Thoughts On Train Simulator Classic's Current State

Signals are also subject to antialiasing. There is also an aura which is supposedly visible from the distance, but not all lights seem to have it.
My standard signal vision distance is about 0.2 mi = 0.3 km, unless the aura itself allows a significant (1.5-2mi) vision.
One of the issues with the auras is that they tend to overlap and are also visible for opposing signals (which could be sorted).
This is with 1080p MSAA. My assumption is that higher resolution and ideally SSAA can help it tremendously.
Of course the ideal solution would be to have distant signals (pun intended) like in Trainz, which show distant stuff. Special rendering, basically oversizing them, and being 5-10 pixels in diameter (even for a far away one), they end up visible.
Our eyes are tricky and capable of wonderful focus, exposed by trying to photograph the Moon (failing miserably), a distant hill (with a two-pixel house in the middle) or watching a cab ride on Youtube (between pixels and compression, quite often not even 0.2 mi signal vision, sometimes great though).

Another part of the problem is that they are not particularly bright. In night scenarios they have better visibility but the day sky is so dominant in (default) TSC (also causing the dark scenes) that signals aren't particularly shining bright.

 

Depends on the signals and their flare texture. Can be customized like almost everything See AP Signal EP, german Schuster signals etc.

 

Copy in the lightglows files from Schuster Signals to the signals on Frankfurt Koblenz, and they will be visible from the correct distance. The lightglows from DTG on that route are simply either broken or plain wrong.

 

Illustration of the points on visibility. Just adding them as thumbnails to be less intrusive to the thread.

While my settings are relatively low, there are players with lower (1366x768) resolution, which, unless coupled with SSAA, is even worse.

This is one aspect where DTG can learn from N3V.
Existing content doesn't have to be abandonware, but possibly a renewable resource where minor updates can keep it alive and lucrative.
In this specific case, creating a special signal rendering system and transforming existing signals to it could help.

 

And while at it. . . . . create an option so that while hovering the mouse over a signal it tells me what the current signal state stands for. Not every one has the time / the will to attend hrs of engineer school and read manuals before driving a route.

 

You are not a very good driver if you don't know what the signal is telling you.
Driving a train is easy - it is knowing what the various signs mean that you encounter whilst driving.

You don't need to attend hours of Driving School when you have to look at couple of pages of the Manual to read about Signal Aspects
Most of the US Signals give very similar indications.
Although this is referring to TSW4 routes the principles apply to all US Routes
https://forums.dovetailgames.com/threads/us-signal-rules-explained-with-diagrams.61808/

 

That's ok. Being a good driver is not what I am after.

Thanks for the url.

LOL, there must a a 1000 different lights colors signs in those 7 tiny-font pages. Already over 100 just for the signal "Clear".

When I pont the mouse at the thingy that does TOOOOOOT or DING DING DING the game tells me "Horn" or "Bell". Would be great if the game would tell me the signal status in a similar way.

 

I'm not sure I understand. If you can see the signal then doesn't it follow that you can see what aspect it is displaying?
I don't know of any colour lights that don't follow the scheme red=stop, yellow=caution, green=proceed or any semaphores that are not horizontal=stop, vertical=proceed at their most fundamental level.

 

Hmm think I will stay away from driving on the track that Woodland is driving on! I cannot afford all the repair costs for collisions

 

It could make sense. I only struggle with some relatively exotic ones, such as German yard signaling.
For reference. Yesterday I had a walk and came across a signal on our Child's Railway. Two red semaphores and two glasses (lights). The top semaphore was horizontal, the bottom was vertical, the third, top glass was removed and the fourth, bottom glass was unclear. I concluded that this must be American style station entry main, showing danger-clear, the lights probably to duplicate but removed. The weird thing is, that we are in the German ecosystem where the top signal is only refined (top is red, you stop), meaning the second semaphore was an error, even if irrelevant. (I've seen an advance with the big yellow round board facing the track and one semaphore but I don't recall.)
Consulting the manual should help (with Köln-Koblenz, semaphores, boards, little sticks - my term) but yeah. Could be nice to receive a message on Tab. Basically an extension to the SPAD - Hey dispatcher, what's the signal ahead, can I pass it?

 

You're supposed to learn the signals, Google's your friend. Dispatcher would be disturbed if a driver asked for what a signal means ("Get him outta there quickly!!") If you press F1 and the top icons are grayed out, you can pass it.

So a certain interest in gathering railway knowledge is the best thing for any simulator, I'm glad we're not treated like kids here.

If you're not sure, press TAB, nothing happens, drive along.

 

You could always remove the signals completely.....

 

It's a simulation game. Can't blame it for simulating stuff as close as it can to be realistic. You can play it as you want of course, but don't expect the devs to bend the game to your style of playing.

Gary Padley ... and make dispatching impossible Took me a while to find out I need to set block splitters on CSX Hanover.

 

No I respect your opinion, but certain things just make no sense to implement. For a mouse hovering over a signal to display its state, it needs to have a "hitbox" defined which would need to rework all existing models.

I'm just realistic.

 

No use talking to you... if you don't get what you want and somebody explains the reasons you become quarrelsome. Better play another game that suits you better.

 

Why can't my train fly?
It's a train simulator, not a flight sim.
So you're ignoring other's opinions, I can play the game like I want to.
Sure you can, I just told you why it's not possible.
You are not valuing other's opinions! Grow up!

(Definition of toxicity)

 

Seems like the opposite is true. Spikeys opinion was different than yours, and you antagonized him for his opinion, as usual.

 

Yes you and Spikee are right.

Have a great day !

 

You obviously haven’t tried to run the ICE3 at 300kph on the semmeringbahn.

 

Now that's true

 

DRM will not get around someone actually buying the product, putting the installed contents in a folder, and offering it for free to whoever wants it. In other words, DRM is a wasted expense that can be easily worked around in the game's current setting. I guarantee you every single JT and ATS product (yes, even the 745 and GEMMA) have been hacked and made available for free at some point. Because there is the group that doesn't care and will take turns buying products to share in an entire library.

I'm not going to go into further discussion on this subject as it may contravene forum rules, especially discussing methods on Steam for Steam DLC (and BTW, you risk banning yourself if found).. The best chance you have to make money with this game is to work with DTG to get products on Steam. I firmly believe that.

In any case, it's just how some player groups operate. It's like VEVO on Youtube; you can screen record the item playing and boom, you have a track you can use offline by saving its MP3. And that assumes you don't use extensions to download the video. They literally shoot themselves in the foot doing this because all those tracks then find their way into a free music collection. They are all legally obtained. Nothing illegal about them. You can record your screen and do whatever you want with the recording. The difference is VEVO made the content available for free. At least here, someone actually has to buy the content first.

 

So true. You want our fave hobby (tsc) to continue, you put money in developers pockets. I don’t even stream music, i still purchase it. Because how else will my fave i die artist have money to make their next record.

 

I understand the behaviour as someone who doesn't have much money to freely throw around at present. But like you, I still buy products. I have almost everything available in the current AP library save some of the newest stuff, having spent hundreds on it. I'm glad I did it before the price increases or I might not be buying it now; I feel the increases were not warranted in some cases, and some content was actually removed from already purchased products while increasing those prices, which I think can be a legal problem that they did not consider in some areas (mine isn't one of them).

 

All I have to say on the matter here is that I am happy to pay for add-ons to support devs and to enjoy the experience that TSC has to offer. In fairness, DTG, ATS and other vendors has released most of what I want/need for my preferences of my favourite trains. Also there are revamp packs available for trains like the HST, Class 390, Class 60 etc that are from Major Wales and are freeware but they do make the train add-ons even better in my experience. This game is just as great as MSTS is but DTG are still working on this game and they are bringing out add ons for it still since the first release back in 2009 and its come a long way since.

Before I came onto the TSC scene in 2015. I had OpenBVE and MSTS with the OpenRails launcher. Not perfect but it worked. Same here with some of the trains and it makes me happy to appreciate and enjoy them. I for one do not mind investing in an add-on and if it is great then that's grand but it is bad, I will call it out in my reviews as I am honest. But that's rarely done. As for the ATS 745. It's too new and its just modern plastic in my opinionso I am not that interested in it but if people are happy to pay the price for it and enjoy its dedicated functions and features, then good for them.

Trust me, if that was a Class 60 pack with all the whistles and bells and a plethora of features and a couple of packs of wagons, TEA's, steel carriers and scenarios for 2-3 routes, I would jump right at it for £38 because I have always wanted a super professional Class 60 pack to come out for TSC and I used to see them a lot when I lived in Nottingham. Therefore it has a special place in me like the HST's do as well. Same for most BR era stuff.

I still would like to see some Irish content come out for Train Simulator Classic like the Enterprise Dublin to Belfast route and that could unlock potential for Irish/Ulster add-ons for the sim as well. From my logs when seeing the trains. Besides the 201 class on the DD stock and the CAF 3000/4000 units. We've had the Rotem ICR 22000 and the CAF 29000 class units up here as well on some occasions. There is also the IE 071/NIR 111 class locomotives that could be done as a pack as well. DTG would need to contact Irish Rail and up here, Translink as well for permits, data gathering and permissions/licensing etc to make this viable. That applies to any vendor really.

 

Since you brought that up, what ever happened with the MW Class 60 revamp pack apparently using stolen content? I've spoken with the person who notes he created the code that MW used without credit or payment or any form (and definitely without permission). I know ATS blocked the MW 60 for a while. What is the current status of this?

 

This is new to me because I didn't think MJW used other peoples work and without permission or giving credit for using ti, its not something I agree with. However had he credited the person for using their work which is common decency in my opinion. I would have been cool with it but to be honest, the MJW Class 60 pack only works normal on AI and if I knew what I was doing, I would remove the TPWS script out and make a patch to disable it because it trips out on almost any signals that are not green and even on signals that that facing the other way, it is very bugged.

I would have been happy with that pack as AI only but what I tend to find wrong with this pack is that is suffers very badly from a bugged TPWS script and the Birmingham Cross City route with the scenario I am making where on the 3rd of September 2004, EWS 60097 had to rescue and haul a failed HST from Bromsgrove to Birmingham New Street up the lickey incline into Birmingham New Street on the last days for HST XC operations for Virgin Trains.

I was trawling through Flickr this week hence that DB Cargo have sold all but 5 Class 60's recently and 12 are going to Land Recovery UK for their trains (there is a topic on this on WNXX and Rail Forums UK) and when I was searching on Flickr, I came across 60097 on this unique working as it was one of the 31 being offered for sale by DB just recently.

60097 Birmingham New Street 3rd Sept 2004 by andy43167, on Flickr

Here is a pic of the scenario I am making.

I will be swapping this out to the JT Class 60 for the public release of this scenario as the MJW Pack is undrivable in its current state. Shame really.

 

Have you tried contacting Ben?...he's been pretty good at dealing with issues before.

 

I notice in the MJW Manual that Ctrl+Q should disable the TPWS - but it does not.
You get a message on the screen saying it is disabled but it still dumps the brakes

 

That's the same problem I am having with the Class 60 as well. Perhaps MJW should remove the script until a working one is available because its a great pack overall but just this annoy TPWS bug.

I will drop him a message on his facebook page and see what he can do. It is a lovely pack otherwise .

 

I tried to place the loco in other scenarios but it just crashed when I selected it.

I edited the TPWS bin files to remove the reference to the script.
I can drive past them on BHM Cross City without it dumping on me.

 

Funny how you got the MJW 60 to work, it crashes for me...

 

That is one of the bugbears for me as well. Most of the time the sim will fun fine with no issues, then other times it has a hissy fit and crashes when selecting the Class 60.

Not sure where the TPWS bin files are located as I can only find CabExtras.bin as well as
If you would know where the files are located that need to be edited. I will make a temporary patch to disable the TPWS and include the fix for my scenarios I am making. That was, it will make the pack usable without the frustration of the TPWS kicking in when it is not supposed to. If I recall correctly, the TPWS would kick in on protected areas like stations, junctions and terminal stations that are armed with the 2000hz ramps that when energised, will trip the TPWS is the train is going too fast to stop safely. Unless I am wrong on that. It should not be tripping on reversed TPWS ramps that are in opposite polarity to the direction of the train. If you can tell me where to go to edit the file/s please let me know so I can get working on a fix. MJW can use my patch if he wants to once I get it done.

 

Its a fickle add-on as sometimes it crashes the game but other times it will work fine with no trouble except for the TPWS bug that I am going to remove. I can live without the TPWS as the AWS will still function without it and that is good enough for me.

 

I'm pretty sure Peter edited the .bin files for the TPWS ramps themselves.

 

I don't know maybe Peter will clarify where they are located.

