My 2 Cents

[lrjanzen]

I am really excited about the new version of MSTS! I only hop that it can live p to all the expectations. I think to make it a success there are a few factors that should be considered. Aside from the obvious ones of being performant and have a minimum number of bugs, there are a few issues that are IMHO required for a successful rail simulation. There is not a monolithic rail sim fan base. There are many different types with varied interests. Trying to satisfy them all will be a daunting task. Some folks like to just run trains, others like operations and more than a few like to design and build content and see others use it. Most want prototypical performance from the simulations (brakes acceleration act). Here are a few brain dropping on how to make MSTS X successful.

1. Make it easy to develop content! I think this is vital to drawing a large group of participants. Everyone has their pet flag, route, time period or type of operation. There are many skill levels also. It should be easy to reskin to allow others to reapaint to their favorite color scheme. Consider a large number “blank” ready to paint templates to allow easy painting. Make the coding of the objects/operations as easy as possible. Since you are in the Microsoft world consider using the .NET framework as a base. That way the development can be done in VS Express in either C# ,J# or VB. Make the graphic format easy to use and allow as many tools as possible to create image files.

2. Make creation of Routes as easy as possible. This goes with No.1 Everyone wants to create their own world as easy as possible. This includes the ability to translate topo maps to terrain in a straight forward way. Easy track laying with prototypical switch angles and operations. Signaling should be very customizable and programmable. This has been a major issues in other sims in the past. (as an aside it would be very cool to be able to add a switch and have a “signal plug” created also. Then you just plug in a created object that had the right interface. I could have flags in some places and lights in others. I can dream…). Make sure there is an easy way to test the route during building. Make good use of splines and “painting” I want to lay in a forest without having to plant every tree! The good route artists will make good use of splines for the distance and individual objects up close.

3. Make it easy to develop operations. It should be straight forward to take an already created route and set up an operation on it. Both AI trains and job orders for the player. Give the ability to define industries that function (see LARS in Trainz). Allow for randomization of scenarios. For instance be able to designate a piece of track to have anywhere from 1..n hoppers of coal ready for pickup then have the program vary it. Have the program print the waybill/workorders for a session. It should be easy to place cars and motive power.

4. Have an open and active Forum. This is the life of the community. Where we go for help with ideas and whines. Keep it open and free wheeling s possible within the realm of civility. Auran used to be great, but the new forum with its frequent deletes and locks drove many away and I feel killed the community. I had many questions answered there about issues I had. You know you have a successful forum when folks check it several times a day just to see what is happening.

These are just a few of the items I have thought about after playing many of the rail sims around. The successful ones are the ones that have a large audience and that is based on. Don’t be afraid of 3rd party input. Keep it open. If someone thinks they can create a better consist builder, let them try! It may or may not be better, to each his own, but it will make someone happier and keep them simming in your app! Plus eagerly await the next version.

Thanks for Listening
Lonnie

[kin__3]

I agree. The creators out there will come up with amazing creations if given the option. Look at what has been created for the first MSTS and also Trainz. This is what will make or break a sim.

[OTTODAD]

To me the most important aspects of any simulator, planes, trains or racing cars, etc, are that they look and perform just like the real ones.

In the case of train simulators tracks, switches and overhead wire systems must look and work like real ones, no splining or overlaying of rails and rolling stock must have round flanged wheels and also perform like the real ones, controls of motive power units looking and working as they should.

It took a few years before advances in graphics took the kinks out of aircraft wheels and jet engine casings and made the display of realistic instrument panels possible ! ;-)

Now that we have graphics excellence and graphics cards which can handle it, as shown by MSFS-X, there is no excuse for not using it to make train simulators as real as possible, providing that their creators have extensive knowledge of how everything in a train simulator should work, from engine physics and their performance to signaling !

Creating scenery should be able to use topographical or satellite maps, like those in GOOGLE EARTH, ideally 3D, which can be imported directly into routes, doing away with right-angled terrain textures and forests forinstance, the latter allowing a greater mix of vegetation in them, defining terrain and forest perimeters freehand !

The rest, including eye-candy and working accessories, will only be limited by the imagination and ability of their creators !

We shall see ! ;-)

O t t o

[muskokaandtahoe]

> 2. Make creation of Routes as easy as possible.

I always worry whenever I see somebody post this. It makes me think of a bunch of folks standing around in an art museum, looking at some paintings by Monet or van Gogh, and they turn to MS and say give us an art program that'll making painting <<like that>> easy.

You can have the tools provided but that doesn't mean what comes out of those tools is worth more than a bucket of warm spit.

So MS, if you are reading, forget about the word "easy", sit down w/ a route builder worth the name and find out what needs to be done by that person and then build him the tools to do that. IMO it'll probably be a whole lot like a simple cad program. If some of that turns out to be easy to use, great. But don't subsitute "easy" or "sloppy, but close enough for government work" for "done right".

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

p.s. Lonnie, this isn't about you, just that you wrote something that triggered these thoughts of mine.

[lrjanzen]

Good point Dave! "Easy" was a bad word. I beleave content creators are artists. Maybe easy to apply would have been better. it should not be difficult to take a content creators work and APPLY it to the application. It should be easy to APPLY a skin to a locomotive. The real work/art is in the skin creation. Sorry if I implied the creation of the content was easy.

Lonnie

[OTTODAD]

To most of us creating a Freeware route in a Route Editor means using existing terrain, tracks, objects, vegetation and other scenery to be placed into it and not having to create them as well, which requires the ability to design them and use a Bitmaps or whatever Graphics editor to create them and their animations with, which is what Payware add-on creators have to do, but are still able to use much MSTS proprietary stuff !

I have few problems with using the MSTS Route Editor, but have with the limitations the MSTS code imposes when manipulating terrain, creating realistic looking scenery such as mountains, fields and forests which can be shaped as required, the latter not just rectangular.

It's the knowing how to do it which matters when using the Route Editor. Routes like the German WUPPER-EXPRESS 11 demonstrate what can be achieved with the MSTS Route Editor, it's GRAPHICS-15 creators using many tricks to successfully make the most of it ! ;-)

The same goes for Bill Burnett's SEAVIEW-4 ! ;-)

O t t o

[sstyrnol]

Well in Trainz, route creation is "easy"! And now look at the huge amount of routes with crappy content, horrible track laying and absolutely no sense for reality.

Creating good quality routes in Trainz is - even though easier - still a lengthy and complex task, starting with research, object creation and ending with proper terrain texturing, object placement and signalling.

Now, if any route editor in the future shall be "easier" than the current one, please make it intuitively usable and most of all stable. I do not care if I need to learn about railroad technology concerning track laying or geology or something, just don't give us anything that crashes on us all the time!

[edwardk]

After getting back into FS9, I have to wonder if MSTS-X will actually follow the footsteps of the Flightsim and the actual world to build upon. At the moment a route is based upon a number of tiles compiled together to give you an area that you wish to work with. In this set area, you place your objects and whatever you want to create your route and you are finished when you are comfortable with what you have done. Following the flighsim's method, how can a route ever be finished? Think about it, you want to run tracks from San Diego to Los Angeles. The track part may be easy so to speak, but what of the needed objects to include?

When dealing with FS9 or FS10, this concept is easy since the only areas being visible the most will be the airport and the city areas. Most of everything else is not viewed because you are flying. In MSTS-X this would be different. Everything will always be in view. I can't wait until they start releasing information on it.

Edward K.