That is a point that has been raised in these forums since "forever" and I agree, it is one of their greatest advantages and, as you stated, will probably never be solved. I can see the attraction for those sims/games that only accept "commissioned" content from, usually, a small group of well established and experienced creators for their free or payware offerings.
Why do so few routes make it to the DLS ?
- Thread starter dangavel
- Start date
That is a point that has been raised in these forums since "forever" and I agree, it is one of their greatest advantages and, as you stated, will probably never be solved. I can see the attraction for those sims/games that only accept "commissioned" content from, usually, a small group of well established and experienced creators for their free or payware offerings.
I've been wondering about that as well. The route development curve is also getting pretty steep as well and that makes me wonder if route creation is also aimed at the pros while the rest of us struggle with the tools much like many other content-creation programs and games.
I hate to say it but the focus of what Trainz used to be, which made it fun and interesting to use, has been lost as the developers focus on the bells and whistles of for new versions that are too complex to use. It never used to be this way even going back to TANE which to be honest was an updated TS12 as much as N3V doesn't want to admit it.
I agree but I feel that this is a natural consequence of "consumer demand".
In the early days of Trainz there was a lot of poorly designed and created assets, routes included, made by very enthusiastic and well meaning creators and, I would argue, their contribution was invaluable. Today, judging from the posts about poor quality assets and the often quoted "lack of realism" that appear in these forums, those "standards" are no longer acceptable to the majority of users. This is the case in all areas of our modern fast paced world.
In those early days GMax was the de-facto "standard" for asset creators and it was relatively easy to master. While I did dabble in using GMax (but did not create any assets using it) I just do not have the time or interest to master Blender and buying 3DMax would be a waste of money for me.
Solutions? Some possibilities that I can think of (but I am not advocating any particular one):-
- Halt all progress (i.e. new developments such as HT Terrain and S20) in Trainz so us "old timers" can continue to enjoy our hobby like we used to. No prizes for guessing the eventual outcome there. OR
- Continue development but restrict DLS uploads to only a small cadre of well established and experienced creators who can follow "the rules" and keep up with the necessary advances in technology. This would eliminate the "community" aspect of Trainz. AND/OR
- Contract more professional creators to significantly boost the number and quality of the DLC offerings. Not sure of the viability or economics of that one.
My thoughts.
@pware
I think dangavel's routes are in a very high percentile (I am sure there are others, I just don't know about them). Quality of the work may be a problem in general, but not for his routes.So not part of the solution for good or better routes. A major problem is the packaging of assets that were once readily available. How are "professionals" immune from this?
- Continue development but restrict DLS uploads to only a small cadre of well established and experienced creators who can follow "the rules" and keep up with the necessary advances in technology. This would eliminate the "community" aspect of Trainz. AND/OR
- Contract more professional creators to significantly boost the number and quality of the DLC offerings. Not sure of the viability or economics of that one.
I think dangavel's routes are in a very high percentile (I am sure there are others, I just don't know about them). Quality of the work may be a problem in general, but not for his routes.So not part of the solution for good or better routes. A major problem is the packaging of assets that were once readily available. How are "professionals" immune from this?
GoofusClam57
Member
Last March, I fulfilled a lifetime desire deeply held since I was 4 years old, and my number one "bucket list" item, by completing a 7-year construction project on my one and only route (the Susquehanna Valley Railroad). I started in TANE and never migrated forward (too much trouble, and I was very busy building more stuff). I am completely satisfied with the result. For me, although it's taken some doing and the learning curve never ended, the product fully lived up to the blurb on the box of the 2010 Engineer's Edition: "Build and operate the railroad of your dreams". I would like nothing better than to be able to upload the route and share it with others but believe it to be impractical because I am now two Trainz versions back from the "state of the art" and have been in the habit of cloning and tinkering with the assets I use (including all locomotives, almost all rolling stock, and most structures). I presently have 1,832 customized assets on my route and, in my tinkering, I never paid any attention to the licensing agreements, making distribution of the route on the DLS "challenging", to say the least.
KotangaGirl
Pre-Grouping Railways Nut
The recent Uk DLC from ProTrain that has a number of significant faults that nobody seems to want to do anything about but are still being sold by N3V despite that raises some concern about that.
yeah I sympathize, I too fell into that trap , its so annoying that even if one wanted to just give an asset the ability to simply tilt or adjust height, in many cases the license would prohibit you from doing so and putting the adjusted version on the DLS so it could be used in a new route.
Interesting thoughts.
I tried numerous times to build routes from flat baseboards without any success, and it wasn't until I bought TransDEM that things took a leap forward. I started a large prototypical route in, I think, TS12. Once TANE appeared, I migrated the route across and continued, but the reason the route didn't see the light of day isn't because of any issue with the DLS or missing assets, but simply due to the length of time it would have taken to build and the realisation that there was little of operational interest beyond end to end operation. I binned the route despite having spent hundreds of hours on it.
Since then, I've started another large route with the aid of TransDEM, this time beginning in TRS19, and subsequently migrating it to TRS22/Trainz+. I've made every effort to try and ensure the assets on the route are DLS only, but it is hard to do with absolute certainty. My last upload contained a number of DLC items even though I thought I'd managed to avoid them and didn't think I'd actually bought any DLC beyond some rolling stock. Again, I've spent hundreds of hours across a few years on this route and the main barrier to me uploading it, is burnout. I like to think I have a high standard when it comes to creating a route, and to create something I know others would also be happy with is very time consuming. I've had to dial back on some of the detailing work or the route will outlast me. That said, I'm not fed up of this route as there's plenty of variety on it. My main worry is that it will no longer work in Trainz when it comes to the point of making it available.
One feature I haven't used as yet, and I didn't see anyone else mention it, is multiplayer surveyor. That's definitely the way to speed route construction along but how do you get a collaborator or two and know their work will be up to standard? I know a few other route creators whose work is top drawer and I'd be happy to work with, but they're busy enough with their own work.
I'll just have to see how many future versions of Trainz will support my route.
Cheers,
Innis
I tried numerous times to build routes from flat baseboards without any success, and it wasn't until I bought TransDEM that things took a leap forward. I started a large prototypical route in, I think, TS12. Once TANE appeared, I migrated the route across and continued, but the reason the route didn't see the light of day isn't because of any issue with the DLS or missing assets, but simply due to the length of time it would have taken to build and the realisation that there was little of operational interest beyond end to end operation. I binned the route despite having spent hundreds of hours on it.
Since then, I've started another large route with the aid of TransDEM, this time beginning in TRS19, and subsequently migrating it to TRS22/Trainz+. I've made every effort to try and ensure the assets on the route are DLS only, but it is hard to do with absolute certainty. My last upload contained a number of DLC items even though I thought I'd managed to avoid them and didn't think I'd actually bought any DLC beyond some rolling stock. Again, I've spent hundreds of hours across a few years on this route and the main barrier to me uploading it, is burnout. I like to think I have a high standard when it comes to creating a route, and to create something I know others would also be happy with is very time consuming. I've had to dial back on some of the detailing work or the route will outlast me. That said, I'm not fed up of this route as there's plenty of variety on it. My main worry is that it will no longer work in Trainz when it comes to the point of making it available.
One feature I haven't used as yet, and I didn't see anyone else mention it, is multiplayer surveyor. That's definitely the way to speed route construction along but how do you get a collaborator or two and know their work will be up to standard? I know a few other route creators whose work is top drawer and I'd be happy to work with, but they're busy enough with their own work.
I'll just have to see how many future versions of Trainz will support my route.
Cheers,
Innis
Ok so I recently ran into this issue (what was previously DLS content now in DLC with a higher version than DLS one) and I can't help but wonder if N3V couldn't just allow route creators to force an older DLS version on their routes. This should in theory avoid this whole issue of needing to download tons of DLC. They could add it to the dependencies list for the route as a right click option perhaps?
Another idea, maybe not allow items previously DLS to be only put in DLC unless it is also put in DLS?
It is insanely frustrating to spend loads of your own sometimes limited free time to build a route only to find items you included which were DLS content when added but are now high jacked by some DLC.
Just my thoughts.
Cheers
Walter
Another idea, maybe not allow items previously DLS to be only put in DLC unless it is also put in DLS?
It is insanely frustrating to spend loads of your own sometimes limited free time to build a route only to find items you included which were DLS content when added but are now high jacked by some DLC.
Just my thoughts.
Cheers
Walter
I actually investigated this situation some time ago and found that a solution had already been built into the (then) latest versions of Content Manager. Unless the situation has changed again then the following situation should apply:-
Extracted from the Wiki Document https://online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki...ng_the_Latest_or_an_Older_Version_of_an_Asset
| In the examples shown below, an updated asset, <kuid2:33404:501440:4>, is installed from a DLC package in one copy of Trainz (shown on the left). An earlier version of the same asset also exists, <kuid2:33404:501440:3>, as Installed from DLS in a different copy of Trainz (shown on the right). The updated version has not been uploaded to the DLS so there is no Newer version available status label. | |||
| |||
The updated asset is then used in a route and uploaded to the DLS. If that route is then installed in a copy of Trainz that does not have the packaged update, then:-
|
That would make a lot of sense and solve many problems but, as N3V has often stated, it is up to the creator of the updated DLS assets to make that decision. The creator could, for example, make an updated version of one of their DLS assets and decide to only release the update as part of their DLC (payware) package.
Agreed. My solution is to check all assets in my routes and sessions to eliminate any that are not on the DLS. Any assets that are labelled as "Packaged" I check to see that that exact version is also available on the DLS. Having more than one installation of the same version of Trainz is also an advantage in testing the availability of assets.
I have learnt many lessons from route building and uploading to the DLS. To keep the route DLS only, you need to have a separate install which has no DLC installed and is used specifically for building. An alternative for Steam users, is to have an install with only DLC and the DLC the building version ships with and not migrate the route to the next version of Trainz, which allows a greater range of assets to be used, but may lead to missing assets for people who purchase a newer version (eg. TRS25) in the future and don't have the previous version.
Filters can be used in Surveyor which can be set to; Payware, Built-in, Packaged, Modified etc. = False, to allow only DLS assets to be seen in asset selection. An unforunate side effect is that the more DLC you have installed, the less DLS assets you have available.
It's a bit restrictive, but a solution nonetheless.
cheers
Graeme
Hi Graeme --
"To keep the route DLS only, you need to have a separate install which has no DLC installed and is used specifically for building."
Even that don't work no more. See my thread here:
https://forums.auran.com/trainz/sho...ng-dependencies-at-quot-Unknown-location-quot
How does Content Manager know there is an updated version of a dependency somewhere?
Where is that "somewhere"?
It's certainly not on the Download Station.
Does Content Manager have access to the DLC routes which contain that updated dependency, but will not or can not access it for download?
I've been using and enjoying Trainz for quite a few years now, but I have to admit my level of frustration seems to be growing exponentially, maybe to the stage where I might just have to quit route construction.
Phil
"To keep the route DLS only, you need to have a separate install which has no DLC installed and is used specifically for building."
Even that don't work no more. See my thread here:
https://forums.auran.com/trainz/sho...ng-dependencies-at-quot-Unknown-location-quot
How does Content Manager know there is an updated version of a dependency somewhere?
Where is that "somewhere"?
It's certainly not on the Download Station.
Does Content Manager have access to the DLC routes which contain that updated dependency, but will not or can not access it for download?
I've been using and enjoying Trainz for quite a few years now, but I have to admit my level of frustration seems to be growing exponentially, maybe to the stage where I might just have to quit route construction.
Phil
I think the route I'm working on now may well will be my last to be free and public , in future i will probably just make routes for myself . The strain of trying to ensure that assets will be available when i add a route is just getting too much as i get older .
I got to that stage ages ago. My route building fervor isn't what it used to be, and my use of the program has dwindled substantially as well. A year or so ago, I stated my frustrations as I was ready to put everything into the rubbish bin and give up. Initially, I took a break thinking that I needed to step back and do something else and I tossed that off as me working on some complex music projects but in reality, that level of frustration hasn't left even with the "improvements" and goodies in the latest versions. In the end, I return to using the program less and less and find other things to do instead and more recently I don't even bother to power up the program unlike how it was even a few years ago.
I'm tired of being frustrated because the things that need fixing aren't, yet we're given all these neat new baubles to play with. It's time the developers sit back and think hard about what they're doing and may be even give the program a try. I know for a fact that the lead programmer doesn't touch the program. Herein lies the problem. If he actually tried the program as a user, rather than poking at the separate modules, he'd actually wake up and see what's being shoveled at us. All those nice new tools and features mean nothing if the whole package doesn't work.
How about fixing the interface with S20? Never mind those new goodies like HD terrain. Go back and get rid of the dark panels on either side of the screen. The screen is crowded as it is and minimizing the various pallets is great but what good is it if those panels remain and keep the screen crowded? It's like using one of the old websites with advertisements on either side of the screen and the viewing area was like looking through a porthole window.
Yes, I know it's still under development but as I said before it's like a house that's being renovated for the past 30 years. As a homeowner, I know that houses constantly need fixing but when the kitchen is pulled apart and has been for 20 years because it's being renovated, then it's time to step back and reassess the situation. If the programmers are too busy to do this, then there's something wrong, and I'll leave it at that.
Fully agree.
I have exactly the opposite opinion and experience. I am enjoying Trainz more than I used to and am loving the S20 interface - I know it isn't finished yet (looking forward to S2.1) and I still go back occasionally and use Classic. But S20 has improved my workflow and increased my "creation rate" compared to Classic. Many of the annoying repetitive and time consuming tasks in Classic have been automated in S20.
Yes, there are annoyances - the grey boxes that remain on both sides of the screen after moving, hiding and/or minimising all the palettes, is one, but the old Surveyor Classic also had its annoyances.
My opinions and, of course, others may disagree,
I feel that the "Packaged" issue has mostly made contributed routes unfeasible. Since sessions need routes, those are fading away as well. It seems like a straightforward issue to backtrack by N3V. But they have chosen not to do so. Each packaged asset still needs to be on their servers, so they must have some ulterior motive.
Good points.
As far as I can determine the following seem to apply:-
Built-in (also Base) - supplied as part of the Trainz installation. I have never been sure of the difference between "Built-in" and "Base". Updates of assets that are built-in can (and have) later become "Available for Download" from the DLS. Likewise, some DLS assets have become "Built-in" in newer versions of Trainz. Built-in assets are in a more compressed format than those on the DLS and load faster.
Freely available is not an official CM designation. "Available for Download", meaning on the DLS, would be the closest official designation. "Third Party" is a designation that sometimes appears - it can mean from a 3rd party site but can also mean that the original asset was on the DLS but has been withdrawn (repair and copyright violation are two reasons for the withdrawal).
Packaged - a "freeware" asset that is included in a DLC download. This is the one that causes the most issues since it mostly (but not always) means a DLS asset that is included in the DLC - a result of the policy of including all required assets in the one DLC download.
My observations.