provision by management of a bean to cup coffee machine with Hobnob dispenser as incentive? (Thank you to the person who sent me a PM - you know who you are )

3) Any chance of the user being able to pare down the interface to its perceived most useful parts? Eg, I don't need the bulk of the Fisher-Price F4 display, but I do find the route display part at the foot of the screen to be very useful indeed.

4) User perception again but will the entire front end also be dragged from 1987 to 2011? Oh, wait, you said 2007 to 2011

[bdy26]

From a route building perspective, the following would be huge timesavers and improve the look of routes no end:

- finer terrain mesh (it is not possible to create an accurate accommodation underpass for example unless you are on the correct terrain angle)
- the ability to offset vertically as well as horizontally
- more accurate terrain painting with straight edges and smaller brush sizes
- the ability to select procedural flora per texture rather than all on or off
- easier ways of creating new textures and getting them in-game
- a tool to form gradients in terrain i.e. When lowering a section of terrain, the ability to create a smooth slope in 1 direction. The smooth tool tends to move the ridge down the hill
- the new lighting engine to treat the ground and lofts in a similar way. In low light they light differentially which makes using lofts less than ideal as a terrain mesh workaround.
- the ability to select a section of terrain including or excluding textures and copy / paste it snapping accurately to the new terrain. This could used to create fields far more quickly
- a more accurate snap to terrain feature, perhaps along the lines of the magnet selection tool in Photoshop. This would help the laying of Walls fences hedges etc immensely. An ability to adjust the distance / sensitivity would be superb.
- the ability to terrain paint certain loft sections in- game
- A virtual moon on a stick

I love the virtual plasticine idea too. Great suggestion.

Thanks to Matt for organising and for RS for listening and sharing. I hope this exercise is seen in a positive way.

Ps if these get implemented I will personally buy Derek the coffee machine.

B

[steved666]

Hi Railworks,

What is the likeliood of future upgrades getting loco headlights to appear on the track and surrounding areas ahead of the loco please?

Regards,
Steved666

[JasonM]

What I would like to see-

Like most have said proper physics, I don't care how good a loco/unit looks but it has to behave(as good as it can) like the real thing, and please update some of your older stock.
Also it would be nice to see by default a red tail lamp on the back of all trains and also by default no driver in rear cabs.

Signalling/AI, it needs to be a bit more intelligent, it would be great to get away from the fixed routing and be a bit more flexible depending on how you are running and what other trains are in the area, Zusi can do it so I am sure RW can do it, it does get a bit boring knowing exactly what is going to happen every time you play the same scenario.
Token Block- it would be good to be able to actually see the signalman/lady holding the token and you have to collect it and then hand it in at the other end, how good would that be.

Level crossings- would be more realistic to have signals locked with full barrier/gated crossings so that the crossing has to be closed to traffic before signal shows a proceed aspect.

Unfitted freight trains- would be good if the AI could operate the brake in the brake van when you are slowing down on a downhill gradient, or maybe that can wait for multiplayer so your mate can be sitting in the van and can be ready on the brake.
And on the subject of muliplayer I am not a great fan of it and would prefer to see effort put into sorting out other issues in RW but I think it would be good if you could be the guard and your mate the driver and you have the option of walking through the train checking tickets etc, and then at stations giving 2 on the bell/buzzer or waving green flag when time to depart(checking signal is off of course), now that would be fun.

So question is is any of the likely to happen in the future?

[TElsmore]

Just another little one from me.

Could we please have a variant of the Deltic with a headlight please, so it can be used in in modern day scenario's? That's it!

Cheers,
Terrone.

[Wikkus]

Been watching this thread develop, hehe...

This is turning into something of a "wish list" rather than a list of questions. I also see lots of people asking for lighting effects, either on trains or on stations, etc. Whilst I would agree that it's a key part to the experience and does require some looking at, at the very start of this thread it was asked that stuff pertaining to the graphics engine be outside the scope of this session, but hey...

Anywho, most all of my questions have already been asked by others, particularly in the areas around:

• AI shunting; that'd be number one on my list and would open up possibilities immensely. The "consist operations" function has been in there for ages and yet doesn't work. How soon can we expect this to be fixed?
• Will the revamp see more granular terrain blocks to allow for smoother terrain/less jagged cuttings and embankments?
• Will the AI get a good going over so there are no more rocket-ship starts and throw-out-the-anchor stops?
• What changes are planned to fix the sound engine so that sounds don't disappear the further one drives, e.g. default Deltic's AWS bell/buzzer? As has been mentioned, will we see a shift to OpenAL?

My own "wish list":

• In the editor, could we have a skew-bridge function, please? To be able to define a top-down parallelogram and have a bridge rendered within those dimensions would be truly brilliant!
• (kinda off-topic, but I cannot resist ) Could we please get a revamped/overhauled/updated/whatever Deltic? With sounds brought up to the standard we've now come to expect from the likes of Oovee and AP? I think the default ones are quite good but simply not LOUD enough any more compared to, say, Oovee's 57 or AP's 66. Twin Napier Deltics should drown out pretty much everything

Cheers, Rik.

[NeutronIC]

Please try and keep your questions phrased as *questions* please - thanks for the fantastic posts so far, it's going very well indeed.

Remember that closing time is 10am tomorrow so get your questions in before then if you want them included this time around.

Matt.

[Kariban]

I would like to know if we are going to see upgrades to old core stock done, without them being included in extra DLC; I still feel slightly shortchanged by the Mk2 upgrade appearing in the 86 pack instead of the core.

And OpenAL or no, are we going to see native 3D audio support for Vista/win7?