Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do we need more ORTS forum subsections?

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Do we need more ORTS forum subsections?

    Now that OR has reached the much anticipated V1 milestone, I wonder whether it would be appropriate to expand the sections in the OR forum to cater for future user (and creator) acceptance of the sim as MSTS use wanes.

    Perhaps sections such as Physics, Cab Design (2D and 3D) and Activity/Timetable Design could be the first to be added.

    #2
    The first two topics you mention are pretty well-covered over at the ET forums, since that's been where most of the nuts-and-bolts discussion of OR has been going on. Not sure how much would migrate back over here or not. Sharing and discussing efforts in the new timetable system might be a good thing here to get more folks interested in trying it out.
    MSTS-Roundhouse (Technical Difficulties, Please Stand By)

    Open Rails and MSTS blog

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by EricF View Post
      The first two topics you mention are pretty well-covered over at the ET forums....
      Go to ET and read the latest post under the topic Announcements.

      Comment


        #4
        In order to provide better support for ORTS user also over here, pre-sorting threads by their topics by having them be posted in topic-specific sub-forums would be great.

        I think, it could best be organized into the sections

        Maybe it´s a bug
        Activity / Timetable design (as suggested)
        Cab design (as suggested)
        Content Creation (Currently Rolling stock only, subdivided into Modelling and ENG/WAG File Creation)
        Screenshots & Videos
        General (everything not covered by the above categories, such as wishes for new features etc.)

        Cheers, Markus
        sigpic

        Trains. Trains? Trains! =)
        I usually hang out at www.elvastower.com (markus_GE).
        Also take a look at my homepage: http://mgelbmann.jimdo.com/

        Comment


          #5
          I'll propose something more radical, and say no. Just keep Open Rails support and questions being placed in the MSTS forums...

          Since we don't have separate forums for TS2013, TS2014, TS2015 and TS2016, why would we do that for ORTS which is essentially a version upgrade?...
          If you like what you see here at Trainsim.com, be it the discussions and knowledge in the forums, items saved in our library or the ongoing development of our TSRE Fork, I hope you'll consider a paid membership to help support keeping the site operating.... Thanks!

          Comment


            #6
            Hi,
            Just keep Open Rails support and questions being placed in the MSTS forums...

            Sorry to disagree with a Moderator, so I post this with respect, and I hope it won't get me banned!!

            I think there are enough differences between MSTS and ORTS to justify separate sections in the Forum. There is enough confusion at present in the MSTS Forums with members posting problems/queries which don't indicate the sim they refer to, and eventually turn out to be for OR. As Open Rails matures, the differences will become greater, but that doesn't mean the use of MSTS will diminish ... or does it?

            I haven't used TS2xxx for a long time, but as far as I'm aware, there are no fundamental differences between the various versions; things will probably change when the new game engine is used, though.

            Cheers,
            Ged

            Comment


              #7
              Don't be sorry for disagreeing with an opinion. The threshold for banning is pretty high lately...

              From where I sit, use of MSTS has dwindled considerably for those who are active here. There are a few vocal holdouts, but I'd guess 50% of MSTS users who are active on the forums here switched at least a year ago, and another 35% have switched in the last year even before the official V1.0 came out.
              If you like what you see here at Trainsim.com, be it the discussions and knowledge in the forums, items saved in our library or the ongoing development of our TSRE Fork, I hope you'll consider a paid membership to help support keeping the site operating.... Thanks!

              Comment


                #8
                While true, Eol, I must also say that when I've posted questions and such in the MSTS forums regarding MSTS Content used in OR, I've been met with choruses of 'Why are you posting this in MSTS? Post in OR'. So...

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Komachi View Post
                  While true, Eol, I must also say that when I've posted questions and such in the MSTS forums regarding MSTS Content used in OR, I've been met with choruses of 'Why are you posting this in MSTS? Post in OR'. So...

                  Have to agree with that. It would be better to swap physical locations between Open Rails and MSTS in the main forum list, putting Open Rails 'above the fold' and MSTS 'below the fold' in what is newspaper-speak. Also move all the sound, modeling, etc. subforums to the Open rails parent folder. Nothing wrong with this website making a statement in how this hobby is evolving.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    One other item I would suggest is re-working the sub categories for the file library. Now that open rails can support activities that would clearly bomb MSTS, we really need to segment out the classifications of uploads for open rails activities and other features like 3D cab support or dds textures to make sure people don't download them for MSTS.

                    There are close to 30 library sub-categories for MSTS uploads, but only one for Open Rails. This imbalanced list needs to get updated to segregate where segregation between MSTS and OR is necessary for proper operation. The library keepers here can't keep kicking this can of MSTS universal content fit down the road.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Including OR in the MSTS forum would give MSTS users a better idea of how OR has improved and surpassed MSTS..just saying...

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by smiljacc18 View Post
                        Including OR in the MSTS forum would give MSTS users a better idea of how OR has improved and surpassed MSTS..just saying...
                        If theyre interested in how OR has evolved, couldnt they simply scroll down to the OR forum? There are still people who run only MSTS and when someone asks a question that is at first thought to be MSTS related and ends up being something that is most likely OR related creates confusion. Im for subforums as it couldnt hurt to have them around, but combining OR with MSTS forums Im against. I am, however for moving the OR forums above the Trainz forums and/or below the MSTS forums.

                        Also, if you think MSTS use is dwindling, I say compare the posts in all combined MSTS forums to how many get posted in just three OR forums. Even though OR forums are more condensed it still doesnt get the posts the MSTS forums has and if the MSTS forums were as cut down as the OR ones the difference would be quite clear.
                        Last edited by Snowman; 05-26-2015, 03:01 PM.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          So is it MSTS or is it a new product? Right now, ORTS is on the fence, kind of like a MSTS 2 equivalent but without fully developed editors and content development tools. Still, it might be worth handling ORTS as a separate product in the fairly near future. There are enough differences now that it's annoying when somebody with a problem doesn't specify MS or OR; that will only increase as time goes on.

                          For the time being, perhaps, add a sticky in the MSTS help and general sections requesting that people specify whether they're using OR or MSTS when asking for help, and also asks that people try to post to the right (MSTS or OR) section.

                          For the future, you could split OR in 2 at first: general help and technical (or developer) discussion. Later on, perhaps, subdivide further as the differences from MSTS become clearer and bigger, and comment trends develop. It'll always be a little fuzzy, because for a long time ORTS will depend on MSTS-based content (routes, trains, etc.) but with accumlating differences. A few ORTS-specific items are now available, though with MSTS-compliant duplicates; that trend will grow, and eventually we will see ORTS-only content that is no longer feasible to make compatible with MSTS. So you will soon need file library sections for ORTS-specific (not MSTS-compatible) items, too.

                          For bugs, there is a bug tracker at OR (actually at launchpad.net) that people should use. There's a difference between needing help and finding a bug - when it becomes the latter, or is a formal feature request, it's not really a subject for this forum any more and should be tracked/discussed in the proper place so the developers can address it. Again, maybe a sticky (expanding on Otto's?) at the top of the OR section should point people at the OR web site and the bug tracker.

                          Just opinions ...
                          Last edited by mikeebb; 05-26-2015, 03:07 PM.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Snowman View Post
                            There are still people who run only MSTS and when someone asks a question that is at first thought to be MSTS related and ends up being something that is most likely OR related creates confusion.
                            I completely agree too!

                            I happen to still be a MSTS user, as I have been waiting for ORTS V1.0 to come out, and now that it has, I am preparing to make the switch...

                            But, when I got MSTS, I found the software in one of those discount sections of an electronic store and picked it up. Many folks may choose to pick it up on Amazon or Ebay. That may be the way many members may enter the simming world, and won't know what ORTS is at all... When they have questions and issues they will do a "Google Search" and come here. (I found TrainSim.com AFTER I purchased MSTS!). And when members start posting questions, asking for help, and many will not note "MSTS" in their posts...

                            By having ORTS Thread and Posts in MSTS Categories, new MSTS members will get more answers pertaining to ORTS, and I also believe it will cause massive confusion too...

                            No one is saying that ORTS is not replacing MSTS, and that usage of MSTS is not diminishing...

                            But, ORTS is not simply a patch or upgrade to MSTS. They are TWO "different" things.
                            Yardmaster of the Great American Moose Paint Shops.
                            a Moose Interchange Rail Company division.
                            http://mjrmstsrepaints.proboards.com
                            TTFN!

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Armchair_Engo View Post
                              Now that OR has reached the much anticipated V1 milestone, I wonder whether it would be appropriate to expand the sections in the OR forum to cater for future user (and creator) acceptance of the sim as MSTS use wanes....
                              No.
                              It's enough that the bulk of the nuts 'n' bolts discussion takes place on another site.
                              If the development team packed up their HQ and moved to trainsim.com then certainly more "offices" would be helpful but at the moment a simple search usually gets what one is looking for.
                              IBM XT i386; 512Kb RAM; 5.25" FDD; 1.4Mb FDD; 5Mb HDD; VGA 256-colour graphics card; AdLib soundcard; DR DOS 6.0; Windows 3.0

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X