Months Under Development And No Shots?

[TrainMan_112]

From what I understand this game was in development for six months before they announced it. So, it's probably about three-quarters of a year deep, and we've seen nothing? Anyone think that's odd?

[BN_9402]

Nope.

BNSF Conductor

[huddy]

Not really. You can't do as much work if you are having to please the constituency.

[OTTODAD]

Hi Jordan !

I think that they are holding back until the next E3, releasing a demo afterwards, á la MSFS-X ? ;-)

No point showing the competition what you are up to, KUJU doing the same !

O t t o

[muskokaandtahoe]

No. There is so much design work that needs to be worked out before you start coding (6 months is easy) -- not just what you want to do but also what can you afford to do in the time allowed. Stuff like "Is multiplayer in or out?".

And marketing has its say -- mostly useless nonesense like "why do you need to do that difficult stuff", "steam locomotives went out with the dinosaurs, don't do them", "our research shows 3 loops around a 3d christmas tree will be essential to commercial success", and last but not least, "any project timeline longer that 9 months will cost us at least 90% of the market to Kuju". See companies have marketing staff solely for the purpose of driving programmers and project managers crazy. That and also spinning fanstastic white lies for customers and upper management... they have no other function in life.

Anyway, after you waste several months figuring out how to have meetings w/o Marketing attending (being unusually boring by dwelling on issues in the most arcane jargon possible is a good technique as they have to be alleregic to detail just to get hired), you then can begin to learn all the little details that will go into the code to make the game features work realistically.

Then you can get into some serious code and you need to have something half way done -- at least an editor -- before you can do a screenshot.

I figure by this date MS has only recently ditched marketing so maybe well see some screenshots by early summer.

[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

[OTTODAD]

Maybe well see some screenshots by early summer.

Like here 11 - 13th of July: http://www.e3insider.com/portal ?

O t t o

[oakpalms]

You may say that it has been even longer than nine months if MSTS-2 took over any of the TMTS items that were being built. While everyone would like to see some pictures, I am really more interested in what support will be provided once MSTS-2 comes out or whatever Microsoft will call it.

I will gladly pass on speed and quality proformance on the computer in order to get good support to provide for upgrades, resolve problems and such.

Microsoft provided almost no attention to MSTS. We got the one patch, but after that it was "do it your self." KRS has stated they will have ongoing support. In my mind, that is something I will be more concerned about more than whether MSTS-X comes out with the latest and greatest graphics.

In addition, KRS is saying they will make their product open ended so that add-ons and freeware items can be developed. Whether Microsoft will be willing to do that is yet to be seen. However, I doubt it.

After a couple of years of MSTS with all the crashes, I determined then I would never buy another Microsoft produced game. It will take a miracle to make me change my mind.

Bob Edwards

[muskokaandtahoe]

> After a couple of years of MSTS with all the crashes, I determined then I would never buy another Microsoft produced game.

But it wasn't a Microsoft produced game, it was a Kuju produced game. They are the authors. All MS did was publish it.

If Ann Coulter or Al Franken write one of their usual garbage uber-political nonesense books that really pisses you off, do you refuse to buy another book from their publisher? Or do you avoid the author? It's the same thing w/ most software games.

[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

[wakeboarder82]

>You may say that it has been even longer than nine months if
>MSTS-2 took over any of the TMTS items that were being built.

OK Bob, that's really getting old. The last time you tried to spread that completely fabricated rumor, employees from both PIE and Microsoft told you you were wrong. Why do you continue to believe that?

>In addition, KRS is saying they will make their product open
>ended so that add-ons and freeware items can be developed.
>Whether Microsoft will be willing to do that is yet to be
>seen. However, I doubt it.

Actually it has been discussed several times. I doubt tdragger would have been giving advice and answering questions about what 3d modelling program will be compatible if the answer was none. Why would you even suggest that MSTS-X would not be expandable? We all know it will be. In fact we already know from tdragger that we should be studying the FSX SDK for a head start on how to produce those add ons. It won't be exactly the same but there will be many similarities.

>After a couple of years of MSTS with all the crashes, I
>determined then I would never buy another Microsoft produced
>game.

