KRS - a Game, a Sim or both ?

[OTTODAD]

This will perhaps give you some ideas of what is planned for KRS in order to give it the widest possible appeal:

http://www.virtual-rail.co.uk/krs012.pdf

Most potential customers just want to run trains and have fun doing so, I think and be less concerned with accurate brake lines pressures and other prototypical correctness ! ;-)

If KRS can please most railways fans most of the time then they will have a winner ! :7

O t t o

[cbq311]

Game from the sounds of it.

And I do not see anywhere in there where they state anything about what potential customers want. From reading the forum at UKtrainsim and here, that assumption seems to be wrong. Most of the folks want it as real as it gets, not a toy like Trainz. Do you have a link to this claim? I would like to read it. I must have missed it somehow.

As it stands now, seems like a loser, but let us wait for futher announcements before going any further than this. I would hope an unbiased person will write a good review of what they see at the show. Hopefully I will be proven wrong.

[OTTODAD]

From reading the forum at UKtrainsim and here, that assumption seems to be wrong. Most of the folks want it as real as it gets, not a toy like Trainz.

That is what some of the forum members want, expressing the expectations of a small fraction of the 1 million who have purchased MSTS, most of which would not notice rolling stock wheels not running on the rails properly, rails overlaid at switches with no frogs nor guard rails, pantographs not making proper contact with overhead wires and other visual blemishes, etc, etc.

O t t o

[muskokaandtahoe]

IMO a completely trite feature. Creating it may have been a technical challenge worthy of admiration, but so is getting steam locomotive performance correct. Why bother with this?

If this is supposed to pass as big news... uh oh.

> Most potential customers just want to run trains and have fun doing so, I think and be less concerned with accurate brake
> lines pressures and other prototypical correctness !

Otto, has it ever occured to you that it is almost always possible to dumb down a sophisticated program for those who only want to wet their toes in the details but impossible to smarten-up something that's brain dead out of the box?

We don't yet know what Kujo is really doing... but I can say that if they are not building something more sophisticated than MSTS, why bother buying it? I can always use Auran's stuff for playing with trains and despite it's flaws, MSTS certainly has kept us all relatively pleased.

This is the question I asked earlier today: Is it a Sim, Playing w/ Trains, or a game? I wish I knew.

[b]Dave Nelson
SLW Route Design: The Cal-P, 1950.[b]
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y51/muskokaandtahoe/Avatars/Dancing_Genma.gif
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y51/muskokaandtahoe/Avatars/4ad3d633.jpg

[cbq311]

I have read the forums and I still do not understand where are getting you information from. Do you have a few links?

In you first post you stated:
"Most potential customers just want to run trains and have fun doing so, I think and be less concerned with accurate brake lines pressures and other prototypical correctness !"

What is "most?" I don't think they are the one coming to the different MSTS websites. I would guess that they are the one who bought MSTS and ran it only to discover that out of the box is stunk and that was that.

Now:
"That is what some of the forum members want, expressing the expectations of a small fraction of the 1 million who have purchased MSTS, most of which would not notice rolling stock wheels not running on the rails properly, rails overlaid at switches with no frogs nor guard rails, pantographs not making proper contact with overhead wires and other visual blemishes, etc, etc."

A small fraction? How small? I just do not see the data to back up your claims. I see the it completely different. And from those that had done addon's, both freeware and payware, I just can't see excitement for a game as compared to a sim.

I don't see anyone just wanting a game, they want a sim. Why do you think the threads concerning what people want in it are so long? MAybe your assumptions of the raw numbers, i.e, total number of units sold verses the number of people that frequent MSTS forums might give justification to your assumption. But other than that I do not see it. Maybe you can enlighten me.

[OTTODAD]

This is the question I asked earlier today: Is it a Sim, Playing w/ Trains, or a game? I wish I knew.

We shall know after the Leipzig show, Dave !

Over at UK-TS Sabrina promised to post some screen shots soon ! But that will only tell us what it looks like and not what it does.

Will have to wait for our European train sim friends who can visit the show to report back ! ;-)

O t t o

[Hack]

>>We shall know after the Leipzig show, Dave !

Provided the "we" who attend that show are given uninterrupted access to fully evaluate KRS, and are also qualified (and unbiased) to make the determination between a simulation and a game.

Cheers!
Marc - 3DTrains
http://www.3dtrains.com

[link:www.3dtrains.com/products/index.shtml|http://www.3dtrains.com/images/pro_funit_atsfmain.jpg]

Pro Series v4.0 SuperPacks

[sstyrnol]

Otto,

you always claim that you need MSTS to keep your brain up and running. If you claim that, you will not want a GAME!
Also, as the others I do not understand where you get the knowledge that most people want just to run trains... Last time I looked around the forums, most people writing here and there were a pleasant mixture of anything between hardcore railfans and the occasional railfan. Yes there are also those "fun runners", but a train simulation should always have the foremost objective of creating a model of the real thing.

IMHO, ugly pink trees in Idaho are probably worth a technical demonstration, but have neither something to do with reality nor with fun.

Finally, I also do not understand where you take the knowledge that most people do not care about prototypical rails and rolling stock? Why for example do we have things like ScaleRail, UKFineScale and all those awesome locos and rail vehicles??? This is due to the effort of a whole bunch of dedicated modellers who wouldn't do this if there wasn't an audience for it.

Coming back to the passengers. It is a nice feature for sure. Having "loading animations" is after all one feature well sought after. This does not only apply to passengers but also to freight cars being loaded or unloaded. Does this make it a game? I do not think so.

Just imagine having a Powder River Basin route and being able to take the coal hoppers through the loading facility with the cars being filled up gradually, increasing weight etc...

A loading animation for passengers should however not delimit other aspects of the game...

[keber]

I agree completely. I don't understand some in this thread, which find people unnecessary. Isn't a goal of a simulation to copy real world as close as possible? To me MSTS was always a simulation of a dead world without life. No moving (except trains), no animation. "External movement" was evident only in robotic cars on some roads.

People crowding stations will add much to realism, while they are not essential to train operation, it will make KRS much more appealling and could open possibilities to range of other uses (loading animations etc.)

If some groan over people moving around stations, then they should also groan over moving cars in MSTS. Different implemetation, but still the same thing.

[OTTODAD]

Yes Gregor, you more or less hit the nail on the head !

There are many who expect software to do what they want but I am talking about the majority of gamers and simmers and what they would like.

I do not have any games other than Chess and the ones supplied with Windows and find them repetitive and boring, whereas a train sim like MSTS is a constant challenge for all sorts of reasons ! ;-)

Have a look at MSFS and what they are now going to do with MSFS-X, moving cars on the roads, etc, there again some saying that they would like to see AI Choppers and heliports, again releasing more than one version of it to suit most and all of it happening in today's world and airports, flying mostly modern planes.

There is a niche market for those who like to fly Spitfires, Messerschmidt-109s, Mustangs, Dakotas, B17s, etc, but I prefer to fly planes featuring all their present day technical advances !

There is also a market for sims as used by the air forces, airlines and railways operators and ignoring their cost do not think that they would attract the average simmer, but would pilots like me and loco drivers like Ragtimer. ;-)

I am not a steam fan, although I like watching the valves gear of some locos like Pacifics, 2-10-2s and the Big-Boy, watching them negotiate switches on my model railway layouts, but prefer modern railways and rolling stock in a sim.

It will soon become apparent whether whatever KRS is going to provide will appeal to most and create substantial sales !

No more from me on the subject of KRS, events will soon speak for themselves !

Take care, O t t o.

[rgarber]

Well that's just it, isn't it? People are going to go after what pleases them and its up to the company to hit and miss the people's preferences. The thing here Otto is how do you know (what you imply to know)that makes you so confident that KRS will meet any of these needs? You say you have no inside information and sure, that's fine, but to keep up this game of coaxing people, especially here, to be more interested and enthused without the benefit of what you SEEM to know -- it's disconcerting.

Is it because of what you wrote here?

"I hope it will after I bought some of their shares, Dave !

One of the reasons why I am promoting KRS !"

The investment side of this is your business, understood, but when you start pushing as heavily as you do without regard to the truth of the situation (if you got inside info, let's hear it) just so you can recoup an investment, you're no better than the previous folk who pushed other train related products here that either became vaporware or scandalous.

