Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: MSTS in a digital version?

  1. #11

    Default

    The reason I dont like Open Rails so much is, I dont feel like it flows as well. In terms of adding content and play factor.

    The view controls for instance, I find highly annoying. You cant seem to just lock onto a vehicle and pan around it, like in MSTS.

    Adding content seems to be a pain.

    I tryed to add some locomotives to a route. I thought. Maybe it can just be a "Trains" folder in the main folder.
    nope, that didnt work. I needed to put it in the route folder. So my trains need to be copied 100x into 100 different route folders?

    I needed Xtracks to get a route to work. Just put Xtracks files into the main global folder? Nup. that didnt work.
    Needed to go in that particular routes folder to make it work.

    Now Xtracks needs to be copied for all those routes that need it in their respective route global folders?

    Im feeling like this is going to be a lot of unnecessary duplicate files.

    So after working all that out to get the first route to work I wanted to play, Now my smoke textures are all square....

    Thats why I was thinking. At least MSTS pretty much just worked. without so much multiple files needed.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Cumming Ga
    Posts
    2,764

    Default

    The view controls, for instance, I find highly annoying.
    Well, you do have a point that I agree with. Camera controls *still* have me wishing for a MODE switch where I can say "use MSTS style cameras or ORTS style cameras". Since I often start ORTS just to 'test' my modeling work... I want to be able to "look at it"... and the MSTS way became intuitive. (I've been pushing the limits of Shape Viewer when in the early stages of my modeling with Blender.)

    Regarding your other points... while I see your point about possible duplication of files... I find the ORTS method of managing content highly preferrable to the legacy MSTS way. I can, without much effort, archive/backup/remove unused content "at-will" and I see that as a plus.
    http://www.railsimstuff.com
    3D Canvas/Crafter and Blender User
    formerly The Keystone Works (All Permissions Granted)
    https://github.com/pwillard/MSTS-replacement

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by macey View Post
    Adding content seems to be a pain.

    I tryed to add some locomotives to a route. I thought. Maybe it can just be a "Trains" folder in the main folder.
    nope, that didnt work. I needed to put it in the route folder. So my trains need to be copied 100x into 100 different route folders?

    I needed Xtracks to get a route to work. Just put Xtracks files into the main global folder? Nup. that didnt work.
    Needed to go in that particular routes folder to make it work.

    Now Xtracks needs to be copied for all those routes that need it in their respective route global folders?
    Yeah, I'm not following you on that one.

    I only have XTracks installed in Global, and only one Trains folder for all my routes in ORTS. No duplication.

    Regardless, if you have hundreds of routes, MSTS won't handle it. ORTS can.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,673

    Default

    By default, MSTS placed all route content in one folder, which then allowed all those routes installed to share one common TRAINSET folder and one overstuffed GLOBAL folder that contained all the track and road systems that were demanded by all of the routes. That worked okay until the volume of routes and consists exceeded MSTS limitations. Then came third party utilities like TrainStore to magically offload (hide) a good portion of irrelevant (for whatever chosen route) assets and consists, except TrainStore added its own layers of issues when mishandled leading to irretrievable data loss. The singular MSTS file structure concept also slowly became a moot point when routes got bigger and more complex, requiring them to be set aside in a separate Mini-Route in order to work within the low asset-count ceilings that come with MSTS. Mini-routes required their own individualized folders - and the need to manage multiple copies of TRAINSET and GLOBAL was born long ago under MSTS.

    The larger point is MSTS in its later years "grew" its own similar set of issues and became dependent upon 3rd party (and non-supported today) utilities and is not free of the same complaints you tend to shadow Open Rails with now.

    If you are seeing square smoke, then you simply do not have the proper file inventory and folder structure needed. Perhaps you lack a proper 'top-down' folder layout perspective of how MSTS and Open Rails can be similar and also be different. You can create an Open Rails installation without MSTS, but there are some essential files that will be missing and be in need of replacement. Many times there are downloadable hyperlinks in the manual that allow MSTS-less users to download and install replacement essential files that used to be only delivered on MSTS CDs, but you have to locate that chapter in the manual. Either that, or you can purchase a payware route that was built explicitly for Open Rails only, which are designed to be runnable without MSTS, where the route vendor supplies their own versions of these essential files.

    Yes, the new features that can be handled in Open Rails that MSTS could never achieve do require some reading in a manual to master. Just no other way around it. The manual is available in the Documents pull down menu on the main OR application screen

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    known universe
    Posts
    2,419

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by macey View Post
    The reason I dont like Open Rails so much is, I dont feel like it flows as well. In terms of adding content and play factor.

    The view controls for instance, I find highly annoying. You cant seem to just lock onto a vehicle and pan around it, like in MSTS.

    Adding content seems to be a pain.

    I tryed to add some locomotives to a route. I thought. Maybe it can just be a "Trains" folder in the main folder.
    nope, that didnt work. I needed to put it in the route folder. So my trains need to be copied 100x into 100 different route folders?

    I needed Xtracks to get a route to work. Just put Xtracks files into the main global folder? Nup. that didnt work.
    Needed to go in that particular routes folder to make it work.

    Now Xtracks needs to be copied for all those routes that need it in their respective route global folders?

    Im feeling like this is going to be a lot of unnecessary duplicate files.

    So after working all that out to get the first route to work I wanted to play, Now my smoke textures are all square....

    Thats why I was thinking. At least MSTS pretty much just worked. without so much multiple files needed.
    None of us that have been using OR for a while have these problems...not to diminish yours, however, what you are experiencing is the starting point of a learning curve. It will take a while, give yourself some time to learn. OR can be overwhelming to someone approaching it for the first time. Read & use the manual as geepster suggests.

    OR is compatible with all legacy MSTS routes and equipment Perhaps it would be best to start with a free OR demonstrator route here >>> https://www.trainsimulations.net/starter

    Follow the install instruction...the last stable version of OR will be installed along with the route and equipment. The folder structure is the same as used in MSTS.
    Cheers, Gerry
    It's my railroad and I'll do what I want! Historically accurate attitude of US Railroad Barons.
    Forever, ridin' drag in railroad knowledge.


  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    883

    Default

    Some good information here and all of it points to one key point -- MSTS/Open Rails isn't precisely plug-and-play. There's a bit of a learning curve to making it all work well.

    But MSTS isn't alone that way. Flight simulators (even the newest, most modern Microsoft flightsim) have similar complexity. So do racing sims. So do many high-end games of all sorts if they allow modding. Take your time, make small changes and make backups along the way as you learn the logic of how all the pieces fit together. It's different for every game out there, but they all have their quirks and limitations to lean as you figure them out.


    MSTS-Roundhouse

    On hiatus and moving to a new host -- Probably in 2021
    (Because 2020 has turned out to be b0rked beyond belief...
    )

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    4,733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by macey View Post
    ........

    ............ Now my smoke textures are all square....

    ..................
    Remove dieselsmoke.ace from your MSTS ...\Global\Textures folder and MSTS will have square smoke textures also. For ORTS without MSTS being installed download the Diesel Smoke replacement from http://www.3dtrains.com/downloads/misc.shtml
    Charles

Posting Permissions

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