Update announcement

[asfinmja]

I would really like them to fix the SBHH which by consensus seems to be caused by a limitation on the assets a scenario can load.

Would allow us all to run far more routes/scenarios and not have to have multiple asset sets as one route after another falls over because you added something required by another route.

Absolutely agree with this! Handling resource issues and allowing a MUCH larger number of assets and routes should be of paramount importance. The game engine is struggling badly now with SBHH errors due to lack of internal resources...

As I see this, easiest way to do this would be to make program native 64-bit. Of course this would mean removing support for older computers and older operating systems. And to further increase performance grahics support for DX9 should be removed. Supporting DX11 would be enough, no support needed for DX10. So program would reguire Windows 7 or Windows 8, 64-bit. It will be nessessary at some point to move to 64-bit anyway as demand for memory increases as routes and assets are becoming more realistic (ie. requiring more memory and CPU and GPU power). Asset handling propably could be made somewhat better by modifying algorithms but 32-bit program will always be limited by memory (address space) and other resources, even on 64-bit OS. 32-bit operating systems suffer even more when compared to 64-bit system, especially in available memory and memory handling.

Of course for older systems current version of program and DLC on steam should be freezed as they are now. So everybody could continue playing on at least current level of features and performance with current DLC. By freezing I mean that there should be version of DLC as it is today, available for current TS2012 versions, even when DLC is further modified for TS2012+.

I know there wil be many who will disagree with me on this issue. Believe me I have nothing personal agains any of You who do not have computer with 64-bit W7 and DX11 graphics card. But patient needs radical treatment or patient may diminish away.

(I'm wondering if this post is going too far from subject? Maybe I should have started new topic?)

[gptech]

As I see this, easiest way to do this would be to make program native 64-bit.

Not so sure about it being 'easiest', but I'd agree it's probably the best way forward. This would of course in essence make it a whole new game, so it's not going to happen soon, though I'd imagine some poor soul is locked in a basement in Chatham sweating over code as we speak (type?) but it is moving a wee bit off topic.
So far we've seen gamepad support added, and (in my opinion) the cooler feature of the 'task map'---questions are now being asked whether this is confined to game pad control or whether the existing methods can utilise it.

[kevmt]

Well as someone who suffers with RSI and can only use a mouse for short periods of time, but is able to use a joypad, then I quite welcome the inclusion of built in joypad support.

Kevin

[TheTazman]

I am assuming the new menu will work for existing methods too

As I see this, easiest way to do this would be to make program native 64-bit.

Not so sure about it being 'easiest', but I'd agree it's probably the best way forward. This would of course in essence make it a whole new game, so it's not going to happen soon, though I'd imagine some poor soul is locked in a basement in Chatham sweating over code as we speak (type?) but it is moving a wee bit off topic.
So far we've seen gamepad support added, and (in my opinion) the cooler feature of the 'task map'---questions are now being asked whether this is confined to game pad control or whether the existing methods can utilise it.

[220389]

Well as someone who suffers with RSI and can only use a mouse for short periods of time, but is able to use a joypad, then I quite welcome the inclusion of built in joypad support.

Kevin

Nice to see some others on here looking forward to gamepad support.

As Gptech it may bring future better support for such devices as Raildriver or even HOTAS Joystick systems for the throttles and buttons.

Chris

[ihavenonamenoreallyidont]

As I said on the Steam forum earlier today: ultimately, as a means of controlling a train, the controller is no less esoteric than using a keyboard.

Not that I'd use my wireless Xbox Controller for Windows (tm), mind, but it's not the decline of western civilisation as we know it, Jim.

Haaaaaaving said that, I do wish they'd fix the basic errors remaining in the game after all this time. Nothing to say they're not, but hey, it's been a while, right?

[USRailFan]

I'd like them to either make the career mode at least something remotely resembling real-world operations, or get rid of the whole ..... ("Excessive fuel consumption" when STANDING STILL??? Uh... Yeah.... Sure...)

[asfinmja]

As I see this, easiest way to do this would be to make program native 64-bit.

Not so sure about it being 'easiest', but I'd agree it's probably the best way forward. This would of course in essence make it a whole new game, so it's not going to happen soon, though I'd imagine some poor soul is locked in a basement in Chatham sweating over code as we speak (type?) but it is moving a wee bit off topic.

Changing program to 64-bit should be fairly easy, at best requiring minimal work. Even at worst it would not make it "a whole new game". I've ranted on this subject on Steam forum earlier this year (using there nick stfinmja), click here to read it.

And now back to the actual topic:

So far we've seen gamepad support added, and (in my opinion) the cooler feature of the 'task map'---questions are now being asked whether this is confined to game pad control or whether the existing methods can utilise it.

I truly hope that this 'task map' would be available on all controls, keyboard and all. It should not be dificult to let keyboard button shortcuts to work as well as gamepad buttons. But I would not be too surprised if they will not. Disappointed yes, very disappointed, but not surprised.

I actually use most of the time small programmable Logitech gaming keyboard (G13), having miniature joystick on it, together with mouse and hud, to control my trains. Joystick controls throttle (lef/right) and reverser (up/down). Very usable. Actually I've programmed other layouts with brakes: second one has loco/train brakes on joystick and third has dynamic brakes on joystick. But I do practically use only first layout. I prefer mouse and either G13 or regular keyboard over Raildriver, partly because my Railddriver is very inaccurate.