I think it's a wise choice you make when you say...

"No more from me on the subject of KRS, events will soon speak for themselves !"

Rich

[muskokaandtahoe]

> I don't understand some in this thread, which find people unnecessary. Isn't a goal of a simulation to copy real
> world as close as possible?

I'll try and explain my comment, above. IMO there can be a railroad simulation, something visual like MSTS, with multiplayer, including dispatching, variety of signaling, etc., where the objective is to simulate a railroad. Scenarios can be played solo whenever any one wants, much like MSTS. Then there is what I call playing w/ trains, which, if I understand correctly, is something Otto and many others enjoy, which is perhaps best exampled by MSTS Explore Route, where the emphasis is almost exclusively on the visual -- you watch the train go. Which railroad, where it is, is often irrelevant. I like to think of one form of this interest as the old Lionel under the christmas tree, only looking much better. IMO animated people fit here, right along with the missile car and milk can loading car. I know that's a bit harsh, but that's just my opinion of it. And the last category is a game, it has a competition element of sorts, and I think Railroad Tycoon is a good example.

Using these definitions -- at least for the sake of this discussion -- adding people to what I've called a simulation is fluff. It might look nice and add a certain flavor, but as far as supporting the objective, it doesn't contribute anything. For playing w/ trains, it adds something. But so does a missile car. The difference between the missile car and moving people is, IMO, only a matter of taste and maturity, as both are simply an animation independant of the railroad and its technology. And for a game, it's just a laugh -- think Roller Coaster Tycoon and all the funny things the little people do.

So when I said the new feature was trite, aside from an edit that toned it down, what was in my mind was wasted resources which could have better spent getting the railroad technology right.

Now I know many people enjoy what I've called Playing with Trains. Perhaps a majority of the consumers. It's a fine hobby. It's just not a hobby I'm all that interested in. For myself, I'd much prefer seeing software that could acheive the same sort of interaction between people and trains in a railroad setting as what you get with a well run operating session on a scale train layout. And aside from that being of greater interest to me, I see it as necessary for the overall hobby of Model Railroading, if for no other reason than the relatively low cost of such software, minimal space requirements, and inexpensive quality add-ons will ensure the survival of that hobby.

Hope this answers.

[b]Dave Nelson
SLW Route Design: The Cal-P, 1950.[b]
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y51/muskokaandtahoe/Avatars/Dancing_Genma.gif
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y51/muskokaandtahoe/Avatars/4ad3d633.jpg

[sstyrnol]

I second what you are saying. My preference with running a trainsim is in the following aspects:

- Scenery - How a railroad interacts with the terrain it runs it (ruling grade, tunnels etc.)
- Operating procedures - How a railroads runs it trains (e.g. SP vs SF)
- Train Handling - Learn how to start up a heavy manifest vs. a hi-priority intermodal

However, animated passengers would be interesting as soon as it comes to commuter operations. Same as e.g. "animated" logs would become interesting on a logging narrow gauge route...

[mrmgp]

>As it stands now, seems like a loser, but let us wait for
>futher announcements before going any further than this.

Did you write off MSTS as a loser when it came out? It didn't have complete realism in operation, either, until some people started tweaking the bejesus out of it. Maybe KRS won't be totally realistic out of the box, but who's to say it's not a diamond in the rough like MSTS was (and in many ways still is)?

[mrmgp]

>Then there is what I call playing w/ trains, which, if
>I understand correctly, is something Otto and many others
>enjoy, which is perhaps best exampled by MSTS Explore Route,
>where the emphasis is almost exclusively on the visual -- you
>watch the train go. Which railroad, where it is, is often
>irrelevant. I like to think of one form of this interest as
>the old Lionel under the christmas tree, only looking much
>better. IMO animated people fit here, right along with the
>missile car and milk can loading car. I know that's a bit
>harsh, but that's just my opinion of it.