Like it was said above, Microsoft has never produced a train sim before. Kuju has. It was called Microsoft Train Simulator. You seem to be frustrated with it. Perhaps you should not purchase another product by Kuju and switch to Microsoft.

[davereage]

That has to be about the funniest description of marketing that I've ever heard! Perfect!

[muskokaandtahoe]

Years of exposure. Took me a while to figure out the best technique to incent them to stay away from my project meetings. Details. Details and Jargon. Works almost every time. When it doesn't, you up the ante and ask them about their process for doing this and a process for doing that. Any real process gives even the toughest marketing pest hives and so such questions drives them away. But sometimes you have a really tough one and so you have to go nuclear and have ongoing meetings about talking about *your* process, which can put any marketeer into anaphylactic shock so you do have to be careful about running those.

'course doing all that puts you at risk for members of the accounting department inviting themselves in, but despite their stodgy reputation many of them can be fairly funny so when that happens it's often a real gain.

[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

[tcain1]

>>You may say that it has been even longer than nine months
>if
>>MSTS-2 took over any of the TMTS items that were being built.
>
>
>OK Bob, that's really getting old. The last time you tried to
>spread that completely fabricated rumor, employees from both
>PIE and Microsoft told you you were wrong. Why do you
>continue to believe that?
>
>>In addition, KRS is saying they will make their product open
>>ended so that add-ons and freeware items can be developed.
>>Whether Microsoft will be willing to do that is yet to be
>>seen. However, I doubt it.
>
>Actually it has been discussed several times. I doubt
>tdragger would have been giving advice and answering questions
>about what 3d modelling program will be compatible if the
>answer was none. Why would you even suggest that MSTS-X would
>not be expandable? We all know it will be. In fact we
>already know from tdragger that we should be studying the FSX
>SDK for a head start on how to produce those add ons. It
>won't be exactly the same but there will be many
>similarities.
>
>>After a couple of years of MSTS with all the crashes, I
>>determined then I would never buy another Microsoft produced
>>game.
>
>Like it was said above, Microsoft has never produced a train
>sim before. Kuju has. It was called Microsoft Train
>Simulator. You seem to be frustrated with it. Perhaps you
>should not purchase another product by Kuju and switch to
>Microsoft.

Not only will it be expandable in the sense of adding routes, trains, objects, but also adding modules in the form of .dll's. So you can actually write program code that will interact with the sim.

[oakpalms]

Microsoft was the contracting party, KUJU was just a subcontractor. It was not up to KUJU to be responsible for ongoing support--It would seem that was not even in the contract with them, otherwise, Microsoft would have had a direct link with them rather than with Microsoft for game support.

My home was built by a builder who had many subcontractors. When something goes wrong, he never expects me to contact a subcontractor to fix something. If something was wrong with MSTS-1 then the responsibility was with Microsoft to get it fixed. I am sorry, but I won't by that can of worms that it was KUJU's fault. We all know there were many things that proved to be wrong as time went on and they were detected. I wonder just how many reports have been made to Microsoft (not Kuju) when MSTS crashes for some odd reason?

As far as who is providing Microsoft with products for MSTS-2, I am not all that concerned who it is or is not. I won't buy the product until well after it hits the market and the kinks are removed. By that time it will be known just what kind of support Microsoft will really provide. Just like I won't buy Vista anytime soon; at least not until SP-1 or even SP-2 comes out.

As far as Microsoft having a lot of expertise with building a Train Simulator, That I will want to wait and see. MSTS-1 at least has files that can be eaily read and manipulated by everyone. Will MSTS-2 have that same level of personal access for files similar to .con, .eng, .wav. .sms, .cvf, etc. where some real pros have been able to improve over the work of the developers at KUJU? If not, we will be stuck with an "as is" product.

Bob Edwards

[OTTODAD]

Hi Bob !

One other aspect of releasing a new Train Simulator one does not read much about will be the ability of it's Route Editor to let us modify existing routes and create new ones easily.

Will their routes be as customizable as the MSTS ones, letting us change track and scenery textures at will, replacing and adding objects if desired ?

