I was talking in general terms. There are probably a few routes on the DLS that aren't bad (although I've yet to find one I like). And I couldn't care less how others feel about me!!!
Payware??
- Thread starter Lewiscc65
- Start date
I was talking in general terms. There are probably a few routes on the DLS that aren't bad (although I've yet to find one I like). And I couldn't care less how others feel about me!!!
I didn't say anything before, but for the most part Dave, you are absolutely right regarding the "quality". I too have downloaded many routes over the years only to delete them immediately. I can count on a single hand and then only a few of the fingers of which routes are worth keeping. I too hold a high standard for myself and I'm constantly revising my own efforts in an attempt to make things better.
I know that people are putting out their best efforts and trying hard, it's just the description and pictures don't quite live up to the expectations which I've built up from reading the descriptions.
If we all think back to the very first routes we created we would all probably agree that those initial efforts were "not good" (tm). It took me several years before I felt confident enough to upload my first effort and a few more years before the second, etc. Thankfully, none of my first efforts made it beyond my own trash bin.
I download very few routes from the DLS mainly because I am not interested in routes from the UK, USA, etc. Philskene's routes are an exception because they are unique and "transnational". But I agree that many DLS routes show a "lack of quality control" but that is probably a reflection of our modern throw away mentality.
I download very few routes from the DLS mainly because I am not interested in routes from the UK, USA, etc. Philskene's routes are an exception because they are unique and "transnational". But I agree that many DLS routes show a "lack of quality control" but that is probably a reflection of our modern throw away mentality.
Vern,
"How do you define crap"?
A good question although often made in a rhetorical fashion - i.e. the assumed answer is that it's entirely a matter of taste. And to a great extent it is; but not entirely.
Whilst I agree with your sentiment that there's no need for a route to be an absolutely authentic copy of every gradient, fence and so forth there is an argument for saying there should be some sort of standards adhered to concerning basic engineering or design aspects of various rail systems. Trainz is supposed to be "a simulation" after all.
But it is difficult for someone such as me to learn enough to do that when I make a route. For example, I try to get the design of sidings, Track gradients/curves, signalling and so forth as near to how it is/was .... but I don't really know enough about how it actually is/was. There's a lot to know!
Perhaps there might be an increase is better quality routes (in terms of their being proto-typical) if creators collaborated more, as with the S&C & Potteries Loop examples? They seem to have a team with a variety of different expertise and this makes their products much more prototypical than others.
Collaboration might also see better design & implementation of Trainz or Surveyor-specific building skills. One member of a route-building team might do the topography, another the built-up areas, another the flora/fauna and so forth. Very few seem adept at all those skills - although there certainly are some who are. Some of the Russian and East European builders produce extremely realistic-looking routes, for example.
****
Many independent single builders (such as yourself) make very well constructed routes. It's rare to find one that gets everything so "right" that the route begins to look "real" - difficult to distinguish from a real-life movie on-screen from across the room, if you like.
Some routes set a standard for realism: recent examples are Much Murkle and the 1930s Cornish route. Once one has travelled such a route, it becomes difficult to go back to the much simpler routes of yesteryear with their often large acreages of bald textures and other simplifications.
And you must admit, there are far too many "routes" uploaded that look like someone's first attempt to use SUrveyor, with nothing but a gaggle of badly-placed items and lots of unpopulated grid everywhere......
Lataxe.
shaneturner12
Tutorial Creator
I'm rather concerned by the way some seem to see DLS routes. Not everyone is an expert of making routes (I for example am still learning and I've been working on my private route for quite a few years). I do have a route (Morrisville Multiplayer) on the Download Station and I know I need to do more work on it although it's not a quick process and I'm currently in the middle of helping to iron out T:ANE bugs, as I'm hoping to be able to add interlocking tower support to the route at some point in the future so that a user or users can act as signallers.
I notice some refer to the mobile versions. If I remember correctly, those who want to transfer between a mobile version and a PC or Mac version have to make use of the Download Station due to what appears to be a lack of other methods.
I know there are quite a few that need quite a bit of improvement or even re-doing, but as always we all have to start somewhere.
In terms of the original post, there is variable quality on both the freeware and payware side. I know that payware routes are normally a higher calibre than some freeware routes but that's due to there being money involved. Saying that though, quite a few freeware routes I've seen are at the same standard as payware.
Shane
I notice some refer to the mobile versions. If I remember correctly, those who want to transfer between a mobile version and a PC or Mac version have to make use of the Download Station due to what appears to be a lack of other methods.
I know there are quite a few that need quite a bit of improvement or even re-doing, but as always we all have to start somewhere.
In terms of the original post, there is variable quality on both the freeware and payware side. I know that payware routes are normally a higher calibre than some freeware routes but that's due to there being money involved. Saying that though, quite a few freeware routes I've seen are at the same standard as payware.
Shane
Phil, you are in the 1%, I have a few of your routes and sessions and they are great.
