Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Why Run8 is a flawed long term investment

  1. #1

    Default Why Run8 is a flawed long term investment

    Hi all

    I have been an avid trainsimmer for many years and have got on well with the latest products including TS2013. This year, though, I wanted to expand my horizons and looked at Run8. Here's 3, factual, reasons why I believe Run8 is a mistaken investment for any other simmer:

    1) Lack of operational realism. It only supports signalling in a two-dimensional way. There is no interaction of player with environment or vice versa. Everything is scenario-specific and it cannot deal with spontaneous situations, which, in the real world, there are in abundance. The programming involved shows a profound lack of understanding required for reflecting true, real world, operational realism. No other simulator is able to reflect this, but Run8 was purported as being the 'first train simulator to actively achieve total operational realism through complex signalling and timetabling'. This is simply misleading as it does none of this. It is not enough to just simulate the basic, modus operandi of signalling, it has to take into account track circuitry, failures of trackside equipment etc. It is way too primitive to do this.

    2) Lack of immersion. Where other simulators have succeeded with lush landscapes and landmarks, Run8 only simulates an abstract, desert landscape and nothing else. From immersion, stems longevity, and the creators of Run8 have only addressed the short-term needs of users and not ensured that the product survives the test of time. This, to me, represents a deeply flawed strategy on the part of the creators.

    3) Lack of multiplayer. Again a deliberate, marketing gimmick. It does not support multiplayer in the true meaning of the word. A game that supports multiplayer supports up to an infinite number of other users across a wide ranging scale. It does none of this and instead only supports multiplayer to the extent that only a limited number of users can play.

    I am not knocking what they have done so far, but Run8 is not a long term investment and its many flaws demonstrate that it has a lot for it to go for.



  2. #2


    1) Just because they have not programmed in signal failures does not mean that it is "two-dimensional" signalling. None of the other sims have this either.

    2) I own Run 8, and it immerses me. Who is to say that the scenery won't improve over the long term?

    3) I don't know where you heard this, but this is entirely false. There is no limit to how many users can join a session.

    I have no issue with people expressing their opinions (I do it all the time ), but these are ill-informed points.
    Nick - Creator of the Virtual Railroading Review Show

  3. #3


    Not ill-informed points, they are based on factual evidence.

    1) You completely ignored my point about not handling real-world scenarios such as track circuit issues. This proves that it has shortcomings.

    2) You completely ignored my point about the limitations of the scenery available. There are limitations now, who's to say there won't be the same limitations in the future.

    3) You completely ignored my point about the true meaning of the word 'multiplayer'. I have given it to above. Run8 does not demonstrate the same flexibility in handling an infinite number of users. It cannot therefore be deemed a 'multiplayer' game.

    Try again.

  4. #4


    1) I didn't ignore your point. I merely observed that no other sim handles issues like these yet.

    2) Again, I didn't ignore your point. Your post was about long-term investment. If Run 8 continues to improve (failures, scenery, etc), then it is definitely a good long-term investment.

    3) What do you mean by "doesn't have the same flexibility"? As I said, there is no limit set to how many users can join a session.
    Nick - Creator of the Virtual Railroading Review Show

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Louisville, KY


    I only played Run8 for a few days after purchase, not because the game was not interesting, but largely because the "immersion factor" of the game depends so heavily on a lightning fast internet connection. Fortunately, I was able to play in some of the early sessions with the game's designers and I feel like the experience was good. The downside for me is having to pack up my tower and take it to somewhere else to play because of my rural satellite internet connection.

    In regards to point 1, I thought the signalling system was fine, or at least did a fair job of mimicking the real-world BNSF style signals. In the real world, signal failures are random, and the railroad spends much effort to prevent failures from being frequent. I don't know what the percentage rates are on the loop, but I would guess that one should play every day for several weeks before expecting a signal failure based upon my own wild guess about signal failure rates. I worked the railroad for an entire year before seeing so much as a burned out light.
    I have, though, seen light engine consists "ghost" signals and get lost entirely in the CTC system for periods of time. This is remedied by running at medium speed until the consist is lengthened. Amtrak in IL was recently having trouble on the CN with ghosting grade crossing signals with their short corridor trains, causing the CN to slow train speeds to 60mph if the train was under a specific length. Amtrak temporarily resolved this by adding additional locomotives and coaches to the train, offsetting the speed inefficiency with equipment inefficiency...

    Point 2: This is entirely subjective, although I do agree that the Run8 team should implement a more detailed world and ROW. I can understand how some users may feel that the view of the outside world is as important as running the train, largely because of what simmers have become used to with the lush foliage and complex scenery of modern MSTS and RW routes.

    I don't have any facts on point 3, but I would guess that 15 players on the loop at any time would normally meet or exceed real-world operation. I'm sure that someone here can offer a better estimate of how many trains enter the Mojave sub over a 4 hour period.

    The real downside of this game, as it has undoubtedly be stated before, is that most train simmers are not railroaders, and that really affects the immersion factor for me. Fortunately, there are groups like RTS that work very hard to simulate the WORK of a railroader and not just operating the locomotive. Sadly, I've been unable to join with this group of simmers because of my woeful internet connection.

    I guess I'll have to stick with MSTS and OR for the mean time, but I hope that Run8 continues to improve so I can get into some action when I move back to the city...

    Just my 2 cents...


  6. #6

    Default Re: Why Run8 is a flawed long term investment

    Perfect troll execution or incredibly dense poster? America, you be the judge.

  7. #7


    Just because I don't think Run8 is for the long run doesn't make me a troll. My observations are based on facts and looking at other simulators in comparison.
    Going back to Train-A-Mania:

    a) You can program other simulators to replicate real-world problems. Run8 purported itself as the first to do it spontaneously. There is a difference there.

    b) I see no evidence of scenic expansion. Priorities are all wrong here.

    c)| In terms of handling and multitasking, Run8 will not support multiplayer when you exceed 500 users.

    Don't get me wrong, I want Run8 to succeed, but it's not a viable alternative, not until its creators get real with its shortcomings and start to think about the future direction of the sim.


  8. #8


    1) 3DTrainstuff never stated that Run 8 simulates signal failures. I have seen discussions suggesting that it may be something they implement in the future, though.

    2) Just because you don't see it happening, doesn't mean it isn't happening. They've already released a few upgrades to the route, and releasing the editors and tools will give users the chance to take scenery even further. Again, you opened this topic about the long-term investment. Saying that their priorities are wrong is an opinion, not a fact.

    3) Even if your number is correct, when will someone ever have a session of 500 users? I don't think people's computers could handle such a large session.

    Run 8 is already an impressive train sim. Its long-term prospects look very good.
    Last edited by Train-a-Mania; 12-17-2012 at 03:58 PM.
    Nick - Creator of the Virtual Railroading Review Show

  9. #9


    I'm as big a Run8 "fan boy" as they come, but in fact users are limited in most sessions by "units in the world." In sessions I hosted, we began having crash issues once 12-15 trains were running. Some hosters have more stable connections than others, but the programmer has indicated that the capacity for efficient transfer of info over the net from clients to host and back to all other clients is somewhere in the neighborhood of 2500 units in the simulated world. But as Nick has noted, it would be a rare day indeed for more than that number of trains to be running simultaneously on 150 miles of prototype line. Aside from that, it does not appear that the OP's multi-player issue has any validity at all. I just got out of a session with two real RR'ers and have met numerous others in the dozens of sessions I have hosted or run in, and Run8's multi-player realism on both sides of the F3 key have been touted to me as unique in the small universe of train simulators.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Why Run8 is a flawed long term investment

    I call troll because you criticize RUN 8 for not having "real" multiplayer because it doesn't allow for an infinite number of connections/players. No game does. Your idea of "real" multiplayer is about as tangible as a unicorn.

Posting Permissions

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