That is harsh. What's wrong with people wanting a sim that has the best of both worlds? Why should a sim be written off if it has a little eye candy thrown in, like animated people milling about a station or walking along the streets? I tended to run MSTS as realistically as possible most times, but I also found the routes to be sterile many times because there was little movement besides automobiles or other trains. If providing eye candy doesn't mean I need a supercomputer to run the sim, I welcome it. I'd love to run a train down the line and see animals moving about, people milling about a station, the occasional simulated bystander or railfan waving at the engineer. I'm hoping that superdetailed routes can be constructed without bringing my computer to a crawl the way MSTS did. Sure, it's eye candy, but from an engineer's point of view in a real locomotive, isn't there a lot of movement going on in the world along the railroad tracks?

[cbq311]

No, but I wrote od Trainz.

[plainsman]

I don't think anyone is finding fault with eye candy animations, as long as that does not substitute for rail simulation capability. I think the point missed bt Otto is that the game environment may appeal to some nieve users who will purchase the product and oooh and aaaw over it for 3-5 days, until they download a copy of MaxxCrash Auto Racing IV, and the Rail Simulator CD is donated to the charity shelter. The market that you really want is the one that has folks coming back for add on equipment, for updated product, for additional routes and features. These folks will demand something more than just a game. no matter how flashy and glitzy. Nothing wrong with marketing to reach the fickleflockfolk, but you better also accomodate your core market as well.
Bob

[mrmgp]

>I don't think anyone is finding fault with eye candy
>animations, as long as that does not substitute for rail
>simulation capability.

But as soon as an announcement seems to be made about some eye candy feature, it gets condemned. Some act as though they would prefer a spartan simulator as long as the physics are strictly adhered to. My problem is that this group demanding 100% prototypical accuracy comes off acting like they are the only group railroad simulator programmers should be listening to, and that the rest of us should be ignored. They aren't the largest base of virtual or physical model railroaders, and I'm just getting a little tired of members of this group threatening Kuju with snubbing if their wishes aren't met to the letter.

>I think the point missed bt Otto is that the game
>environment may appeal to some nieve users who will
>purchase the product and oooh and aaaw over it for
>3-5 days, until they download a copy of MaxxCrash
>Auto Racing IV, and the Rail Simulator CD is donated
>to the charity shelter.

I don't think Kuju would care one bit if a quarter million buyers did exactly that. It's all about marketing, and I still maintain that if Kuju is smart, they will aim their product at moderate railroad simulator operators who would like to see some eye candy, and at the same time have a fair semblance of real world railroading. We seem to be the largest group, and while we like dabbling in virtual or physical model railroading, getting it "right" isn't an obsession to us. KRS should be made so that anyone demanding better accuracy and realism can easily tweak the program for performance enhancements, but the rest of us probably don't feel like spending the next two weeks religiously studying how to get a train moving properly. It took me a few minutes, without ever having sat behind the throttle of a locomotive, to get MSTS trains to move decently. If I had to sit there for hours, I'd have been the one sending MSTS to the charity shelter. I'd love to drive a train in real life, but my color vision won't permit it (not color blind, but one of the rare few who has trouble distinguishing a few colors, and also cannot pass a light test). So I'm content with the taste of real railroading MSTS provided. All I'm asking is that KRS continue providing that taste. I don't think I'm anywhere near being alone in that sentiment.

[ragtimer]

Firstly,the present sim is a pretty good product.If MS would produce an update to fix the bugs we know about then there would probably be no need for a new sim.Secondly,when producing a new product it is just as easy to get the basics correct as get them wrong,all that is needed is a little expert advice.I am sceptical because Kuju do not have a good track record and have said nothing to make me change my mind.The pictures of allegedly UK semaphore signals are a case in point.They rushed them out without asking someone with knowledge of the prototype and many of them are just plain wrong!However,time will tell and there is no point us falling out before the sim is released!

[Matt Vince]

Just my 0.02:

Passengers on stations (or lack of) are the one thing which MSTS does miss out on - although all credit to those route-builders who include them. Quite frankly, for many rail systems, passengers are the 'bread-and-butter' business. I think that by including passengers, KRS reflects the importance of them in the overall operation of a rail system. I'd like KRS to include a random 'slowcoach' passenger (the type who takes forever to get on the train, thus delaying you), and factors in the weight of passengers (an empty train will perform differently to a full one), but I think that's possibly too ambitious. KRS could well be used for tramway routes - a realistic pedestrian/passenger model is essential, as otherwise you might as well be driving through a ghost-town.

