maxandfeeze
yaya
WE NEED EXPLOSIONZ OKAY?
lol
lol
collisions
- Thread starter mastertom88
- Start date
maxandfeeze
yaya
oooooops
2 postz
But we need phisicks lick hl2
2 postz
But we need phisicks lick hl2
freightcar2
New member
I no like explosions!
I want trains that pile-up, buildings that collapse when hit, shattered glass in a wreck...etc..etc...etc...:wave:
I want trains that pile-up, buildings that collapse when hit, shattered glass in a wreck...etc..etc...etc...:wave:
hpoznanski
Splat, I hit alps!
in the meantime try using the "Coupler mask" rule. mask the front couplers of each colliding train and DRIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
jadebullet
might be back?
I would like to say that i do feel a need for better collisions in TRS. Nothing as extreme as blood and gore, and i say that there should be no deformation involved at all(think of the people who make third party locos.) but i do feel the need for better physics. my train should tip if i run a turn too fast. I also dont really like how everything passes through each other train car wise. I can understand buildings but not rail cars.
applegathc
NoT tHe StAtUeS!
MSTS Influence
TRS2006 should ask the MSTS programmers for some ideas. I kno wthis sounds stupid, but it might help. Cuz the derailments in TRS are stupid.
TRS2006 should ask the MSTS programmers for some ideas. I kno wthis sounds stupid, but it might help. Cuz the derailments in TRS are stupid.
freightcar2
New member
100% agreed!I really don't understand why you need detailed crashes because this is a train simulator not a crashing simulator and whole point is not to crash. I think it is really stupid that some people think that 'oooh it would be well cool if we had crashes and it all blew up' becasue we don't and there are alot (and I mean ALOT) of things that come before it in improving trainz.
This crashing thing is really stupid, I'm shocked how far its come and how people have supported this....
My 2p
Robert
This crashing thing is really stupid, I'm shocked how far its come and how people have supported this....
My 2p
Robert
There are two separate issues here:
1. Under what conditions is a collision detected. The current system only checks couplings, not the whole vehicle, so vehicles can partially pass through each other which is highly unrealistic. It would nice if this could be fixed in the future by using bounding boxes of roughly the same shape and size as the vehicles, provided that wouldn't impose too great a processing load.
2. What happens when a collision occurs. The current system often has vehicles flying about for great distances very unrealistically, whereas all that's needed in most cases is to simply derail the vehicles and nothing else. As Trainz is a simulator and not a shoot 'em up game, I wouldn't favour adding explosions and other such effects. Deforming vehicles would (I think) add enormously to asset creation complexity and to processing at runtime, to little good purpose. There are plenty of alternative computer games available for people who want to experience death and destruction.
Just my 2c-worth.
John
1. Under what conditions is a collision detected. The current system only checks couplings, not the whole vehicle, so vehicles can partially pass through each other which is highly unrealistic. It would nice if this could be fixed in the future by using bounding boxes of roughly the same shape and size as the vehicles, provided that wouldn't impose too great a processing load.
2. What happens when a collision occurs. The current system often has vehicles flying about for great distances very unrealistically, whereas all that's needed in most cases is to simply derail the vehicles and nothing else. As Trainz is a simulator and not a shoot 'em up game, I wouldn't favour adding explosions and other such effects. Deforming vehicles would (I think) add enormously to asset creation complexity and to processing at runtime, to little good purpose. There are plenty of alternative computer games available for people who want to experience death and destruction.
Just my 2c-worth.
John
I really don't understand why you need detailed crashes because this is a train simulator not a crashing simulator and whole point is not to crash. I think it is really stupid that some people think that 'oooh it would be well cool if we had crashes and it all blew up' becasue we don't and there are alot (and I mean ALOT) of things that come before it in improving trainz.
This crashing thing is really stupid, I'm shocked how far its come and how people have supported this....
My 2p
Robert
Robert, I agree !
There are several things that are more important in a sim, to me, then realistic crashes. Hopefully the programmers spend their 'extra' time on these other items (whatever they might be) ?
Seeing if one can reach the highest unrealistic speed, seeing who can make an engine jump the farthest, are far from what I am interested in !
It will remain up to Auran .
My thoughts ---DLR
jadebullet
might be back?
This is exactly what i am talking about. i agree with the other posts too. We don't need explosions or deforming. Bit i would like a little more realistic physics when it comes to collision detection.
Yes i know that this is a train running simulator, not a crashing simulator. But as i have explained before, if i screw up i at least want to have the satisfaction of seeing the train derail relisticly, like if i run a closed switch with three cars it would be nice to see just those three cars derail slightly. Or if i dont pull into a siding far enough, and a train clips the back corner of the last car, rather than running through it, or derailing and the entire train derailing and running through each other, have it come off the tracks realisticly.
One of the reasons that i want more realistic collisions is i would like to set up a scenario where at the beginning, two AI trains hit each other and derail, then the user has to run a wreck train to the crash so that cleanup can begin.
Also when a train runs a turn too fast i would like the consist to tip, not just drive off the tracks unrealisticly.
jadebullet,
Something that I had not considered !
Possibly a less dramatic derailment and loose the exclaimation marks ??
But there are sooooo many things I hope are addressed first .
My thoughts ---DLR
jadebullet
might be back?
Yeah there are things that need to take priority. This would pretty much be detail work.
freightcar2
New member
What we need is if trains hit buffers or each other they fly and do summersaults like in MSTS. Not deforming, not explosions. Just what i said.
jadebullet
might be back?
no doing summersaults is unrealistic. Ive seen a test vid of some brittish engine hitting a buffer and it just drove off of the track and just oblitorated itself but it didnt summersault.
Here is the vid. OK it was a railcar not a buffer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHtRZ_k0s7M
anyway, there should be no crumbling, the trains should tip when going around turns too fast, and it should be realistic physics. No sliding for miles after leaving the track. The train should pretty much slow down to a stop after a few hundred feet to a few hundred yards. Also the train cars should do similar to what the train cars did in the movie Hancock, (but only if it is feasable. As in the right speed, the right amount of stopping of the engine, ect)
Also if a car runs the grade crossing and gets hit by the train it should be flung by the engine(again no crumpling or gore) and the engine should have a slight chance of derailing, depending on what type of vehical it is. Also maybe have some spillable products. like when you make a product such as coal you have to make the spilled version of it too.
Here is the vid. OK it was a railcar not a buffer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHtRZ_k0s7M
anyway, there should be no crumbling, the trains should tip when going around turns too fast, and it should be realistic physics. No sliding for miles after leaving the track. The train should pretty much slow down to a stop after a few hundred feet to a few hundred yards. Also the train cars should do similar to what the train cars did in the movie Hancock, (but only if it is feasable. As in the right speed, the right amount of stopping of the engine, ect)
Also if a car runs the grade crossing and gets hit by the train it should be flung by the engine(again no crumpling or gore) and the engine should have a slight chance of derailing, depending on what type of vehical it is. Also maybe have some spillable products. like when you make a product such as coal you have to make the spilled version of it too.
freightcar2
New member
Trains do Summersaults in MSTS. They fly up and flip.:hehe:
