Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Convert TS2015 to MSTS

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    17

    Default Convert TS2015 to MSTS

    Is there any way to convert objects (sound files, cars, engines, buildings, even routes) from TS2015 for use in MSTS? Have some sound files I would like to transfer.

    Thanks.

  2. #2

    Default

    No.
    The shape file of Train Simulator is very secured.
    For Audio, search DAV Decoder in UKtrainSim F/L.
    Remember Train Simulator uses 44KHz and MSTS don't.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Swindon, England
    Posts
    4,202

    Default

    Not to mention if the sounds are not your own, for other than personal use you would be in breach of EULA and copyright on the original files.
    Vern.

  4. #4

    Default

    Look, he wants to convert from Train Simulator 2015 to MSTS. Haha

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Swindon, England
    Posts
    4,202

    Default

    Regardless, it is still asking about reverse engineering which is frowned upon on these forums and has led to people being perma-banned for pushing the idea.
    Vern.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Yamba, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    2,919

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DigitalRailways View Post
    Look, he wants to convert from Train Simulator 2015 to MSTS. Haha
    Don't knock it; Open Rails provides some of the best dynamics of any of the sims available today.
    The work that third-parties have done on the physics is light-years beyond those of the original MSTS.
    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

  7. #7

    Default

    Agree.
    But reverse engineering is bad.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Yamba, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    2,919

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DigitalRailways View Post
    Agree.
    But reverse engineering is bad.
    Well.....I wouldn't necessarily agree with that and neither would the Russian aviation industry.
    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

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Yes, the other way around. I have no real interest in Railworks via Steam (Steam won't run on my laptop - tried everything everywhere and it simply won't...so once in a while I actually use a Desktop) and would gladly use it if it ran on OR...haha. The interface, IMHO, is too slick vs the bare bones on OR (I don't care about "awards" or "points" or video ads on startup. All that's needed is a good choice laid out in front completely, just my personal option. Says the guy who finally moved on from 35mm film in 2016, and was stuck in 2005 technologically for 10 years.

    The controls in someways are exact opposites, so things like throttle are more along the lines of "aww crud, which control is it?" (Been using MSTS off and on since mid 2000s....this keyboard layout is hardwired.) Truthfully, there should not be any need at all to use an internet connection to run it, since after everything you need should already be installed.

    There are many things I do enjoy, just watching the scenery go by in New Haven on a New ACS (yes, I do have the MSTS/OR Equivalent - TT ACS-64 pack, NALW, and MN-NH, but there are some errors hard to pass up...notabably the North River Tunnels 5.2% grade and lack of Sunnyside). The TT ACS is rather sluggish, while the TS ACS is a rocket, would like to combine the two to get the very best (personal use of course), or maybe a decade in the future, have the capability to run TS20XX on OR. I find it hard to shell out big bucks for a good selection of addons for TS while the MSTS counterpart, although older and less detailed (mostly) is free and easy to repaint. I can't spend a couple thousand replacing each and every piece of rolling stock, let alone waiting however long to actually get it. The sounds for the Amfleet are quite catchy...a flat spot that sounds as the wheel rotates vs the every 3 seconds jointed rail clack....Many things are well done, but overall I think the UI of OR or even MSTS are more intuitive.

    Seeing the way it is here, I guess the general trend on software is towards "giving permission" for you to use it, as in you can't even view the source files. Repainting, building your own, etc are all replaced with DLC while even the very game itself requires you to connect to DRM..instead of having the option to be independent. Yes I do understand that some people will take advantage and pirate copies, but I bought this stuff my monry. I just want to be able to use it. I can't even get a refund for a couple games since Steam utterly refuses (4 hours playing they said. I got to the main menu once, and spent 12 hours troubleshooting....) Having to "ask" the DRM every time for everything (nevermind updates I do not want) is another chain in the process that weakens reliability. I think the openness to allow editing, additions, substitutions, etc has allowed MSTS to prosper past what Kuju/MS originally intended, but at the same time, TS could use a little more of that simplicity.

    I understand many people many not share my viewpoint, and may be fine with TS for what it is. But from using MSTS and Now Open Rails for some thirteen-ish years, downloading many many addons, gladly paying for high quality payware, and of course meeting many faces, it's hard to trade in all of this group effort for a rather sterile sim with backwords controls seems out of line.

    And yes, IL62 vs VC10, Ty-144 vs Concorde, look similar but under the hood, the Soviet counterparts were different. IL62 was apparently more rugged, and the Ty-144 (although faster) was dangerous.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Yamba, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    2,919

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arc Light View Post
    ....... IL62 vs VC10, Ty-144 vs Concorde, look similar but under the hood, the Soviet counterparts were different. IL62 was apparently more rugged, and the Ty-144 (although faster) was dangerous.
    They may have been "similar" but they were certainly derived from their western counterparts; it is a proven fact that someone in the Dassault company was passing Concorde design information to the Soviets.
    The Tupolev Tu-4 (NATO "Bull"), however, was a perfectly reverse-engineered knock-off of the Boeing B-29 Superfortress.
    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

Posting Permissions

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