The "joys" of creating a railroad simulator.

[mrmgp]

The hobby of railroading, whether through scale physical models or through virtual electronic models, has to be the most unique hobby in the world. In this hobby, there exists three primary factions. You have a faction that demands nothing less than 100% perfection in the recreation of railroading. You have another faction that just wants to run some trains, and couldn't care less about prototypical operation. And you have a faction that doesn't require painstaking adherence to prototype, yet doesn't want to just "play" with trains, either.

A "smart" company making a railroad simulator will aim their product toward the last group I mentioned. Why do I say this? Well, first of all, if you aim the simulator at people who just want to "play" with virtual scale models, you run the risk of aiming your product at people who will probably not stick around long after buying the product. I can't begin to tell you how many un-prototypical 4' x 8' plywood railroad layouts I've seen laying abandoned in people's basements or garages or dens because after a few laps around the layout "playing" with scale train models, the thrill is gone and they loose interest. Translate this to virtual railroading, and make a sim too simplistic, they get bored easily, or make a sim too realistic, and it becomes a chore rather than fun.

The first faction I mentioned earlier is damn near impossible to please. Many in this group are haughty people who demand perfection, and look down their noses at anyone who doesn't demand 100% adherence to prototype as people just "playing with toy trains." Someone spends hours creating a physical or virtual model, and these people will pick it apart and be more than happy to point out every last flaw in the model, right down to some part being three scale inches off the prototype. They demand everything in a sim to be completely like the prototype, or else they will walk away. The problem with creating a sim to suit this group is that it takes a lot of time and a lot of money, and the end result is a completely realistic sim that takes the beginner hours and hours to learn if one has the patience (many will not), and probably has a price tag into the hundreds of dollars.

I believe the last group I mentioned to be the largest in the hobby. These people don't want to just play with toy trains, nor do they feel that every last detail of prototype railroading be included in a layout or simulator. They were generally happy with MSTS despite its flaws, because it gave railroad enthusiasts a little taste of what it is like to run a real train. This group will be the most forgiving of a sim not being as true to life as possible, as long as it provides the taste of the real world without having to go work for BNSF or CSX or Norfolk Southern or Union Pacific (which most won't be able to do). As long as the simulator doesn't require hours of study to learn how to use, and as long as the simulator provides some semblance of prototypical railroad operation, these people will be happy.

Making a simulator to suit this last group is the best hope a company has to mass market a railroad simulator program. But to give a "glimmer of hope" to those demanding perfection, the program should be made in a way that members of this group can do a little reprogramming and tweaking of their own so that greater realism can be achieved, even if it takes a few weeks to accomplish this. A lot of good people spent a lot of time poring over MSTS to make it run much better, with more realism. For those who wanted the realism, they could easily download these improvements. For those who weren't such sticklers for prototypical accuracy, these improvements could be ignored if desired. And for those who just want to "play with" trains, a simulator like this can provide this with just a little study and practice to learn how to get the train moving down the tracks, but not so much as to be a turn-off.

I'm just now getting back into railroad simulation. I got burned out years ago with too much MSTS, and eventually gave my discs to a friend. A few years later, I started to miss railroad simulation, so I picked up the discounted copies Wal-Mart sells. MSTS still gives that taste of running a real train, but I'm more than ready for the next generation of railroad simulator to come along. I'd like to feel that I'm still getting that taste of running a real locomotive as I do with MSTS, but with much better graphics and capabilities than MSTS provides.

[kmanc21]

I believe you have hit the spike dead center with this post.

If Kuju aims at the third market you describe, I predict it will be successful with KRS. The purists will find a way to make a new sim better, just as they did with MSTS. Many of those who were not successful, my self included, in route building or activity writing may give it another shot in the new sim if the editors are easier to use and not too expensive. Thus adding to everyone's enjoyment of the sim.

