http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/showthread.php?t=274527

I'll explain in due time.

Rich

Noticed you had taken the plunge, hahahaahahaha.

Wondered why you had turned 180% the other day when you were so strongly defending the payware release of the Foliage Pack.

I bought it as well, but i still think RSDL is being cynical.

cheers,
Mike.

Well, Rich's post over at train-sim has got me laying track as well - 6 or 7 spurs laid off a single line so far, forming a (very short) switching route - I tell you what, laying some track then going straight in to hear Justin Cornell's GP38 roar and rumble its way by as it pushes a couple of cars is a load of fun, even without scenery in place.

Rich, I am seriously impressed with what you have achieved in a week - I am still struggling with those blasted buffers that keep appearing (seemingly) at random

Looking forward to your first KRS Payware Route

Rod

The two aren't connected in all honesty. I just happen to wander through the forum when I saw the fuss. To me the fuss was absurd with a few putting the cart way before the horse as I said in that one post.

The fuss did compel me to put up pics sooner than I meant to. I would have liked to had a little bit more time and developed more completed scenes. I have a huge library and I've only converted over a fraction of the objects. I would have rather started a post here first on what I had been doing. Do not conclude I'm endorsing RS or a part of some PR effort. From a route builder's vantage point I would say that there is a misperception that RS is harder than it really is. It's the opposite and I am frankly shocked but well pleased with that.

There's been a lot said of RS and frankly I have no idea any longer what has been said. But what I can attest to is working in RS is very easy and quick. As for headlights not illuminating and activities not working I haven't gotten that far though I don't discount any of it.

I will say this. RS is addicting. There's just something about it that makes it difficult to put down. No lie.

Rich G

Rod,

I was expecting misery. I was expecting frustration to the max. I had been toying with this idea of checking it out (cause I stupidly said I would) but was very reluctant to waste time doing it. Now I can't put the blasted thing down. My little track plan that I am working on is an adaptation of the Gorre and Dephetid track plan found in the 101 Track Plan book by Kalmbach done by Jack Armstrong. My first three attempts... the first day... where I laid all the track went so fast but the size was way too big. I wanted to work on something small.

And this is what I'm getting at folks... I did this 3 times over the first day where I successfully laid the track and then deleted the route each time. It wasn't until last Monday that I finally settled on a size that I thought would be comfortable to work with.

You can lay track... so fast. You can do grades... so fast. You can manipulate terrain... so fast. And when I say ... so fast... I mean and have the control where to me it looks good. Not sloppy, not shoddy not not not. And working with objects is so easy. You can place bridges, line 'em up... so fast. What's slowing me down is converting my buildings over to RS. That takes more time to do but a big part of that is I'm just not set up for this kind of operation. Never had to do it, never needed to do it so I have to take extra steps in places where someone else might not have to.

And I'm not putting hour after hour into this. I tend to be terrible about dragging my feet when I start something new. I'll bet I sound enthusiastic to you guys but behind this monitor I'm just simply amazed more than excited. There's still a ton to learn but I have to balance that with what pays the bills and msts routes do. This is a check it out thing for now.

Rich G

Hi Rich,

yup i would agree that from the viewpoint of creating routes. RS is easier than MSTS, once you get to grips with the difference in techniques.

From a prototypical railway operational point of view, it is the pits.

I have just started to try and create a scenario from the Needles Portal end of the Cajon route, with a 140 car double stack train.

Now short of releasing a new version of the route ( which is allowed by RSDL ), with extra waypoint markers to force pathing.

There is no way that i know of to get that player train to run south to San Bernadino, without it deciding to take the scenic route through Barstow Yards.

Pathing & Signalling is so damn frustrating.

I don't rant and rave at RSDL because i want the game to fail. I just want them to do something constructive in the way of improving it.

Instead of releasing patches, that do little more than gloss over the problems.

Whinge over.

regards,
Mike.

Hi Mike,

Just bear in mind that all I'm saying is... so far... building a route in RS is pretty easy to do. Rather than bite off everything at once, I'm taking the small steps first. The more I learn in a software application, the more confident and assured I feel that I can do the rest. Right now, with only knowing a little bit of RS, the whole process looks intimidating. But each small step towards the end result makes me all that more confident I can handle what's to come.

Before I started RS, I was completely assured I wasn't missing anything. Now that I'm investigating RS, I find it hard to put down. Remember, I like building routes. This is my passion. This is the big 'turn on' for me when it comes to our hobby. If all I have in the end is an all manual switch route with one engine doing switching, that's fine by me. And I have a large enough customer base to know there are many others out there that are like that too. You look at all the payware vendors out there and I'm still the one doing the most talking -- to you guys. We share the same passion.

Okay, so I know you're thinking 'but Rich, you'll fail where others have tried.' Maybe so. But my approach to sims has always been different than most. The thing you gotta know was how fast Jim Ward put his RS route out. That came out pretty fast, did it not? But Jim likes to push things and it was his frustrations in pushing that compelled him to take his sabbatical again. My approach is slightly different in that I take what the sim will give me. I also temper that with trying to obey what the real railroads do. I'm more into trying to bring to my routes what railroading is all about. Couple that with my 'passion' and I like to do routes that are more simplified in scope and that suit the computer environment they are written in.

As a developer I have to accept what the ceiling limit is. For instance, I know most of you guys like looking at the engines. So it's no small understanding on my part to keep my buildings detailed but not so detailed the poly count interferes with the running of heavier poly'd engines. It's a strategy I developed through the years to understand what works best in our computer environment with the community I work with. Lots of dynamics and not necessarily all of it in agreement with my own tastes.

MSTX will deliver its own challenges and I dare say many who are now anticipating it will have their disappointments with it as well. Until working with RS I saw no future for it. But I can see a crack of sunlight where I couldn't see one before. It's possible but RS could be child's play compared to what MSTX will be. I have no idea if that's true or not. But I daresay if RS in its feature rich complexity is this difficult to catch on to, something completely different and new could be even more difficult. So...

One step at a time!

Rich G

Hiya Rich,

i completely respect your views in regards to RS mate and your own personal approach to the game.

If i was any good at route building, i would probably have my nose in the game, all day and everyday.

That side of RS is pretty good, better than MSTS i would venture.

It`s the operational aspect that niggles me, as an ex-railwayman i find it far from satisfactory.

Anyway i was thinking of doing a fictional desert route, based on Texas or something. 200 miles in a straight line with the odd cactus tree, here and there. I could probably manage that.

Good luck to you Rich, i wish you all the best with your project.

regards,
Mike.

I posted two more pics at this thread and a description of one of the tools in RS that is such a time saver for a route builder.

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/showthread.php?t=274527

Rich

Well Rich, you would have me in the queue to buy. From what I have seen in my tinkering, the sim, as it stands, is absolutely ideal for small, simple (but because of the limitations of real life small routes) realistic routes. There may well be frustrations with 200 car unit trains on Cajon, but that just doesn't exist on a small switching route.

I can honestly say that I haven't had as much fun in a long time with any rail sim as I have had in the past 24 hours with my "1 tile" 2 mile maximum of track route, even with the minimal structures in place.

I am thinking (in fact I will later) of starting having a go at Progressive Rail's confined rail business park - extensive switching in a limited area - ideal for this sim...



Good idea, but also visually stimulating to have some very detailed buildings and textures close to, with the simpler textures further back - say a scale 1/4 mile away. RSDL on the IOW route have used predominantly 512x512 textures and have used a lot of repeat structures (deliberately, but very subtely) but it is not obvious and has really bumped up the framerates.

This sim has a lot to offer and it is early days yet. It might ultimately be eclipsed by MSTS2, but it will maintain its own niche.

Like the extra shots Rich - is that default foliage or the RSDL pack?

Rod

Mine.

Whoops - but there again, wow. Very good indeed...

Any chance of some closer shots?

Rod

Closer shots? Can you give me a for instance by what you mean?

Sorry Rich, I meant close up photos of the foliage, or photos closer to the foliage.

That is the trouble with the internet - seems like everyone lives next door to you and can understand your local speak.

Rod

Looking mighty fine there Rich!

Great pics Rich, you certainly have the talent for route building.

And an eye for scenery placement, which makes it all look natural.

regards,
Mike.

Thanks guys, I appreciate your comments.

I'd like to go back to something Mike said earlier for just a moment so we can further analyze the situation. Here's what Mike wrote:

"It`s the operational aspect that niggles me, as an ex-railwayman i find it far from satisfactory."

I must've missed this earlier or I convienently ignored it or something... But this is a good point. This worries me too. Going back to the early days of MSTS, this wasn't a worry though later on it became as the nightmare we know it is today. It's no fun creating activities because what you create and what you get are too often two different things. I got to where I use very little AI traffic in my MSTS routes cause I'm just plain tired of testing an activity for hours only to see the AI train succeed and then fail at the same points but at different times. People ask me why I don't charge for activities and it's real simple, I'm not going to sell something that's broke. Routes I can make work 100% of the time. Activities are so up in the air that when I see an email come in and it's about some Ohio Rail activity I wrote no less than four years ago, you can imagine the groan on my part. The day we can get any activity editor to give us predictable results will be a day long remembered. With RSDL, and again, this is not an endorsement... at least they're suppose to be working on it. With MSTS we don't have that. That's not a put down, all I'm saying is with both sims we're gonna have to accept their strengths and weaknesses til the best one comes along?

The only thing I would add to this mess about activities in RS is... I'm curious to see just how bad it is. Or, does it help to know a route inside out when you create an activity. What I mean is, it wasn't until Ohio Rail that I felt I was starting to get a handle on how the AI worked in MSTS. Ohio Rail was my 4th route (y'all never got the PMI, another 1 tile route I completed).

I believe you got to take this stuff one step at a time. And I believe the first step is building a route. Then you worry about textures, signals, your own new stuff... etc. Mostly everybody I know is jumping in where they left off from MSTS and that may not be the best idea.

Rich

A new crop of pics posted here.

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/showthread.php?t=274527

Rich

Hey Rich,

i get used to you ignoring me mate, i worry when you don't.

Lovely piccies up on ts.com again.

Very excited by the news of SR in RS.

I see the pressure is coming on already, in the expectation stakes.

Regards you developing in RS.

regards,
Mike.

"I see the pressure is coming on already, in the expectation stakes."

Whacha mean?

I think because I have no personal expectations for RS everything is looking good. However, I see the folks at uktrainsim are getting some nice results. Give a look if you guys get a chance.

RS pics here

Rich

I meant from others Rich.

cheers,
Mike.

Sorry Mike, I just ain't following. Nobody is putting any pressure on me that I'm aware of. Unfortunately for most of the freeware guys the dynamics aren't in place for them to do nothing much with RS because of the so few objects RS offers for them. One of my objections early on to RS was I noticed that RS was top heavy with users. Users are fine, of course, but they don't develop. And the worst of it was there wasn't any answers forthcoming for those who did. I still sense the RS community as being top heavy in users and so I still can't see much growth for RS. The kafuffle over the foilage pack was absurd because if there is going to be any development somebody better do something and RSDL did. But rather than embrace that the user base, or the vocal 'cheapskate' ones spoke out against it giving the foilage pack a bad rap. The RS community is probably the worst I've ever seen of a community for nailing its own coffin shut. They talk about a future for RS like there's going to be one. Like how!?

The sad part of it is you do have a company, albeit slowly, supporting it's sim. Granted they will argue that better support would be forthcoming if they fixed the thing. Well, I say it's a catch-22. You got a sim that's being sold for free practically. If that's the case their can't be money being brought in so they got to bring it in somehow and it won't be on their good looks.

And so far, I've found the route building features impressive. Most of my issues are coming from the 3d Canvas export. I have textures that behave wonderfully in MSTS which are now showing edges in RS but this is something I saw 3d Canvas exporting to MSTS as well. Just in the vegetation and I know how to fix it but it all takes time to get to all the things that need to be done. Anyway, there's a lot of folks who would like to build their own routes, who find MSTS difficult. Difficult may not be the truth but with RS route building is easy. Very stable. It's fast. And it's very intuitive. It's been fun to work with but I don't think RS sales will pay the bills so I need to get started on my next MsTS route soon enough.

Rich

Hi Rich,

no i didn't mean actual pressure.

Never mind mate, i just wrote a reply here. But what i hear in my head comes out all wrong in writing.

So i deleted it.

I haven't got the way with words that you and some others have on the forums.

regards,
Mike.

At least you're saying something. The thread seems to be actracting interest and there are a few remarks but I'm still not getting a feel what or if folks are giving RS a second look or even want to.

So far my impression for RS is very favorable.

Disclaimer: Now hold on before anybody shouts treason, I'm saying that I'm comfortable with both MSTS and RS. There's no endorsement of one or the other.

You kind of inferred earlier that you expected my findings would be favorable to route building with RS, so basically to many I guess, I'm just catching up to them. Except I'm doing it with USA type objects and maybe that's where the interest is coming from, I can't tell.

I'm going to have to get sidetracked here for a bit to learn Blender so I can create the kind of vegetation textures RS uses. Everything I'm importing was made for MSTS and made to complement my strategy I use to place objects in MSTS. Some of it just isn't working as well as I would like.

Anyway, just shop talkin.

Rich

Rich,

i think the interest is greater in the UK & Europe than in North America.

Route building in general is easier than with MSTS.

But some of the ideas i find infuriating.

The fact that i spent two hours trying to join two pieces of track.

One connected to a turntable , the other too a traverser.

Still not managed to do it and i find it ludicrous that track does not auto snap together like Trainz and even the MSTS track pieces.

regards,
Mike.

Heya Mike,

Well... hmm... I gave this a try, just a quickie and this is what happened to me.

Click to view attachment

I highlighted where I wanted to join to...

Click to view attachment

And then joined...

Click to view attachment

Oddly though, when I tried to connect anything or join to the turntable entry way (the side pointing down), the sim crashed. I could join everywhere else though with no problems. Is this what you mean?

Rich

Hi Rich,

i could be wrong, but i believe that track has to be laid from fixed objects.

Like turntables, traversers etc. You cannot start laying track towards the fixed object and finish at the fixed objects attachment point.

I hope that makes sense.

regards,
Mike.

Do you mean I should have plunked the turntable down somewhere and then started adding track from it?

Rich

Yes Rich, from the attachment points.
But then try attaching the other end to another turntable.

You can't, as far as i know you have to start the two seperate sections of track from each turntable and then join them in the middle.

If you use the linear join tool, it moves the track away from the attachment pont on the turntable and breaks the path.

regards,
Mike.

Maybe what you need to do Mike is insert another piece inbetween the two turntables? Then you'd have a fixed... a fixed... a fixed whatever you called it. ???

I got worried so I used a different turntable and did this up at the mine.

Click to view attachment

Doesn't matter mate, i am not getting across what i mean.

My fault entirely.

regards,
Mike.

I agree that laying track in RS is very quick. However it's the other processes which are frustrating. Terrain texturing I found very difficult. Not easy to blend differing textures as you can in TRS or apply ready blended squares as in MSTS. Even if you do manage a good blend, you can't copy and paste it elsewhere on the route.

Those rocky slopes appearing on anything over a 40° slope just becomes an annoyance (maybe that can be eliminated via Blueprint, but that's beyond my understanding). We still have the limitation where only one terrain texture set can be used without major surgery to xml files - again something beyond the average non-techie route builder. Of course another opportunity for a £5/$8 RSDL mini-pack offering a new set of all inclusive terrain textures.

Copying and pasting scenery items - it should be possible to select the type of item you wish to copy, not just everything (track and road) under the cursor. Then have to reselect after the paste operation to set them level on the terrain. No way of randomly rotating either.

I found water decals appalling to work with. Try selecting any other object in the vicinity once these are placed!

Then there's all the different versions - some running UK + NA Add on. Some running NA + UK add on. Some have combined both full versions. Some with the IOW route, some not. Some upgraded to Mark 2, some not.

If RSDL really want to make some money and attract more developers, maybe their next step should be a "Special Edition" release, which incorporates both original retail versions, the IOW route and all the official add-ons (including IOW, Class 66's and foliage pack) as a fresh start and common user base.