Carl
Last edited:
I agree that the single baseboard circle-of-track routes obviously created by a nine year old would probably be better served not on the DLS. Equally there should be a separate depository for the iOS and Android efforts to be hosted.
I'm sure this is not the first time some rating system for freeware has been discussed but the solution has always been... complicated. UKTS (at least when I was a member) had a comments system for add-ons but this was closely moderated to prevent abuse (both for and against the item). With N3V struggling to moderate this forum and fix up TANE, it's doubtful they have either the staff or inclination to host such a venture.
Of course the OP was with regard to payware and I fully agree this should be rigorously policed to ensure decent standards are met, certainly if something is being sold by N3V they or trusted associates should be vetting it first. Ultimately, if you don't like a freeware route it can always be deleted and I fully admit to doing so myself, albeit not in the percentage of 99.9 to 0.1% For example, an effort at a well loved GWR prototype suddenly had a 1 in 15 gradient in the middle of it where it was obvious the user had either failed to obtain a profile or at least average the height and distance. But again, should this be dismissed as crap or more constructive feedback employed to build the skills and experience of a route builder for whom it might be their first outing.
I continue to strive for better standards myself and of course one of the steps in that is using the most up to date material available (preferably in TANE once it is fit for purpose). Another reason why, IMHO, N3V should have resolutely ditched all the old versions and formats for the new game (while continuing to support TS12 for a few more years) which would have forced everyone to adopt modernization. The original excuse about the new graphics engine putting older content in a better light is, I'm sure by now we have all realized not the case. Old still looks... old. Just like running MSTS in Open Rails, you can't make something that was state of the art in 2003 look top of the line in 2015 going on 2016.
I'm sure this is not the first time some rating system for freeware has been discussed but the solution has always been... complicated. UKTS (at least when I was a member) had a comments system for add-ons but this was closely moderated to prevent abuse (both for and against the item). With N3V struggling to moderate this forum and fix up TANE, it's doubtful they have either the staff or inclination to host such a venture.
Of course the OP was with regard to payware and I fully agree this should be rigorously policed to ensure decent standards are met, certainly if something is being sold by N3V they or trusted associates should be vetting it first. Ultimately, if you don't like a freeware route it can always be deleted and I fully admit to doing so myself, albeit not in the percentage of 99.9 to 0.1% For example, an effort at a well loved GWR prototype suddenly had a 1 in 15 gradient in the middle of it where it was obvious the user had either failed to obtain a profile or at least average the height and distance. But again, should this be dismissed as crap or more constructive feedback employed to build the skills and experience of a route builder for whom it might be their first outing.
I continue to strive for better standards myself and of course one of the steps in that is using the most up to date material available (preferably in TANE once it is fit for purpose). Another reason why, IMHO, N3V should have resolutely ditched all the old versions and formats for the new game (while continuing to support TS12 for a few more years) which would have forced everyone to adopt modernization. The original excuse about the new graphics engine putting older content in a better light is, I'm sure by now we have all realized not the case. Old still looks... old. Just like running MSTS in Open Rails, you can't make something that was state of the art in 2003 look top of the line in 2015 going on 2016.
Yes, poor content is a good way to ruin a brand. The DLS already has something of a reputation of being a repository of junk, even though there is quite a lot of good stuff on there as well. Vinny's idea of separate repositories for the mobile stuff is worthy of consideration, and, frankly, should have been done from the start.
amigacooke
Well-known member
I'd advise forming your own opinion on routes rather than following the opinion of over exuberant posters. 
LNERlover5
Average Grad
There are quite a few awful routes, as well as quite a few awful assets. Bad content creators exist, not everyone has experience in graphic design.
Such is life.
Jack
Such is life.
Jack
N3V said they were going to look into that at some point then T:ANE came along...
CPRailSD40-2
GMD C44-9W
So true, I am tackling some routes myself, for me routes take MONTHS AND MONTHS to complete
stevelerro
Owner of K&L Trainz
The problem with downloading something off the DLS is that anyone can upload anything. Reskins, "routes" that are no more than grid and a loop of track, an image representing an engineer, hornsounds, ect. The DLS doesn't allow you to upload more than a tiny thumbnail preview to show what you're uploading, so ultimately thats the chance you take with downloading content off the DLS.
As for payware, that will really come down to who the creator is, and how much they put into showing what the product is/does/sounds like/features and ect. The amount of payware creators is VERY small in comparison to those who deal with freeware. There isn't really a list of requirements in order to make your item payware other than you feeling your time was worth the value you sell it for.
The problem with selling your content is that there is ALOT of amazing free items available. Ben Neal has a massive collection of content he made a number of years back thats all freeware...Jointed Rail has a wealth of free stuff that is jam packed full of features and details, RRmods has a decent list of stuff for free as well.
