Atomic Systems

As Vern and Longbow have mentioned if this is done right it may bring a extra dimension and sense of purpose to the Sim other than just playing a bunch of unconnected scenarios.

But as has been mentioned by a quite a few, things need improvement/fixing to the sim side of the game first to allow the career mode and stats it uses to mean something. That is why I mentioned earlier that implementing something like this properly comes with a bunch of prerequisites that we all want fixed or implemented anyway and if this is a catalyst for those thing happening wouldn't all types of users be the winner ?

Some of the prerequisites that I think need to come before implentation are -

Proper monitoring and implementation of safety systems for US and Germany trains perhaps. eg dead man's switch in US loco's
Various extra prototypical behaviours monitored eg. sounding the horn before crossings
Extra instruction functionality added to the scenario system eg AI droping off consists or maybe picking them up , improved triggers that are also based on location and can trigger more events such as breakdowns in various systems perhaps, play sounds and cause other events such as changing the weather etc.
A more consistent and predictable dispatcher ie.it recognises and obeys signals as displayed in game, no more crawling services etc.

There are more I know but you get the idea. Some if not all may be required for the career mode to matter and be implemented properly. So in the planning, these type of issues should be part of any decision process. So if this was the case the sim would get better in tandem with adding this extra dimension to it.

John

The scoring can only be based on the quality of the route and the scenario so points for technical aspects of driving can only be scored if the route and the scenario take this into account.

Building routes that are 100% technically accurate is very difficult indeed so this implies that the scoring can only be related to the scenario instructions even if they are technically incorrect in many places. Many enthusiasts may not like to be scored high on something that they know to be flawed and this will only spawn more critical comments. As long as the scoring system is clearly promoted on a 'fun' basis and not to be taken seriously then this arcade style of approach would possibly be of interest to 'gamers'.

I think it is anticipating too much to expect the scoring to be based on accurate information and the long term accumulation of points would be just for fun.

Still, if there is an element of existing and potential users that like this approach then OK.

If I look out of my ivory tower and raise my eyes up to the skies, I can share a lot of view with Vern, James & John.

I do see the potential of virtual railways. However, they need a route or network that is interesting (read: complex) enough to maintain their interest long enough, and interesting (read: complex) scenarios on that network which are easy to create (because you need many of them) and executing 100% reliable, because crashes would spoil the whole fun.

I would love to try my hand in a challenge to drive a steam engine with minimum coal consumption. In fact, that was the ultimate aim of any driver in Germany & Austria because there was a strict regime of coal bonuses, so you felt every shovel in your wallet. Implementing that would however require a somewhat advanced modelling of the engine (fire temperature reacting to dampers and feedwater warming at least). Unfortunately, it appears a bit useless to discuss it while the exhaust is not fixed.

Regarding the realism of such evaluations, I still have my doubts. The real career consisted of years as a fireman. Not sure there is too much demand to simulate that too realistically. Also, with people reporting field divert as a bug, I am not sure about the reception of a prototypical evaluation system.


Another use of social networking and rating stuff comes in my mind, not really related to the original RSC idea: Trainz had some system in place where people rated downloads and beta-tested them. While there is always a lot of controversy around that, one metric could be interesting: The number of times a certain item is placed in a route, as a total over all routes taking part in the system. This would give the creator a somewhat better figure than the number of downloads where you never know what people actually do with it.

At the same time, this would raise the question of data collection on the user computer, which is controversal if not transparent. And if it is transparent, you can fake it. But if it is just the number of placed items, there is less motivation to fake it than for the log of fame for your driving. Plus, you would always cut off extreme results, like someone placing some house 1000 times on his route for whatever reason. But even here, you need to be clever about it because for a tree, it would not be so abnormal to be placed 1000 times.

In my opinion the achievement and career stuff should be done in community(being closest for prototypical thing in real world). For example player joins a virtual railway company(like virtual airlines) that keeps track of player certificates(like in virtual airlines) and due time/experience will get hands on better equipment. This could work by making certain harder scenarios locked from newbie drivers in virtual train community. Having multiplayer implemented would make it much more interesting.

Interesting idea. If we put the sentiment that there are many things that could/should be worked on that are more important, to one side (though I agree with it), and focus on the announcement itself...

I tend to agree with Vern on this one - it's got the potential to add a strong new challenge; now you actually have a reason to improve your skill at driving to a tight timetable or completing shunting tasks quickly, or driving as well as possible. As long as the scoring takes in to account many factors that encourage good driving (including negative factors such as speeding, uncomfortable driving at uneven speeds, slowing down too quickly, banging wagons around etc) and the feedback clearly shows the driver what aspects they need to improve on (perhaps even including visual feedback during the drive itself as another option) perhaps with more visible penalty points for spads and things where these are flagged up and then removed after a certain period of non-recurrence, then I think this kind of thing can really improve the player experience.

If it's done badly then it'll do more harm than good, e.g. if it's simply how long did it take you to complete the scenario, did you stop at all the stations or get all the wagons - well, never mind the speed limits then - wahooooooo! Similarly, if I travel at 61mph for 2 minutes in a 60mph zone, I don't want to be penalised more than someone travelling at 70mph for 1 minute.

I also think there would be something useful to be had by making this information available in another format as was suggested by another poster, have an xml file or something that some other app can read and then they can use this for virtual rail companies, e.g. drivers can submit files which show what has been done, for example.

Then again, why not take the official approach further - careers for a single driver, achievements, great, but if you let people start "virtual railways" and then people join up as drivers, the operator can dish out scenarios to be completed and drivers can do them and their points get added, giving a leaderboard of companies, how well those companies drive, who is delivering the most freight, who is delivering the most passengers, who has the best customer satisfaction and so forth. You can integrate career mode in to this potentially too, as the driver goes up the career path so different sets of scenarios could be unlocked.

My only concern about career mode style approaches in a sim like this is that in order to be meaningful you need quite a lot of stock - for example if you start out as a yard shunter you need that shunter to drive, plus wagons and/or coaches. Maybe you promote to a pilot, so now you need to have things going on in a station that you can interact with, plus mainline locos and stock. Next maybe you're a branchline passenger driver, so you might need a bigger loco or at least a different one, plus coaching stock. Then if you move this around to different periods, era's and places around the world you can see this multiplies up very quickly - put simply you really want at least one unique drivable loco per career level, per period, per style (diesel, electric, steam), per country. Some could be borrowed, a jinty used for shunting in one level could be another option used on the branchline passenger services. Similarly, some people might choose to go down a freight path, starting with short freight and going up to long distance mainline freight, while others go for the toplink passenger service path, perhaps going via the local suburban service route first. So my concern has always been that without this variety, the actual number of people interested in following the one single career path that is laid down is going to be very limited and highly focused, which doesn't necessarily befit the work involved to create it.

I guess it depends on how these things are designed and implemented, if it's done in a generic way so that anyone can include one or more career paths within their third party route, that might be perfectly fine.

So in summary:

Scores and achievements - have great potential both positively and negatively, if done correctly with a view to encouraging good professional driving it will be great.
Career mode - I have many doubts but it'd be nice if it could be made to work.

... but as has been said before in this topic, before any of this will really work well, issues mentioned previously must be looked at or it will quickly be very frustrating for people.

Matt.

Also note that this could really only apply to default assets and routes. Using add-on payware in a key scenario means that you would have to buy that payware before you can be scored against others on a like for like basis.

Mike Wilson (sp762) mentioned somewhere the possibility of unlocking new freebie stock by getting to a certain level - I thought that sounded to me like a real incentive to persist, and adds value to the game whilst making RS.com popular by allowing you to 'earn' some freeware.

I agree with Matt's points on how achievement is calculated - for example when I drive a diesel, I'm always careful to keep the ammeter in the green or only straying briefly into the yellow. I bet I'm in a minority! But in real life, whacking the power to 100% from a standing start would earn you a stern warning at the very least.

Paul

for example when I drive a diesel, I'm always careful to keep the ammeter in the green or only straying briefly into the yellow. I bet I'm in a minority! But in real life, whacking the power to 100% from a standing start would earn you a stern warning at the very least.

Yes, it almost seems to me that to make it nicely generic and extensible, there need to be hooks in the engines themselves to essentially be able to tell the scoring system if the unit is being driven well or not since engines are not alike and it might not be practical or possible to try and lump good and bad driving practices for all engines in to one definition (or one per type, i.e. diesel, steam etc).

I thought that sounded to me like a real incentive to persist, and adds value to the game whilst making RS.com popular by allowing you to 'earn' some freeware

Or perhaps even it earns you discounts on payware as well.

Also note that this could really only apply to default assets and routes. Using add-on payware in a key scenario means that you would have to buy that payware before you can be scored against others on a like for like basis.

It almost needs some kind of scenario registration system, where the scenario is "signed" and versioned, and then you can run that exact scenario and be scored equally against it - but if you have changed any stock or anything then you're using a different version of the scenario... of course, what do you do then about someone who changes the engine file of a stock item in order to make it accelerate mega fast and stop on a dime, for example, or tighten up couplings so that freight wagons can't bounce around. It almost implies that not only does the scenario need to be signed and versioned, but all the stock it uses must be too - which then brings other problems - changing *any* aspect could alter that version, so replacing the sounds or putting a nicer texture on it. It also could give you serious conflicts such as scenario A needs loco A at revision 1, but scenario B needs loco A at revision 2, and then what exactly *is* revision 1 versus 2? i.e. revision 1 is as shipped, revision 2 on my machine is where i changed the textures, revision 2 on johns machine is where he installed some new sounds, though I guess the signature would say if it's actually the right or wrong one you wouldn't know how to *get* that one... which really starts pointing to the fact that it must all be seriously tightly controlled - making 3rd party scenario submission for this rather more difficult, and even more difficult for locos - unless the whole thing is distributed entirely by some central resource that manages the signatures and versioning so that you can do this...

So it's not impossible for it to support non-default assets, but I suspect it would start to eliminate hosting sites like this one from hosting assets that could participate in it.

But then i'm speculating far too far in to the distance now

Matt.

I have spent all of my life building & operating O gauge model railways, Railworks has more or less replaced that for me, I get the same enjoyment building routes as I did layouts and I can operate the finished product on my own without a small team of signal men.
Scoring etc had no place in model railways so that does not interest me.

I think most of us would very much appreciate the RW's team to put the effort and time into the signalling so that it works well, and folks can build any type of route and be able to signal it appropriately, within reason. Try and bring into the game more 'cool' effects such as the train going dark in tunnels, exhaust bouncing back off the tops of bridges, good quality sound effects that give the feel of travelling through places, station sounds, cuttings etc.

Thanks to the team for continuing with support and asking for our opinions and ideas.

Mark

NeutronIC wrote:

...It almost needs some kind of scenario registration system...

It would be nice if we had a flag in RW right now for scenario completion, as I lose track of which ones I've completed or not!
FSX is good for this as you get a nice green tick if you have completed the mission.

you get a nice green tick if you have completed the mission

Sounds excellent to me

Matt.

If RS.com promoted and organised this type of scoring system, they would inevitably ignore third party content altogether. We already know that updates to RailWorks are only tested on default routes and assets so there is no reason to believe that this would be different. This is not a criticism of Rs.com as there are limits to what they can do but the wails of discontent will resound for years when things do not work correctly, or Steam wipes out your accumulated score one day, or there are serious concerns over dumbing down to attract the casual user.

Why not organise something like this through a third party group, sponsored by RS.com but open to all (but independent of Steam ). This independent group could source assets and routes from a variety of sources that are free or default and create something like a set of examinations (scenarios) that can be tried and tested and all based on exactly the same routes and assets. I can think of at least five people on UKTS who would have the knowledge and expertise to organise something like this but the group would need to be made up of people from all over the train simming World.

RS.com could then stick to the core issues, the product would receive the benefit of a well organised and enthusiast controlled enhancement and those that wanted to join in could and if you were not interested then you are not adversely affected.

I still cannot see that such a system organised by RS.com can be anything other than a fun promotion, but organised by experts .... well that is a totally different matter. (Not that RS.com are not experts but they are restricted to only the content that they produce).

This could be the first step towards the RailWorks Academy.

Scoring and Career Mode is a great idea - for Games Players. And let's face it most users of RailWorks are games players. Start RW, select a route, load up a scenario and play to score high points, get yourself Top of the League: great! RS.com can provide that with the game as it stands.
Some of us, a minority of users, will insist on treating RW as a virtual railway. RS.com cannot please us in most of our 'requirements', it would not be profitable for them to do so. The core game (repeat 'game') will remain much as it is now. Graphics will be improved, but not the despatcher. Sounds will probably be left to third party developers.
Yes we virtual railwaymen are the minority. Look at the thread about 'Problems with Update 97.8a - Yes or No': only 80 people have voted. How many people do you think have bought or upgraded to RailWorks? What percentage of that do you think 80 people represents?
Sorry to be a pessimist, but that's the way I honestly see it.
Ted.

RSderek wrote:http://railsimulator.blogspot.com/2009/ ... -mode.html

Constructive feedback and comments welcome.

By and large, I quite like the idea as it's a concept I'm familiar with in the realms of online gaming both on PC and Xbox. If the achievements and so on could be made to be pertinent to railway simulation, i.e. a 'test' of one's knowledge, ability or understanding of a route, a locomotive, a type of train or a particular task, then I'd welcome it.

If, on the other hand, it pushes it too far into the realm of pure 'game', then I'd be less keen. I acknowledge the desire (need even) to attract more 'users', however, the core market of railway simulations are -- and how to be polite and not overly self-deprecating -- a curious collection of individuals and I firmly believe that these are the ones who are in for the long haul rather than the short.

From my experience with most of the online games, their 'replay value' is often limited and the awards/achievements systems/mechanisms are nothing more than 'bragging rights'. This may suit the typical teen (I know my 15 year old son loves that sort of competitiveness on the 360) who can then crow about it in the playground or via instant messenger, etc. but I doubt there'll be many adults overly bothered about this.

It might be a different story if, say for arguments sake, there were some kind of goal reward at the end of it, e.g. a special re-skin or item of rolling stock only available to those who 'unlocked' it through achievement.

I would also err on the side of caution that the majority of others have expressed in this thread and would desire that this sort of extension comes only once all the other key issues are fixed. Believe me, you wouldn't want the teenage hordes bemoaning a flawed product on the 'intarwebs'...

Cheers, Rik.

jp4712 wrote:But in real life, whacking the power to 100% from a standing start would earn you a stern warning at the very least

...unless driving a 'tractor', in which case it's de rigeur


Rik.