[SurvivorSean]

I agree with the majority of that post as well. I too have recently spent alot of time if not waiting for the next best thing, taking another look back at MSTS and realizing that it may be the best thing we have for a long time, so what am I going to do with it. I to was burned out of running the same activities, and it was quite refreshing to run MSTS this past weekend again. You see everything old is new again, and my girlfriend found FYM and TD3 a little too boring with no eye candy. Unlike myself who could forgo the eye candy for more operations and variable/random situations that the later would provide. So I compromized and ran the Pokey and because I haven't run in so long, I didn't remember where the trains would be, and what signals I'd have to stop at. In the end she got bored after an hour, and I wanted to keep running at 35MPH for at least another hour, but alas I'm a smart man and quit while I was ahead :)

I'm not 100% sure if that purist group really exists. By that what I mean is there are alot of people that say they'll never return but perhaps if they never returned they were never really that interested to begin with. If KRS fails, I'm going to do everything in my power to make RTS a reality and I do hope KRS is open ended enough to allow RTS to be part of it. Honestly though KRS is starting to show signs that it may be entertaining on it's own and may be just as much fun as a stand alone provided it's adaptable and has playability. MSTS did not have the long term playability factor on scenerios, you simply had to keep building and building.

I'm going to keep my fingers crossed this time, and in the mean time when I stop typing rumors, and hopes, and concentrate on my RTS code maybee we'll all meet up some time :) But for now I must admit this speculation, and anticipation is very exciting.

Thanks

Sean

[mrmgp]

>I'm not 100% sure if that purist group really exists. By that
>what I mean is there are alot of people that say they'll never
>return but perhaps if they never returned they were never
>really that interested to begin with.

Oh, they exist, all right. They're called "rivet counters." These are the people who bitch to Model Railroader because someone's submitted blueprint of a caboose has a window placed two scale inches too far toward the rear (and that ain't much of an exaggeration). These are the people who will rip into a virtual model because, no matter how well skinned the model is, the bell isn't in the prototypically accurate location. They are the elitists of physical and virtual model railroading, and scoff and anyone who doesn't share their anal retentive demands of 100% adherence to prototype as people who just want to play with toy trains, like it's a sin equal to animal abuse or serial murder or child molestation. It's probably a response to being chided for being an adult playing with toys, and no matter how painstakingly accurate they try to duplicate real-life railroading, they still know that some people will accuse them of being Peter Pans who still want to play with toys. And I do believe that the majority of this group will be extremely unsatisfied with any railroad simulator that doesn't provide complete realism, and many are probably serious about refusing to buy a product that doesn't conform to their standards. But even if they don't buy a new simulator program, I don't think their sitting out will impact sales as much as they would like to think.

[Rich P]

I think the third group is the key one, and I think, from my viewpoint at least, this is where MSTS falls short. I would count myself as a member of that third group, but as an English user I was very dissappointed with MSTS 'out of the box', and had it not been for the uktrainsim site, would probably have given the sim up altogether.

I know very little about US railroading, but MSTS makes an awful job of simulating the UK. First off, there was the Settle & Carlisle route. Out of the three trains that come with it, only one ever operated on that route during the period modelled. It was a bit like supplying N&W steamers to run on Marias Pass, to use an American analogy.

Then there is the cab technology. UK trains are fitted with an array of saftey deveices, which, if properly modelled, keep the driver very, very busy at all times. Not a single one was modelled in MSTS. The freeware BVE simulator, on the other hand, has all of them, and driving a thirty minute commuter run on a British BVE route is far more challenging than a two-hour express on MSTS.

For this reason, when I do play MSTS, I try to play without driver aids (closer to BVE driving), and I only play in half hour stints, because I become bored after that. All you seem to do is set the throttle and go. I am learning to manually fire steam engines at the moment to try and up the challenge factor, but after just a year, I feel I have got about as much from the sim as I ever will.

