Atomic Systems

Well, here is my latest riddle.
Freeware is not about sharing ones efforts, it is about testing the water about how you will get paid.
And for me, that water is getting muddier (or dirtier) by the day. What are you prepared to charge for?
The pre-requisite is enjoying what you do.
And if you have other interests which take your time, do you think that means you are not committed?
An environment where people are working together, is one better than one where it equates to the biggest pay packet.
But can people work together if someone thinks they are worth the entire bottom line?
Reply to a request for help, but do not think about the consequences? You signed up to it.

Well, apart from the rubbish above, I like some of the efforts made to bring the community together with some kind of focus. How focused are some of the freeware packs though? Can they be used without populating a route full of irrelevant junk?

I don't think it intrinsically matters whether the end result is payware or freeware because the satisfaction of producing something you can take pride in should be the goal in both cases. I had a chap who worked for me once who had a simple mantra: "It'll do won't do!" and he'd never do less than his best at anything, no matter how trivial. It's not a bad motto for anyone to follow.

As users, I suppose we want value for money. With a payware item the equation is simpler because you can decide whether your pleasure is worth the outlay. I have one item from a commercial outfit that I find almost useless, for example, so it gets very rare outings but there's more latitude with freeware stuff. I've downloaded items and thought them average at best and shrugged and carried on. I've paid nothing so I've lost nothing. There are others where I've been open-mouthed at the generosity of the author in putting such a fantastic piece of work into circulation for no return. But if an item released as freeware at some stage, whether a route or something else, is looking very good why should we criticise the author for accepting an offer from a distributor for the final version? It's still their baby at the end of the day, not ours. We users don't gain any rights because we use something.

Keith

I don't have many Payware Routes because I purchase only the ones I will enjoy. I also tend to be influenced by who has built the Route. I started on Freeware because I found the Default Routes that came with the original Rail Simulator not to my liking and very rarely used them. Along with a few others at that time I started building something I wanted based in my own area but not exactly as it was because I used my memory and added things that would interest me. I never considered releasing it because I thought it would not be good enough. Being retired I did not want to go back to Deadlines and Targets and would never do that again. I do set myself goals but they are totally under my own control now.
For the younger or older ones amongst us I feel it is quite in order if they choose to go down the Payware Route. Why not earn some money for something you enjoy doing. There are quite a number of Freeware Routes I would not object to paying for.
Freeware to me means being free to do what you want when you want, with the only pressure being what you want it to be. It is quite a liberating experience IMHO.
Kind regards James.

This has really produced some fantastic discussion an it has been pointed out time and time again, it's all about enjoyment and pleasure at the end of the day.

I fall into both categories discussed and so can understand both sides of the argument. I don't see one side as superior to the other, and enjoy both equally. If I didn't enjoy it, I wouldn't create, what would be the point? After months of hard toil working on a commercial route, some may see it as a more superior achievement to releasing something freeware but it isn't. I gain just as much pleasure from releasing a free scenario and receiving a comment to tell me they enjoyed it, that means it was worth it.

We also see many people treating top class freeware as a natural progression for the creator to possibly move on to commercial projects. There is absolutely no harm in this whatsoever and I think many understand. It isn't a case of the author going for a ride to make as much money as they can, quite often these projects are very personal and reach a level of development where the creator feels they are at the limit of what they can achieve on a project, if they receive an offer that can add the final 25% and make them realise what they had hoped for, I don't see anything wrong with that whatsoever.

On the flipside to that, I am personally aware of half a dozen routes that could potentially have gone down the payware route but the author has chosen not to. Not because the quality wasn't there, but because the author either wanted the route to stay freeware plain and simple, or didn't feel they wanted the extra pressure that comes when a project turns commercial from which the goalposts move considerably in terms of what can be expected when an end user is paying out hard earned money for a release. To me, that shows an incredible amount of community loyalty.