 

Yes, that is correct.
\Assets\DTG\CrossCity\RailNetwork\Signals\Pro Signals\UK_Mod_Track
I changed the TPWS files apart from the Dummy ones by clicking on each to create an .xml version
In the xml file is this section

<_script>
<cScriptComponentBlueprint>
<Name d:type="cDeltaString">DTG\CrossCity\RailNetwork\Signals\Pro Signals\UK TPWS</Name>
</cScriptComponentBlueprint>
</_script>

I removed the highlighted section so it shows

<_script>
<cScriptComponentBlueprint>
<Name d:type="cDeltaString"></Name>
</cScriptComponentBlueprint>
</_script>

Then save and use Serz to confirm the changes.

I thought about deleting the UK TPWS.out but the game would just see the one in the *.ap folder
Another idea might be to replace the UK TPWS.out and replace it with a txt file of the same name.

Any thoughts Gary Padley ?

Peter

 

I'm still having a problem as it crashes on some routes with Out of Memory.

 

Yeah, but most of them you probably wouldn't like
Editing the TPWS grids to effectively break them can only be viewed as a very temporary bodge--2 wrongs don't make a right!
Bear in mind that editing the grids only works on routes that use those grids.

The obvious answer to problems with the MJW rework is not to use it!
As the scripting is all in compiled .out format there's little chance of us mere mortals being able to suss out what's going on so it's really a case of hoping Ben can/will revisit it.

 

It is a bit obvious that "editing the grids only works on routes that use those grids"

I have been caught out with these grids when they are set wrong - so if it stops them operating then I'm happy.
Not sure why the AWS sounds when running in the wrong direction.
Departing Bromsgrove towards New St from the Bristol platform the AWS for the signal at the Bristol end sounds.

There are a few buggy things on the route.
Departing Bromsgrove for New St I have the Junction at Barnt Green set against me to give me a Red Signal
After 3 Greens I get a Red at the top of the bank then one or two more greens before a Red before the Junction.

 

Would you be happier though if they were set right?...you could probably do it in the same amount of time it took to edit the grid's .bin files.

Most routes have their quirks/glitches but what we're primarily taking about here is an issue with the MJW class 60.

 

I can't really see Ben revisiting the 60 myself, we all know by now that one of the recent"ish" core updates broke a lot of .lua (or .out if compiled) scripting, iirc something to do with no longer allowing certain erroneous values through the net and therefore catching them and either ignoring the whole call or dumping the game completely.

I see that Ben has updated a few of his releases recently and I'm going to assume it was to address these script errors but he hasn't addressed the 60 issues or even mentioned the 60 at all, so no I don't think he will patch the 60 because it will most likely just re-ignite the whole poo storm all over again, I'm not advocating or defending Ben, far from it, imo it was a very silly thing to do and his handling of it when it came to light was very poor form, in fact I initially jumped to his defence over the issue (or more accurately took issue at the way in which it was aired on Facebook) not fully understanding the situation and made a lot of enemies in the ATS community because of it.

I appreciate his work and have an extensive library of his freeware and even his payware wagons, I just wish he'd worked with the other Ben from the get go or at the very least addressed and amicably fixed the situation once it came to light.

Apparently us Welsh are very stubborn, who'd of thunk...

 

"Apparently us Welsh are very stubborn, who'd of thunk..."

We Yorkies...we look over our shoulders and see you Taffs are catching up with us!

 

Ahem…maybe the last posts belong in a discussion of that particular dlc…. This is, after all, a general discussion about the general state of TSC.

 

In that case, essentially the game is fine...it's the addons to it that cause bother.

 

Does it really matter Kim? Forum threads will always oscillate between on and off topic, I counter that calling out "off topicness" derails further than anything else, my reply case in point.. Care to counter.. lol.

We have mouse scroll wheels for a reason.

 

Kim is certainly right, he was just politely pointing it out which shouldn't be condemned.

After all, it's more in the interest of people having issues with the MJW Class 60 - as it won't be seen if buried in this thread. Making a separate thread would be helpful - though I've downloaded it, but dropping it onto the track in Freeroam crashed my game, so I've dumped it and won't bother anymore, considering getting the JT version on their next sale.

 

I never suggested Kim was wrong and certainly didn't condemn him or his comment, an odd thing for you to say if I'm honest Torf.

But we are proving my case in point though aren't we.

 

Somehow we are

That was generally speaking, I've seen a lot of egos being triggered instead of just saying, yeah you're right, let's just make a MJW Class 60 thread for elaborating on this further.

Welcome back Reef!

 

Agreed.

Dánke.

 

Croese.