The worst things about Railworks are the AI and the physics. Going up a 3% grade at 1 notch of throttle with a fully loaded train, is not my idea of anything but a kids game.
I Finally Erased RailWorks
- Thread starter boleyd
- Start date
The worst things about Railworks are the AI and the physics. Going up a 3% grade at 1 notch of throttle with a fully loaded train, is not my idea of anything but a kids game.
raildumper
Awaiting...
Going up a 3% grade at 1 notch of throttle all depends on the creator of that locomotive. There are setups for it, just like in Trainz. My idea idea of a kids game is : unrealistic looking turnouts, unrealistic curves and unrealistic flat graphics.
I have a flight-sim friend that has a fairly new $2,000 gaming PC, and Railworks runs like a lead balloon on it. Frame rates in the 20's if he is lucky, and stutters galore. If he turns everything off , it is passable. I think he paid about $4 for Railworks last year when they had a sale, and he still feels like he was overcharged.
Plus honestly, I think most who are deleting up to 50GB worth of product in exchange for 7GB worth of product because they are happier aren't caring too much about graphics superiority. For me it boils down to form and function and Trainz blew me away..
Graphically though, it does a fine job and depending on the route I've already seen it hold its own with Railworks.
I also wasted no time stripping the paint jobs off freeware and repainting it for my personal railroad..
Last edited:
raildumper
Awaiting...
Something is wrong with his PC. My Intel i7 2.6 with 6MB Ram and nVidia GTX 560 runs Railworks like a charm. (Or you are lying, I can see from other posts of yours you are a fanboy) Be honest
I think you are a rude arrogant troll trying to stir up hate and discontent on a Trainz forum, but that's just my opinion. Others will think what they want.
raildumper
Awaiting...
I think you are the troll and trying to make people purchase an outdated sim.
By the way, i also think RS.com should sue this site for all lies about their sim posted here, It is harming their sales for no reason, just because their sim is focused a different way. I guess N3V is very happy with it, that´s why this thread is not closed yet.
By the way, i also think RS.com should sue this site for all lies about their sim posted here, It is harming their sales for no reason, just because their sim is focused a different way. I guess N3V is very happy with it, that´s why this thread is not closed yet.
shaneturner12
Tutorial Creator
That would be difficult, as they would have to prove that what was said is false, which is not always easy.
Anyway, one of the major things holding RW back is the fact that they will only use Steam for distribution (correct me if I'm wrong there), which some users do not like due to the restrictions placed on users as well as giving Valve the ability to terminate the account of any user without warning. Also, from my own experience, the Steam client also uses a lot of memory, which is not good if the system it is running on does not have much memory.
Shane
Anyway, one of the major things holding RW back is the fact that they will only use Steam for distribution (correct me if I'm wrong there), which some users do not like due to the restrictions placed on users as well as giving Valve the ability to terminate the account of any user without warning. Also, from my own experience, the Steam client also uses a lot of memory, which is not good if the system it is running on does not have much memory.
Shane
"Going up a 3% grade at 1 notch of throttle all depends on the creator of that locomotive. There are setups for it, just like in Trainz."
Disagree, with Trainz you have one engine spec file to fool with, railworks has a whole bunch of complicated files with internal paths and incoherent programming language apparently made up during a KUJU office party. You have to start with editing the loco's BIN file to point to the engine simulation folder you intend to hack, then wade through all the
<EngineSimulationContainer>
<cEngineSimContainerBlueprint>
<EngineSimFile>
<iBlueprintLibrary-cAbsoluteBlueprintID>
<BlueprintSetID>
<iBlueprintLibrary-cBlueprintSetID>
<Provider d:type="cDeltaString">Kuju</Provider>
<Product d:type="cDeltaString">RailSimulatorUS</Product>
</iBlueprintLibrary-cBlueprintSetID>
</BlueprintSetID>
<BlueprintID d:type="cDeltaString">RailVehicles\Diesel\SD40-2\Default\Simulation\SD40-2 Engine Simulation.xml</BlueprintID>
</iBlueprintLibrary-cAbsoluteBlueprintID>
</EngineSimFile>
</cEngineSimContainerBlueprint>
</EngineSimulationContainer>
fluff for each bit of data to make sure it's pointing to the correct folder before you even start changing values. When you do finally get it all working you discover the core physics pays no attention whatsoever to loaded versus empty, in fact the resistance is calculated at the start of the scenario - so if, for example, you start with a single GP9 and couple onto 100 loaded coal hoppers you can run full tilt boogie up a 4% grade because the physics is now set for a single GP9 with nothing coupled on. If you start with the GP9 coupled onto that 100 car train you won't be able to move even after uncoupling because the weight stays with the loco. Load or unload all cars in the train and the weight is the same, couple on more cars or uncouple half the cars and the weight stays the same. The game was programmed for British commuter rail and does not adapt well to anything else.
"My idea idea of a kids game is : unrealistic looking turnouts, unrealistic curves and unrealistic flat graphics."
Now there I agree with you, it's all a matter of taste but in my opinion railworks looks better, but it's not much good for anything except screenshots. If them KUJU Klutzes could make tracklaying tools that were easy to use and generated realistic looking switches with ease on their first try, why can't Auran/N3V do it after all these years? Incorporate the Railworks tracklaying tools and switches into Trainz and you would have a perfect simulator in my book.
Disagree, with Trainz you have one engine spec file to fool with, railworks has a whole bunch of complicated files with internal paths and incoherent programming language apparently made up during a KUJU office party. You have to start with editing the loco's BIN file to point to the engine simulation folder you intend to hack, then wade through all the
<EngineSimulationContainer>
<cEngineSimContainerBlueprint>
<EngineSimFile>
<iBlueprintLibrary-cAbsoluteBlueprintID>
<BlueprintSetID>
<iBlueprintLibrary-cBlueprintSetID>
<Provider d:type="cDeltaString">Kuju</Provider>
<Product d:type="cDeltaString">RailSimulatorUS</Product>
</iBlueprintLibrary-cBlueprintSetID>
</BlueprintSetID>
<BlueprintID d:type="cDeltaString">RailVehicles\Diesel\SD40-2\Default\Simulation\SD40-2 Engine Simulation.xml</BlueprintID>
</iBlueprintLibrary-cAbsoluteBlueprintID>
</EngineSimFile>
</cEngineSimContainerBlueprint>
</EngineSimulationContainer>
fluff for each bit of data to make sure it's pointing to the correct folder before you even start changing values. When you do finally get it all working you discover the core physics pays no attention whatsoever to loaded versus empty, in fact the resistance is calculated at the start of the scenario - so if, for example, you start with a single GP9 and couple onto 100 loaded coal hoppers you can run full tilt boogie up a 4% grade because the physics is now set for a single GP9 with nothing coupled on. If you start with the GP9 coupled onto that 100 car train you won't be able to move even after uncoupling because the weight stays with the loco. Load or unload all cars in the train and the weight is the same, couple on more cars or uncouple half the cars and the weight stays the same. The game was programmed for British commuter rail and does not adapt well to anything else.
"My idea idea of a kids game is : unrealistic looking turnouts, unrealistic curves and unrealistic flat graphics."
Now there I agree with you, it's all a matter of taste but in my opinion railworks looks better, but it's not much good for anything except screenshots. If them KUJU Klutzes could make tracklaying tools that were easy to use and generated realistic looking switches with ease on their first try, why can't Auran/N3V do it after all these years? Incorporate the Railworks tracklaying tools and switches into Trainz and you would have a perfect simulator in my book.
^^ That about sums it up. The running joke was RSC had a folder labeled "physics" and if they were building an American engine they would just copy and paste the SD40-2 or F7 simulation file over into the new engine over and over again. Then they eventually started changing things but then everything was so drastically inconsistent with each other the physics instead of being linearly wrong were now fragmented to heck wrong. They still sell items that putting your engine into step 1 dynamics will send a 100 car train into orbit. They gobbled up all the good free lance developers, slowly but surely closing off the sim from end user development and pump out payware like a Chinese sweatshop. Freeware if it's good usually ends up to the 1/2 way finished stage then RSC will scoop them up and have them develop for them. I swear everyone works for them now. And don't get me started with all leftover freelancers charging money for everything from soundpacks stolen from youtube clips to modded locomotive physics.
Last edited:
As Shane says, this would be impossible to do, besides the internet is open to free speech unless you live in a place like China where everything is censored. If anything, Railsim.com should be in trouble. Isn't it interesting that their Train Simulator 2012 is named similar to N3V's Trainz Simulator TS12, and they both came out at the same time. The Trainz version was announced ahead of the RWs version. Hmmm.... yet N3V never bothered to do anything about it, at least we haven't heard anything on that side. So, let the public determine which product is better.
If you want playability with decent graphics, decent AI control, and an easy to use construction environment, go with Trainz. If you want pretty pictures with canned AI, go with RW. It's that simple. Remember too that there's always going to be a trade-off in one area or another just like there is when buying a car. Some brands and models have more, better, features than others, and you can't always have the best of both, so you have to compromise. And, to be honest, I would rather have a program that's easy to use. I have the old MSTS and that was no picnic to try to build or modify routes in. There were things I liked in it though such as the Activity Manager with the ability to edit schedules easily, but that was about it. I couldn't lay tracks for beans in the route editor, and the bloody thing would crash anyway when I did get it to work. From what I've read, and yes I did consider getting RW at one time, that the crashes and awkwardness is still there. When Trainz came along, it was like night and day. No, the program isn't perfect, it does crash on occasion, but it's a heck of a lot easier to get the AI to do what I want, and for me to build things that I want. There's no reason to make things so awkward and complicated, not in this day and age, with OOPS programming tools, and drag and drop graphic interfaces.
So, if you're happy with your RW, that's great. Enjoy your game. (shh! I shouldn't have said game!). There's no reason to have to get so snippy and snotty about it. There's no reason to defend your purchase like that. You are acting as though you're on the defensive, or trying to justify to yourself that you made the right decision. If anything, it is still a game, and you can even have both on your hard drive if you want.
John
If you are such a Railworks aficionado, then why don't you explain to the rest of us why you choose to hang out on a Trainz forum. Either you are a rather stupid person and can't figure out that you are in the wrong place, or you are just trying to stir up hate and discontent. My vote is for both of the options that I have just offered.
That's been a common tinfoil hat idea since rail simulator first came out in October 2007, anyone who complained about the lack of simulation features was part of "a conspiracy to make it fail". Which presupposes that any potential customers would read the first negative post, take it as gospel (after all if I read it on the internet it MUST be true) and not buy the game (apparently all potential customers are incapable of making up their own minds so they let strangers make all their decisions for them) therefore sending the company into bankruptcy. :hehe: Which obviously hasn't happened since the company is still here. From my perspective the only real mistake was not marketing it as a "train driving game" for casual players from the start, by billing it as a simulator, people who understand railroading expected certain standards which the game never had and never will have. Trainz is not in competition with railworks for the same reason it's not in competition with Railroad Tycoon, it's actually a completely different genre designed to appeal to a different market.
Or putting on my tin-foil hat, heavy duty foil at that, the Railwork's trolls seem to magically appear when Railworks is on sale.
Followed by a gazillion posts declaring Trainz as the one true religion. Keepin' the herd.
Just sayin'
Harold
It seems Railworks is always on sale, couple of people I know bought it when it was about $4, sometime this past summer. Two people that I know, said in their opinion, even at that price point, it was no bargain.
Last edited:
cascaderailroad
New member
Why can't a simple educated discussion take place on this forum ?
In this case the pro's vs con's of Trainz vs Railworks.
It always turns into name calling, insults, and personal attacks.
Can't we have a civil conversation/discussion without all the attacks ?
In this case the pro's vs con's of Trainz vs Railworks.
It always turns into name calling, insults, and personal attacks.
Can't we have a civil conversation/discussion without all the attacks ?
I agree, and if the person on the Trainz forum putting Trainz down, had refrained from calling me a liar, maybe the personal attacks would not have started,
I agree too. I almost slapped him with a few spikey words, but kept things quiet, hoping he'd get the drift.
I still think he feels guilty of purchasing Rail Works, and has become defensive about it. It's like when you call the cards out on someone they retort with "Whatever!"
John
Guys, guys! Calm down! I have both Trainz and Train simulator 2013, I love both and play both! I dont see whats wrong with having 2 train sims to get some fun out of... A train simulator is a train simulator.. It only simulates like what the real thing would be like... The only way to get to experience realism of railroading is too drive a real train... When you have driven a real train under real conditions, then you can come back and say what sim is more realistic, untill then, they are both fun to play and both are very enjoyable...
Each time someone has felt the ned to bring up a thread about (sssh, you-know-what), I have passingly given a polite but regular wee moan. That has been based on the fact that it leads to confrontations here on Trainz! Basically each time a thread insists bn appearing here it is the same arguments but an effort to make the discussion different.In turn that leads to a repetitive negativism. We know Trainz has far more to offer and easy to build stuff and RW (oops, mentioned it!) is more limited. I dare say I will be waiting until the need to have long chats here or arguments regarding the competition soon reaching double figures in threads. Being a staunch Glaswegian I will give out a loud groan and take the train to Edinburgh which is a terrible thing for a Glasgow man to admit to! :'(