One thing I don't like is hypocrisy when we discuss these subjects though, especially in the freeware versus payware discussion, although it hasn't happened for a few weeks. Quite often when discussions arise, many like to hop on the bandwagon (I generally whistle and wave as it passes by ) and pass comment after comment about how there is too much payware, or too much content has been turned from freeware to payware etc. In cases, some users have joined this bandwagon and made ridiculous comments about payware, only to travel down into the route building forum half an hour later, and leave a comment in a freeware thread stating how they think the route should actually be payware and they would happily pay for it!

Darpor wrote: We also see many people treating top class freeware as a natural progression for the creator to possibly move on to commercial projects. There is absolutely no harm in this whatsoever and I think many understand. It isn't a case of the author going for a ride to make as much money as they can, quite often these projects are very personal and reach a level of development where the creator feels they are at the limit of what they can achieve on a project, if they receive an offer that can add the final 25% and make them realise what they had hoped for, I don't see anything wrong with that whatsoever.

The offer of that final 25% could be made by skilled members of the freeware community of course.

Funny though.

Freeware S&C released

RSC pops up with a modern day Version.

if someone did a Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth, im sure RSC would do it aswell.

Money making spins on Highly detailed well known routes, hence the reason they stay away from lesser known areas.

salopiangrowler wrote:Funny though.

Freeware S&C released

RSC pops up with a modern day Version.

if someone did a Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth, im sure RSC would do it aswell.

Money making spins on Highly detailed well known routes, hence the reason they stay away from lesser known areas.

The modern S&C hasn't just "popped up" though, we know that they plan their releases about a year in advance of it going public.

Of course you're going to get a higher proportion of payware addons based on the better-known routes, since these are the ones that people want to see.

As for the future of freeware routes, as long as RS.com continue to focus primarily on Britain and throwing a few leftover bones to America there will remain a huge 'market' for freeware routes. Somebody will have to fulfil the interest from other countries where there are plenty of routes that easily rank alongside or above British routes like the S&C, and so far it seems the best-built routes of all are coming from Italian freeware authors who do it all without having any country-specific payware assets made for them.

salopiangrowler wrote:Funny though.

Freeware S&C released

RSC pops up with a modern day Version.

Indeed, even RSC consulted the freeware route author months ago to tell them they were doing it as well. What a conspiracy it is!

paulz6 wrote:The offer of that final 25% could be made by skilled members of the freeware community of course.

Of course they can, and it happens frequently.

transadelaide wrote:and so far it seems the best-built routes of all are coming from Italian freeware authors who do it all without having any country-specific payware assets made for them.

It makes me wonder whether starting out with no country-specific assets encourages people to work together to get their creations of the ground. It is then easier to keep things for free rather than argue who deserves what in monetary credits. In the UK it was easier for one man bands to jump onto the micro-payware band wagon (and looking at some of the recent RSC developments, I can see the wheel falling off of that one).
Then again, maybe cultural aspects are a factor. Perhaps there is not a culture for wanting to pay for the littlest of things which seems to be the case on this board.
If decent freeware routes and stock exist which interest me, then I would prefer it over commercial products any day. Take Woodhead for example, the commercial decision to stop at Sheffield excluded Barnard Road sidings which was the Sheffield equivalent of Mottram, Wath, etc.. This as considerably reduced the scope for scenarios. A freeware version would be most likely to expand and improve. In the commercial world, the team have moved onto the next project.

I have just re-read the OP's original post.
I think the original point he was making is that, with the very high quality of the payware routes that are available now, is it worth anyone going to the trouble of creating their own routes if they cannot achieve that same level of quality themselves.
RW has developed to the point where routes and assets are now of a very high quality that also demand that you keep your computer upgraded to a sufficient standard to run them successfully.
Certain train simulator enthusiasts have repeatedly pressed for more realism and more sophistication in RW in order to achieve an ever rising level of 'immersion'. Raising the Bar I think was the term often used. The bar has indeed been raised, to the point where many people have had difficulty in running the latest routes until they have upgraded their computers. Maybe this has brought us to a crossroads. Which way forward should we take in the future?
I think the answer lies in what you want from RW. Do you simply want a thoroughly realistic and immersive driving experience, and that is it? Or do you want to be creative, and produce something that is otherwise unavailable? Or even produce a simpler version of what is already available, but which can be run very effectively on an older less capable computer?
That in turn raises the question of 'quality'. Will you be satisfied with anything of less quality and sophistication than is available as payware? And as for uploading them for free distribution, would you dare to make your own self created route available to others, or would you be afraid of the perfectionists criticising and demeaning it, and those others who have little knowledge of railways and RW in general, and who never read 'read-mes', wanting constant online help?
Only the individual can answer these questions for him or herself. For myself I am quite happy to have a simple basic quality loco (aliased to the 7F or Black5) or coach to run on my own self-created routes. I remember reading in the model railway magazines the advice that it is not whether a model railway is built to fine scale or coarse scale that makes it realistic, but that it is made to a constant scale or standard. I think the same applies to train simulators.
regards Ted.

Well said Ted

After my disaster with the woodhead route my paywear days are over. I do a few local exhibitions and most of what is shown is freewear. Because I live on a low income I am unable to keep up with the latest hardwear
.

Regards


John

Oldpufferspotter wrote:I remember reading in the model railway magazines the advice that it is not whether a model railway is built to fine scale or coarse scale that makes it realistic, but that it is made to a constant scale or standard. I think the same applies to train simulators.

I've long been of the thought that that applies most especially to vehicle sounds - for any simulator, it's just as valid for cars - which made me chuckle a bit at times past here. What I think you're really after for routes is a superset of consistency, and that's not having anything that jars you from your suspension of disbelief by standing out as being not-of-the-world ( which also applies to any simulator ). But then, that's just a synonym for quality.

Good afternoon everyone
Picking up on Teds point
I firmly believe if something looks right then it is right
I still use Rail Simulator for reasons mentioned elsewhere so no need to repeat them here
Like Ted says I suppose a crossroads has been reached
As the sim evolves then the demand for better hardware increases
We are a mixed bunch at UKTS with varying income scales and interests in the hobby
Trainsimming for me is a form of escape from the harsh realities of life
Kind regards Stephen

Just looking at my own play list, there are still a few of the Challenge Routes that I regularly play with such as Brendan's delightful Edenderry Branch which ambles through the Irish countryside.

There may be a demand for more freeware but we already have hundreds of routes in the UKTS library alone and I am pretty sure that some people are completely unaware of how good many of these are. Upgrades in the program may have made some of these routes difficult or impossible to play now but most should be OK and there are many that require only default assets or the minimum of assets from elsewhere.

Anyone looking for something different to try can do no worse than spending some time in the RailWorks and Rail Simulator route libraries looking for some real gems.

I think the original point he was making is that, with the very high quality of the payware routes that are available now, is it worth anyone going to the trouble of creating their own routes if they cannot achieve that same level of quality themselves.

Thanks for re-iterating that Ted. The simple fact as I have found perusing the MSTS file libraries here and at TS the last couple of days is, that despite the efforts of many, the freeware range after four and a half years of RS/RW doesn't even come close to that same time period for MSTS or indeed Trainz. I can go into the MSTS library and download just about any item of UK rolling stock I desire including a huge selection of different first generation DMU's. It was the multitude of scenery items which made many of the routes in MSTS happen - yes I know we have the UKTS packs and they are very welcome, but look what happened when Mike W. and I appealed for people to create stuff for the Blackpool Tramway. Response was virtually nil - a couple of people wanting their hands on the route to test, but that was all. So that leaves trying to create your own objects in an old version of 3D Canvas, with the likelihood these will glow in the dark due to changes RSC have made to the core code.

So it is easier to revert to building in an environment where the difficulty level is less, the competition from the payware groups is less and there is a fixed platform that doesn't obsolete your work at the next upgrade (have you seen what the latest upgrades have done to Dorman LED signals in routes where these were previously used?).