Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

  1. #1
    TucsonCoyote Guest

    Default Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    Tucson Coyote here

    after a Lot of Considerable thought I myself Probably will be ditching MSTS in Favor for Trainz..(Some of the reasons..)

    1. Ease Of Use... Trainz Looks a Lot like a Drag and Drop or Drag and pull System where Track Laying and Scenery design Will Be Easy (And From What I have Heard DEM Data would be a Snap in Surveyor...Thus Routes could be Easily and Quickly assembled with very Little Hassle..

    2... Variety.. Trainz has a Variety of Locos and Probably when thrid Party Groups Jump in then passenger and Freight Cars will start to abound...

    3.... Flexibility.. Besides Probably Activities you can Build eventually Trainz will incorporate Interactive use with fellow Train Sim People (With Trainz Online..)

    in Short for the 50 Bucks I spent On MSTS and the Time and Frustration of MSTS I say that Trainz will be "The Harry Potter" of Train Sims..(Totally Magical, Easy to use and versatile..)

    Probably after the New Year I will order it and Have it Shipped (then Wtach the Routes Go..(Wonder if will have a section for Trainz Routes Cars and the like..)

    Just some points of Interest from a Soon To be Defector from MSTS..:-)

    Tucson Coyote

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 1999

    Default RE: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    I have to wait and see if creating new routes in Trainz is easier than creating new routes in MSTS before defecting from MSTS to Trainz. As far as I know, MSTS works better on Windows XP than on Windows 95/98/ME. Jeffrey.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Victoria, Australia.

    Default RE: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    Trainz looks like it will be a good product but I really don't see what all the hype is about. While some aspects (such as the Surveyor module) are clearly better than MSTS, other aspects of Trainz don't appear to be that outstanding:

    1. This idea of a "virtual model railway" seems a little bit strange. The reason behind the small size of real layouts is the fact that no one can ever model a full length route in real life. However, in a computer world, the size of the "layout" is only limited by the amount of data we can store and process in our computers. Therefore, why are Auran only releasing model railway type routes with Trainz when full length routes are possible? While the routes in MSTS aren't necessarily 100% accurate, at least they do provide the opportunity to drive a train over a full size route. I'm not saying that there isn't room for the "virtual model railway" concept, I just won't be interested in Trainz unless someone does some proper full size routes like the ones in MSTS.

    2. I have seen nothing to indicate that Auran's models will be anything special. If you look at Auran's MSTS addon, most of the equivalent locos from other sources look much better (eg 3DTrains' F7). I have also downloaded the preview models on Auran's site and I have not been impressed by any of them. Most of the detail looks out of proportion and some of it is incorrect. If you also consider the lack of transparent windows, I think the Auran models look very average and only marginally better than the Kuju ones in MSTS. While I'm sure groups like TrainArtisan will come out with some exceptional Trainz models, I just don't see what the big deal is with the Auran ones.

    3. At the moment there doesn't seem to be anything on the Trainz web site about a 3D editor. This means you still need a product like 3D Studio Max to make locomotives, rolling stock and other 3D objects. Producing 3D objects for Trainz will still be a fairly difficult process and I don't see any sudden rush of Trainz models. I think it will be fairly similar to the way add on models for MSTS were released. Overall, while the route building in Trainz appears to be improved, 3D object production looks like it will be much the same for both sims.

    4. To me, Trainz doesn't seem to have any clear direction. MSTS concentrates on being a driving simulator and does it reasonably well. Trainz seems to be trying to do everything from layout construction and driving to online gaming, signalling, maintenence and even business. By trying to do so many things, will they really be able to do each individual module properly? I doubt that any of these modules will be as good as a product that concentrates on just one of these areas. For example, can anyone see the Dispatcher module being a better signalling simulation than the Train Dispatcher series?

    5. The initial release seems very limited (just building layouts and an "explore" style mode in Driver). You will have to wait for Yardmaster before you get activities, better signalling, the ability to save and a number of other options. The initial release of Trainz doesn't have as many options as MSTS, yet it costs more. Unless I am mistaken, you also have to buy Yardmaster in addition to Trainz. In my opinion, I think Auran should have waited until Yardmaster was complete so they could include it with the initial release.

    6. Many people seem to be saying that MSTS is filled with bugs and is absolutely unplayable. Honestly, I really don't know where your problems are coming from. My system is a PII400, 320mb RAM, 48gb hard drive space (2 drives), GeForce 2 MX and Win98SE. I have been using MSTS since late August and I have installed over 5gb of 3rd party addons. The only real problem I have found is the uncoupling bug which shows up in three locations on the Marias Pass route. The game has only crashed a few times. These occured while I was editing a cab and once when I forgot to alias the sound and cabview gp38 folders for an SD40. On the whole, I have found the game to be very stable with only minor bugs. Considering that this is a first release program and there haven't really been any others like it, MSTS is a very good product. For those who are expecting Trainz to be bug free, I really don't know where you get this idea from. Every program has its bugs and it would be extremely unlikely that the beta testers will find all of them.