Can rolling stock's shape files be modified if their creators make a mess of them as is happening frequently, wheels not running properly on top of the rails and pantos not touching the overhead wires, which should be an automated function in any new Train Simulator ! ;-)

O t t o

[wakeboarder82]

>Microsoft was the contracting party, KUJU was just a
>subcontractor. It was not up to KUJU to be responsible for
>ongoing support--It would seem that was not even in the
>contract with them, otherwise, Microsoft would have had a
>direct link with them rather than with Microsoft for game
>support.
>
>My home was built by a builder who had many subcontractors.
>When something goes wrong, he never expects me to contact a
>subcontractor to fix something. If something was wrong with
>MSTS-1 then the responsibility was with Microsoft to get it
>fixed. I am sorry, but I won't by that can of worms that it
>was KUJU's fault. We all know there were many things that
>proved to be wrong as time went on and they were detected. I
>wonder just how many reports have been made to Microsoft (not
>Kuju) when MSTS crashes for some odd reason?

That's not a bad analogy but that is only the case because you have a warranty from your builder. After a period of time that warranty expires. In the case of MSTS, the warranty expired 90 days after you bought it. Even within 90 days if the product was performing substantially you had no rights. Honestly I think the software outperformed everyones expectations. I certainly did not buy it thinking it would have a lot of the capabilities that it had. I also never had a crash before I had modified the software. Basically they gave us a product that worked substantially. Only after end user modifications did I see crashes. I don't see how Microsoft should be responsible for me tinkering with the software.

One other point I would like to make is this. Did your builder ever call you up and say, "Hey Bob, I just thought I would stop buy and install better windows than the ones I gave you." Sure, maybe if the window was cracked from something he did. Certainly not if it was something you tinkered with and broke. But what if the window was not cracked. Say the windows did everything they were supposed to. What if you just thought you were entitled to higher performing windows? I doubt he would stop by and give you better windows. After all you paid for average windows. It's the same with a train simulator. They gave us a product that cost me $19 in 2002. For 19 bucks I have certain expectations. I expect a piece of software that will do what it says it will do. One of those expectations was NOT, that I would have somebody show up and install a full motion simulator in my basement. I realize that is not covered by my 19 bucks. Honestly I also never expected anything but that default piece of software. After all, it only cost me 19 bucks.

>As far as who is providing Microsoft with products for MSTS-2,
>I am not all that concerned who it is or is not. I won't buy
>the product until well after it hits the market and the kinks
>are removed. By that time it will be known just what kind of
>support Microsoft will really provide. Just like I won't buy
>Vista anytime soon; at least not until SP-1 or even SP-2 comes
>out.

I can't blame you for that and I agree in general. I am not buying Vista until the kinks are worked out either. That's not a bad course of action.

>As far as Microsoft having a lot of expertise with building a
>Train Simulator, That I will want to wait and see.

Actually I don't think that they do have expertise with "train" sims. I do think that they are the most experienced "flight" sim people hands down. I think that there are similarities and parallels between those two things that will make the transition to trains a smooth one.

>MSTS-1 at
>least has files that can be eaily read and manipulated by
>everyone. Will MSTS-2 have that same level of personal access
>for files similar to .con, .eng, .wav. .sms, .cvf, etc. where
>some real pros have been able to improve over the work of the
>developers at KUJU? If not, we will be stuck with an "as is"
>product.

Well I don't know for sure, but I do know this. MSTS-X is being built from FSX. FSX is well documented in the SDK that is in the deluxe version. We know all about the file formats. We know how to add planes, scenery, airports, AI, Partical FX, autogen items, textures, DEM terrain, sounds, animals (probably people for that matter), create missions, create new guages that can do anything you can dream up, and most importantly, we can write software that can interact with the sim. Data is streamed out of the sim and can be streamed into the sim. It's all documented and there for everyone to see. Flight Simulator has been this way through every release I can remember.

I do think that there will be a difference in the expandability for KRS and MSTS-X though. I have a feeling that KRS will have easy to use editors. I think that they will market them as such and will be such. However, with that ease of use will come a penalty in what can be added. I think MSTS-X will have a steeper learning curve for add ons but the possibilities will be far more vast. That's just my speculation for the day.