In the meantime, we now have opportunists over at UKTS trying to sell "Scenario Packs" for £5 a shot. Even if they are well done, IMHO I regard that as a step too far for the "Mini-payware" scene. I can't recall anyone ever charging for an MSTS activity...

Hey Vern!

"Not easy to blend differing textures...

Those rocky slopes appearing on anything over a 40° slope just becomes an annoyance...

Copying and pasting scenery items... not just everything (track and road) under the cursor... Then have to reselect after the paste operation to set them level on the terrain

water decals appalling to work with. Try selecting any other object in the vicinity once these are placed!

Then there's all the different versions... "

I've run into some of that too though I didn't follow you on the rocky slopes thing, but yes, they are an annoyance. And apparently I gather with Surveyor you don't have those annoyances but Trainz, Vern, that's an even harder step to get used to their graphics. Too misty looking for me. How do you do it?

But if we list the pros and cons of working in RS beside those of MSTS, the pluses outweigh the minuses. I'm not saying abandon MSTS, first of all. I'm saying RS is very doable. With all the nay-saying I was hearing I was expecting RS to take me a year to learn. The bulk of the operations is so easy to do that most folks could pick up RS and be route building in a very short time.

Now let's just stop their a minute and talk about route building. Route building is a tough way to go especially if you do your own stuff. No sim is going to make that job easier. You have to get into the nuts and bolts of whichever to learn what drives the machine let alone the 3rd party stuff you got to use. There's a lot of people who would like to build a route, and were it not for the shortage of objects in the RS coffers I think there would be plenty of doin'.

Obviously for me, MSTS is where my loyalties are. It has the biggest market and I'm payware. I can pretty much do whatever I want in MSTS. To me it's not which is better, but are both useable. I prefer that over one is better than the other. Painting ground textures while easy to do is time consuming and that to me is RS's biggest advantage over MSTS. In MSTS I have to balance using Mosaic against downloadable file size. In MSTS I can setup track in yards and industries much quicker than in RS.

And most importantly, from my payware perspective, just how much in the way 'advanced graphics', does the user care about anyway? If the user settles for MSTS like simplicity and 'plain-ness' then fine. It's fun doing prize winning stuff. But when time is a factor, I'm willing to do less.

Ultimately what gets things the fastest out onto the shelves is my best friend. I can't see where either of the two has an advantage. I once told a fellow vendor that I thought my best asset in route building is I know what my main goal is; to finish. Anything less than that and I have nothing to put on the shelves.

Oh, btw, 3dtrainstuff charges for their activities if I'm not mistaken.

Rich

As a result of this thread I've gone back to give RS another look. I've downloaded some of the more recent additions and played a few scenarios. I have to say that my impression hasn't changed much from my original reaction. It's not any of the technical issues since I'm only a consumer at this point, but rather the "feel" and "look" of what I've seen. It seems closer to a model railroad (a bit like Trainz, in my view) rather than a simulator.

I have no doubt that my mind could be changed by a route put together by Rich Garber or other of his talented colleagues, but until then I'm afraid that it will continue to languish on my hard drive.

Bob Barrows

I think at some point in its history, the TRS graphics engine was given a subtle tweak to look a bit more lifelike. There's also a far better selection of (free) items available off the DLS to assist in making things look more real. That includes some superb examples of foliage and ground cover. You can also turn the mist off and tweak the draw distance to make things more lifelike.

However I still maintain that RS does not look a whole lot better than third party TRS - when the first "proper" screenshots started to appear I made myself quite unpopular with Kuju and at UKTS by pointing that out.

About the only advantages I can see the RS Route Editor has over MSTS are slightly better stability (though I have encountered disappearing track sections ala MSTS) and of course native DEM import. I don't regard the Google Earth marker system as a particularly good equivalent of being able to plot markers in TS Tools (for MSTS) or import scanned and georeferenced maps via Transdem (for TRS). Even if you get a route up in running in RS there still appear to be pitfalls of corruption to XML files on other user's PC's and disappearance of other routes which has been reported.

