A question for Tdragger

[High Iron]

I have a question for tdragger. I understand that TS2 will be using a WoR (World of Rails) concept that despite conjecture would include all railways and their applicable routes, whatever a "route" may be defined as in such a system. My question is will one still be able to create route content that will merge with existing routes if a WoR concept is used? For a example, if I create a route or line that no longer exists but once connected midway to a currently existing line at one end or in many cases both will I be able to connect it to the existing core track database that comes with the program. Most of todays lines are much smaller than they used to be with many sections and spurs truncated from the mainline. Does MS have a plan or solution on how this may be carried out should a developer choose to re-introduce these lost sections? Secondly, will current or up and coming terrain DEM be able to reconstruct the default terrain? This again pertains to my previous question as terrain in many areas has been changed or modified for various developments that did not exist during some abandoned lines eras, requiring terrain data to be rolled back to pre-abandonment conditions. Will this be possible with the new TS2?

Cheers,
High Iron

[TrainMan_112]

I don't see why not if the rail has been layed out.

[tdragger]

As I said in the other thread we are working on several ideas to make sure different "routes" play nice together.

[Poltergeist]

What will the World of Rails include? I mean will it provide just the rails and we have to include the buildings and scenery ourselves? Will it provide rails and ground textures? What can we expect to see come out of the WoR concept?

[wakeboarder82]

Sean,

I have a feeling that it will be set up just like FSX. I think the buildings and trees will be autogenerated based on landclass data. Certain areas will be detailed. They will probably be seemlessly connected to the undetailed areas, just like certain FSX cities and airports are.

[TrainMan_112]

>What will the World of Rails include? I mean will it provide
>just the rails and we have to include the buildings and
>scenery ourselves? Will it provide rails and ground textures?
> What can we expect to see come out of the WoR concept?

I agree with Wakeboarder82, most things should be there, however areas would have to be re-done in someways to be of any quality.

[tdragger]

Yep, more or less.

[NoMoreTrains]

>Sean,
>
>I have a feeling that it will be set up just like FSX. I
>think the buildings and trees will be autogenerated based on
>landclass data. Certain areas will be detailed. They will
>probably be seemlessly connected to the undetailed areas, just
>like certain FSX cities and airports are.

Which, in my opinion, is fantastic. I realize that it would be impossible to have the entire worlds rail network available in absolute full detail (track, scenery, etc.) but I would be thrilled to have most of the track in place out of the box with autogen scenery for the community to expand upon. Let's face it ... no matter how much or how little Microsoft includes in the box as far as fully, correctly "scenicked routes" the efforts of the community will far surpass anything they put in. We only need to look as far as MSTS1 to see that.

As I've said regarding 'the other new sim' I would much prefer that the developers concentrate on giving us a great game engine (physics, API's, graphics, etc.) with exceptional tools than a meager game engine with plenty of pretty scenery and rolling stock.

[NickF]

On the one hand, what a drag after painfully learing how to use the current route editing tools we gotta start learning all over again.

On the other hand, with MSTS-X being based on FX X and available two years later, there should be a wealth of tools available.

[ns4eva]

So, would this mean like if Austin Yoder redid the Pocahontas Div. and I redid the Clinch Valley that when both "routes" were downloaded, say if I were coming outta Bluefield Yard headed west I just make the choice to take the switch out on to the CV or continue on the Pokey mainline seamlessly? How would this work between both "routes"? What if on author makes a change to the tracks at the junction thats incorrectly matches the other route? I'm guessing this is what tdragger meant by making things play nice together?

[font color="red"]My Railfan Photos
[font color="red"]http://ns4eva.rrpicturearchives.net

[font color="black"]--Drifton

<<There's a bit of Norfolk Southern in all of us>>

[tdragger]

>So, would this mean like if Austin Yoder redid the Pocahontas
>Div. and I redid the Clinch Valley that when both
>"routes" were downloaded, say if I were coming outta
>Bluefield Yard headed west I just make the choice to take the
>switch out on to the CV or continue on the Pokey mainline
>seamlessly? How would this work between both
>"routes"? What if on author makes a change to the
>tracks at the junction thats incorrectly matches the other
>route? I'm guessing this is what tdragger meant by making
>things play nice together?


Our goal is to do as much as we can so the scenario you describe works.

[BNSF4723]

That sounds really awesome. If the simulator won't include a working multiplayer, this will make "virtual multiplayer" like the one we use now a lot more fun.