making a detailed route but being frame rate friendly?

[deadpoolmx55]

is it really possible to be detailed and realistic but staying frame rate friendly and is there such thing as being to detailed?
any tips and tricks to get the best out of a route?
thanks
-justin

 

[cascaderailroad]

Reeds, Grass, Twees, and ALL Splines (including track) effect framerates.

Trees should be kept to @ 12 genus route wide (you can push the limit and use more genus than that though).

Textures ... I believe that there is a limit to the amount of total textures (242) ?.
Textures, painted over another texture, are still there, hidden underneath (I believe more than 4 deep). This can effect framerates.

High poly SketchUp assets, High Poly loco's, and thousands of railcars, all spread out on a large route, are all counted, and perpetually recounted, by Trainz, every nano second in Trainz (as to their location, are they stopped, are they moving ... etc ...) ... so lots of Stufz' ... effects framerates.

Some buildings, and clusters of buildings, will drop framerates to an absolute crawl.

16m track on long straights has better framerates, than 2m or 4m track.

Chunky mesh tracks such as MP Wood v2 have excelent bending in curves and switchs, and have very little effect on framerates.

Great looking tracks, including Greenery, USLW, and many other medium to high poly tracks, kink horribly in turnouts, and will slay your framerates, especially in large multitracked yards.

Multi track yards, and complex turnout ladders, should be constucted using a exteremly low poly, chunky mesh track, such as MP Wood v2

Check out GFishers fabulous routes: "Down East Fishing Village", and "The Loops" ... and you will see what effects framerates. A high quality PC is needed, for high poly routes.

 

[philskene]

A few objects many times

Justin --

Cascade's tips are very valid.

Importantly, limit the number of different objects, textures, ... that you use. It's better to use a few objects many times that many objects a few times.

Some of the built-in content uses the same kit-bag of textures in many different structures. This can be very beneficial for frame rates.

" ... detailed and realistic but staying frame rate friendly ... ."

Hmm. Have a look at Krashnburne. It does follow prototypical practices, it is certainly frame rate friendly (few objects many times and built-in common texture structures), and I'll let you decide if it's sufficiently detailed.

Phil

 

[boyerm25]

Kranshnburne is framerate friendly when it's just your train, but when an AI train passes you, the fps drops, and when 2 AI trains pass you, it turns into a slideshow. Have a look at the UMR for a very large route I get amazing framerates on, for the size...

 

[Dermmy]

Never use a new anything if there is not a really good reason to not repeat something you have already used. Try to keep 'detail' to eye-candy vignets track-side. If you can catch the viewers eye with something close-up you can get away with remarkably little farther back. If you try to 'detail' everything its gonna bog down...

 

[deadpoolmx55]

thanks everyone for the advice i will put it to use

 

[philskene]

Krashnburne "slideshow"? - not never!

Hi boyerm --

"Kranshnburne ... when an AI train passes you, the fps drops, and when 2 AI trains pass you, it turns into a slideshow."

Wot!~! I used to find that AI did seriously impact on frame rates. But ever since Auran shunted the AI off onto the second core of a multi-core processor (I think that this was with TS2009) it's never been a problem for me. At 3:57 into this video (best viwed full screen and HD), for example, an AI passes the player on Krashnburne and a second AI at 6:18, with almost no impact on frame rates, despite the overheads caused by running FRAPS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnCCLhuhh38

Do you have a dual or quad core PC? Or maybe my PC has a bit more grunt that yours?

Phil

 

[boyerm25]

I have a MacBook with a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, and a Dell optiplex GX-520 with an Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.40GHZ. I haven't tried it on the PC yet, maybe I will do that, but the mac has overall better framerates than the pc and it is mach newer.

 

[MSGSapper]

While these tips are interesting and useful I haven't seen the most practical one of all mentioned: Try keeping the layout/route size SMALL.

No one says that a route/layout has to be large to be prototypical or fun. As an example a lot of folks enjoy my Progressive Rail (4 baseboards) and Camas Prairie (20 baseboards) routes. I sometimes wish my other 10 much larger layouts/routes were this size. It would make it MUCH easier to manage and keep them current.

There is always going to be a tradoff point between size and level of detail. Personally I would love to see more smaller routes/layouts that are in essence dioramas that cover a single industry or small town or something similar. Dioramas are small highly detailed layouts and Model Railroaders have been using diorama based railroads for many years with good success. I think we could learn from this approach.

Here are some examples of diorama ideas:

1. A small one or two baseboard size layout that models a coal mine operation in high detail.

2. A small one or two baseboard size layout that models a saw mill or lumber operation in high detail.

Too many new people new to route building try to make large prototypical railroads as their first layout. Few of these route builder wannabees progress very far with them before abandoning them because they find that the amount of effort required to complete is simply too much for them. As an example my last layout (Wilsons Mills & Mount Olive) took about seven months of very hard work (5 hours per day 5-6 days a week) on average to complete. The larger it is, the more detailed it is, the more time and effort it is going to take to complete, if you ever get it done.

If you keep it small you have a much higher chance of completing it and the result will look good and be something that the average Trainz user can enjoy in an evening or afternoon (think beer and pretzel railroading). Small can be beautiful too.........