I actually plan on buying both KRS and MSTS-X whenever they come out. I'm sure at some point I will tend to use one more than the other and one will get shelved, but both will get my money.

[dgauci]

>>My home was built by a builder who had many subcontractors.
>>When something goes wrong, he never expects me to contact a
>>subcontractor to fix something.

As already stated by others about the home builders analogy. Your builder will give you a final walkthrough the home and a chance to point out any defects that need to be fixed then and there by the builder. After a few months the warranty expires and any further modifications are your own responsibility, since the home was sold "as is".

Software is the same, if it meets the original specifications at the time of purchase any further modifications or changes to the original program by the purchaser which cause new issues to surface are the responsibility of the buyer.

>I do think that there will be a difference in the
>expandability for KRS and MSTS-X though. I have a feeling
>that KRS will have easy to use editors. I think that they
>will market them as such and will be such. However, with that
>ease of use will come a penalty in what can be added. I think
>MSTS-X will have a steeper learning curve for add ons but the
>possibilities will be far more vast.

True statement, you can have complete ease of use for novices to edit, or powerful development tools and a superb environment for great expansion possibilities. You can't have both, so choose one: dumbed down and limited, or powerfully wide open with higher learning curve.

[oakpalms]

John,
Thanks for the info, you are very familiar with FSX and that is great. Me, I am not into flight sims any longer. Just not enough time to go around. I have a son-in-law who is an Air Force F-16 pilot and he is very big into all the aviation sims that have come out. With all of the flight sims, you would really be up in the air if Microsoft had simply left off with the first one they put out--would you not? At least Microsoft has made several upgrades with flight sim--why couldn't they have done the same with MSTS?

I was shooting back at someone who had made a comment that KUJU should have provided support for MSTS. Your right in that a supplier does not have to provide support for things beyond a warranty date. However, as problems arise for whatever reason, it is good logical and business sense to fix things that are broken in order to make continued sales of a product if in doing so more products will be sold. Do you think that if Microsoft would have fixed things early on that they would have had a greater sale of MSTS?

I am sure there are many MSTS users who never really gave MSTS a lot of "word of mouth" recommendation if what I have read over the years has any weight. I am not convinced that MSTS would not crash with just the "as is" functions when first installed.

But, there were things that were bad, out of the box, that have never been fixed, but which were supposed to have functioned. For example, the waiting points. We all know that waiting points have never worked as stated--at least, not until BIN fixed the problem! I am sure some people can add a whole list of things that fits the list along with waiting points. I firmly believe that if something is said to work in a certain way by whoever makes a product, then they should stand behind their product in support to make sure it does. In my opinion Microsoft didn't.

Bob Edwards

[oakpalms]

I don't know your builder, but mine will not hesitate to fix a problem that would destroy his reputation. For example, in southwest Florida we only use a furnace about three weeks out of the year. If the instructions on the furnace says it is supposed to do something and it doesn't during that first year, the builder will have it fixed.

However, it is not just a few months. It is 12 months, but once the problem has been identified he will take care of it. How long did it take to identify problems with MSTS? You make it sound as if no one ever found a problem until after the warranty--but, they have kept selling the product. Why haven't they responded to the warranties of the ongoing sales? I am sure Microsoft has known for years that there are problems with the software, but they keep selling it don't they?

Do you think it is logical or even ethical to keep selling a product when you know there are problems? You talk about problems caused by the user--we just want resolution of the problems caused by the developer. Those things should have been fixed a long time ag--even before the product hit the market. I am sure that KUJU and Microsoft both share responsibility in that regard. But, it was Microsoft's position to see that something got done either by the supplier or themselves--they did neither.

Bob Edwards

[dgauci]

>Do you think it is logical or even ethical to keep selling a
>product when you know there are problems?

In the real world it is called an economic success. If the original 6 routes that came in the package work reasonably well, then they succeeded because that is all they sold you. If people are still willing to purchase it, why not sell it?

Home builders in California don't care about reputations. They can build a cardboard shack, charge $500,000 for it, and people will camp out in lines for weeks in advance of the sales day for the privilege of paying for it.

[OTTODAD]

It always amazes me how easy it is to hype people into parting with their money.

