Atomic Systems

jp4712 wrote:Again, aimed at no one in particular, keep it civil and on-topic or Mr. Padlock comes out to play for 24 hours to allow cooling off. This is the third moderator to have to intervene, so if next time we come in heavy-handed please don't be surprised.
Paul

Paul,
you say to keep it civil, but its difficult who should keep it civil as we, me or he, doesn't know what he has posted wrong.
Was it me ? If so I can't see anything wrong with it, that's why I posted it, but I'd like to know.

It really would help us to know so that we know to avoid that in future, and, if not the poster concerned may post
much the same in the future.

Thanks.

Ditto here, I can't see anything untoward in the posts made between the two moderator interventions.

Getting to the stage where I'm reluctant to post on UKTS anymore...

Maybe "civil" should be complemented by "on topic".

This is a thread about improving the communication between the forums and RSC. Comments reiterating that RW is totally bad as a whole have a lot of room in other threads. Here, they are very harmful, because we try to establish a climate of sober dialogue or anyway some kind of meaningful flow of information.

If anyone really tries to get back to the dealer (Valve) to get RW fixed, a separate thread on the results would certainly be interesting.

This is a thread about improving the communication between the forums and RSC.

The thread actually originated as someone posting that the techs had updated their blogs. That (to me) opens up the floor to debate on more than just communication flows, any and every aspect of what is in those blogs is fair game and on topic.

Indeed the primary subject is COMMUNICATION. Communication from Rail Simulation is a basic need for the Community that feels very confused about the Rail Works product. As mentioned earlier if simple train driving and adjusting objects is satisfactory the product seems to address that segment quite well. Again, as mentioned, the simulation portion of the customers are upset over a lack of communication as to their more technical needs.

So we return to communication and the need for it by the simulation customers. As someone pointed out there seem to be many examples of little or no communications TO the customers of today's gaming software. The exceptions are when there is a marketing release with the hyperbole of - revolutionary, ground breaking, awesome, etc. Personally as soon as I see that stuff I know I will learn nothing. But it keeps many on the hook and they wait..... The new CEO comes from this background and "seems" to have installed the philosophy of only releasing information that will increase their market share. Telling existing customers about the objectives for Rail Works does nothing for sales and may in-fact hurt them as the simulation minded potential customers do not see a direction they like. Therefore, silence is the best marketing strategy. Most of the posters here have already paid Rail Simulation money so the companies' primary objective is satisfied.

Their next objective is to attract new customers. I would argue that the majority of new customers are the ones who like to drive trains in visually appealing settings. Guess what - the product already meets the needs of that largest potential market segment. This sets the stage to make more money through advertising rather than spending money to retain existing customer's who put expensive demands on the company without significant new sales. The old RSDL went under because they tried to satisfy existing technical customers. It was expensive to dialog with customers (salaries) and even more expensive to contract with Kuju to fix the the technical errors. My GUESS is that you simply cannot cater to your smallest, and most costly market, and stay in business as proven by RSDL.

Yes, I agree with that.
The changes of name from Rail Simulator and from RSDL indicate to me a change of direction. In my estimation RailWorks is now a game which is only intended to satisfy the games player.
This means that my purposes in playing RS, route creation and scenario creation, will not be directly catered for in RW. Indeed, any jiggling about with code and scripts that I may do to achieve my own aspirations through RW will be overwritten by future updates, and those codes or scripts returned to the official standard versions. I also believe that the AI/Despatcher will also remain as it is, as the games player is only concerned with downloading additional readymade routes and scenarios, rather than creating his or her own.
These are my two main reasons for staying as I am now with Rail Simulator.
regards Ted.

I've just been looking at the amount of content creation still going on in MSTS. They have far from captured the simulator market. Now they seem to want to turn it into a game (economic/commerce simulation etc..), and I think the product is just to complicated to make an enjoyable game in that direction.

Hello,

As a new comer to train sims I am still struggling to understand why every thread is turned the same way.
I understand a thread or 2 to release frustration, but please not all of them.
Looking for imformation is hard in forums due to many people taking threads off topic, I think Derek and co have got it right with the wiki.
Though I have to say it is growing by the day, i don't even understand half of it.
Adam's blog is very interesting, Derek's seems a little more random, but both are better than nothing.

Thanks

Bill

Hi Dick

Your posting is "Spot On" and with Europeanbahn confirming their "tie up" with Railworks it only re-inforces your summary.

If this proves to be the case it brings up two very interesting scenarios :-

1) Will Rail Simulator be supported in the future and if so by whom?

2) If not Railworks will be then competing "Head to Head" with MSTS which already has an abundance of ready made Routes,Rolling Stock & Activities (scenarios) with the latest contributions offering exceptional detail.

I have tried to keep my posting "on Topic"

Regards

Mike

boleyd wrote: The old RSDL went under because they tried to satisfy existing technical customers. It was expensive to dialog with customers (salaries) and even more expensive to contract with Kuju to fix the the technical errors. My GUESS is that you simply cannot cater to your smallest, and most costly market, and stay in business as proven by RSDL.

I don't think you lot understand the situation and legal obligations that RSDL inherited in regard to RS and RSDL didn't "go under". The formation of RSC from RSDL and release of RW was a necessary condition to get full control of the product and make it into a sim that they and all types of users want. It was a necessary step if they were to achieve that goal.

While I agree RSC could do better on the communication side of things the same can be said for nearly all software companies. Your desire for information does not equate with your need to know even if that does sound a bit harsh.

John

Oldpufferspotter wrote: In my estimation RailWorks is now a game which is only intended to satisfy the games player.

I agree with Ted,I've always thought RS/RW is more of a game catering for the younger market,I really think statements like "The most realistic experience on the pc" is the Catylist
of where most of the bad vibes come from,along with carefully selected snippets pre RS to keep the more technical simulation buffs interested,which is probably why I've had such a hard
time accepting RS/RW as a simulator.

Well you can't help yourselves can you ?

Since I made my last post, there has been more utter garbage come out than before.

I strongly suggest withdrawing the statement about RSDL going under... what on earth made you put something like that in ?

And that just emphasises the point I was making...

You get what information you deserve... none

You still here Alexander ?

Sly

AlexanderMeerkat wrote:I don't want to talk to, communicate with or have any relationship with RSC.

I just want them to fix this mess they call a train simulator.

Which in reality is no more than a train game for the 3+ age group and overs.

If you are not wanting to have any communication or relationship with RSC then why are YOU constantly drivelling on in a thread called "Derek & Adam Keep In Touch"?

OK, that's all folks - you were warned. We'll review things tomorrow.

Ash

Problem resolved, business as usual .

Keep it kind and civil and we won't be here again.

Ash