Scenarios

[lakenhamrod]

Hello,
Looking through the new additions in the UKtrainsim library I noticed a senario that I fancied until I read the requirements I needed to run it, my question is are these all necessary and really needed, my computer takes a liftime to load Railworks now so anymore additional files are putting even more strain on it , please lets have a few more senarios without so many files to download,
Rod.

[transadelaide]

Hello,
Looking through the new additions in the UKtrainsim library I noticed a senario that I fancied until I read the requirements I needed to run it, my question is are these all necessary and really needed, my computer takes a liftime to load Railworks now so anymore additional files are putting even more strain on it , please lets have a few more senarios without so many files to download,
Rod.

I can't tell whether you're referring to payware DLC requirements, freeware stock (or reskin) requirements or both, but either way I have the same opinion regarding all of them. I have a fair few scenarios for different routes at various stages of work currently, so speaking as a creator I have a completely opposite opinion to that of a person who just wants to play without having to hunt down required assets.

When I'm sitting down to make a scenario (if released it will be freeware, i.e. a free gift that nobody else has to accept) I'm making it primarily for myself, so I'm thinking more about what is need to make it well, not what is needed to make it average. The number of scenarios I could possibly do that would give me great enjoyment using just the default content provided with RW2 is quite small, and having paid for downloads I will kind of want to use them to inject the variety I want.

The scenario editor is quite easy to pick up if you start off with modifying a supplied scenario that already works or with creating a scenario with no AI trains in motion to worry about. If you see there being a shortage of scenarios that have less requirements, why not have a go at making some instead of asking others to do it for you? I recently got to the end of playing through all the scenarios included with the Just Trains A4 Pacific and saw the lack of freeware scenarios using this pack, so that's why I'm making some scenarios using the A4 currently. I may release them on here and/or other websites if I want to, it's also possible that I may not.

Regarding the technical side of things, I have never noticed that adding content makes my computer load RailWorks more slowly - I wouldn't know simply because I don't sit there with a stopwatch timing the loading screen! In any case, I love variety so a couple of seconds delay would be a cost I would see as being worth it.

[FrankJ]

transadelaide

I totally agree - a scenario with no AI traffic would be very boring. I also agree with your sentiments regarding the size of your Railworks Library (mine is currently 42.5GB)
Yes it does delay loading but the resulting variety of activities makes for increased longevity of interest.

If Payware is the problem it is always possible to change that for freeware using Railworks tools

Happy Driving

Frank

[jaycat]

I have to say I agree with the poster that most scenarios require too much payware and even freeware software to be already owned or to be acquired to get them to work. I found that it's also difficult to find all the assets required for a lot of the scenarios. I am lucky in that I can use RW_tools to swap some out but a lot of people have no idea how to do this.
Now don't get me wrong, I am not putting down people who make scenarios but I am requesting they consider that not everyone has or can afford all add ons and/or simply do not have the time or knowledge to mess about substituting assets.

[lakenhamrod]

I am not having a dig at all you senario makers out there, in fact I thank most of you for many hours of enjoyment playing some that I have downloaded from UKrailsim, ALl I am saying is why must there be so much freeware to download to make them work, I don,t care wether a 47 has the correct logo or brand as long as it goes, as far as the A1 traffic is concerned the more the merrier, I was brought up with steam and saw the first diesel and before I gave it all up everything was blue and grey and at seventy years old I have no idea how to change a senario nor do I really want to learn, I am envious of people who have been brought up in the age of computers but calculators or plastic had,nt been thought of when I was a kid, all I am asking for is something a bit more simple and easy to use, If only there were a few more hours in the day,
Rod.

[malkymackay]

Can't seem to win sometimes . Like Transadelaide, I create scenarios firstly for personal enjoyment & if they're good enough, I upload them here. I don't see why I should be limiting my stock palette, just for other's benefit. Where would you draw the line? The only way that everyone will have the same stock, is if you only use default content & I'm sure there would be complaints about that too.
My scenarios are written with period Working Timetables & if I have appropriate stock, I'll use it to give as realistic a flavour as I can.

[donny]

Can't agree more with Malky and others. Most scenario makers, indeed most (if not all) freeware creators, create content first and foremost for their own pleasure. If its good enough then they will upload it here and share it with everyone else, then it is up to you to wether or not to download it.

If you wish to make demands on content creators then might I suggest you look towards the payware creators (Of which there are many) who i'm sure will be only too delighted to help you acheive your desires.

[transadelaide]

Substituting in default items is a nice theory, but it hits a snag when you have a specific requirement that means there is no capable substitute available. Going back to my example about giving the A4 Pacific some love, substituting in a Black 5 would not work for the same reason that top link express locomotives like the A4 were built in the first place.

If the scenarios released freely by members of the community or those released as payware fail to meet your (collective your, I'm not addressing any one person) needs/wants/tastes/restrictions, then instead of complaining about it and waiting for somebody else to pander to your desired, a more effective move might be to set about being the person who responds to make things better. Every RW2 user has everything they need to create a scenario, it really is all in the program, and every RW2 scenario creator had to start from the same point of having just the program. In addition, the RW Creator Manual included with the game by RS.com (under \Steam\steamapps\common\railworks\Manuals\EN\) helpfully suggests that a great way to get started with learning how to create a route or scenario is to edit one of those supplied.

The endpoint of this question from my end as a user is that I do not "deserve" to have scenarios tailored to my requirements or tastes, and that users have no right to complain about what others offer freely. My view is that freeware is not a right or entitlement, it's a free gift that didn't have to be given and doesn't have to be accepted. If somebody creates a scenario that I can use instantly that's excellent, if it's one that I can't then I still haven't lost anything compared to where I was before they created it.

