Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 54

Thread: Some Discussion Fodder From Europe-RW

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Delmont, PA USA
    Posts
    2,113

    Question Some Discussion Fodder From Europe-RW

    If true, an interesting set of goals for Rail Simulation to tell us if they will eventually find there way to Rail Works. The objective is to forget about your pet peeves and, if you agree or disagree with the specific comaprisons this guy posted on UK trains forum. It is early in the game and their validity is open to validation.

    One response will be - it is too early so shutup and wait. Let's see who posts that one.
    =======================
    What are You talking about mr. moderator? What beauty contest? I'm talking about facts ... here is no place for emotions. Pointless comparisions? Lets take it another way ... maybe more understandable for You:
    Non-emotional feature comparision of MSTS (2001) - Trainz 2006 - RailWorks (2009):
    1. Manual dispatcher (preprogramming junctions states and signallisation working accordingly): MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    2. AI coupling and uncoupling: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No).
    3. Player can decide are there passangers in the train when scenario is starting: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    4. Train jumping. Will driver move to right cab when jumping?: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    5. Security systems like German PZB 90, SIFA: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    6. Authomatic cruise controller (in german trains AFB, LZB): MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    7. Functioning (interactive) cruise computers (in german trains EBuLa): MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    8. Can AI driver take over player train and vice versa? MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    9. Can scenario start on-the fly (train already running when scenario starts)? MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (No) - RW (No)
    10. Working railway crossings: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    11. Can You use roundtables in scenarios?: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    12. Can You preprogram signallisation elements separately in scenarios?: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    13. Can You make special scripts to make scenario interactive? MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    And more and more. This list is a factual account without emotions. Results of this comparision make more clear how advanced those simulators technically are. Making this list I tried to find at least one feature Railwork is ahead of others ... and didn't find. Can You find at least one feature what RW can do and Trainz can't? Without emotions of cause. I found only 1 in MSTS others can't do.
    So lets stop stupid talking about "beauty contests". In my original post I didn't made comparisions in graphic quality.

    http://forums.uktrainsim.com/viewtop...?f=314&t=95091


    Regards - Dick
    i5 2500K$ 4.2ghz, GTX 750 2gb, 8gb of SkillFULL memory, A 700 watt power thingy, lots of cables
    Program to take screenie weenys from da puter. Bro, Dude, Man operator Murysville,Pa.



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Chilliwack, B C, Canada.
    Posts
    993

    Default

    Hi Dick; Thanks for such a great post. I was hoping someone would come to their senses. What I find most interesting about your info., is that the best functionality is with Trainz. So how come we're all not running Trainz and forgetting about the rest? I don't have Trainz so I can't make a comparison. I'm hoping that the strong point with RW will be that they will listen to the sim community and be able to build on their product. They are going to have to develop a way for simmers to upload their ideas and modifications, and if approved, will then be incorporated into upgrades. But at this point, I feel its too early to tell even what direction RW is going, as the largest part of the market is in Europe, and RW, like RS, is based on European railroading. I think RW will become a good simulator, but will it become a GREAT simulator for the NA market? Only time will tell. Cheers; Chuck F.

  3. #3

    Default

    I have binned 3 versions of TRAINZ, neither of them using proper tracks and switches, the latter using splined rails, no frogs nor moving blades.

    RW will get better in time ? Based on their efforts or that of third-party add-on vendors ?

    RSDL had 1-1/2 years to improve RS with another version and by the looks have failed miserably.

    That was the last chance they had to make a name for themselves and RW. Nobody is going to trust them to do better in future, not being able to even give comprehensive details of what has been fixed since RS-2-MK2 and never mind the eye-candy !

    O t t o

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Delmont, PA USA
    Posts
    2,113

    Default

    I think that we can all cite personal preferences or problems with Trainz if we have tried it. However, that is not relevant to the questions that were posed. I certainly have my issues but those cited are somewhat core and your personal views may not be within that list. I would like to see discussion on the proffered points. This will clarify Rail Works and also suggest to Rail Simulation areas they might care to address.
    Regards - Dick
    i5 2500K$ 4.2ghz, GTX 750 2gb, 8gb of SkillFULL memory, A 700 watt power thingy, lots of cables
    Program to take screenie weenys from da puter. Bro, Dude, Man operator Murysville,Pa.



