Update announcement

[Leaf85]

Having the option to use a game controller is becoming more popular in sims these days, and I haven't any problem using one. A good example in the milsim world is ArmA 2 which allows for keyboard, joysticks, controllers and wheels&pedals(!). That sim is as 'simmy' as you want it, with community mods like ACE etc which enhance the simulation aspect. Anyway, using the keyboard is fine too. A mix of controller and keyboard would be interesting...I just wish it was all re-bindable to suit the user

Kind regards,
Dave

[jimmyshand]

Bearing all that in mind, I can only see one conclusion. Proper "simmers" and rail enthusiast types are the only viable customerbase for the long term and satisfying those people is where the focus and attention should be made (in my opinion). Attempts to broaden appeal will almost certainly fall foul of barrier numero uno, you have to be interested in trains to buy it.

How much interest do you need?...
imagine little Johnny who like all 8 year olds wants to be an engine driver when he grows up (we're genetically programmed like that) and like all 8 year olds loves machines. he might not have a particular passion for trains but the game could appeal to him. He natters at Mum and Dad for the game and because it features nice and easy '8 year old handleable' controls and systems alongside the more advanced 'proper' ones for ardent railfans they get him it. Fast forward 10 years and little Johnny is heading up RSC after Paul Jacksons retirement with a squillion quid in the bank because little Johnny came along with big ideas, and an even bigger passion for trains.

Far fetched?....certainly, but lets not start thinking of playing train games as an exclusive club, the more users the merrier and anything that can be done to increase that number whilst retaining the 'train geek' stuff has to be applauded and welcomed. Bear in mind that many of what we call 'advanced' features can really be called just the minutiae of railway operations.

Reasonable scenario there mate but unfortunately you fall foul of major roadblock number 2, a NASA spec PC is required to run RW! Chances of little Johnny or his dad just happening to have a cutting edge game spec PC are incredibly unlikely. The high PC demands of RW place it only in the realm of serious gamers with serious rigs. Most people in the real world don't own high spec computers, they own laptops for Internet and some casual games or they own a cheaper desktop for their home office uses. I know dozens of people in my immediate circle of family and friends who own PC's but none of them could run RW. My PC is by gaming standards a bit of a dinosaur now but compared to everyone I know, it's as powerful as a space shuttle! My 6 yr old nephew loves to play RW when he comes round my house, he fits the scenario you describe above perfectly, he loves it. I said to him to get daddy to buy it but his dads PC doesn't even come remotely close to the minimum spec. If RSC want mass appeal then they would have to lower the complexity and demands of the sim down to console levels.

[AndyUK]

......a NASA spec PC is required to run RW! Chances of little Johnny or his dad just happening to have a cutting edge game spec PC are incredibly unlikely. The high PC demands of RW place it only in the realm of serious gamers with serious rigs........... My PC is by gaming standards a bit of a dinosaur now but compared to everyone I know, it's as powerful as a space shuttle! My 6 yr old nephew loves to play RW when he comes round my house, he fits the scenario you describe above perfectly, he loves it. .......

So is a NASA spec PC required or not?

Andy L

[220389]

Having the option to use a game controller is becoming more popular in sims these days, and I haven't any problem using one. A good example in the milsim world is ArmA 2 which allows for keyboard, joysticks, controllers and wheels&pedals(!). That sim is as 'simmy' as you want it, with community mods like ACE etc which enhance the simulation aspect. Anyway, using the keyboard is fine too. A mix of controller and keyboard would be interesting...I just wish it was all re-bindable to suit the user

Kind regards,
Dave

Have giving that example about gamepads etc. Agree with what you put, ARMA 2 for combined arms type of games is a simmy as you can get especially after ACE etc. Myself on it i use Keyboard and mouse for all things on foot and aiming turrets etc. 360 pad for Armour and Vehicles and a Joystick for Fixed and Rotary wing aircraft and UAVs.


Chris

[hertsbob]

Bob, if you're good enough, you're old enough........

Good answer.

[jimmyshand]

......a NASA spec PC is required to run RW! Chances of little Johnny or his dad just happening to have a cutting edge game spec PC are incredibly unlikely. The high PC demands of RW place it only in the realm of serious gamers with serious rigs........... My PC is by gaming standards a bit of a dinosaur now but compared to everyone I know, it's as powerful as a space shuttle! My 6 yr old nephew loves to play RW when he comes round my house, he fits the scenario you describe above perfectly, he loves it. .......

So is a NASA spec PC required or not?

Andy L

Yes it is. Your use of selective quoting paints a confusing picture but it's really quite simple. You need a gaming spec rig to run Railworks with any degree of stability and quality. 3-4 years ago my PC was relatively NASA-like but now only just runs Railworks by the skin of its teeth and only then with painstaking tweaks, adjustments and performance enhancing trickery applied.

My point is that amongst my wide circle of family and friends, my PC is the most powerful by far and yet I'm only just scraping through in RW. The myth that any Tom, Dick or Harry can pick up RW and have a go and hence why it is worth RSC investing time and effort in appealing to this market, is a bit flawed. Not many people have PC's capable of running this game, even if they wanted to.

[Darpor]

I'm not even sure that is true. Granted, the better your system is, the more advantageous it will be, but that is going to be for any software, not just RW.

The problem I see is the inconsistency, there are plenty of stories on here of people with what would be regarded as really poor systems, yet they can still happily use RW. On the other hand, there are people with plutonium powered systems that seem to get no end of errors.

Making a statement that you need a "NASA spec PC" isn't true, and doesn't really help anyone. There will be a wide range of lower end systems that can run it, you generally just have to make allowances on quality.