I am hopeful about KRS. Obviously, being a British trainsimmer and a fan of British trains, I was pleased to hear that the Reading-Oxford HSTs and York-Doncaster Deltics will be included. Now, if Kuju build in AWS, TPWS, DRA and the other safety features, I will be in heaven. Obviously this is just a personal wishlist, but I think BVE has done much to raise the bar. If a free sim can do everything that a £30.00 sim could, and more, with only the lack of an external view against it, KRS will have to be good to persuade me to get my wallet out.

[muskokaandtahoe]

I'm a rivet counter and proud of that fact. I don't care what kind of derisive comments you may make because I know the vastly superior appearance and accuracy of the newest scale model railroad equipment (in North American) is directly a result of us rivet counters.

Had the industry listened to your opinions we'd still be seeing 40-50 year old tooling cranking out every more numbers of fantasy cars and locomotives.

The same will be true of sims. If you don't ask for accuracy (supported by documentation) you'll never see it made -- all for the simple reason that the makers, be they model railroad companies or software firms like Kujo -- they don't have the expertise AT ALL. They do makreting, code, whatever, just fine, but they count on content experts to give them the facts that go into the product.


[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

[mrmgp]

>I'm a rivet counter and proud of that fact.

There's probably a cure for that nowadays.

>I don't care what kind of derisive comments you may
>make

Sure you care, otherwise you wouldn't be using such a snotty, arrogant, condescending tone in this response to someone who doesn't share the elitist attitudes and anal retentive obsession with scale realism many rivet counters have.


>Had the industry listened to your opinions we'd still be
>seeing 40-50 year old tooling cranking out every more numbers
>of fantasy cars and locomotives.

Here we go again, with the tired old elitist attitude that anyone who doesn't share the obsession with realism is someone just playing with toy trains. Anyone indulging in the hobby of model railroading is playing with toy trains, regardless of whether they are running Kato or Tyco.

[cbq311]

And here are the same old comments from one who doesn't know better. Toy trains have their place. To get people started in the hobby. Then you show them the real deal and let it go from there. I understand that not everyone can afford the finest brass. But, there are was to make things better.

This is an arguement that started with the first train set.

[Turbo Bill]

The true joy is getting in, sitting down and running a train the models the actions of it's RW counterpart. I ran GP39-2's ( amongst other loco types) for ten years, yet I can't tell you how many doors a GP39-2 has on each side or how many fans it had on the roof. I focused my attention on the fact that it had good brakeshoes, the lights all worked and it did the work required of it. If I ever mentioned that a locomotive looked different because of some asthetic feature, I would have been run off the railroad. This is why railroads don't hire railfans. They want you to focus on your duties at hand, not counting doors or verifying where the bell is located on other locomotives. I too like a well detailed locomotive. I look to see that it captures the "flavour" of the original but it doesn't have to have every exact detail. You worry so much about every minute thing that you lose the joy of railroading and getting to experiance what the modeler was trying to give you just because you off'd it because of some little tidbit out of place or absent. I look for a new sim to give the "feel" of an SD40 with 40 loads behind it as well as accurate braking and power levels. If a door is one short on one side, I can live with it. Does it run and do the work required of it as it's original did, that is what I want to experiance.

[cbq311]

"I focused my attention on the fact that it had good brakeshoes, the lights all worked and it did the work required of it. If I ever mentioned that a locomotive looked different because of some asthetic feature, I would have been run off the railroad. This is why railroads don't hire railfans. They want you to focus on your duties at hand, not counting doors or verifying where the bell is located on other locomotives."

And how does this tie into this discussion?

I understand the feel also, but I am not worried about an inch here or inch there. But I want it right. The physics can be fixed, hopefully, we have done it with MSTS as far as we can. But is you are going to skin something, use the right model, if not, as the modeller to change it. ####, Chip, and a couple of the others have worked with people to get it right.

[Turbo Bill]

"I focused my attention on the fact that it had good brakeshoes, the lights all worked and it did the work required of it. If I ever mentioned that a locomotive looked different because of some asthetic feature, I would have been run off the railroad. This is why railroads don't hire railfans. They want you to focus on your duties at hand, not counting doors or verifying where the bell is located on other locomotives."

