Even worse than MSTS?

[Sly401]

Klaus

Thats not my quote.... I for one wish that they would give it a try and I'm sure that they have plenty to offer..

PG
Canvas hard to learn ?

It has been my first experience at 3D modeling... Canvas purchased 28th Dec... (ahem authorized 2 Jan )
First model released 8 weeks later... yep the model is quite embarrasing now but we all have to start somewhere.

Can't be that difficult to learn ?


Sly

[Retro]

Klaus

It has been my first experience at 3D modeling... Canvas purchased 28th Dec... (ahem authorized 2 Jan )
First model released 8 weeks later... yep the model is quite embarrasing now but we all have to start somewhere.

Sly

If that was your first at 3D stuff then the results where far from embarrasing and you have improved on them since.
Along with others who know who they are we have seen some excellent work developed for KRS. Not forgetting another persons Utility Programs. Without these peoples efforts and RSDL's efforts the program may have bitten the dust.
Yes I have complained about KRS but most of the problems I have encountered are down to producing a Route in the hope it might be good enough one day to upload. The important point here is that we owe a lot to the people who have taken the Bull by the Horns when KRS was launched and produced this stuff and if you look in the relevant parts of the Forums it is obvious that they have struggled at times but kept going with a determination that I have not got but wish I had.
Kind Regards James.

[decapod]

Sly - that's exactly what I thought at first.

but after many years, I now realise that if anyone has already learned a 3D package they would first have to un-learn it before learning a new one. I still have trouble with sketchup which is supposed to be really simple.
You always end up looking for the same functions as the old system you learned and often they are not there or completely different.

[KlausM]

Klaus

Thats not my quote.... I for one wish that they would give it a try and I'm sure that they have plenty to offer..

Hi Sly,

I was referring to the following statement you made. Since it was only two postings up, I didn't include a quote:

Just to clarify...... it is aimed at people who so far have made no contribution to this area of the community, yet come on here and spout off about how bad things are and imply that anyone who is attempting anything must be an imbecile.

Klaus

[RSderek]

Hi,
We were not allowed to release a Gmax plugin/exporter.

However with Max/Blender and 3DCanvas I feel that there is more than enough to get assets into RS.
We are looking at ways to make it easier for people to understand what fields need to be filled in to get their assets into RS.

regards
Derek

[thenudehamster]

Well. Hmmm. Seems as if I've stirred up some very polarised feelings among the community. General opinion, apart from one or two notable dissenters, seems to have split into two camps. One says that this is almost the greatest thing since sliced bread; just give it a little while longer and it really will be as good as was promised. The other says it already is the best thing since sliced bread and if you don't ike it, go play somewhere else. Both seem to have missed the main thrust of my argument.
MSTS was produced many years ago, and despite many flaws and shortcomings (as well as taking some downright liberties with a few odds and ends) it was actually a pretty creditable effort at simulating driving a train on a PC; certainly no worse than some of the flying games of the same era. yes it had faults, some serious ones, and over the last six or seven years many herculean efforts have been made ot force the thing into the twenty-first century, light years advanced in some respects in terms of computers compared to the archaic machinery MSTS was designed to run on. We reached the theoretical limits of what the game engine was capable of some time back; it's simply not made to work on hardware that runs at tens of times and more the speed of the original specification.
I can't recall the date of the birth of the 'new' Kuju project, but it wasn't too many years back - so why is this simulator plagued with so many faults, errors and omissions? Someone at Kuju must have still been taking an interest in the the MSTS community otherwise the idea of a new sim would never have been mooted. This being the case, why oh why didn't they also take serious note of the many flaws in MSTS and write their new simulator to avoid them? Some, they have; the graphics engine must work in a different fashion to the MSTS one for starters. Mind you, even that stutters on my almost state of the art PC. It's the simple things that they either didn't research properly, or didn't implement properly for various reasons. So many of the signalling logic errors would have been avoided in the first instance if only they'd taken the time to understand signalling practice. The basic, simple errors in the controls of the locos show that nobody properly researched just what feedback from the machinery is needed to drive a steam loco. With the basic flaw in the MSTS steam loco cab (eye position) so very well known and decried, why can I still not see out of the cab of the S&D 2-8-0. Steamers weren't noted for brilliant visibility, but you could at least see the track! Why, with the experience that everyone has had with MSTS is the 'driver aid' so awful? I can use it to see where I am, but not where I'm going or how I'll get there - at least not until it's too late to stop.
We still have permanently flat track, missing one of the things everyone has cried out for since day one of rail simulation, superelevation.
At least the trains carry some passengers, and they do move around occasionally (I think - it's difficult to tell from an HST at well over a ton)...
I do commend them on producing more realistic performance physics - at least most trains don't accelerate like a scalded cat on steroids, and stand on their nose once you breathe on the brakes. Sounds seem to be nothing like loud enough, though. Both the steamers on the S&D are so quiet even at full chat it's unnerving - and the actual sounds are discontinuous; it's very off-putting, and spoils the enjoyment when these 'modern' implemetations of locos sound less like themselves than the MSTS Scotsman did. I'm not sure what the db level of a Class 43 actually is - but I know they sound a LOT louder than this when they blast through Newbury; someone's bound to tell me I should turn the volume up on the PC - but then the AWS bell would sound like Big Ben!

