Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: Geez. I made this in 2004 and never shared it.

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Brough UK
    Posts
    1,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lateagain View Post
    I agree with Neil

    ........and also geepster's second point gets my vote too.

    Has anyone actually TESTED the difference in performance between adding low poly "scenery stock" as opposed to actual wagons? ...or is this a myth from the history of MSTS that's never been updated since bin and the 19 years of hardware development. There's little doubt this WAS an issue but has anyone tested it since?

    Don't theorise about the latter. Test it! If you can prove the difference on various spec machines/OS's and in MSTS and OR then we have some basis of fact as opposed to historic reportage?

    Frankly given a choice of yards with fewer REAL wagons as opposed to stuffed full of low poly "scenery stock" I think I've made my preference clear.

    I do have some knowledge of this from some development if a UK route but that was years ago now. It was decided to ditch the low poly stuff for actual wagons because there was little or no difference. IT MUST BE POINTED OUT THOUGH .......the UK never had the vast yards that some of the available US routes have attempted to model.

    Well If you want my view on it I redid 90% of the MLT Sand patch route and replaced all the cars with SLI this also changed all the cars that were parked as static along with some of the locomotives I did change as well. It has not slowed down the route but Sand Patch doesn't have some of the real details and realism of the routes now. I just know replacing the trains helped solve a lot of the jerking motion the game use to have when the trains would appear.

    My computer is not that high end Nvidia GT1030, 32 GB of ram, supermicro X9SRL-F, Intell Xeon E5 2.10 GHz. but it handles OR just fine.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hanover Park, Il., USA.
    Posts
    8,974

    Default

    Not that I don't agree geepster, but if a car type/manuafacturer/load type exists as pictured on the previous page, I'll take those over the ones that don't exist, which are made to todays standards and expectations - just for my point, distant eye candy, until the "better" version arrives on the scene.

    If I am cruising down the mainline 45mph, these tanks will look just fine to me as I pass them on an industry siding that I am NOT switching.
    Neil

    Here at home, in the railroad mayhem capital of the world.

Posting Permissions

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