A look at the N. American release Options

[tgalbardi]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/w00t.gif)

Actually, I thought that I will never buy KRS. But with every new screen shot you post here I'm sure I will. VERY AWESOME!!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) Love those terrain textures and the density and foresight of the vegetation.

As mentioned before, the sky could need some improvement and the entire sim should be a little less saturated. Other than that - AMAZING!!!

Any signal close-ups? How does the lighting look like?

[ATSFSD9]

I'm getting a Copy can ya download the the full Sim after ya Order it.

[mako88sb]

Yup. Once your payment is ok'd your good to go. I found that download site around noon and was up and running about an hour and half later. Too bad I had to get to work and only ran it for 15 mins.

Rob

[steamed]

Does anyone know if it can be run under win2000 ?

[Eaglefan9727]

Processor: Intel P4 2.0 GHz or AMD Athlon XP 2400+

RAM: Windows XP SP2 (512MB), Windows Vista (512MB)
Video Card: 128 MB 3D Graphics card (Nividia 7xxx or above) with Vertex and Pixel Shader (VS/PS) Capability

[jovet]

I think it looks pretty good, too. As good as I would expect.

As already mentioned, the lighting really bites. The light diffusion is like a cloudy day, but I guess there's enough sun peeking through to light "some" things up. But there are no proper shadows. The lighting model has got to go, and really ruins the simulator for me. MSTS's is far from perfect, but... it can make my jaw drop sometimes.

The track doesn't look great, but it doesn't look terrible. It looks textured incorrectly, like the default MSTS Track...ties too large. The way the trackside has been textured is a nice touch, though I don't really care for the "reddish gray" color scheme and really have no clue what they're trying to present there. Ash, with a touch of reddish ballast dust?

The object density and design of vegetation etc looks really very good. As already mentioned, the general terrain looks right at home. Whomever worked on that should be promoted.

The lighter "sandstone" rock formations look fine. The darker gray rock formations look dreadful, such as in strack2ch7.jpg. Likely a victim of the lighting model, there is no "dark" side to the rocks, they jump out at me as totally foreign and unnatural. They don't "seam" worth squat with the adjacent "natural" terrain, either. And their texturing is awful. Too blurry. Too similar to a painter's palette full of egregious colors. I dunno. But it's wrong, and bad, and whomever made them should be fired. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

At some point, I'll buy this route/game. But not yet. The lighting model needs overhauled (which will never happen) for me to really enjoy playing with KRS.

[Genma Saotome]

As already mentioned, the lighting really bites. The light diffusion is like a cloudy day, but I guess there's enough sun peeking through to light "some" things up. But there are no proper shadows. The lighting model has got to go, and really ruins the simulator for me.

IMO a perfect description of a serious flaw. Positively fluorescent. Let's hope for RSDL (and it's customers) that it can be fixed.

The track doesn't look great, but it doesn't look terrible. It looks textured incorrectly, like the default MSTS Track...ties too large. The way the trackside has been textured is a nice touch, though I don't really care for the "reddish gray" color scheme and really have no clue what they're trying to present there. Ash, with a touch of reddish ballast dust?

Agree again. Ballast is odd. But the rails... I don't understand how they came up w/ such poor rails. They're too wide, badly textured... they are perfectly flat on top, which may be just the way it has to be, but they look perfectly flat as well. And that doesn't have to be that way.

Check out the video they released last week... there is a scene where a steam locomotive comes onto a turntable and is rotated. Check out the differences between the default rail and what's on the turntable: it's as bad as comparing default MSTS to Scalerail. IN short, somebody there knew what railheads look like (the turntable) but whoever did the default rail obviously didn't.

The darker gray rock formations look dreadful, such as in strack2ch7.jpg. Likely a victim of the lighting model, there is no "dark" side to the rocks, they jump out at me as totally foreign and unnatural. They don't "seam" worth squat with the adjacent "natural" terrain, either. And their texturing is awful. Too blurry. Too similar to a painter's palette full of egregious colors. I dunno. But it's wrong, and bad, and whomever made them should be fired. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Bingo!

[rgarber]

"IMO a perfect description of a serious flaw. Positively fluorescent. Let's hope for RSDL (and it's customers) that it can be fixed."

In the earlier days of RS, this is what I was thinking too. If we redid the textures to photorealism and the same with what we did with the ground texturing and the sky all would work out. But look at this photo where somebody did it.

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/showthread.php?t=266980

Now look at the buildings and see how all of a sudden they look garrish? Like they are backlit or something. Especially the church looking ones. My guess is if you change one thing you affect another. And having this very same discussion with another developer yesterday I pointed out it's like msts all over again where everything would have to change to get the right kind of look to the sim. So my point is why go through all that again when in a few months, hopefully, we won't have to do that since it's already been illustrated to have the right kind of lighting.

If they can fix the lighting to where things appear naturally without the over saturation effect they'd be spot on in my opinion.

Rich G

Edit: trying to find the best way to put this... with natural lighting the sim takes more of an unnatural look than a natural one is I believe the best way to put it. It's like looking at Railroad Tycoon in a way.. 3d objects plopped down on a natural looking surface kind of thing.

[Southwest Chief]

Terrain looks very realistic. Although the exposed rock is not so great. The Joshua trees are not so hot looking either and I haven't seen too many in the pass, they tend to show up after (heading east). But all in all, it's a pretty good looking rendition of Cajon. By the way, all trackage I've seen in the photos so far posted here are BNSF.

Incidentally, the tunnels are being daylighted as we speak (see second video clip below).

For some comparison shots of what the route should look like to those unfamiliar with the real Cajon, here are some good video clips that give you the overall impression of what Cajon should look like:

Video 1

Video 2

Video 3


Oops, almost forgot, the Mojave bridge is wrong (yet again). It should look like this:
Bridge
Can anyone get this bridge right for a train sim?

[Jail]

Rich G. That picture looked cartoonish to me

[ATSFSD9]

How come the Cajon Pass Route looks better then the Europe Routes,I mean the Graphics are better & more Realistic.

[jovet]

Ballast is odd. But the rails... I don't understand how they came up w/ such poor rails. They're too wide, badly textured... they are perfectly flat on top, which may be just the way it has to be, but they look perfectly flat as well. And that doesn't have to be that way.

Yeah I forgot about the rails. Ugh. But I know how they came up with them: They're exactly like MSTS's!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)

Maybe they can fix that when they fix the other trackwork flaws? (Such as lack of gaps in places, which I view as minor, except for having shiny guard rails.)

I wish I could comment more about the physics! There's a gentleman on t-s raving about "more physics, less eye candy" but both are equally important--they're what make a simulation.

There's no reason why our train simulations can't be all-around impressive!

[EvilChiefK]

Operationally, it has its issues, too:

1. Throttle control isn't right, since there are no "notches".
2. Train brakes don't seem to work right, either. (Read Al Krug's description of air brakes.)
3. The sound is horrible. Do locomotives in the UK sound like lawnmowers?
4. Some documented keypresses don't work. Some functions are not documented.
5. In-cab viewpoints should include views of instrumentation, or at least be storable, so that a hotkey can be used to "glance" at the instruments.
6. There is no distance counter. I shouldn't have to go to "view 3" to see if I've cleared the rear of the train, I should know, like the real guys do, inside the cab, that the train is clear.
7. I didn't see any in-cab signalling, either.

Is it "better" than MSTS? No, I don't think so. Neither is it "worse". It's just different. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. But so many years after the introduction of MSTS, with all we've learned in those years, KRS ought to be BETTER than MSTS.

[august1929]

Do locomotives in the UK sound like lawnmowers?

Yup, but things are so back to front over here that my lawnmower sounds like a locomotive - need to get it serviced (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Is it "better" than MSTS? No, I don't think so. Neither is it "worse". It's just different. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. But so many years after the introduction of MSTS, with all we've learned in those years, KRS ought to be BETTER than MSTS.

I agree with your first. As to KRS being "ought to be Better", just give it time, it will be - anyway, even if it is just different that will still be fun...

Rod

[brucek]

.....

Maybe someone from RSDL can tell us who actually did the route scenery-wise. If it's the zoo project people then that's going to be a tough act to follow since they are professional graphic design people who do this kind of stuff for a living. And those pictures show it.

Rich Garber

Several of those from the original Trainz team worked on this (Rail Simulator) project.
In fact, much of what Auran developed for their route creation suite (Surveyor) was adopted almost without change for Rail Simulator, along with the "Scenario" format of activity creation.

So for those who knocked Trainz, for whatever reason, you've ended up with a fair whack of it anyway! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

BK

[ajwtcb]

Whew. That's good to know. Well, atleast it's good to know that I'm not totally crazy when I think how much the KRS tools work and act like those from Trainz.

[rgarber]

Several of those from the original Trainz team worked on this (Rail Simulator) project.
In fact, much of what Auran developed for their route creation suite (Surveyor) was adopted almost without change for Rail Simulator, along with the "Scenario" format of activity creation.

So for those who knocked Trainz, for whatever reason, you've ended up with a fair whack of it anyway! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

BK

LOL!!! That's funny! How ironic. Look, don't tell nobody else til it catches on better. Love to see those faces when it comes out. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

Rich

[Eaglefan9727]

LOL!!! That's funny! How ironic. Look, don't tell nobody else til it catches on better. Love to see those faces when it comes out. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

Rich

I guess that explains it why I dont like KRS. It reminds of Trainz. No thank you.....

[moose49]

Several of those from the original Trainz team worked on this (Rail Simulator) project.
In fact, much of what Auran developed for their route creation suite (Surveyor) was adopted almost without change for Rail Simulator, along with the "Scenario" format of activity creation.

So for those who knocked Trainz, for whatever reason, you've ended up with a fair whack of it anyway! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

BK

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)
I knew things looked odd in it is this for real? So far I'm not impressed and have quit using it will try again after the super duper fix it all patch comes out. This is wild news if it's correct. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)

[brucek]

..... This is wild news if it's correct. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wacko.gif)

I don't consider it "wild" at all.
It is common in the games industry - and software-development in general - for skilled programmers, artists and animators to move from one project to another.
For example, the lead programmer for Trainz, back when it was under development (2000/2001), was from the UK and he came out here (Australia) for the project and a couple of others followed.

(I know this for a fact as I was involved in Trainz early development).

BK