My purely personal opinion is there is not enough interest in RS (compared to MSTS or TRS) to contemplate even a freeware route, let alone a payware one. Maybe if they did release a "Special Edition" at some future point and incorporate a few improvements in the route building process I might consider. I can't see route building in RS being any less time consuming than MSTS or TRS so might as well concentrate my limited time where I'm comfortable with the tools and know there is a good user base if the end result is worth distributing.

Hi Bob,

I wouldn't argue on any of this though on a few pics from RS I have had my jaw drop. RS can look really good, as can MSTS of course. The difference is with RS, as a route builder, you can fill a scene more and that's where my fun comes in. With MSTS it's balancing between the 'arts' so as to stay within poly and object count. With RS you don't really have to worry about that. At the same time with MSTS your textures are much crisper and you can do a lot with even the smallest of textures. But my advantage with RS is I have my own library I can import giving me lots of USA stuff to look at right off. 99% of the default stuff looks wrong to me. Too much color, too much saturation, too much like the stuff you put in a fish aquarium. So I don't discount what you say Bob, sounds right on. I plan on making the same freeware buildings I made available in my building packs for MSTS available for RS. Folks gotta start some place and the default stuff doesn't cut it. And for me, I don't view RS as better than MSTS. Because of the trade-offs it has advantages but there's disadvantages too. It's just a nice change of pace and a good break from MSTS but it won't replace MSTS, I agree.

Rich

Ahhh Verne,

Well, in all honesty, you're not making much of an argument here. Cause on one hand you work with Trainz. And if you can get along with Trainz then you can get along with anything. I'm not knocking Trainz but it's more of a leap to accept its foilables than RS. Trainz has had more than its fair share of 'goofiness' resulting in patches and its market is pretty tiny as well. Auran has alienated just as much of its community with hardly backward compatible versions to boot. RS has a tiny market too but it's just been released and it was done so rather clumsily. It doesn't have a following here in the NA side of things because there was hardly an effort on their part to do so. Shame on them. But it is easy to work with though and I'm quickly coming to where I can call this test route I'm doing nearly done, which ain't bad for a couple of weeks worth of work. The only crash I had with the sim was working with turntable I described earlier. I think it's worth a second look. Maybe not as simple as Trainz and it may not be as pretty as MSTS, but it's doable. Very doable.

Rich

Trainz is not a tiny market Rich. It`s also far more flexible than RS and the railway operation side of things is 200% better than RS.

Basically that is all RS is, a badly made clone of Trainz. Except with RS they left out all the good stuff or copied it really badly. Portals for one thing as the flexibilty of Portals in Trainz compared to RS. Is like comparing the nuclear age, with the stone age.

The one single advantage that RS has over Trainz, is the direct importation of DEM ( hgt files ). Apart from that Trainz Surveyor leaves RS World Editor in the shade.

Take a look also at these NA payware locos, better than MSTS and easily as good as RS.

Have a look at the 3D Cab piccies.

http://www.rrmods.com/pmain.shtml

regards,
Mike.

Sorry Mike, but talking Trainz to me, you might as well be talking to a wall... that's how much I'm listening.

Rich

No wish to argue - just a friendly discussion in the virtual pub.

It really all does come down to personal preference. I tried three times to get something up and running in KRS but foundered after a couple of weeks in abject frustration. Rich, you are entitled to your views about TRS but it really isn't that bad and has come a long way since the very early days. Even taking into account its established status, I think you will find far more content created for TRS in the last 12 months than for KRS (including two routes from myself!).

KRS to me still seems to be fitting a little niche slightly above Eisenbahn.ex aka Virtual Railroad, which programme it seems to be rapidly emulating with this mini-payware thing.

Maybe I will revive KRS at some point and perhaps an extended "John Armstrong" type model railroad plan is the way to go. There is a certain irony in that KRS could become the programme that does model railways while TRS has moved towards prototype routes!

However before that happens I would really like to see some good housekeeping from RSDL as mentioned above with everything tidied up into one definitive edition.

I see my reply has been removed.

Welcome to MY forum Mike.

Like that is it.....talk to yourself then....................

I do it all the time.