BTW there are many tricks a user can use to increase performance on their highly detailed routes. One major one would be to decrease the draw distance but I seldom hear this one mentioned.

My philosophy on my route building efforts is simple: I build layouts that I like, with the level of detail I want, and then share it with others. While you can't please everyone, nor should you even try, you can please yourself - and should. This is a hobby after all......

 

[cascaderailroad]

True ... Keep it small ... one could effectively capture the feel of Reading to Pittsburgh line, making many condenced scenes, of just the key railfanning locations ... all on @ 100 baseboards or much less.

 

[ray_whiley]

MSGSapper - excellent advice; small layouts can be both realistic in appearance and fun. This was my approach in my railway modelling days I think my longest layout was (portable, sectional) sixteen feet long. Of course, that would fit on one baseboard in Trainz - and look silly! But there's a great deal that can be done, as you say, on one or two boards in Trainz, and I have made several - and published one or two. On the other hand, a project started four or five years ago, a complete branch line in the UK, has never been finished. I always want to try something new!

But everyone must choose his/her own way of doing things, and what suits one will not suit another. It's enjoyment which matters!

Ray

 

[Dermmy]

While these tips are interesting and useful I haven't seen the most practical one of all mentioned: Try keeping the layout/route size SMALL.

Sorry Bob, but I gotta take issue with that. The size of a route has absolutely no impact on the performance of the route, and performance is the point of the OP. Huge routes can be lo-impact and tiny routes can be slide-shows. Content is the sole issue that governs smoothness, size doesn't matter. The issue is how much content - and specifically how much new content is in the present view. Trainz loads content into a cache till the amount of content equals the allocated space, then content needs to be dumped/loaded as the view changes. It's the dumping and loading that causes the stutters, which is why the crucial issue in route 'smoothness' is re-using content already present on the route and not introducing 'new' stuff. An infinitely big route with no content change will run smooth as silk, a single board with excessive detail will stutter and jump....

Andy

 

[mezzoprezzo]

Spot on Andy. Very well put too!

One thing I’ve learnt is to keep what you put on the baseboard to a minimum whilst trying to achieve maximum visual impact.

Using trackside cameras can help with this and be very rewarding. You can fill a large proportion of the frame with very few assets if they are placed close, or even within the hood of the camera, e.g. a tuft of grass and a couple of bits of trackside rubbish. In turn that foreground interest will give a good impression of depth with the train in the middle distance set against an economical terrain background.

Far distant scenery can simply be textured. IMHO this can give better results than planting vast numbers of trees and shrubs, particularly if the textures are carefully chosen, rotated, blended and sized. For me this is one of the best techniques for reducing the stutters and visually, at long range, can look far superior to many of the foliage assets.

 

[jrfolco]

Sorry Bob, but I gotta take issue with that. The size of a route has absolutely no impact on the performance of the route, and performance is the point of the OP. Huge routes can be lo-impact and tiny routes can be slide-shows. Content is the sole issue that governs smoothness, size doesn't matter. The issue is how much content - and specifically how much new content is in the present view. Trainz loads content into a cache till the amount of content equals the allocated space, then content needs to be dumped/loaded as the view changes. It's the dumping and loading that causes the stutters, which is why the crucial issue in route 'smoothness' is re-using content already present on the route and not introducing 'new' stuff. An infinitely big route with no content change will run smooth as silk, a single board with excessive detail will stutter and jump....

Andy

I have to agree with Andy. The WM & B&O Mega Route Native Mode has over 4000 baseboards, and covers over 815 sq miles (App 2111 sq KM). In the Trainzoptions file, I set the FPS to 25, and the 'Frames to average' to 16.

A consist will maintain 25 FPS over the entire route, except when approaching congested areas like the towns of Cumberland, Connellsville, and Elkins. Here the FPS momentarily drop to about 15 or 20 with some minor stutters. Once inside the town, the FPS jump back to 25.

I use the same residential, commercial, and industrial content on all of my routes. In addition, I use 10 of Pofig's trees on the routes.

I run both TS2010, and TS12.

Joe

 

[malikrthr]

I think it all depends mostly on your graphics card. If you have an IGP, then I think the frame rates will drop pretty fast during the route building process. If you have a discrete graphics card, then the frame rates should be smooth for a good time. It all depends on what you put into your route. I think spline objects such as shrubs, bushes and grass will cause stuttering if alot of them are placed close enough to the tracks. The tracks from JR work pretty good for curves and are frame rate friendly.

 

[deadpoolmx55]

see i have a 2 gig vid memory and i forget that what my PC can handle doesn't necessarily mean others pc's can and i need to constantly thinking about that. lol thats why i started this thread so i can learn how to make it overall frame rate friendly

 

[Paulsw2]

My philosophy is small routes because I like super-detail and my enjoyment is building the route so I just couldn't cope with a massive long line - there'd be no chance of me finishing it! Also I come to Trainz from a model railway perspective so I tend to think in terms of 'layouts' rather than 'routes'. Not the most fashionable view, I know, but I wish I'd had Trainz when I was 12 and dreaming of my 'perfect' layout!

Paul