[rivimey]

Changing program to 64-bit should be fairly easy, at best requiring minimal work. Even at worst it would not make it "a whole new game". I've ranted on this subject on Steam forum earlier this year (using there nick stfinmja),

In my time as a developer, I've known programs that go 64-bit with the flip of a switch, and those that literally take man-years of effort.

TBH, I'd expect RW to be more the latter than the former: it's large, complex, old and has a long history of change. All of that mitigates against going 64 bit easily, though I too consider it to be necessary.

Ruth

[gptech]

Changing program to 64-bit should be fairly easy, at best requiring minimal work.

Yeah, but you did say over at Steam...

Unless code is totally horribly wrongly written

RW has evolved from RS, which was essentially a rushed out (on the orders of EA) piece of software, and even now we are using old, probably out-moded and inefficient code.

[asfinmja]

As I said on the Steam forum earlier today: ultimately, as a means of controlling a train, the controller is no less esoteric than using a keyboard.

And even in real life there are locomotives controlled with gamepad: http://vaunut.org/kuva/44429, these devices are used like this: http://vaunut.org/kuva/31691

[faedundee2]

As I said on the Steam forum earlier today: ultimately, as a means of controlling a train, the controller is no less esoteric than using a keyboard.

And even in real life there are locomotives controlled with gamepad: http://vaunut.org/kuva/44429, these devices are used like this: http://vaunut.org/kuva/31691

Some DBS 08s were fitted(some probably still are but don't get used because they are blooming useless acording to the men and women on the ground) with remote control equipment, similar to those handsets pictured. All this new tech looks great, I just wish they would fix the SBHH but maybe they will get down the list to fix that eventually but the gamepad idea seems a good one perhaps we will see someone wire up and program a full loco desk to RW to really show off what the game can do...

[220389]

As I said on the Steam forum earlier today: ultimately, as a means of controlling a train, the controller is no less esoteric than using a keyboard.

And even in real life there are locomotives controlled with gamepad: http://vaunut.org/kuva/44429, these devices are used like this: http://vaunut.org/kuva/31691

So is the Shuttle stock as well and believe so are the shuttle locomotives?

Chris

[asfinmja]

In my time as a developer, I've known programs that go 64-bit with the flip of a switch, and those that literally take man-years of effort.

TBH, I'd expect RW to be more the latter than the former: it's large, complex, old and has a long history of change. All of that mitigates against going 64 bit easily, though I too consider it to be necessary.

Ruth

RW has evolved from RS, which was essentially a rushed out (on the orders of EA) piece of software, and even now we are using old, probably out-moded and inefficient code.

I have to say I do not have any knowledge on TS2012 game engine code quality or coding practices used, never seen it. But clearly I'm more optimistic than You are. Sometimes even old, badly written, complex, inefficient and much modified code can be easily moved to 64-bit, it depends on what has been written badly. On the other hand, neat and simple looking code may be practically impossible to go 64-bit.

And yes, I've seen software that in practise will never be 64-bit as it has all those bad programming habits making that difficult, a behemot (million+ lines of code) originally written back in eighties with C by programmers who know nothing about programming with C. Also I have ported another software behemot (million+ lines of code, badly written, complex, much modified, inefficient) originally written back in eighties with C by programmers who know nothing about programming with C, to 64-bit with moderate work (man-month or two). It just depends on so many things.

Hopefully RS programmers can make it work using any means necessary .

[transadelaide]

Countries which run more significant amounts of freight on rail than is done in Britain will usually have a decent number of booster units in use. A booster unit is basically just a diesel-electric locomotive built without a cab, to be used only for multiple unit working. These locos do need the ability to shift around on their own at a depot, so they have a plug where a remote controller - simpler than some gamepads - is plugged in and used by the depot driver standing on the side...



For operators who run 1800 metre freight trains across a desert, units are a real advantage for the operators. They are significantly cheaper to build without all the cab equipment (like the toughest cab air conditioning in the world), and cheaper to run as they can go one stop further on a full load of fuel and don;t need power (or maintenance) for all the cab systems.

By the way, the panel on the outside at the near corner is not just evidence of where the cab would go, it's actually at the opposite end and present as an aerodynamic aid to enhance airflow for cooling!

As I said on the Steam forum earlier today: ultimately, as a means of controlling a train, the controller is no less esoteric than using a keyboard.

And even in real life there are locomotives controlled with gamepad: http://vaunut.org/kuva/44429, these devices are used like this: http://vaunut.org/kuva/31691

So is the Shuttle stock as well and believe so are the shuttle locomotives?

Chris

The Class 9 locomotives used for Le Shuttle actually have a second driving position at the rear which can be used for full operation if needed. Remote control is not usually a great solution for shunting with a single cab unit, because you need either a side platform where the driver could stand or an internal position with a rear window.

If you have a side platform then that means you're dealing with a hood unit where you don't need remote control for shunting because the driver can just look out the back of the cab and have visibility no worse than steam drivers had. Hood unit locomotives with only one cab are rare in Britain, the EE Type 1 being the only ones still in use, although Class 08 style shunters could at a stretch be called a hood unit!

If you have a carbody unit then you need a space for the driver and a rear window so you may as well just put in fixed controls at the back, like what was done for the Intercity 125 and 225 locomotives. The only question is whether you include a full set of controls (Eurotunnel Class 9, IC225) or a reduced set of controls for shunting only (IC125, TGV locomotives).