Maybe I'm expecting too much of something that was produced on a very tight budget and rushed to publication in time for Christmas - but this is supposed to be a professional, commercial product, and I'm afraid in my estimation, it has failed in that regard. Yes, I will persevere with it because MSTS really has effectively run it's course, but I can see me feeling uncomfortable playing it for some time to come.

I'm not even going to think of the debate that has sprung as a side plot about the capabilities or otherwise of the varioous contributors from the voluntary sector. Many of them have produced work I know well from MSTS, and I have no doubt will do equally sterling work for KRS should they choose to. My fear is that many will not do so because of both inherent deficiencies in the program that should never have been there, and the thought of yet another tedious learning curve for the new simulator's idiosyncracies. I can't comment or advise on either; I just hope they persevere.
I am a user, a player, not a creator, although I do like to do some experimentation with getting the physics more accurate. I am, in model railway terms, more of a kit-basher than a scratch builder, and more likely a box shifter anyway. From that aspect, a game should work and work properly. I am bitter, disappointed and not a little angry that this simulator does not live up to even reasonable expectations after the promises we were given when it was first propounded.

[bigvern]

If you struggle with 3DC you can always do as I have done and construct the model in TSM, then import into 3DC for texturing and export to RS.

[Blackpatch]

Well. Hmmm. Seems as if I've stirred up some very polarised feelings among the community.

I share many of the points that you have highlighted but for me the RS glass is very much half-full. Why so optimistic? Simple, it is so early in the life of RS and the team at RSDL is prepared to engage the community so fully, often in their own time.

I never thought we'd have a simulator, straight out of the box, with so much UK content. For me its a godsend, and is something that I'm prepared to help support and nurture and I hope in the future to contribute content.

The shortfalls have been mentioned countless times now and are well documented. But they have also got alot right. Many seem to gloss over the fact that the present RSDL team haven't had the luxury of all the decisions that have governed the development of the game.

Given patience and support, I do feel that RS will develop into a very worthy alternative to any train sim on the market.

[Sly401]

Hi Barry
Certainly no questioning of the ability of any contributor on my part, however I do think that sensationalist statements have been made a little prematurely... I am not a "Fanboy" and I have probably come across more problems and quirks than most, but I do think it has potential and certainly great flexability..

From the little bits I've been delving into I think that it will be possible to do some pretty incredible things given time..

Like... being able to move valve gear into full forward or reverse gear, A fireman that climbs down and turns on a Water Crane then climbs back in the cab when you press "T", a working coaling tower.


I think at the moment it is more suited to those that want to get their hands dirty, and it will undoubtably satisfy those that like to watch trains go by before the "Driver's" amongst us finally get most of what they want / need..

Are we having fun yet?
Sly

[johny]

If you struggle with 3DC you can always do as I have done and construct the model in TSM, then import into 3DC for texturing and export to RS.

Especially when you find much of the texturing is imported as well. Took me a while to figure out the shadows, though.

John

[markjudith]

I'm enjoying RS at the moment and do agree that some things could have been better and wonder why some of the basic things we have in MTS are not available in RS. One thing that we must all be thankfull for is the fact that Rail simulation/games are available............we would have a heck of a lot to be upset about if we didn't have any! At least we have some toys to play with, back up from Derek and Adam makes all the difference and inspires confidence in the product I think.

[kevmt]

Like... being able to move valve gear into full forward or reverse gear,Sly

You've mentioned this before. Can you explain how it's done?

Kevin

[g0fthick]

Been watching this discussion unfold and I decided to throw my two cents in, regardless of whether anyone was short of change or not.

RS has it's flaws, it has issues. But not only do we have a dedicated team that are not only gradually fixing these issues with their updates, but are also creating new content. We never saw anything like that in MSTS which is a shame because it could have advanced further if some of the fundamental issues were fixed in the early months.

Whilst I agree that the end user shouldn't have to tailor the product to their whims, it's at least something that is not only possible, but well documented too. I had a quick read through of RSDL's new loco import and blueprint setup guide this evening and the improved clarity I saw there shows they take in our criticisms and do their best to amend them.

I'm personally looking forward to seeing where RS is a year after release. With the content that's been uploaded to UKTS I find myself gradually more and more impressed, not only with the quality but the speed at which our user's have adapted to not only a new way of building and importing their work, but learning new methods to bring their models up to speed with the current generation of game content creation.

[eaglefan]

Remember when MSTS was released,it was bug ridden,with poor quality models,constant crashing back to the desktop,even now years on it still does not deliver half you have mentioned in your post. Looking back when you think about it Microsoft made a complete hash of MSTS,compared to the quality of there flight sims at the time! look at the default pendennis castle or flying scotsman. So Rome wasnt built in a day! but RS is moving in the right direction, and, as i have mentioned previously, with the developers still developing, RS! its forward progression is assured. my advice would be! download the tools, documents, Etc, take time to learn the program (this is the bit that takes time)and dive in creating content or routes you will be suprised how rewarding it is.
kevin

While I agree with everything you have stated concerning that MSTS was released with bugs and other known things. MSTS didnt have 6 years to learn from another train sim program like KRS did. That is the diffrence between both MSTS and KRS being released with bugs. Just my two cents worth.

[superheatedsteam]

I had a quick read through of RSDL's new loco import and blueprint setup guide this evening and the improved clarity I saw there shows they take in our criticisms and do their best to amend them.

Am I correct in assuming you have a pre-release version of this document. If not then please advise where this file can be downloaded from.