We have been doing that since the first version of WINDOWS ! ;-)

O t t o

[jkcooney]

Otto... you have nailed it.... hands down. Debate over.
Now, let's wait and see when we have a real product to hammer... for considerably more than $19.00 I'll wager.
j. cooney

[TVRRMAN]

Now here's a real question:

What if Microsoft makes sure this new sim works only on Windows Vista? I know for fact I am not purchasing Vista anytime soon.

I've already long since made up my mind after a series of incidents and different issues that I won't even continue to build add-ons after MSTS goes, if it does.

Remember guys, we have months if at all before we'll see anything, if at all. We could just be waiting for another hoax, Like TMTS, or TA Sim, or the original MSTS2. we've seen this before. Just my $10 worth of advice...

Besides, there's nothing really indicating how good it is until we see pictures, or actually operate it, right?

[landnrailroader]

I'm willing to go to VISTA but not until after at least one SP comes out for it. I've heard rumours of a new version of -XP to comeout in 2008 as well. For now, I am continuing to piddle along in MSTS and have plans for many more simulations of the Milwaukee Road. If MSTS-X comes out fine, I'll get it and switch, but if not, MSTS does really well with XP-Pro and a good processing system.

In dense areas of the Hook & Eye that I am working on, I get frame rates of 20, even at 60mph which is good. Very little flicker or jitter. IN less desn areas, it goes as high as 50.

System is a Athlon-3000+/64 with a gig of memory and two SATA drives. Video is a Nvidia with 512M.

Jerry Sullivan

[gltech]

Hook & Eye??? In N. GA??? Wowie-zowie!!! Tell us more!!!

And do you or anybody else know where you can find any pictures/aerial shots/etc. that show where the "hook" track used to be? I live nearby and have always been curious.

GLT

[BNSF RACETRACK]

Well, now it has been about a half a month, I think we sould see atleast a little something. More than that circle on the main site.

[Erick_Cantu]

Hardly. Just because you think they've had enough time to do something that can actually be worth taking a shot of doesn't mean they actually have. You know absolutely nothing.

[jb17kx]

>>What if Microsoft makes sure this new sim works only on Windows Vista? >>I know for fact I am not purchasing Vista anytime soon.

By the time TSX is out you probably will have Vista - on a new machine, or by upgrade. SP1 for Vista is due out by the end of the year, and it will hopefully go a long way to fixing many of Vista's small issues. And there's nothing to say that you can't dual boot if you love XP that much. I still use XP, but I've had my hands on a number of machines with Vista and it's not as bad as everyone would have you think. Different, but not bad.

Now that's not to say that TXS will be Vista exclusive - IE7 was supposed to be, but it was released to XP late last year. MS also looked at making Office 12 and a lot of other apps only available to Vista users. Din't come about - instead they just simeultaneously released them so that people though "Well, I'm getting a new version of Office, and it says it works best with Vista, and there's a package discount..."

Give them time. TSX is a comparitevely low-volume product - why would they alienate customers by cutting out 80% of those who'd want to use it?

And Jerry? Why would Microsoft do that either? Why a new version of XP - that goes against all of the work done since Longhorn was conceptualised in 2002.

[Poltergeist]

>Hardly. Just because you think they've had enough time to do
>something that can actually be worth taking a shot of doesn't
>mean they actually have. You know absolutely nothing.

Agreed, we didn't see anything of FSX until only a few months before its release.

[TVRRMAN]

JBTXX,

I really doubt that I'll be on Vista anytime this year, next year, or the year after.

The computer I am writing this from (My "office Computer") was built specially for me in 2005 and recently upgraded again.

I am running Windows XP professional, and have all I need or want on it right now. If It ain't broke, or likely to be broke anytime soon, I ain't gonna "fix it" by spending a fortune on some program that the bugs and quirks ain't even out of. That's just my 2 cents on that.

reason I made the statement about "what if MSTS X goes Vista only?" was because with alot of us still being loyal to XP professional or other versions of windows, and with Microsoft always wanting to push us to pick up their latest **Billware**, who knows.