Like I said, it comes down to the creator whether or not the stuff is given away, or sold. I personally choose to sell my content because I invest hundreds of hours into each model and try to have something finished almost every month, not to mention hundreds of dollars are spent every year for books, blueprints, trips to see the real trains to get photos, licensing agreements with the real trains owner, videos and cds and so on. Train stuff isn't cheap no matter where you buy it.
You will always take a chance of something you download not being up to YOUR expectation. At least with the freeware, you can just delete it and move on, but with payware, it helps to check the forums or even just email the contents creator and ask about the product before you buy it. No one is going to refuse to talk about what they made if you're willing to buy it from them.
As for selling content, the most common way is to have someone send money to a paypal account. You create an account, have people go to paypal.com and send your email money, and then its done....or if you have a website, you can have checkout buttons made that will send payments to your paypal account.
Hope this helps!
Steve
Last edited:
Hi everybody.
I would very much agree with forum members who have stated in this thread that mobile content should be separated from pc/mac content on the DLS. However it would be very important in that situation that mobile app forum members are not made to feel as though they are "second class" in this community as it is revenue from their purchases that is maintaining the whole of the Trainz franchise at this point in time.
The above was advised by Tony Hilliman in the articles section of this forum two weeks ago. No mobile app sales, no Trainz of any category.
Bill
I would very much agree with forum members who have stated in this thread that mobile content should be separated from pc/mac content on the DLS. However it would be very important in that situation that mobile app forum members are not made to feel as though they are "second class" in this community as it is revenue from their purchases that is maintaining the whole of the Trainz franchise at this point in time.
The above was advised by Tony Hilliman in the articles section of this forum two weeks ago. No mobile app sales, no Trainz of any category.
Bill
Last edited:
Bill,
I agree that the mobile users should not be ostracized from the rest of the Trainz user-community and be allowed to share their work with the rest of us, however, the problem is their unfinished work is kept on the publicly-available DLS. This means that every small loop of track and mound for a mountain becomes a piece of downloaded content. What has been suggested, and N3V did say they would look into this, is the ability for mobile users to store their personal route-data on a private server so that these incomplete works don't clog up the DLS.
Then T:ANE came along...
John
Hi everybody.
John, I would very much agree with you that their is a substantial amount of "unfinished" mobile app creations on the DLS. However, i believe that mobile apps are used in a far lighter manner by their users than PC version users. In the forgoing, I was writing some program in my new hobby "Arduino"/on my tablet/Chromebook while travelling down by rail from Newcastle this week (as I have got fed-up with waiting for T:ane to be usable and therfore worth buying) . The journey terminated before I finished the coding, so I saved the file off to Code Benders site.
As the whole Arduino project is open source, the file is open to any site member to access and use if wanted. when I accessed the file a day later, a member had completed the code and saved it as a separate file (with notes) leaving my own original file intact in case I wanted that. Perhaps the DLS could be made open source so as to allow forum members to update/change content without having to seek permission of the original creator provided a copy of original remains on site.
The above takes some organizing and site user discipline, but seems to work well on several sites in my new hobby.
Just a thought.
Bill
John, I would very much agree with you that their is a substantial amount of "unfinished" mobile app creations on the DLS. However, i believe that mobile apps are used in a far lighter manner by their users than PC version users. In the forgoing, I was writing some program in my new hobby "Arduino"/on my tablet/Chromebook while travelling down by rail from Newcastle this week (as I have got fed-up with waiting for T:ane to be usable and therfore worth buying) . The journey terminated before I finished the coding, so I saved the file off to Code Benders site.
As the whole Arduino project is open source, the file is open to any site member to access and use if wanted. when I accessed the file a day later, a member had completed the code and saved it as a separate file (with notes) leaving my own original file intact in case I wanted that. Perhaps the DLS could be made open source so as to allow forum members to update/change content without having to seek permission of the original creator provided a copy of original remains on site.
The above takes some organizing and site user discipline, but seems to work well on several sites in my new hobby.
Just a thought.
Bill
Last edited:
In a sense this is already the case - insofar as it is already possible to download an asset, clone it, make some changes (an optional step for "some people") and then upload it to the DLS under your own userID, but I see what you are getting at. Obtaining permission from a creator can sometimes be a PITA, particularly if that creator is no longer active or doesn't respond to requests. Those who post their work onto such a site would have to grant implicit permission to all for modifying the work, simply by posting their work there.
I was recently working on a collaborative project involving other Trainz users where assets were shared between the group members for modifications, updating, etc. We used DropBox for that purpose which required that all members had to have DropBox installed on each of their computers. Using a common open source site, open to members of that site, would eliminate that need.
On the downside, it could open your work to unwanted scrutiny or alteration by others. I don't know how open source sites work - perhaps you can set up "restricted membership groups" (but that would defeat their "open source" nature). DropBox achieved the same result for us.
"User discipline" is something that can be in short supply on the existing DLS. The fact that some creators, as is their right, do not want others altering their works would be a show stopper for any open source system. They simply would not post.
A good idea and one that is worth thinking about but, as they say, the devil will be in the detail.
Last edited: