I suggest that we all drop this as everyone has and is entitled to their own opinion which by its very nature will be different.
On a side note, I think its really time US freight routes drop the Kuju Rolling Stock, they are getting tiresome to look at. Just at least used the ones from Marias Pass or make new ones.....
Yeah but what's the point? They're in the game and won't get deleted. Many of them were the base for later upgrades. It's all there No offense, but I think this thread's pretty pointless.
I see you have completely ignored triznya.andras's post. From doing research in places like modelling forums it is clear that "that's what the hex code is" will not get you actual accuracy to rail blue as seen in real life.
At the same time though, DTG could, if they so wanted to, Upgrade all of them and any third party stuff would have to update on their end or just retire the product. Its part of the conditions of modding, the Game Developer is not responsible if any mods are broken by an update to their game. Personally i wouldn't mind seeing an update to the base game models. Would definitely help draw in some new players if the default stuff you get looks good and has more features. Of course its unlikely DTG would do that given the small size of the TS Classic team. Resources better spent on Core developments to improve simulation performance and features.
They're not going to do that, the Kuju packs are essential requirements for a huge amount of content. Withdrawing it would not only break the majority of user creations but most or all of DTG's own DLC pre-TS2013. However DTG are fully aware of the damage updating the Kuju assets will cause, breaking things up to 16 years old. They can be weird sometimes but DTG are not braindead. It wouldn't draw in new players. As has been described before, almost all of the Kuju content has been replaced and these replacements are better in every single way. Only the Class 166 and BR294 have no other alternatives - yet. Plus, they haven't been consistent default content since TS2013 released. Except for a few editions of TS a new player would never be able to get these packs without specifically buying them or a DLC that is bundled with them. Even the worst of the current default content in TS Classic is better than any of the Kuju content.
I see you have not read my post properly. No one uses hex codes in real life, for actual physical paint, no, which is why I mentioned that Rail Blue is a British Standard colour, with real life mixing formulas for it. This is not a modelling forum though, this is a computer game where RGB values are relevant. You absolutely can get accurate colour representations on screen, and reference RGB values for them if you understand colour profiling and have a calibrated workflow. How else do you think as a photographer I can produce colour accurate imagery of client's products ready for print? The only reason people suggest that numerical values are not accurate, is because most people's screens are not accurate and for most people, there are just too many variables to consider. I go to immense lengths here to ensure my work is colour accurate: Munsell Grey walls, high CRI lighting, hardware calibrated monitors costing £3k each etc. It doesn't stop you viewing it on cheap, uncalibrated screen in poor lighting conditions and seeing it completely differently than I do, but that's your fault, not mine. Show me a colour, and I can provide you with a RGB value for that colourspace that will be accurate assuming there's a colourspace standard with sufficient gamut for it. Whether your screen and viewing conditions allow you to see it accurately is a different matter. I think you are being pedantic here though, as the difference between those two colours being discussed is VAST and very noticeable on any screen, no matter how poor. The Kuju models in question are the wrong colour. Very, and obviously wrong.
And? There's more to paint colour than mixing. And I have no idea what your rant about RGB values is about.
The RGB thing might be related to an earlier discussion where the BR Blue has been also described with a different standard, which has fairly different RGB. And a long term itch that pretty much every single release through TSC life has been different. The Class 101 and 455 are relatively dark But the Mk1 (and Mk2) is fairly bright I don't have photos myself but the two BR Blue packs have been noted to be different, thus hard to mix. I suppose this section is of interest, including notes about photos: wikipedia BritishRail corporate liveries I guess over time the pressure builds up in those who care
Re: Your photo. They are the same colour, one weathered matt, one still gloss. They are clearly the same colour though... the same hue. The Kuju 37 in question wasn't even blue.. it was aqua. Either your monitor is atrocious, or you are colour blind. The "rant" about RGB is because you stated that hex values are pointless, which is just incorrect.
Pot calling kettle here. Can someone please call a stop to this incessant bickering? I tried earlier to no avail. Let's discuss things that matter to us all instead of to some.
The photo is of five newly painted locomotives lined up outside the factory for a publicity shot. Yet even in this case the shades clearly differ. If you actually do a bit of research it becomes clear that BR blue, as actually applied in real life, varied quite a bit, especially once weathering set in, no matter what the official standards said BR blue was. It is worth remembering that more factors affect the colour of something than the colour of the top layer of paint.
So trains were never stripped when they had BR Blue applied, so still had green underneath. In these cases the trains really were aqua, although I'm not sure the Class 37 that started this whole argument was the train in question (Deltic perhaps?)
I'm not defending the Kuju models. I'm criticising your position of "if it deviates from the official colour regulations, it's inaccurate".
Not if they were made to directly replace the old ones (ie same filenames, folder structure etc) like they did with e g the Class 47 and Mk1s
No, directly replacing the old ones is exactly the issue. The BIN files would have to be updated so sound packs would not work anymore. Updated GeoPcDx files would break all reskins due to different mapping. Updated loco numbering systems would break scenarios, particularly shunting scenarios. But as bad of an idea it is, it's also a pointless one as I have tried to explain multiple times. Class 37 - AP Class 37 packs Class 47 - Huddersfield Line HST - AP Enhancement Packs (which would be broken by the update) BR101 - Virtual Railroads BR101 BR143 - Virtual Railroads BR143 BR151 - Virtual Railroads BR151 BR52 - Forge Simulations BR52 ES44AC - countless US DLCs SD40-2 - countless US DLCs EMD F7 - countless US DLCs All of the above trains have various replacements that have existed for years and are far better than what DTG could ever achieve. You seem to be insisting on updating the Kuju assets but I hope the message comes across that doing so is absolutely meaningless and actually will make TS worse.
Updating the old assets will and should not happen. You're free to swap stock yourself if you want to - not everybody wants that. Use LocoSwap, TSTools and the Editor. The mentioned Class 47 update happened in the very early days of RailWorks. The Kuju assets are now preserved legacy. Changing these locos can lead to unforeseen consequences, especially with scenarios that have trains overtaking the player at some point. That's because the dispatcher calculates the timetables based upon the loco's specifications (simulation.bin). There's already some old scenarios that refuse to save again when opened in the editor, showing multiple pathing errors (e.g. SD40-2HN on Cajon Pass) The Kuju assets are legacy - keep your hands off Btw I still enjoy a session of classic DooM on 320x200 using a CRT filter.
I didn't say DTG retiring the Kuju models, But the Third party reskins would have to either update to work with any potential upgrades or be retired.
No, you're right... it's done on purpose to simulate weathering and variation, which is why the 37, and the 87 with WCMLoS and its coaching stock are all the same identically wrong colour. I was clearly mistaken. I mean, it's perfectly normal to expect every Inter-City train on the WCML to be the same incorrect colour, and suggesting that it was a mistake of any kind is utterly unacceptable.
Pookeyhead please just accept that your opinions are noted and other people have a right for theirs to be. If you are so sure you’re right why not sit quiet in that knowledge instead of your sarcasm which only weakens your case (in that folk get tired).
Hey, not sure how much part I played, but I certainly don't want to annoy you! I personally appreciate your crusade trying to show that the world isn't flat, but in fact round! You could see from the last posts here that we aren't really contesting that. It's more about preserving and avoiding problems. As many noted, swapping is possible which should allow for the best of both worlds: legacy content remains functional for those interested, while the scenarios can become authentic for those who care by using better models, colors. It's like my relationship with Classic WoW, I totally like its raw, old feel, but it still aged noticeably and I enjoy the updated versions. So your contribution is very much helpful - moving forward. My take on the matter, it's not the end of the world to have some odd colors, it reduces the uniform feel. (Plus, if these models were better, AP would go out of business.)
That's not a position people will accept easily. Reskins and updates far newer haven't been updated. A reskin from 2008 almost certainly won't be, and therefore any scenario that would hypothetically use it will be partially or fully broken.
I mean personally rather than the rolling stock (which aren't terrible*, well unless you are comparing to AP of course ), I'm sure perhaps all the buildings could probably do with updates - even to textures though to be fair . (that wouldn't affect anywhere near as much as a train would ). (notes - that's just personal opinion of course - not speaking for anyone but myself ) Then again there is probably about 0% chance of that happening sadly. * I'm not saying they are good either though.
No, I'm criticizing the method you use to determine the colour's "accuracy". There are building reskins though, and route builders may have used the buildings in unconventional ways. Assets that have been engrained into the community, like those of the Asset Pack, should probably not be tampered with.
That's why I also said textures - an update to textures to improve the visuals wouldn't make much of a difference - but I do see your side too though. (then again not that it would ever happen anyway )
I find most of the old buildings nice to look at in various ways, many of them are a bit painting-like. I'm quite happy with my recent shots involving houses on old routes like the ECML or Falmouth. That said, some routes have shadow errors on homes, updating those would be very much welcome. Overall, this thread is an interesting question: when, where and how is the point where a new version of the classic assets is due? We have two route remasters I know of, PDL & Woodhead, were they a financial success? (I enjoy the PDL as you can surely tell.) Would we end up going in circles? Reissuing gradually all historical DLC as v2, then v3, then... Or should we just accept that TSC will inevitably die eventually, so might as well explore a few more areas instead while it lasts?
The golden rule is still: If you're updating legacy material that has asset A, then instead of overwriting asset A you need to create asset B and refer to this in the route files