And how does this tie into this discussion?

From a RW'er's point of view with real deal, the function of the locomotive far exceeds the aesthetic details. The point I'm making is detail to physics and the ability of the model to mimick the real engines physics is more important to me then whether minute aesthetic details are modelled.

[muskokaandtahoe]

> Sure you care, otherwise you wouldn't be using such a snotty, arrogant, condescending tone in this response to someone who
> doesn't share the elitist attitudes and anal retentive obsession with scale realism many rivet counters have.

Bwahahahahahaha!!

Look who is mouthing off, tossing insults left and right. I must have pushed the right button. :) Right in the center.

> Anyone indulging in the hobby of model railroading is playing with toy trains, regardless of whether they are running Kato or Tyco.

No, I didn't say that nor do I hold that opinion.

[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

[mrmgp]

>I must have pushed the right button. :) Right in the center.

If that helps you maintain your air of rivet counting superiority over us "lesser" model railroaders, by all means, indulge yourself.

[mrmgp]

>And here are the same old comments from one who doesn't know
>better.

Oh, believe me, I know better. I know the difference between the old Tyco and Lionel offerings, and realistic representations offered by Athearn and Kato. But regardless of whether we're running model railroads or radio control airplanes or automobiles or using scale model soldiers to re-enact a battle, we're adults playing with toys. I can live with that.

[muskokaandtahoe]

> If that helps you maintain your air of rivet counting superiority > over us "lesser" model railroaders, by all means, indulge yourself.

Listen bub, I have no desire or intent to maintain an air of superiority over something so trivial. You OTOH, are shoving all sorts of words right into my mouth just so you can rant, insult, get your jollies about some issue that bugs the hell out of you. Leave me out of your arguments with whomever has pissed you off in the past.

At no time have I said anything insulting about anybody who plays with trains. In fact, I said:

QUOTE

It's a fine hobby. It's just not a hobby I'm all that interested in.

ENDQUOTE


You OTOH have gone out of your way to attack me. Frankly, your need to feel insulted and to attack someone is YOUR PROBLEM, not mine.

For myself, I see nothing wrong with adults playing. Trains, airplanes, dolls, whatever. I play with stuff, just not trains. You seem EXTREMELY sensitive about this tho. That is YOUR PROBLEM, not mine.

So... after you stop twitching, grow up. And if you cannot, once again, that is YOUR PROBLEM, not mine.

[mrmgp]

"Had the industry listened to your opinions we'd still be seeing 40-50 year old tooling cranking out every more numbers of fantasy cars and locomotives."


This comment of yours from an earlier posting in this thread wasn't meant to be insulting? Damn. I'd better go back and brush up on English language skills.

[muskokaandtahoe]

No, that's not an insult. That's a fact. And that is my last word on the subject.

[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

[Erick_Cantu]

You're just getting your undies in a bunch because he's basically right. I'm so sorry that the truth has a tendency to scald a bit. My heart bleeds for you.

Oh wait...silly me, I don't have one!

[OTTODAD]

The truth is that millions purchase software based on what their marketing hype says, showing pretty pictures in the gaming computing media and on the box covers, or how much or how little it costs.

Most not being aware of specific forums for it are in the dark about it's quality, if these forums are reporting unbiased opinions that is ! It also seems that it is usually a minority of "Purists" and "Prototypers" who have the most to say on the subject of a particular hobby ! If developers were to listen to them then we probably would not be able to afford buying it ! ;-)

I lost count of how many time I purchased software from a web site or retailer in respond to marketing hype without checking it out first and then finding that it was not good enough binned it !

For some time now I have been doing a GOOGLE on everything I intend to buy or in the case of Drugs are about to consume ! Did that with VIOXX years ago when a medic prescribed it for my painful shoulder, already reporting fatalities caused by heart attacks then !

