Like many Trainz enthusiasts I enjoy downloading the many and varied routes from the DLS. Unfortunately it appears there are errors in many of them. Or they are “not quite right” from a taste point of view forcingthe user to either delete them again or begin altering or fixing them – often a hugely time-consuming business. At times a user ends up effectively doing the work the route-builder should have done inthe first place. I know that it has often been said – “ Hey its all freeware,if you don’t like it delete it”! However that’s missing the point. I’d rather give someone’s work a try out first in the hope that wont be necessary.
The best route creators put in enormous effort to build highly detailed, realistic railways –spectacular towns and cities, beautiful landscapes full of vegetation, and fantastically accurate track and signal layouts. Routes full of atmosphere of real world locations. Favorites of mine like this as examples are Sherman Hill by TrainzItalia and Protoclinch by TrainsPro Routes (bothUS), Oxford to Queens (Australia) Kent and East Sussex Railway and Ashburton to Windrush Railway (both UK).
On the other hand some routes come nowhere near this high standard – wobbly tracks, hardly any texturing, minimal, carelessly laid outbuildings if any, no trees or vegetation. There seems to be no regard given to aesthetics whatsoever. Bare boards with a giant switching/shunting yard, or a few miles of track with a couple of portals at either end. Not very good!
But many routes are in between – very promising, but when downloaded found to be aesthetically disappointing. Or with errors such as some missing assets that may be worth trying to fix depending on how much you like the route and think its worthwhile commiting time to what might be a massive job.
Recently for instance I downloaded a very large route I liked then made the shock discovery (having not noticed at first) that every single switch lever on every crossover was missing. I did every check I could think of via CM and concluded that the route was for an older pre 2010 version of Trainz and notideal for my TS12. But as I really did like the route I decided to go ahead and add all the hundreds of switch levers, only to find that the track would not accept any type I tried (all showing red/red arrows rather than red/green arrows). The only solution, I found, wasto cut out every single crossover track section and replace with another track type - a shorter option than replacing the entire track. Only then could I add a switchlever which worked correctly. Until this massive work in progress is completed my supposedly “new” route is redundant . I cant go where I want and AI wont operate. Very frustrating!
So what are some those irritating problems that need fixing withsome routes?
Missing assets. As mentioned above. Personally I have found this to occur with nearly every route download I have ever done. You simply have to go through the process in Content Manager under the “installed” tab to check if everything is there, whether showing warning signs and if committed, then retry downloading what’s missing. None of this is necessarily to do with the route creator, and more to do with obsolescence and that the DLS should be more clearly divided by Trainz versions. Creators could help more by always stating what version their route is built for. Not everyone does this.
No trackbedballasting. Track splines are in-built with ballast texturing. But if a route builder merely lays this on, say, a plain green ground texture it looks all wrong - bare and incomplete. You need to run matching-colored ballast stone(rock, ash or whatever) texture to create the effect of a wider trackbed along every track section of your route. Some people possibly forget to do this, but it’s worthwhile doing.
Inadequate landscape texturing. As mentioned above all too often a base colour like green (for UK routes for example) is laid and little more. Trainz provides a bewildering range oftextures for every environment - crop fields, meadows, marshes, forests and mountains – why not make full use ofthem. Same goes for trees and trackside vegetation. Learn about natural history– what flower and tree species grow in what habitat. Real world railway corridors are a haven for specific plants – in the UK for example – buddleia,common broom, foxgloves, and of course rosebay whose parachute seeds are spreadfar and wide along the network by the trains’ slipstreams.
As a showcase of how spectacularly detailed a route can bewith its full complement of assets, texturing and vegetation look no further than Angelah’s routes – for example – WestCoast Line, A Kentish Winter or Overhillsand Faraway. For me her work is on a level few others match. It raises Trainz route-building to a beautiful art! Clearly she has a great love of landscape and a highly developed aesthetic sense. And, mirroring the realworld, Trainz is as much about landscape as it is about railways.
Other things I am not keen on, though they are personal to me, are short routes and sameness. Short routes are just frustrating. There’s no scope, and once again you are forced to alter by merging to make something rather better. Some longer routes don’t have enough variation in the landscape - all farmland or all forest for example - over the entire route length. The real world may or may not be like this,but in Trainz it would be better to avoid the tedium of some real rail journeys. And better still avoid forcing the user into having to alter and adapt the route to avoid boredom.
In conclusion I admit I have adapted a lot of downloaded routes both through necessity because of errors and because I didn’t like its shortcomings, such as for example not enough or inappropriate industries, or industries in the wrong place – like a seaport suddenly appearing in what is essentially an inland route without giving it reference by having an extended rocky coastline for a considerable distance on either side.
Most changes I have done for my own use and I have never uploaded them to the DLS. It seems from what I have read many route creators are not bothered if you make changes, some actively say it is okay to do so as long as you don’t make money out of it. Some developers like for example the Checkrail guy (dermy) seem to make a song a dance about it in his lengthy “licence”disclaimer which I find slightly amusing. (His East Kentucky route is excellent right enough, though with missing tunnels and bridges needing fixed after I downloaded). Everyone who uses Trainz knows that there are masses of excellent routes on the DLS that you don’t pay a penny for. Why would anyone pay money for what they can get for free. So why get hot under the collar that suddenly there is going to be a global outbreak of intellectual property theft. Seems pretty unlikely somehow?
Meanwhile despite everything I have said about problem withroutes, I appreciate the huge amount of work and time many people have put increating routes and thank them for their generosity in letting us share in the rewards.
The best route creators put in enormous effort to build highly detailed, realistic railways –spectacular towns and cities, beautiful landscapes full of vegetation, and fantastically accurate track and signal layouts. Routes full of atmosphere of real world locations. Favorites of mine like this as examples are Sherman Hill by TrainzItalia and Protoclinch by TrainsPro Routes (bothUS), Oxford to Queens (Australia) Kent and East Sussex Railway and Ashburton to Windrush Railway (both UK).
On the other hand some routes come nowhere near this high standard – wobbly tracks, hardly any texturing, minimal, carelessly laid outbuildings if any, no trees or vegetation. There seems to be no regard given to aesthetics whatsoever. Bare boards with a giant switching/shunting yard, or a few miles of track with a couple of portals at either end. Not very good!
But many routes are in between – very promising, but when downloaded found to be aesthetically disappointing. Or with errors such as some missing assets that may be worth trying to fix depending on how much you like the route and think its worthwhile commiting time to what might be a massive job.
Recently for instance I downloaded a very large route I liked then made the shock discovery (having not noticed at first) that every single switch lever on every crossover was missing. I did every check I could think of via CM and concluded that the route was for an older pre 2010 version of Trainz and notideal for my TS12. But as I really did like the route I decided to go ahead and add all the hundreds of switch levers, only to find that the track would not accept any type I tried (all showing red/red arrows rather than red/green arrows). The only solution, I found, wasto cut out every single crossover track section and replace with another track type - a shorter option than replacing the entire track. Only then could I add a switchlever which worked correctly. Until this massive work in progress is completed my supposedly “new” route is redundant . I cant go where I want and AI wont operate. Very frustrating!
So what are some those irritating problems that need fixing withsome routes?
Missing assets. As mentioned above. Personally I have found this to occur with nearly every route download I have ever done. You simply have to go through the process in Content Manager under the “installed” tab to check if everything is there, whether showing warning signs and if committed, then retry downloading what’s missing. None of this is necessarily to do with the route creator, and more to do with obsolescence and that the DLS should be more clearly divided by Trainz versions. Creators could help more by always stating what version their route is built for. Not everyone does this.
No trackbedballasting. Track splines are in-built with ballast texturing. But if a route builder merely lays this on, say, a plain green ground texture it looks all wrong - bare and incomplete. You need to run matching-colored ballast stone(rock, ash or whatever) texture to create the effect of a wider trackbed along every track section of your route. Some people possibly forget to do this, but it’s worthwhile doing.
Inadequate landscape texturing. As mentioned above all too often a base colour like green (for UK routes for example) is laid and little more. Trainz provides a bewildering range oftextures for every environment - crop fields, meadows, marshes, forests and mountains – why not make full use ofthem. Same goes for trees and trackside vegetation. Learn about natural history– what flower and tree species grow in what habitat. Real world railway corridors are a haven for specific plants – in the UK for example – buddleia,common broom, foxgloves, and of course rosebay whose parachute seeds are spreadfar and wide along the network by the trains’ slipstreams.
As a showcase of how spectacularly detailed a route can bewith its full complement of assets, texturing and vegetation look no further than Angelah’s routes – for example – WestCoast Line, A Kentish Winter or Overhillsand Faraway. For me her work is on a level few others match. It raises Trainz route-building to a beautiful art! Clearly she has a great love of landscape and a highly developed aesthetic sense. And, mirroring the realworld, Trainz is as much about landscape as it is about railways.
Other things I am not keen on, though they are personal to me, are short routes and sameness. Short routes are just frustrating. There’s no scope, and once again you are forced to alter by merging to make something rather better. Some longer routes don’t have enough variation in the landscape - all farmland or all forest for example - over the entire route length. The real world may or may not be like this,but in Trainz it would be better to avoid the tedium of some real rail journeys. And better still avoid forcing the user into having to alter and adapt the route to avoid boredom.
In conclusion I admit I have adapted a lot of downloaded routes both through necessity because of errors and because I didn’t like its shortcomings, such as for example not enough or inappropriate industries, or industries in the wrong place – like a seaport suddenly appearing in what is essentially an inland route without giving it reference by having an extended rocky coastline for a considerable distance on either side.
Most changes I have done for my own use and I have never uploaded them to the DLS. It seems from what I have read many route creators are not bothered if you make changes, some actively say it is okay to do so as long as you don’t make money out of it. Some developers like for example the Checkrail guy (dermy) seem to make a song a dance about it in his lengthy “licence”disclaimer which I find slightly amusing. (His East Kentucky route is excellent right enough, though with missing tunnels and bridges needing fixed after I downloaded). Everyone who uses Trainz knows that there are masses of excellent routes on the DLS that you don’t pay a penny for. Why would anyone pay money for what they can get for free. So why get hot under the collar that suddenly there is going to be a global outbreak of intellectual property theft. Seems pretty unlikely somehow?
Meanwhile despite everything I have said about problem withroutes, I appreciate the huge amount of work and time many people have put increating routes and thank them for their generosity in letting us share in the rewards.