[jimmyshand]

I'm not even sure that is true. Granted, the better your system is, the more advantageous it will be, but that is going to be for any software, not just RW.

The problem I see is the inconsistency, there are plenty of stories on here of people with what would be regarded as really poor systems, yet they can still happily use RW. On the other hand, there are people with plutonium powered systems that seem to get no end of errors.

Making a statement that you need a "NASA spec PC" isn't true, and doesn't really help anyone. There will be a wide range of lower end systems that can run it, you generally just have to make allowances on quality.

Fair enough to a point Darren, but I don't think it's any secret that performance issues have been the biggest problem affecting this game from day 1? There have been endless years and thread after thread of debate on the subject. Also it is 100% true to say that to run the game at anything like decent quality then you definitely require some serious hardware. There are some freak occurences at either end of the PC spectrum, but the overall cencus is that i7 16GB RAM = happy days, anything less = muchos problemos.

Without knowing accurate data on what is the average spec of PC owners in the UK then it's impossible for anyone to claim they are right in this discussion. I can only go by the data I have, around my family and friends, and like I said, I am the only one in that group who could run RW and even then it's only just.

[boleyd]

The GamePad is not a problem it is just a symbol. In and of itself it poses no danger to the product's simulation focused customer - it is an addition.

However, as a symbol it does raise issues. Lots of people see the gamepad as yet another step of several toward a game, leaving simulation behind. These are people who have bought the product expecting improvements as a simulator using a very nice base product. Instead they see a slow creep towards making it a just another mass market game. Customers that have devoted lots of hours to the product as a hopeful simulation are, in some cases, embittered.

A few of the simulation camp still hope that the revenue gained by adding easier control, gamepads, etc will gain more revenue. Their fervent hope is that Paul Jackson will allocate some of that cash to improving the simulation areas of the program.

What are the chances of that happening? In my less than humble opinion very few. Paul Jackson came solely from a gaming background. He has literally kept the company afloat by moving it toward a vastly larger market base - gaming. Do any of you really believe he will waste a few quid on a very small (relatively) group of enthusiasts? Is there a tiny chance that he might spring for a few fixes? Maybe, and that keeps some people hanging around the forums and Steam waiting for what would be a handout to a small customer segment. It just ain't logical. The die is cast and you are now the owners of a game not a simulator. Get used to it. Rant and rave but you do not spend enough to pay RSC bills. The name RailSimulations will remain to entice the unknowing gamers to part with their cash. But either move on or enjoy the game.

[davejc64]

I wouldn't consider my PC very NASA spec and it runs RW OK, maybe I'm the exception to the rule in this case, but I very much doubt it.

[1S811985]

I wouldn't consider my PC very NASA spec and it runs RW OK, maybe I'm the exception to the rule in this case, but I very much doubt it.

Would have to agree.

If I was to put my relatively decent performance down to anything then it's a combination of having shadows turned off, using "clear cache" every time I start up, having an almost exclusively steam/UKTS freeware pack installation and refusing to tinker around under the bonnet in a fruitless search for perfection.

1S81

[davejc64]

Would have to agree.

If I was to put my relatively decent performance down to anything then it's a combination of having shadows turned off, using "clear cache" every time I start up, having an almost exclusively steam/UKTS freeware pack installation and refusing to tinker around under the bonnet in a fruitless search for perfection.

1S81

I tend not to worry about frame-rates, I wouldn't have a clue what frame-rate TS2012 runs at on any given route and don't intend to find out or worry about it, doesn't mean I don't know how to find out, it just means I don't care, as long as it looks to be running smoothly, then that's good enough for me.

[Basherz]

What are the chances of that happening? In my less than humble opinion very few. Paul Jackson came solely from a gaming background. He has literally kept the company afloat by moving it toward a vastly larger market base - gaming. Do any of you really believe he will waste a few quid on a very small (relatively) group of enthusiasts? Is there a tiny chance that he might spring for a few fixes? Maybe, and that keeps some people hanging around the forums and Steam waiting for what would be a handout to a small customer segment. It just ain't logical. The die is cast and you are now the owners of a game not a simulator. Get used to it. Rant and rave but you do not spend enough to pay RSC bills. The name RailSimulations will remain to entice the unknowing gamers to part with their cash. But either move on or enjoy the game.

Hit the nail right on the head there Boleyd, and has been exactly how I have felt since he joined. Like it or lump it, they are nowadays just here to sell as much as they can to the masses, whilst any forms of support will eventually dwindle.

[Easilyconfused]

This is all getting pretty repetitive now and is serving little purpose other than egging each other on to more and more ludicrous statements. Some of the comments are verging on personal attacks on the motives of Paul Jackson which is not going to be tolerated.

So far we have seen the following debates recycled for the umpteenth time :

1. The "NASA PC" requirement.
2. The simulator Vs. game argument.

Both of those have been done to death in other threads by the same posters so the discussion on those lines can stop here now. Repeating yourselves over and over again does not make the points any more valid than they were the first time round (and some were perfectly valid then so repeating them adds nothing).

To suggest that support will dwindle away beggars belief - to continue to develop the product RSC will need to keep supporting what they currently have out in the wild.

If you are going to contribute to the discussion then please try to bring something new to the table and not recycle old threads.

[transadelaide]

Hardly makes you wonder why RS.com staff avoid this forum now, when a free update offering new options is greeted by personal attacks and members who previously claimed to be quitting all involvement on the subject of RW come out from under their bridges.

Posted from my average consumer computer which runs the thing just fine.