$64,000 question now is likely release date?!
Send me the $64,000 and I'll tell you the answer
Mike.
Trainz Classics 3rd Edition "Settle-Carlisle"
- Thread starter Lance_Jago
- Start date
Send me the $64,000 and I'll tell you the answer
Mike.
Wessex_Electric_Nutter
New member
Send me the $64,000 and I'll tell you the answer
Mike.
This is actually quite funny (then again, I am also quite strange, like you needed to know that), some suggestions are better off left in the bin, like I was saying to my shop manager this afternoon.
They say "send in a suggestion and recieve £50 vouchers", which I have several relating to productivity, but the chances are, they'll go in the bin.
"Lets see a Multiple Unit of some type for Trainz Classics 3", errr.... yes...
binned, judging by the silence.
Unless Mike, you're saying "make it and get it to us by x date and then we might think about it". Judging by the way the group works, contributations and offers are not really that......... well thought of, are they?
No, not binned. Just waiting to see what the response is. If I had jumped in there and given an immediate response we would not know how strong the un-solicited feeling was for a DMU. As it stands, of the several thousand views of the TC3 related threads there have been 2 requests for DMUs and one post about how unfair it is that no-one's made any. It's hardly an overwhelming clamour is it.
Make it to the required standard, with custom cab, full interior, nightmode, changeable liveries/weathering, custom sounds, AWS, ACS couplers, and with no third party contributions, all in the required timescale and with a resonable poly count and texture usage and we'll think about it. Of course you'll also need to be prepared to change it several times to make use of new features if required.
If somebody makes something that is of the required standard and meets all the criteria for something the group is working on then we will take contributions and offers.
We do work with people outside of the core team, we do, and have, use content by other people. We have also asked some people to contribute content and they've turned us down.... it is a two-way street, sometimes our solicitation isn't..... 'well thought of' to use your words.
If anyone feels they have something they would like to contribute towards the release then I am more than happy to talk to them if they'd like to mail me. I would say though, that I feel we have a reputation as a team for the quality of our work, and that won't be compromised. (apologies if anyone thinks that sounds arrogant)
Mike.
Last edited:
Send me another $64,000 and I'll tell you as well.Mike will; it be before the Kuji release
Mike.
johnchisem
Mr Grumpy
Mike, I know that a hard core of about six of us would love a whole fleet of DMUs! They were a fact of life in our golden days. Now if they will second me the ball might start rolling.
John
John
The desire for DMUs is in our conciousness, so the ball has started rolling. How far it will roll is another matter entirely.
Mike.
The DMU I would like to see (which AFAIK has never been done for MSTS let alone Trainz) is the Swindon Class 120 Cross Country. Not sure if these ventured on the S&C but they were in their time a very versatile unit. ISTR they combined the legendary AEC "whine" with a rather hellfire exhaust stack crackle.
So please add me to the DMU "wish-list."
So please add me to the DMU "wish-list."
Trainz Classics 3rd Edition "Settle - Carlisle"
Like many others, I was very pleased to hear that the Settle to Carlisle route was to be the subject of Trainz Classics 3. Having started with UTC, and purchased the 2004 and 2006 versions as soon as they became available, I firmly believe that Auran should have been organising such packs from the very beginning of Trainz, thus creating a larger pool of British locos and especially rolling stock. Individual content creators have a very difficult job, and it is to their credit that they continue to produce such amazing products. The stumbling block is that even working flat-out, they produce only a few items per year, by which time a new version of Trainz has been produced, or a service pack is awaited, and further delays are inevitable. So it is good news indeed that this large pack has been announced.
However, I was initially disappointed that the release date was at least 3 to 6 months away, until I realised that the announcement was primarily to invite comments and suggestions which might then be incorporated into the programme within that six months.
I am more than happy with the locos initially suggested, and I am assuming that running numbers can be customised, etc. Coaches [or lack of suitable ones] have always posed a problem for me – perhaps also a uniform standard for livery, outline etc can be agreed for TC3. My wishlist would be further Mark 1 coaches as per the Railwaves ‘open’ stock, perhaps covering many of the other versions of Mark 1s. However, pre-nationalisation designs such as the LMS ‘porthole’ stock would be useful, which might complement LMSMan’s coaches from an earlier period which he has recently mentioned he might develop further. Thompson stock could be another option, and would go well with the Gresley coaches recently produced. Suitable suburban stock too is conspicuous by its absence as well. Any coaches produced for TC3 could initially be in only lined maroon livery to cut down on the work involved, with other livery versions perhaps being offered as stock packs at later dates.