There is a MS-FSX demo out now, I had nothing but problems with installing and running. Doing a GOOGLE for FSX +problems find that I am not the only one ! :-(

O t t o

[mrmgp]

>You're just getting your undies in a bunch because he's
>basically right. I'm so sorry that the truth has a tendency to
>scald a bit.

Huh?

[cbq311]

yep, while those million may be good for kuju, what will it be for the 3dtrains, Deko, DW, MLT, and SLI's of the world? If all it is is a toy train simulator, there will not be the aftermarket addons that make this fun.

[OTTODAD]

Hi Bob !

If KUJU do not satisfy real loco drivers like you, Ragtimer and others then the same will happen as has with MSFS, real commercial pilots like those in the UK-FS User Group getting what they wanted from 3rd party add-on providers, freeware or payware, the online Air-Traffic controllers system being but one example. I hope we shall get similar with a KRS-PRO version, online multi-player traffic controllers running and supervising online sessions.

Might be a good thing for the 3rd party Payware developers if KUJU don't provide all that is asked for, leaving the door open for those who feel that there is enough demand to justify investing their time and money into creating alternatives !

But if Freeware creators can do likewise, is there going to be enough incentive for Payware creators ?

MS not providing bullet proof security with it's software spawned a huge market for firewalls, virus, trojans and other checkers ! ;-)

O t t o

[cbq311]

That is true, but look at trainz. While there is some payware, you do not have the mature (?) market that is with MSTS. It is the inability in trainz for you to mesh the very varied payware. Without the capabilities that MSTS has for varied activities (for all its faults) you will not see the addons.

A lot depends whether is a better version of MSTS style of simulator or trainz style. And that is something we cannot build on until we know more. We have to hold off on the speculation and guesses.

[SurvivorSean]

The reason why you don't have it is the software locks you into that mode. Things like I've mentioned in the Kuju thread about loading & unloading, or the fact that the size of the "layout" (a model railroad term) is limited in space.

I just recently quietly left my model railroad club. The funny thing is the group was formed from the self destruction of another club. That club thought that we were too prototypical. I don't think we'd be called rivet counters, but we wanted to operate within an era, and have operational guidelines for sessions, car movements, dispatching, etc. Many felt that we were trying to boss people around, take over the club, etc. I was kicked out with 2 other members. We then formed a new club, and 4 other members not part of the kicking us out meeting joined. The old club is now gone. I left the new club because even amongs the operationaly minded there was differences that I felt was limiting me. So I left, no fights, and I'm sure I'll come out sometime to pay a visit. In the meantime I now enjoy FYM and look forward to whatever else comes our way virtually.

Going back on topic, open source is a serious concept that will make or break this or any other simulation as far as serious competition to MSTS. I don't mean so open as to know the code, but it must be configurable enough to satisfy the diversity of everyone. Most people can deal with limited features, provided that the features presented are configurable enough to represent the level they wish in the simulation.

MSTS did have open concepts in environments, physics, etc. Despite it's buggy editors some have perservered and have and continue to make exceptional routes. What has kept MSTS alive quite frankly is lack of any simulator at the level who is as open as MSTS, and the fact that MSTS ironically enough never had a 2nd version. Had a 2nd version come out that wasn't more open concept it would of split it's users unless it was upgradeable, etc.

Having user support, patches, upgrades, and limited (perhaps slightly better open concept) than MSTS will not be enough to get buys in my opinion. This is because for many MSTS has become a way of life simply because of how much they've invested in time and energy. Any program that wishes to compete must be superior in technology, and even more open to adaptability. It's like having a used car that gets you from a to b. Perhaps you have the money, but there something about your baby that you just can't give up. I'm willing to give up my baby, only if I fall in love with something else, not just like it. If it has a pretty face, it's not enough because I have needs, etc.

Thanks

Sean

P.S. Just to set the record straight the above was a clichee and I'm happily attached and wouldn't give up my real girlfriend for anything.