As for the 'game'/'sim' argument - including passengers into the equation adds realism, which surely makes it more of a simulation? KRS has to be capable of covering all extremes - whilst there aren't any passengers in the Mojave desert, the complete opposite is true in the middle of a major city with a large metro/tramway/railway network.

[mrmgp]

>Firstly,the present sim is a pretty good product.If MS would
>produce an update to fix the bugs we know about then there
>would probably be no need for a new sim.


But MSTS isn't going to get any official bug fixes. Microsoft has walked away from the product. It's time for the next generation of railroad simulators to step up and take the baton. MSTS was good for its time, but we're past due for a simulator with improved graphics, and the ability to superdetail a route without resorting to trickery or bogging down all but the most top-of-the-line home computers. Yes, KRS, throw in some eye candy, but not at the expense of some semblance of real-world realism. I think we can have the best of both worlds with the right programming.


>Secondly,when producing a new product it is just as easy to
>get the basics correct as get them wrong,all that is needed
>is a little expert advice.

Yes, input should be given, but I'm getting annoyed with the purists demanding perfection or face boycotting, and how these purists act as though they speak for all virtual model railroaders.


>I am sceptical because Kuju do not have a good track record
>and have said nothing to make me change my mind.

I, too, would like Kuju to be a little more forthcoming about details and screen captures of their product. But for right now, they seem to be the only game in town when it comes to making a railroad simulator that succeeds MSTS, and I am more than ready for the next generation of sims. Trainz ain't making it in my book.


>The pictures of allegedly UK semaphore signals are a case
>in point. They rushed them out without asking someone with
>knowledge of the prototype and many of them are just plain
>wrong!

I cannot attest to the accuracy of the signal pics Kuju has released, but from what I have seen, the base is there for some really nice rendering of prototypical equipment by third parties. To this day, I still despise the default US crossing signals in MSTS, and wish they had taken a little time to make them look even half-way real. But fortunately Bruce Bridges was able to make signals that resembled the prototype. I'm hoping that KRS is at least a more promising diamond in the rough than MSTS was, and with much better graphics and ease of route creation.


>However,time will tell and there is no point us falling
>out before the sim is released!

Exactly. Those with the "do it my way, or I'm not buying your product" attitude really aren't helping. They seem to be the most vocal on this forum, but they don't speak for all of us sim users. It's past time for the next generation of railroad simulators to step forward. And I'm ready to give KRS a chance, just as I gave Trainz a chance, and was going to give MSTS2 and TA Train Simulator and TrainMaster Train Simulator for home users a chance before they turned into vaporware.

[rgarber]

Every time a new sim is to come out the same speculation abounds for each one and so far it's all been a disappointment. I think most folks here at TS have a wait n see attitude and that's a good thing. I think the question you want to ask is Kuju even listening to this forum? I wouldn't think so, at least nothing I've seen suggests it. So what if they got a forum or a gal who moderates it. You'll see their level of commitment to you in the promos and end product.

One thing I noted in the latest press deal was Tim mostly spoke of the graphics and didn't say a word about handling. This is odd since Tim was heading up TMTS which was supposed to excel in physics.

Anyway, we can speculate to the 9th degree about all this but it really doesn't seem to do much good. My 2 cents is let's just wait n see.

Rich

[NS185]

Adding passengers to stations does add realism, but what I have to question and I think what someothers are also, is that. We have anouncements for tuntables, train jumping, passengers at the stations and such all those things "I" believe are going to make it a great game. But what about the things that are going to make this a great sim.
MSTS is far from being a perfect sim but I would not downgrade it enough to call it a game. Like it was said above, It is time for a new age of rail simulators to come out, Microsoft is not going to debug MSTS anymore. But then again I kind of wonder are we going to get the 2006+ version of MSTS or the 2006+ version of TRAINZ?

[rgarber]

"We have anouncements for tuntables, train jumping, passengers at the stations and such all those things "I" believe are going to make it a great game. But what about the things that are going to make this a great sim."

That's a really good observation.

Rich

[plainsman]

"rail simulation capability." I didn't expect every user would want prototypical fidelity, but the capability to satisfy those of us that do should be built into the simulator.
BTW, how well would MS be doing if everyone bought just one copy of windows and never upgraded?
Just a thought,
Bob

[OTTODAD]

BTW, how well would MS be doing if everyone bought just one copy of windows and never upgraded?

If some of you guys had not talked me into upgrading from WIN-98SE to WIN-XP years ago I would not be writing this now. ;-)

Took me a while to convince Sniper too and the rest, as they say, is history.

It will make sense for KUJU to try to please as many train simmers as they possibly can ! :7

O t t o

[rgarber]

"It will make sense for KUJU to try to please as many train simmers as they possibly can !"

Great, here we go again. The point is Otto, what makes sense to you and what makes sense to the company could be, and probably will be -- two very different things. It would have made sense if kuju or MS had even taken one inch of effort to support the last train sim they put out. And did they? No. So sense doesn't really factor in here. Come out of this fantasy world of yours Otto and stop worrying about your investment and just come back to Earth and just let them finish the stupid thing and then in due time, we'll see what made sense to them -- then.

What's Sniper got to do with this anyway?

[mrmgp]

>But what about the things that are going to make this
>a great sim.

What I'm hoping is that Kuju has learned that there is a market for a good, and quite realistic railroad simulator, and that they are aiming their KRS product for this market. I am also hoping that they have paid attention to the shortcomings users have noticed and pointed out in MSTS, and are addressing these issues as best as they can and still produce an affordable simulator. Time will tell...

[OTTODAD]

What's Sniper got to do with this anyway?

I said:

If some of you guys had not talked me into upgrading from WIN-98SE to WIN-XP years ago I would not be writing this now.

Took me a while to convince Sniper too and the rest, as they say, is history.

It took him a long time to mentally switch from WIN-98SE to WIN-XP, eventually being forced to when his WIN-98SE got destroyed by lightning and believe that he is still hankering for what he could do with the MSTS-RE in WIN-98SE ! ;-)

O t t o

[sinclair97]

Having being mysteriously booted out of FS9 when I clicked one of the Aircraft's "Fly now" buttons, and spending hours and hours trying to find out why, and then seeing pages and pages of help queries in the Train-sim forum makes me realise that I want this new Train simulator to work and work without any problems: I wanna press the "button" and get my jollies with out any hassle--that has to be the first Number-one priority.

Mike http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/up1/109368.gif

[rgarber]

This is like an analogy? You are saying eventually we will all be "convinced" persuaded to move to KRS I take it. Maybe. Or Kuju never releases the thing, or it's so European in focus we don't care to run it, or the circus Kuju creates with the 'rules' to develope for it -- it's not worth it. Anything can happen. The difference between wait and see and your view is you pretend the thing has already been released and is a hit. You're behaving no different than the early days before Trainz was released. You're doing the very thing you cautioned enthusiastic tmts against. Lots of hype from you based on so little. Why not just wait and see before giving analogies like you just did? The difference between your analogy is Win XP was already released, in peoples hands, on their machines, and people knew what it could do and hence Jim did his switch I guess. I didn't realize Jim switching to XP was such a big moment in history. I'll send him a congratulatory note right away. You may have helped, who knows? You're always assuming all the credit for something. But that's not the point. Like I said before, you're the only one trying to shove this thing down people's throats; no different than the early days which took us from the early days of a cooperative spirit to the rancor we see so much of today.

[NickF]

I tend to agree with you, Rich. Kuju may release the great train simulator that we are all lusting for, but nobody will know until we can actually get our hands on it and see how it meets each of our individual expectations.

[dgauci]

I still so remember Georgi who used to come into the MSTS forums before the release of Trainz, and tell us how great Trainz was going to be and what a pile of turds MSTS was. Oh, How the release of Trainz turned that scenario so completely around!!

History repeating itself; just wait and see IF KRS is any good before telling us how much better it is going to be!!

Simple, no substantial North American content, no purchase by me. I probably won't still be interested years after it's release if I have to wait that long for third party content making it worthwhile to eventually purchase. MSTS never had that problem; it got off running from the start and improved with age. KRS may never start running so it won't last long enough to have a chance to improve.

Charter member since 2001.