Mike has mentioned the ‘lack of interest’ in DMUs. I, for one, would certainly like a good variety of ‘heritage’ DMUs, the Metro Cammell class 101 units being almost ubiquitous, but any other type would be most welcome. I am sure many people, like myself, are rather reluctant to write in to ask for their favourite types of rolling stock unless invited to do so, for when someone does write in, it seems the person is inevitably berated by one or two individuals for apparently daring to criticise content creators for failing to deliver said favourite item and telling the person to take up G-Max and construct the item himself/herself! This may be part of the ‘lack of interest’ and I would hope that other people are now willing to make the effort to air their preferences. However, back on topic, perhaps DMUs if produced might have customisable destinations and headcodes [which could be altered in-game, perhaps at a terminus], and selectable numbering, including regional prefixes.
Once the comments and suggestions have been digested by the team, what do they have in mind as to how information on progress should be made? On one hand, we know that the project will be simmering in the background, and so a big announcement about a month before release date might be ideal, to avoid the speculation and silliness that has been prevalent until recently on the KRS Forum. On the other hand, everyone is eager for up-to-date news, so perhaps an announcement on a certain date each month could be made to avoid frustration. It will be interesting to see how they will deal with this dilemma.
I hope these are taken as constructive suggestions. I know all the types of coaches I mentioned could not possibly be included in TC3, but the more people who write in with their preferences, the more chance there is of the team taking their preferences seriously.
Bruce.
Like many others, I was very pleased to hear that the Settle to Carlisle route was to be the subject of Trainz Classics 3. Having started with UTC, and purchased the 2004 and 2006 versions as soon as they became available, I firmly believe that Auran should have been organising such packs from the very beginning of Trainz, thus creating a larger pool of British locos and especially rolling stock. Individual content creators have a very difficult job, and it is to their credit that they continue to produce such amazing products. The stumbling block is that even working flat-out, they produce only a few items per year, by which time a new version of Trainz has been produced, or a service pack is awaited, and further delays are inevitable. So it is good news indeed that this large pack has been announced.
However, I was initially disappointed that the release date was at least 3 to 6 months away, until I realised that the announcement was primarily to invite comments and suggestions which might then be incorporated into the programme within that six months.
I am more than happy with the locos initially suggested, and I am assuming that running numbers can be customised, etc. Coaches [or lack of suitable ones] have always posed a problem for me – perhaps also a uniform standard for livery, outline etc can be agreed for TC3. My wishlist would be further Mark 1 coaches as per the Railwaves ‘open’ stock, perhaps covering many of the other versions of Mark 1s. However, pre-nationalisation designs such as the LMS ‘porthole’ stock would be useful, which might complement LMSMan’s coaches from an earlier period which he has recently mentioned he might develop further. Thompson stock could be another option, and would go well with the Gresley coaches recently produced. Suitable suburban stock too is conspicuous by its absence as well. Any coaches produced for TC3 could initially be in only lined maroon livery to cut down on the work involved, with other livery versions perhaps being offered as stock packs at later dates.
Mike has mentioned the ‘lack of interest’ in DMUs. I, for one, would certainly like a good variety of ‘heritage’ DMUs, the Metro Cammell class 101 units being almost ubiquitous, but any other type
Once the comments and suggestions have been digested by the team, what do they have in mind as to how information on progress should be made? On one hand, we know that the project will be simmering in the background, and so a big announcement about a month before release date might be ideal, to avoid the speculation and silliness that has been prevalent until recently on the KRS Forum. On the other hand, everyone is eager for up-to-date news, so perhaps an announcement on a certain date each month could be made to avoid frustration. It will be interesting to see how they will deal with this dilemma.
I hope these are taken as constructive suggestions. I know all the types of coaches I mentioned could not possibly be included in TC3, but the more people who write in with their preferences, the more chance there is of the team taking their preferences seriously.
Bruce.
I am reliably informed, that local services were steam hauled until after 1967.
Somewhat after the time period we had in mind.
Mike.
Keep an eye on http://www.trainzclassics.co.uk We will be keeping it updated regularly and it will be our means of showing everyone the progress.
All taken as constructive Bruce, don't worry.
We are happy to hear people's preferences and ideas, it has to be kept in mind however that we are limited in our time budget for this and anything not already started that is of a complex nature could be beyond the scope of the project at the moment. Our ethos is definitely 'Quality not Quantity'.
Mike.
Wessex_Electric_Nutter
New member
Mike, I believe I owe you an appology for my previous post, I tried to order it in a correct response, but sometimes, when you don't answer something, I try to add sarcasam and humor, as well as trying to put a serious point across.
That can be done, if I knew the required timescale. I would like an object to appear in TRS, of mine and I would love some details by a lot of things. Decent polycount (look at my 141, 20k polys, add that to a shed, shouldn't drop your frames.
LOD - I know about
AWS - no details about, fiddling with the 06 one atm
Cab - already have several
Third party contributions - already bringing on a lot in house.
What I would like to do, if its going to be released as part of R.C.U, I'd like to use standard scripts wherever possible, so I can conform to an agreed standard and not trying to get out of scriping, I've been wanted to look and try it, but when you have soo many people demanding this, that and the other, they don't think "you haven't tried scripting yet". It looks suspciously easy, now that I have tried BASIC programming. (where have I said that before?)