The endpoint of this question from my end as a creator is that any scenarios I release as freeware will be my scenarios done my way. If that means some people are unable to use them then so be it, I'm not going to get into the game of trying to please everybody because everybody loses at that game. I will say that if I do make any scenario releases you can expect a full listing of requirements as tested on a clean installation of the game, so if you follow the instructions properly you will not have any problems with missing stock, I see this is basic decency.


Sometimes I can't help but wonder if there is scope for establishing some sort of "creators only" community where freeware could be discussed without any demands. Most of the time it's idle speculation while I'm waiting for RW to load something, but every now and then this sort of thread arises where it becomes a serious thought.

[black8]

..... I am lucky in that I can use RW_tools to swap some out but a lot of people have no idea how to do this.

I too have a fairly large amount of pay- and freeware and I do agree that a certain amount of this is necessay to make a scenario look and feel realistic. However there will always be some item that I do not have and I will swap those with a suitable alternative from my 'stock' using RW_Tools. Many times you will see that a certain required loco will only pass you once, maybe twice in a scenario and before you recognize the type it is already past. What I am trying to say is that you do not always need all the required items to enjoy driving in a certain scenario. Swapping rolling stock (and even scenery) items with RW_Tools is not difficult and can be 'mastered' by everybody. Check the manual or when you have questions contact the creator, Mike Simpson.

Cheers
Jos

[FoggyMorning]

All I have to add is that something I try to ensure with scenarios I upload is that any additional stock requirements actually have some value in the scenario. For example, I would try and avoid using a payware locomotive addon if I just wanted a single example to sit in a siding somewhere or hauling a single AI train (with the obvious exception Of named "famous" preserved locos).

Of course, my scenarios are all heavily fictionalised so I am not basing the motive power strictly on the real thing. Where a scenario is written from a real working timetable I think it is more than acceptable to use individual addons in small quantities in order to match the real thing as closely as possible.

As noted above, scenarios are written first and foremost for the authors' own enjoyment and shared when the author feels they are "good enough" (for want of a better term) for the wider community. If I come across a scenario for which I don't have the appropriate stock then I have the option of substituting the items in question with RW_Tools.

Steve

[jimmyshand]

Interesting debate.

Personally I would never dream of criticising any scenario creator for their work. These people are true heroes of this game who keep the longevity going and the interest sustained. Nearly all the scenarios I have and that I drive are those that have been created by freeware community members. Without them my interest in this game would have dried up a long time ago. In fact the owners RS.com owe a lot to these people, RSC do not actually supply or create many scenarios themselves, it is kind of an unwritten natural order that they produce the bulk of the stock but the re-skinners and scenario creators make them come alive.

Can you imagine how boring the game would be with just default RSC scenarios and how quickly it would end up being shelved?? (involuntary shudder!)

At the same time I do share the frustration of sometimes having to track down and install dozens of different freeware files to get a scenario to work. As a compromise I tend to use a rule thumb, if the extra asset/reskin can be installed quickly with an rwp file then I'll download and install it. If it is an asset that requires much 'faffing about' i.e. cutting and pasting numerous .geopdx files etc then I'll generally swap the item out with RW Tools for something similar which is quicker and easier than faffing about with files in Windows Explorer. I often also have trouble installing some of the freeware stock that doesn't come with a rwp installer and that has to be manually extracted and installed.

I would have to say that honestly most of my time on RW is spent mucking about with files trying to get scenarios to work. It's a pain but I'd rather that than nothing and don't forget just how many amazing scenarios we do get for completely free.

[alexnick]

Hmm.

I always liked the idea of producing packages of scenarios with similar DLC/freeware requirements. In doing so, I found that certain DLC items turn out to be much more useful than others, for instance, the DT Mk1s, the 08 pack, the 101 DMU or a lot of the 16t mineral wagon repaints tend to come up frequently. Of course, this varies with era.

However, if you look through lots of the scenarios available on UKTS, you'll find some add-ons recur more frequently than others in the required stock lists. I have, for a while, used this as a guide for buying DLC as it gives me an idea of what I can make the most of with freeware reskins and scenarios.

The other point I'd like to make is perhaps a more philosophical one. Creating content for Railworks is, to an extent, an artistic process, and the creator has an artistic vision behind it. Particularly in freeware creation, where there is no commercial influence and pressure to produce things which will sell well. I would encourage anyone who wants to create a scenario to use what they can and want to best demonstrate their original idea, be it a scenario produced using working timetables and stock diagrams for 100% accuracy, or a more fanciful vision produced in the creator's mind (something which I've enjoyed doing in the scenario editor). Would you tell a painter to use different colours to make their work more popular?

AN

[transadelaide]

I definitely agree about the artistic part of things, which is why my favourite routes for scenario creation are the semi-prototypical ones like Cresston and Western Rail Corridor. With no real timetable to even take inspiration from, the creative side must be engaged. Non-standard freight services, diversions and railtours also open up those possibilities a bit on the more realistic routes. The last thing I would want to be modelling (except if somebody makes a route in my area!) in my scenarios is an ordinary service!

[smarty2]

As a scenario creator myself I agree wholeheartedly with Transadelaide's sentiments, I make a list of requirements on the download screen so people who haven't got the required items don't download it and waste their time. Simples.

[photons66]

To be honest, the OP's concerns were at the forefront of my mind when I did my scenario pack. I was afraid people would look at it and be put off by the amount needed to make them run.

However, I feel that payware stock enhances any scenario pack significantly. It therefore really isn't much of an expense when the quality that is offered through several of the locos raises the bar of the scenario.

And there's the option of subsituting every payware item used in a scenario. So the person who downloads it really has options and we all end up winners.