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

Thread: IC Heritage unit for CN

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    UP's dead Santa Barbara Sub
    Posts
    1,023

    Default IC Heritage unit for CN

    Perhaps old news for some, but I just found these photos on TrainOrders. Kinda basic, but captures the death star image nicely.

    IC3008_54536_61a7e708329c2.jpg
    IC3008_54545_61a7e71424156.jpg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hanover Park, Il., USA.
    Posts
    9,479

    Default

    Nice. Been hoping to see this unit down here...no go yet.
    Neil

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

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,614

    Default

    I like it... If I have to choose, though, I'll take sering some of their old EMDs running around in black

  4. #4

    Default

    Clicked hoping to see the orange and white livery. Or the grey and orange.

    But this is acceptable.
    "My dog got loose once, what I did was show him his leash & he came running back, thinking it was time for a walk - stupid dog."

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Saskatchewan, CA
    Posts
    924

    Default

    I would add it gladly
    Rory

  6. #6

    Default

    One of things that I've noticed, sadly, is that there seems to be little interest in both the payware and freeware MSTS/OR community for producing current generation Tier 4 locomotives or any kind of heritage units or special livery locomotives. There are a few exceptions, but, for the most part, there's not much out there. There also seems to be little interest in producing current "rebuilt" versions of older generation locos. Not many years ago, that kind of stuff would been released almost before the paint was dry on the prototypes.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    UP's dead Santa Barbara Sub
    Posts
    1,023

    Default

    I agree. While I understand that the number of payware vendors has decreased somewhat over the last few years, I too was expecting to see some new releases. If you think it, about many of the Class 1's (UP, CSX, CP, CN and NS) have come out with commemorative units that would be a nice addition to the game.

  8. #8

    Default

    I'm surprised we have any payware model builders left.

    Dealing with the piracy has driven several of the builders to shut down.

    Each unique model represent a hundred hours or more of work start to end, and there's no profit made selling perhaps a couple dozen copies.

    So why bother?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    .
    Posts
    2,741

    Default

    Then again, as an Open Rails user, I get ever so tired changing out any as-delivered dual environment MSTS physics for genuine Open Rails physics from any of my payware purchases. On delivery timelines, any vendors who are busy also tackling the Open Rails physics learning curve get cut some much needed slack. In the short term, each release becomes an experiment of sorts for them.

    Some vendors are trying to use technical differences available to open rails exclusively to drive a usability wedge between their new material and the legacy freeloader/piracy demographic that plagued MSTS. How odd that the vendors who draw swords and publicly engage in piracy battles the most are the least inclined to use these advantages and still stick with peddling a dual environment catalog.

    One might think it would help a little bit to sell new material that is now slightly incompatible with some person's vast collection of "pirated MSTS stuff".

  10. #10

    Default

    Unfortunately, we seem to be stuck in a netherworld where some simmers--sometimes justifiable, sometimes not--doggedly hang on to MSTS, while more and more of the simming community has moved on to OpenRails. I'm in the latter group, abandoning MSTS 8 years ago. So, both payware and freeware suppliers are stuck trying to satisfy their shrinking, but important MSTS customer base, while supplying OpenRails users with viable content. That's not a great situation. Still, the biggest problem that the providers seem loathe to confront is the old, but very true retailing adage, "You can't sell out of an empty wagon." When many freeware and payware providers are now only producing a few new products a year, it's not surprising that both MSTS and OR customer bases are losing interest in either MSTS or OR. I could list about a hundred OR rolling stock products that I would purchase or download tomorrow if someone would build them. Same with routes. As to routes, nearly every route produced prior to 2010 needs a serious re-work or outright replacement. Yet even today, route builders are still using many tired old shapes from 2002 and 2003 that should have been scrapped years ago. Sadly, we are faced with a "chicken and egg" situation--producers don't want to produce stuff for a shrinking customer base, and a lack of product causes customers to lose interest in the whole product line and shrinks the customer base even more. The big bright spot is that the OR volunteer team continues to improve the sim itself.

Posting Permissions

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