PM me with some model details. I'm interested in being an outsourcer, but not working within the team. (If you understand what I mean). I am under an Auran NDA, so thats a huge advantage, I am tallented in 3D modelling, as you should know. But the fact is, no one utilises me for group work. Ok, I am with UK Branch Lines, but they don't really have deadlines.
Some of us are exactly the same, thats why I thought, sometiems, its better if we work on our own, as the quality of a product, can be seriously compromised. I was asking another question, which I won't repeat here for obvious reasons.
It also strikes me that most people take the easy way out with models, passing off a Mk3 reskin as a Wessex or a 153, but hang on, aren't most people only interested in modelling accruately than quickly?
That can be done, if I knew the required timescale. I would like an object to appear in TRS, of mine and I would love some details by a lot of things. Decent polycount (look at my 141, 20k polys, add that to a shed, shouldn't drop your frames.
LOD - I know about
AWS - no details about, fiddling with the 06 one atm
Cab - already have several
Third party contributions - already bringing on a lot in house.
What I would like to do, if its going to be released as part of R.C.U, I'd like to use standard scripts wherever possible, so I can conform to an agreed standard and not trying to get out of scriping, I've been wanted to look and try it, but when you have soo many people demanding this, that and the other, they don't think "you haven't tried scripting yet". It looks suspciously easy, now that I have tried BASIC programming. (where have I said that before?)
PM me with some model details. I'm interested in being an outsourcer, but not working within the team. (If you understand what I mean). I am under an Auran NDA, so thats a huge advantage, I am tallented in 3D modelling, as you should know. But the fact is, no one utilises me for group work. Ok, I am with UK Branch Lines, but they don't really have deadlines.
Some of us are exactly the same, thats why I thought, sometiems, its better if we work on our own, as the quality of a product, can be seriously compromised. I was asking another question, which I won't repeat here for obvious reasons.
It also strikes me that most people take the easy way out with models, passing off a Mk3 reskin as a Wessex or a 153, but hang on, aren't most people only interested in modelling accruately than quickly?
johnwhelan
Well-known member
Just a comment.
There is a market both for accurate models and approximate reskins. An approximate reskin is much faster to do than an accurate model. Also the more accurate the model usually the higher the poly count so there are trade offs.
Cheerio John
Especially the original B1 bogie/wooden panel/large seat/tungsten light/steam heat TSO's.
Sorry, slightly OT drool--woffle.
:udrool:
Hmm, does this point towards a need for some non-corridor local/suburban coaching stock for steam haulage? Coincidentally, I recall that WEN brought out a couple of examples of such stock last year. Perhaps these could be developed further?
Wessex_Electric_Nutter
New member
Yes, but never made the TC, I really need to remake the coaches, as the polycount is unaccepable. The reason for this, is because I built the coach out of sections (so the body has a higher polycount) rather than intergrated. The windows don't help either, but having alpha windows is much more of a problem, due to issues with Trainz.
EDIT: I saw the note about the period, this is true to an extent, like a lot of places in the UK, steam hauled, until 1967, but a lot of places also had diesel traction and steam traction working side by side. DMU failures were very common for the few years of their life, because of the bedding in of the traction equipment and the crew training needed. And as for some features....? Well, some were a constant source of trouble. Air driven ones being a typical example, as each vehicle produced their own air supply and there was no common train supply of air.
Last edited:
Russell_Benton
New member
Trainz Classics
Seven! DMUs got to be the most neglected part of BR History whether in model or simulator form. While , like another contributor, I'd love a Swindon 120 (actually a Swindon Ayrshire 126 would be better!)these did not run on S&C. What is needed are Class 101 and Class 108s.
Don't forget that if meant to represent 60s that blue diesels would have got a look in too, including Class 50s!
The North West 1966-1968 was a fascinating place with blue diesels /blue grey coaches mixing with maroon coaches and green diesels along with the last steam engines. Britannias, 9Fs, Black 5s, Standard 5, Standard 4, 4MT,2MT
Assuming TC3 can run alongside TRS2004 I'm a probable purchaser- but that DMU might just swing it!
Russell
Seven! DMUs got to be the most neglected part of BR History whether in model or simulator form. While , like another contributor, I'd love a Swindon 120 (actually a Swindon Ayrshire 126 would be better!)these did not run on S&C. What is needed are Class 101 and Class 108s.
Don't forget that if meant to represent 60s that blue diesels would have got a look in too, including Class 50s!
The North West 1966-1968 was a fascinating place with blue diesels /blue grey coaches mixing with maroon coaches and green diesels along with the last steam engines. Britannias, 9Fs, Black 5s, Standard 5, Standard 4, 4MT,2MT
Assuming TC3 can run alongside TRS2004 I'm a probable purchaser- but that DMU might just swing it!
Russell
