A general observation about routes...

[nicky9499]

Please don't get this wrong, I was not suggesting in any way the enforcement (oh god no) of any "standards" whatsoever, not at all. It's just that some of these things absolutely cannot exist in the real world, like floating stuff and rails that cross each other at different heights at the frog. These are the kind of things that can be spotted and fixed easily, if only everyone was not trying to rush through everything. In fact, if done right the first time there is no need to go back and "fix" the errors.

Of course other aspects are debatable. If someone modeled this exact scene in Trainz you'd think he or she forgot to straighten a spline.

 

[JCitron]

Fair points Nick, but how much of that is down to the bugs and inefficiencies in Surveyor as much as the route builders' efforts to compensate for them?

The tools are awkward, but if enough time is spent figuring out how to get around the limitations, the end results can be quite rewarding. Sadly both the texturing tools and terrain modification tools are like drawing with fat crayons which make blending and smoothing almost impossible in some areas. More recently I've been using retaining walls which I've customized with matching ground, ballast, and tarmac textures. These help mitigate the floating tracks and even roads, but the extra work needed to get this done can be discouraging at times. The more recent pauses in Surveyor, why TADD has to write to the database when we're in the middle of moving the mouse is beyond me, don't make things any better. There's nothing like having the mouse movement pause when a slight adjustment is needed to some track splines. It like having a sticky tuning hammer when trying to tune a piano!

We have to keep in mind that even when a route is "up to our standards", it's very easy to still find stuff that needs adjusting. Even now I am still going over my more recent routes and still fixing things that I find out of place. I find that getting down to eye level and walking the tracks helps spot things that are out of place.

We need to keep in mind that a creative effort, such as route building is like any artistic work. It takes time to get things right, and rushing to produce a product only makes things look sloppy. As a classically trained pianist, I've spent many, many years learning and perfecting the pieces I have learned. Undoing bad mistakes, however, is the most difficult because of bad habits. This is the same as undoing bad construction in an already built route.

John

 

[rickf77]

Morning All; Hope this isn't too far off the topic. I'm just curious about unfinished routes being uploaded. For example, I saw one a few minutes ago, called "checking" or something like that. I'm not complaining, I'm just wondering why folks do this. Is it in some way helpful to the person who uploaded it? Is the person looking for feedback? Again, I don't care about it being there, I just don't understand the reason for all the "test" routes (I guess that's what they are?).

Cheers .... Rick

 

[pware]

Unfinished layouts are posted for all sorts of reasons, one of which (feedback) you have mentioned. For some creators all the challenge is in the track work so they post layouts with no landscaping (flat terrain), no ground textures and no scenery. Some use DEM data and the TransDEM program to create the landscape but add no textures or scenery. Some downloaders prefer these "bare" layouts so that they can add their own features.

I am certain that there are a few who simply get bored with a project and uploaded it "as is". I have noticed an increase in unfinished layouts and those with "Autosaved" in their title since Trainz became available for tablet computers but this may be just a coincidence.

My thoughts.

 

[pware]

A picture says a thousand words, so I made a handy picture guide of how to treat Bad Trackwork Intolerance Syndrome...

That made me go and have a closer look at my current project and I found a few "nasties" that I was able to correct but there was one point in your post that is not a sin in all situations.

Turnout radii - I agree with your point for high and moderate speed tracks, but not for low speed tracks.

 

[Vern]

The tools are awkward, but if enough time is spent figuring out how to get around the limitations, the end results can be quite rewarding. Sadly both the texturing tools and terrain modification tools are like drawing with fat crayons which make blending and smoothing almost impossible in some areas.

Actually compared to TS2014 (Railworks) the texturing tools in Trainz are much better. It's the track laying system which lets it down, hopefully that is all set to change in T:ANE.

However I have to say what N3V should be aiming to provide in this day and age is this sort of environment that is possible in a 9 year old flight sim and looks just as good at ground level than at 15,000 feet.

http://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showt...-Simulations-Scotland-Scenery-Haggis-Overload

How about that, Mr Hilliam?!

 

[nicky9499]

That made me go and have a closer look at my current project and I found a few "nasties" that I was able to correct but there was one point in your post that is not a sin in all situations.

Turnout radii - I agree with your point for high and moderate speed tracks, but not for low speed tracks.

Certainly correct Peter, as shown by boyerm25 earlier, industrial sidings are an exception. However most routes still have unrealistically sharp turnouts on mainlines. Let's not name examples to keep the thread civil, just that in my observation this practice is still very pervasive.

 

[nicky9499]

Morning All; Hope this isn't too far off the topic. I'm just curious about unfinished routes being uploaded. For example, I saw one a few minutes ago, called "checking" or something like that. I'm not complaining, I'm just wondering why folks do this. Is it in some way helpful to the person who uploaded it? Is the person looking for feedback? Again, I don't care about it being there, I just don't understand the reason for all the "test" routes (I guess that's what they are?).

Cheers .... Rick

Many of these are mobile uploads. Either these users don't know better or they are doing it on purpose - using the DLS like as if it's their personal storage and backup space.

 

[shaneturner12]

There is another reason why 'unfinished' routes/sessions are being uploaded, and that's by those who are testing the multiplayer facilities.

Shane

 

[JCitron]

And... it maybe that their mobile version doesn't have any local storage available so it uses the cloud, I mean DLS instead. It would be nice if the mobile versions had a different build ID so we wouldn't see the content.

In addition the unfinished views could also be Surveyor's quick thumbnail of the route in progress. I noticed that when I modified another route I was working on and merged an unfinished route. The once pretty photo of my route became a baseboard with a couple of trackmarks instead.

John

 

[Railwoodman]

This has been brought up before, but could a grading system smooth over some ( but not all ) of the issues brought up in this discussion.

A grade as to finished (AKA track work and secrecy )
A grade as to prototypical route.
A grade for content used ( DL only to privet content used )
A grade to payware use

and a section for only example of use of content.

It would let the user have information before downloading it. This has been done to some extent, but not on a consistent basis.

 

[SuperFudd]

Hi Railwoodman,

Generally a good concept, however:
Giving a "grade as to prototypical route" would not be a good idea, if you mean the more prototypical the better. Some of the highest quality work I have seen is model railroad based and very not prototypical. Many (most?) will enjoy some very un-prototypical layouts/routes over those prototypical.
The concept of a "grade" for "DL only to private content used" would be invalid. Don't forget to include Built In Only.
How do you assign a grade to "payware use"? The more payware the worse?
Please expand on "section for only example of use of content".

 

[Railwoodman]

Yea I would fully agree, I've have found routes routes fictional, and prototypical vary well done. And great to run. Others are fantastic done but over task my PC to the point I can't run them. So a indentation of what would be required to run would be nice. I've found the better route builder and those who make content do this already, but not all.

Overall: track work, how finished, size, and build in content only. If custom content is needed, from were if possible. This I know has been beat to death, but hunting down missing content isn't a fun time, only to find out it's not needed, no longer available, or payware.

There are many routes that I think really need there own category, they are of the examples of use of content, or how to install content.