One example is the famous game: Halo 2. It's coming out for PC, but all ads I've seen for it are Vista only. Not one ad for a copy compliant with XP

who knows what will really happen until it really is on the shelves though, if at all. As I've already voiced, we've all seen these new announcements of a new sim to replace MSTS before, and we've all seen them disappear like that too...

Just me, I ain't holding my breath, that's for sure.

[landnrailroader]

I'm not holding my breath either. IT has been some time now since there was any comment out of the developers, so it may already be dead and buried for all we know.

As for VISTA, well, maybe. My pooter is 2 years old, and I just had to replace both hard drives account of a brownout (and got a UPS to prevent that little problem as much as possible) and the wife just bought a new computer equipped sewing machine, about $1100 with a UPS for it. So it is my turn to buy a new toy. I expect that early next year, and if VISTA has had 1 service pack out or more, I may consider it. So far though, I have not heard anything good about it.

Jerry Sullivan

[cbq311]

http://www.3dtrains.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12567

[BNSF RACETRACK]

>Hardly. Just because you think they've had enough time to do
>something that can actually be worth taking a shot of doesn't
>mean they actually have. You know absolutely nothing.
Thanks.

[TrainMan_112]

>Hardly. Just because you think they've had enough time to do
>something that can actually be worth taking a shot of doesn't
>mean they actually have. You know absolutely nothing.

Ease off, pal.

[BNSF RACETRACK]

>>Hardly. Just because you think they've had enough time to
>do
>>something that can actually be worth taking a shot of
>doesn't
>>mean they actually have. You know absolutely nothing.
>
>Ease off, pal.

Now without slient sarcasm. Thanks trainman!

[jb17kx]

Well, I suppose it's a case of each to his own. I like XP, but I expect I'll end up with Vista at some point. I'm not going to go out the instant I get my next paycheque, but neither am I going to run away screaming that Bill Gates is the devil and Vista his illegitimate offspring. It's really not that bad, and their are minor updates to the UI, like a new file overwrite dialogue and a file rename system that doesn't select the extension, that blow XP out of the water for simplicity and streamlining of one's workflow. This are minor features that never make USA Today or whatever newspapers you read over there, but they greately enhance the user experience.
But that's just my opinion.

I'm not saying you need to upgrade to Vista *now*. You don't. I don't, and I'm not going to. Most people having problems with Vista are the ones who rushed out to buy it, generally on the most inferior machine they could, and then rather than search for a driver blogged about how horrible it is.

And to Halo 2 - I'm not exactly sure about how they plan to make it Vista exlusive, but I think it involves DirectX 10.

All I can say is wait and see. Wait and see what MS does with TXS, and wait and see what you and other people think about Vista. Ask somebody you know who has Vistato have a play with their machine, read some reviews and commentaries, such as from this site:
http://www.winsupersite.com/

Jeez, I must sound like a Mac fanboy...

[jbones]

Seen nothing and heard nothing for the most part. I think it's odd. I'm waiting for the announcement that the projects cancelled like that previous one by another developer. Personally I can't wait to uninstall that bugaddled original MSTS which is way more trouble than it's worth. Spending hours a day just trying to smooth things out is an excercise in frustration.

[bwbrgb]

If you're spending " hours a day " to get MSTS to run smoothly then you have a lot more problems than the program itself . Over the years most of the " bugs " have been overcome - thanks to many talented and devoted simmers and that " OLD PROGRAM " ain't too bad anymore . Just ask all the modelers , repainters and route makers who spend a lot of time on that " bugaddled original MSTS " There's nothin' better out there yet and might not be for some time .
Hope you get your problem fixed .

[Erick_Cantu]

Bite me. When people get a clue, I'll ease up. People have no concept of the groundwork involved, and it's silly to assume that the moment it's announced a game engine is in the works, there's a game to be seen.

[BNSF RACETRACK]

>Bite me. When people get a clue, I'll ease up. People have no
>concept of the groundwork involved, and it's silly to assume
>that the moment it's announced a game engine is in the works,
>there's a game to be seen.

I don't think you have the concepts. They are obviously able to make one screenshot, so why not make others.

[Erick_Cantu]

....And you're 100% sure that's a screenshot? Because it doesn't look like one to me!

[Pennsyduplex]

The shot on the homepage of the MSTSX site, is not a real shot. Its been posted already ( if I remember correctly) that it is a real world photo, not an in game shot...

[Company Notch]

>The shot on the homepage of the MSTSX site, is not a real
>shot. Its been posted already ( if I remember correctly) that
>it is a real world photo, not an in game shot...

'Tis true - as I've posted before, that image on the main Train Simulator site (http://www.microsoft.com/games/trainsimulator/) is in fact a photograph, NOT an in-game image. I should know - I took it! :-)

You can see the real, un-cropped image here:

http://www.pbase.com/rselby/image/63563321

You shouldn't read too much into what's shown in this image. We needed a railroad image for the web site, and ownership rights weren't an issue, since it's my image. That's why we used it.

Our preliminary work around visual quality is very promising, but I don't want anyone to assume we'll have true photo-realism, at least in this version.

Hope that helps clarify. Thanks.

-Rick

Rick Selby
Lead Game Designer
Microsoft Corp.

http://yardlimits.spaces.live.com

[driver89]

Thanks for posting that clarification Rick, hopefully this will clear up a few issues people are having. It should also serve notice to people that the team is indeed monitoring the forums for feedback and not ingoring everyone as the some would have us believe.

James


An easier way to share your pictures with other railfans;
www.tracksideproductions.com

[heavymetal91]

My worry is what the system requirements are going to be. I have heard a few things about msfs X that have made me reluctant to buy it such as it doesn't run well on anything less than a 3.0 ghz machine with 1024 meg of memory this computer is a 2.8 ghz machine with 512 megs of memory and a nvidia fx 5200 video card with 128 megs of memory, and with that said will this machine be too slow to run it?





JD :)

[ED_4]

>My worry is what the system requirements are going to be. I
>have heard a few things about msfs X that have made me
>reluctant to buy it such as it doesn't run well on anything
>less than a 3.0 ghz machine with 1024 meg of memory this
>computer is a 2.8 ghz machine with 512 megs of memory and a
>nvidia fx 5200 video card with 128 megs of memory, and with
>that said will this machine be too slow to run it?
>

With anything that comes new, you will more than likely need high end machines. These new games are always targeted for future stuff, so when you speak of, will the older hardware work with the newer stuff?

You can normally get a most likely answer that it will definitely require you to upgrade. It's not like you are not dealing with non graphical stuff. It's fine if all you are doing is text related stuff, but when it comes to 3D graphical stuff - new means you will more than definitely need to go faster. After all, that's what the new base is going to start running with. Using the faster CPUs, faster graphics card, faster memory, faster everything.

So the question you should really be asking is: Are you ready to upgrade your hardware just to run the newer software? :)

[heavymetal91]

>So the question you should really be asking is: Are you ready
>to upgrade your hardware just to run the newer software? :)


Good point Ed. the answer can only be yes. Computers are only going to get faster and faster how long do we have until we are wearing wireless sensors on our bodies to interact with the games that we will have at that time? how long do we have until they put out a small home vr unit? I have no idea but I will bet it won't be very long



JD :)

[landnrailroader]

I let the wife acquire a brand-new super-duper computer equipped sewing machine to use with her cloth doll hobby a few months back. This thing cost nearly $1K, more with sales tax. I have two friends who have their own computer companies locally, and just to be nice, I sort of swap back and forth with them when I need a new toy. I could build my own, but then I would have to drop something else to do it.
Bottomline: I don't plan to upgrade my system until Vista is solid, probably after the first service pack. I hear all sorts of horror stories at the moment. But then, I will spring for what it takes and that is likely going to be a dual core Athlon (right or wrong, my gut feel is that Athlons handle graphics a bit better than Pentiums) with 2G of memory, and probably 2, 250G serial drives, whatever the video card that is required, a DVD read/write also, with 4 USB-2 ports. I don't expect to pay more than $1100 or so to get it either.

J. H. Sullivan
aka landnrailroader

[SCL-A-Line]

I am running a Cetrino Core 2 duo 2.4Ghz 2GB DDR Ram and an ATI Mobility Radeon X1600, running vista home premium and i havent had that many issues with it