  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boleyd View Post
    I would like to see discussion on the proffered points. This will clarify Rail Works and also suggest to Rail Simulation areas they might care to address.
    No problem ... I see that the Auran product scores well on the list ... now tell me ( for trainz ) which items are the result of the companies effort and which are the result of third parties efforts and suppling work ( via the download station ) for auran to use and release


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Delmont, PA USA
    Posts
    2,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by westdetroittower View Post
    My question is, don't they have working crossing gates in Europe? If they do then why can't RS/RW even simulate that? If this falls under simulation and not games then it should at least simulate the very basics. If they don't have any crossing gates in Europe then I sort of understand but in the US (and especially in the East) there are lots of working crossing gates. That would make them just as essential to railroading as engines are to drive trains.
    The original poster never mentioned crossing gates. I would like to see responses to the things he said were allegedly true not the many other things everyone has in there baskets of musts & wants. Otherwise this simply degenerates into another rubber room of frustrated detractors or supporters of their favorite cause!
    Regards - Dick
    i5 2500K$ 4.2ghz, GTX 750 2gb, 8gb of SkillFULL memory, A 700 watt power thingy, lots of cables
    Program to take screenie weenys from da puter. Bro, Dude, Man operator Murysville,Pa.



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Another Planet
    Posts
    8,619

    Default Oooh - oooh - I got me a list too!

    RW contains many operational deficiencies, but I'm confident these will be addressed as time goes, as I truly believe RS.com is in this for the long haul.

    Other than that, I suppose it all depends how you view things when coming up with a list...

    1. Built-in route and DEM creation: MSTS (No) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    2. Real-world latitude and longitude: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    3. Ability to hack and tweak to your heart's desire: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    4. Realistic environments: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    5. Good performance on average PC out of the box: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (Never) - RW (Yes)
    6. Ability to load routes that containing missing assets without screaming bloody murder: MSTS (No) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    7. Simple and intuitive interface: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    8. Bloatware: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    9. Overall toy-like appearance: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    10. Contains bugs: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (Yes)

    etc.


    Last edited by plainsman; 06-14-2009 at 11:01 AM. Reason: my mistake, hit wrong key!!
    3DTrains - Home of the Feather River and Sherman Hill routes for MSTS

    Signature

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hack View Post
    RW contains many operational deficiencies, but I'm confident these will be addressed as time goes, as I truly believe RS.com is in this for the long haul.

    Other than that, I suppose it all depends how you view things when coming up with a list...

    1. Built-in route and DEM creation: MSTS (No) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    2. Real-world latitude and longitude: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    3. Ability to hack and tweak to your heart's desire: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    4. Realistic environments: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    5. Good performance on average PC out of the box: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (Never) - RW (Yes)
    6. Ability to load routes that containing missing assets without screaming bloody murder: MSTS (No) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    7. Simple and intuitive interface: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (No) - RW (Yes)
    8. Bloatware: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    9. Overall toy-like appearance: MSTS (No) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (No)
    10. Contains bugs: MSTS (Yes) - Trainz (Yes) - RW (Yes)

    etc.



    Nice list .. but you forgot to add procedural flora .. and lets not forget the trees

    I'll take RW anyday


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    549

    Default

    As another poster said if Trainz is so good why isn't everyone using it, well it all comes down what you the user wants out of the different sims. Trainz does allow you to do a lot of those things and I say this as a Trainz user from the begining it can be very complicated to get going properly, most of the good content is user made but most users in a sense are observers rather the drivers.

    You can do lots of things with the AI and its Trainz code system is quite powerful and has allowed lots of things to be done to extend functionality but it does come at a cost in terms of complexity.

    At the end of the day all the Sims do some things well, some so so and some not.

    John

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hack View Post
    RW contains many operational deficiencies, but I'm confident these will be addressed as time goes, as I truly believe RS.com is in this for the long haul.
    [/FONT]

    I hope you're right. I hope they are in for the long haul. But if that's the case there are simple things they just refuse to do! Take the F7's. There were done great. My goodness they even have notched throttles. The others still require futzing with the files. I know, I know, you can change them yourself. BUT WHY? I've changed them way more times than I care to think about. Every time I add routes with loco assets, bang, my changes are gone. Can't they do even the simplest thing like notch a throttle? There are lots of things they can do to make this better, but this one really gripes my rump!

    Sorry for the rant!
    Jim
    Last edited by plainsman; 06-14-2009 at 11:34 AM.

Posting Permissions

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