    Victorian Railfan Web Site:

  4. #4
    DJErnie2001 Guest

    Default RE: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    Definatley go for Trainz it's loads better than MSTS.
    Benjamin Clist
    CEO, British High Speed Trains

  5. #5

    Default RE: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON Nov-17-01 AT 01:03PM (EST)[/font][p]It's far too early to say which will be best - in fact I would prefer not to, ever. I am too much into MTS to ever delete it having constructed one route and now building another. I will enjoy Trainz too for what it offers and certainly, apart from the lack of continental European passenger rolling stock, offers a fairly good initial collection of diesel and electric traction.

    As regards route creation in Trainz, well it *is* different to that in MTS, if I had to make a comparison I would say MTS is the Technical Drawing class and Trainz is the Art class. I have no doubt some longer prototype routes will be forthcoming in Trainz but please remember that has never been the stated objective of Auran. From the outset Trainz has been touted as a Virtual Model Railroad - more so certainly than 3D Railroad Master - with the emphasis being on designing 3D worlds where you can operate your collection of rolling stock.

    I agree that the specification for Yardmaster sounds more like Driver + and hope that, i. Yardmaster will follow on very quickly and, ii. It will be reasonably priced, certainly no more than GBP15-20 in order to get the functionality in there people are expecting. Even a condensed "model" needs to run to a timetable!

    Like many people in the train sim community I'm still frustrated that what we really want - an updating of the almost perfect Train Driver 3 programme - has yet to become a reality. MTS in all its excellence is just a bit too technical for many casual users to sit down and do routes. Trainz while being an enjoyable experience also goes wide of the mark.

  6. #6

    Default RE: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    Don't forget that MSTS has only been out for a few months. I'm convinced that if we give people some more time we will see a plethora of add-on programs, as opposed to just locomotives and rolling-stock. Just look at what is available for the Microsoft Flight Simulator.

    And I'm convinced that we will see third party graphical route editors that are easy to use. Just give MSTS some more time....

  7. #7

    Default RE: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    The forthcoming TsTool from DCM should do exactly that! Being able to set up your contours and markers in a GUI interface before entering the 3D Editor will be a Godsend.

  8. #8

    Default RE: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    Vern said: "Like many people in the train sim community I'm still frustrated that what we really want - an updating of the almost perfect Train Driver 3 programme - has yet to become a reality. MTS in all its excellence is just a bit too technical for many casual users to sit down and do routes. Trainz while being an enjoyable experience also goes wide of the mark."

    Hi Vern, I have never used Train Driver 3 or any of this series, but just out of interest what did you find nearly perfect about TD3 that is missing in for example Trainz (with all it's future functionality, not just the first release), and why does Trainz go wide of the mark for you personally, when all the other beta testers are raving about it? :)


  9. #9

    Default RE: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    Well you really need to have played Train Driver 3 to understand my terms of reference on this - which I hasten to add were not meant to denigrate MTS or Trainz in any way. With TD3 you had an excellent selection of routes and motive power. In the last version released by Paul Robins you could make up your own consist. You could define the timetable including adjustment of arrival, departure and dwell times at intermediate stations. You could select fixed or random weather conditions. You could choose a difficulty level from 1 - 9 which determined the frequency of speed restrictions, signal checks and on multiple track routes whether you got switched to the slow lines.

    The graphics were basic but you still got a sense of driving a train - some of the motive power had ironwork for the cab window and "nose" created in Deluxe Paint. The sounds were great - with traction horn and track sound (where necessary).

    The route editor, though requiring some thought, was fairly simple to use and had an essentially GUI interface so long as you understand Amiga Workbench. It was easy to add new motive power including sounds.

    I have not yet reviewed Trainz and it would be inappropriate and indeed a breach of NDA to base comments on the Beta test. However I can look at and am free to comment on the specification for Driver. Many of the features desired will not be added until Yardmaster comes along. No matter how good the editor is (and it *is* good), no matter how swish the graphics and sound - the success of Trainz for the serious rail sim fan will hinge on getting some if not all of the above elements into Driver. Driver module will be the key to Trainz success (or otherwise). If it's a good experience then users will be encouraged to go into Surveyor and create routes/layouts. If not, then they will be less inclined to do so.

  10. #10

    Default RE: Thinking about Defecting From MSTS (Going to Trainz)

    Yep, I see where you're coming from here. However I think you hit the nail on the head when you said about TD3; 'the graphics were basic...', in that today with the processing power we have at our disposal, much more development time is spent on making attractive graphics. I don't see how within the constraints of a reasonable time scale, we can possibly hope to include everything we want first time around. MSTS looks great but lacks some functionality and useability (that no end of third party add-ons will fix). Auran have adopted IMHO a more realistic (time-wise) modular approach which means that the Trainz platform will be built on gradually.

    Naturally some will dismiss Trainz on the first release saying 'well it doesn't do this or that', but it's only when we see the big picture can we understand where it's coming from (and going to). The latest 'Inside Track' article from CEO Greg Lane ( really puts things into perspective, and I think everyone who is considering Trainz or comparing it with other products would do well to read it.

    One thing is sure, the next 2 or 3 years are going to be very interesting for train-simmers :).


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts