I'd like to ask "the question" ??? - "Uploading"

M

meatloaf747

Spotter...
Ok, everyone that's been around Trainz for awhile knows that Trainz is for the enjoyment of both young & old. My question is should there be some sort of minimum standard to "upload to the DLS?"

Lately it appears that a number of 5 to 10 year old's have learnt how to "upload to the DLS". Whilst I personally have no problem with that, (hey, we've got the option of whether we want to download that ___p or not) what I do find a little frustrating is that they upload a blank baseboard with a few hundred meters of track on it and call that a "Layout" 50kb approx !!!

They put one loco on that, and call that a "Session"!!! So the big question is, should there be some sort of quality control set/minimum standard, or should we just keep it as a "free for all" where anything goes???

Hey, I'm just asking the question, so don't shoot the messenger !!!

What are your thoughts?

Happy Trainzing...

Cheers, Mac...:o
 
Last edited:
"don't shoot the messenger", you never let me have ANY fun. :'( Dunno if this has come up in Trainz before but I have seen it on MSTS forums in the past - some kid uploads a solid sky blue SD40 and someone asks should we have quality control? Answer is no, because who judges? Some cranky kid hater kicks out pink and purple Barbie engines, replace him with an adolescent girl and she kicks out anything that's NOT a pink and purple Barbie engine. Don't like it don't download it, there are quite a few routes I would consider garbage that seem to be fairly popular, so you don't want to start restricting since they might put ME in charge. :eek:
 
do not have anything on the DLS..But it seems to me that there should be some kind of criteria..I would think it would be a terrible ordeal for N3V..
 
No.

But I do think that like thumbnails, descriptions should be required.

I also get tired of a series of assets, like say signs, where there are 10 different signs and they all have the same thumbnail or all 10 signs... not helpful.
 
They have trains in Arkansas?

Don't wanna name names, but think of a route developer who couldn't even spell his own username correctly. :hehe: He does have quite a following, so obviously that type of route does appeal to lots of users, altho having seen his screenshots in trainz and having tried one of his MSTS routes long ago, they don't appeal to me at all. Over 1000 downloads for some of his MSTS routes tho, so they should be banned just because I don't like them? If we go that direction where does the line get drawn and who draws it?

There does seem to be a flood of bare baseboard routes recently, but it's not new, there have been many before that. What we really could use is an ignore list similar to the forum ignore list so when we see something we're not interested in we could add that author to the ignore list to filter out 10,000 new sketchup airplane models uploaded by the same guy to find something more interesting.
 
I've seen this topic come and go several times since the beginning, and it never comes to resolution. The issue is only made worse by the new versions of Trainz available now.
 
My ears are not just to hang my spectacles on lately - I have learned to listen to those on the forum first who have been there and done that , saves me a lot of trouble.:)
 
From observation, most of the routes in question are actually uploaded as 'backups' or 'transfer routes' between a PC version and a mobile version or vice-versa. Perhaps N3V should look into an alternative backup/transfer method for the mobile versions of Trainz.

Shane
 
.
I don't think restrictions or censorship would be a good idea or even practical - who sets the parameters, how do you monitor them etc.?

sniper297 said:
...What we really could use is an ignore list similar to the forum ignore list so when we see something we're not interested in we could add that author to the ignore list...
Click to expand...

I agree with sniper297 that adding an "ignore list" function to CMP would be useful. This is already possible to do this in CMP by adding search filters "AND NOT" + "Author = xxxxx" to a CMP search of the DLS (and saving it) but it's not a simple procedure for an end user.

The fact that it is already possible suggests that the underlying database structure and code to support this are already in place, so enhancing CMP to support an "ignore list" is possible but I am under no illusions about the time (= cost) of implementing this. Would you rather have this or another enhancement to core Trainz functionality?
 
Everyone has a different skill in making routes and sessions and next to that there is a difference in taste. As a result, there is a pretty large grey area in which a lot of us will disagree about what "deserves" to end up on the DLS.
But outside of that grey area, I think we can qualify black and white. Even with just very easy / low requirements, I think we can lock out a lot of garbage that the OP is pointing at.

The next step is that these requirements should be easy to "explain to a machine". In other words: Programmable, so it does not require human action so the people at N3V dont have to waste time on it.

What I mean / think of is this:

I think it should be technically pretty easy to decline routes that have no 'paint' on them or are simply painted for less then 95% (leaving room for 5% hiding below objects we placed). This should easely lock out those blank-base-board uploads.
Same goes for sessions. Cant really call something a session with less then 2 train vehicles on them and maybe we can even agree on a minimum of session rules or the requirement of a HTML asset.
Maybe even requiering that a description of a route or session has to be a minimum of X characters would already help to make people think what their route/session is about and conclude it aint worth uploading and/or spend more time on it; who knows.

With a little bit of discussion, We might even be able to narrow it down slightly more before reaching that grey area.
We just have to keep in mind it should be logicly explainable to a machine so it aint going to cost N3V time after putting the system in place.

I hope you all understand what I mean.
 
shaneturner12 said:
From observation, most of the routes in question are actually uploaded as 'backups' or 'transfer routes' between a PC version and a mobile version or vice-versa. Perhaps N3V should look into an alternative backup/transfer method for the mobile versions of Trainz.
Shane[/QUOTE|

Way off the mark....

Now Shane, while I consider you to be one of the 'three' most helpful people currently on the Trainz forum, I'm dumb founded by your response to my original post. This has absolutely nothing to do with so called 'backup's' or 'transfer routes'. What I'm talking about has nothing to do with 'mobile versions of Trainz'

What I am specifically talking about is the 'extremely basic' route & session that are no more than 40kb to 70kb and whether or not they are good enough to be able to be hosted on the DLS... (without any censorship)

Hey, I'm not a policeman, and I don't want to make a personal judgments on this issue, but hey, anyone above 10 years of age, knows that this ___p is ___p and only possibly interests 1% of the community at best.....

My comments aren't meant as any personal criticism to you personally Shane, They are just my personal frustration about some of the ___p that NV3 is allowing to be hosted on the DLS....

Cheers, Mac...
Click to expand...
 
frogpipe said:
No.

But I do think that like thumbnails, descriptions should be required.

I also get tired of a series of assets, like say signs, where there are 10 different signs and they all have the same thumbnail or all 10 signs... not helpful.
Click to expand...

I think a description, and a thumbnail should be a minimum, along with what version of Trainz it is designed for. If you don't take the time or have the ability to make a description, then your upload is probably worthless as well.
 
I suspect what triggered this is new routes like "Ho nooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
That one does have a thumbnail showing a loco on a track on a bare baseboard, with the description;

"this is extremely oawesome because if you look at the wheels when the train is going rely fast it looks so cool."

So for that suggested check it would pass the test, got a thumbnail image, got a description, and as far as what version that's automatic by the build number. I didn't download it to try it, but apparently that image and description looked good to SOMEBODY, it has 33 downloads already. Obviously a route slapped together and uploaded by a young kid, but again who judges value? If it was up to me every single painting by Pablo Picasso would be removed from every art museum in the world and tossed into incinerators. I've never seen a Picasso that looked like anything more than the worst examples of Kindergarten finger painting to my eye. Apparently most of the art world would not agree with my assessment.
 
meatloaf747 said:
shaneturner12 said:
From observation, most of the routes in question are actually uploaded as 'backups' or 'transfer routes' between a PC version and a mobile version or vice-versa. Perhaps N3V should look into an alternative backup/transfer method for the mobile versions of Trainz.
Shane
Click to expand...

Way off the mark....

Now Shane, while I consider you to be one of the 'three' most helpful people currently on the Trainz forum, I'm dumb founded by your response to my original post. This has absolutely nothing to do with so called 'backup's' or 'transfer routes'. What I'm talking about has nothing to do with 'mobile versions of Trainz'

What I am specifically talking about is the 'extremely basic' route & session that are no more than 40kb to 70kb and whether or not they are good enough to be able to be hosted on the DLS... (without any censorship)

Hey, I'm not a policeman, and I don't want to make a personal judgments on this issue, but hey, anyone above 10 years of age, knows that this ___p is ___p and only possibly interests 1% of the community at best.....

My comments aren't meant as any personal criticism to you personally Shane, They are just my personal frustration about some of the ___p that NV3 is allowing to be hosted on the DLS....

Cheers, Mac...
Click to expand...

I competely agree with you there. If you're wondering what I'm referring to regarding the mobile versions, N3V have decided that the only way of backing up routes or transferring a route from Ipad/Android versions to a PC version is to upload it to the Download Station.

I too get annoyed with 'extremely basic' routes, but it does make me wonder how many of these fit what I stated in the previous paragraph (as the mobile versions are very limited compared to the PC/Mac versions).

Shane
 
Currently I think using the DLS as a backup or more likely on-line storage due to the lack of space on these pads pods and tablets is likely to be half of the problem, I got the impression from one or two posts that some of the users were not aware we can all see what they have uploaded, thus a couple of requests about getting stuff removed.
 
We all know the old statement. What's one person's trash is an other person's treasure. Having said that it is difficult to pass judgement and censor items uploaded.

What would be nice is if N3V setup a BETA Tester area on the DLS so that if there are Beta or even Alpha versions of routes, they can be uploaded to that area. They could do the same thing for mobile users -- What's wrong with setting up a mobile storage area for those with mobile devices such as 'droids and ipads.

John
 
I don't believe I'll ever have the skills needed to do ANYTHING good enough to upload to the DLS. I would hope that only the best work could make it there. At my old flight sim site, you asked for testers to make sure everything was perfect. If something was not good enough, forget about uploading it to the site. A lot of the time, after it did make it to the downloads section, some people found for one reason or another, it was still not good enough. The site members would then offer info and help to make it worthy of being on the download list. I find it hard to believe that anybody who can figure out how to upload to the site can submit their work. Does anyone look this stuff over? Perhaps what you need is a group of respected trainz vets to have a good look at the uploaded items before it is allowed into the DLS? I know this would be time consuming and anyone who worked on it should be rewarded in some way. I would never want to give up anymore of my time (even if I knew what I was doing) to do this job. I would think anyone who did, deserved something for their time. Don't you guys want only the best items available? I'm sure this must have come up before, I have no idea how things are dealt with on this site, I'm just an old newbie.

Cheers.......Rick
 
Some time ago, as an experiment, I uploaded a number of what I described as 'station modules', making it clear in the description that these were basic station layouts with track and immediate station facilities, but no scenery, the idea being that they would offer an authentic UK track layout for the user to decorate as he/she wished. The idea seems to have been reasonably popular, as they attracted in the order of 1000 to 1500 downloads each, but they would of course come into the 'bare baseboard' category mentioned earlier. I had wondered about doing some more - but perhaps not, in view of this thread ...

Ray
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
I'd like to download the Orient Express
Replies
8
Views
320
pware
P
N
Objects that react to mouse clicks
Replies
1
Views
168
Nellodd
N
Q
What does the "tons" refer to in "enginespec"?
Replies
3
Views
523
QQ2178312972
Q
C
In Regards To The Pennsylvania Railroad T1
Replies
2
Views
507
Thai1On
T
F
Junk Files Uploaded to DLS
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
pcas1986
P
Back
Top