Trainz "Next" is announced...

[geophil]

Yep, this is one reason that I think it's also a great idea.

Since Trainz Surveryor has built-in functionality for merging baseboards, why would you need a new server based solution for this task that has already been solved 15 years ago?

Is there actually a user requirement for this? Has it been expressed on the wish/suggestion list?

Aren't there enough other challenges for the next version of Trainz? Yes, there is some sort basic superelevation available now. But for practical use, it's far too complicated to address each individual spline point. And what about turnouts? Indeed, they exist in a superelevated variant, too.

Interlocking. A nice start, yes. But has anyone tried to configure a reasonable mid-size station? It needs a lot more automation to become more than a pastime.

How about train brakes? It had been on the list already. For the time being we only have basic Westinghouse (or have I missed something here?). And Westinghouse was never in use in most European countries. In this respect Trainz is still a game, not a simulator.

We could continue here endlessly. Catenary, for example. Automation again.

Why waste precious development resources on something that hardly anyone needs? If the overall idea is to open new ways to generate revenue then I can understand the motivation, but the counter value on offer for that subscription service doesn't look convincing at all. One of the reasons I think there must be more to it, looking in the direction of data mining.

 

[ish6]

Since Trainz Surveryor has built-in functionality for merging baseboards, why would you need a new server based solution for this task that has already been solved 15 years ago?

Is there actually a user requirement for this? Has it been expressed on the wish/suggestion list?

Aren't there enough other challenges for the next version of Trainz? Yes, there is some sort basic superelevation available now. But for practical use, it's far too complicated to address each individual spline point. And what about turnouts? Indeed, they exist in a superelevated variant, too.

Interlocking. A nice start, yes. But has anyone tried to configure a reasonable mid-size station? It needs a lot more automation to become more than a pastime.

How about train brakes? It had been on the list already. For the time being we only have basic Westinghouse (or have I missed something here?). And Westinghouse was never in use in most European countries. In this respect Trainz is still a game, not a simulator.

We could continue here endlessly. Catenary, for example. Automation again.

Why waste precious development resources on something that hardly anyone needs? If the overall idea is to open new ways to generate revenue then I can understand the motivation, but the counter value on offer for that subscription service doesn't look convincing at all. One of the reasons I think there must be more to it, looking in the direction of data mining.

Except for the subscription services, which, at this time, there's no way to judge that, I think you're off base, sir!

The ability for folks, or better yet, friends to come together and built a world together is awesome! I've been playing online games for over 15 years, and it's quite fun, especially when everyone is on the same page!

I remember when I was in the forum back with Trainz 1.3, I suggested multiplayer, but it wasn't a good fit for trainz then ... I kept pushing the subject year after year, and I can still recall the comments ... folks saying I am crazy, blar blar ... even an N3V stuffer express their opinions against it, but where we are!

Of course, if you sit down and put thought-on-paper I'm sure you can pin down lots of other things to do for the next trainz ... Ask anyone, I have suggested plenty from new landscape tools to.a dedicated TranDEM program embedded into trainz, etc ... the list is long ...

All in all, let's just trust Tony and accompany ... They have decided, it's out there, so in a year, or more we will see ... And like I said, if it's not your cup of team, trainz will still be there for you, the offline version!

Lastly, it seems you're talking about cosmetic issues here, which in time, can be fix and address ... Tony did say more SP are coming, etc! (Anyone can correct me if I am wrong, but I did read the newsletters, tho)

As for revenues, well, N3V need to eat, too!

Ish

 

[Pencil42]

Since Trainz Surveryor has built-in functionality for merging baseboards, why would you need a new server based solution for this task that has already been solved 15 years ago?

Because it's a real pain to delete the extraneous baseboards to trim the route down to the one board you are working on. Although that could be mitigated, there's still overhead in importing and exporting baseboards, as well as keeping track of who is working on what; which baseboards are 'checked out', and what the status of those boards is.
What this new multiplayer (may?) offer would be for different people to work on the same area of the route at the same time. For example, one person could be adding vegetation at the same time someone else is working on the track and a 3rd person is building a city. A baseboard wouldn't have to be 'checked in' and merged for someone else to do some work on it.
It could be analogous to having a work party for your model railroad.

All just idle speculation until we get more details, but I do see some promise in the idea.

Curtis

 

[SailorDan]

Last week we asked whether anyone could guess the next direction for the expansion of the Trainz franchise.

Is it just me, or does 'the next direction' say 'we are giving up on the direction we are currently heading in and we are choosing a new direction to go in'?

Surely that is not the message you are trying to send. It is the next stage, the next development, the next advance, the next big step - anything other than a different direction. With T:ane still wet behind the ears, any suggestion of a different direction should be absolutely avoided.

If you want to drag the existing customers along with you it is critical to make it clear that what they have invested in the current product (time, money, content, emotion) will continue with the changes. Your comments seem to indicate this is what you intend. Yet the principal message seems to be that you have now decided to head of in a new direction!!

It just doesn't make sense.

 

[Vinnie264]

Alright. So let me get this straight. It took a year to fix TANE, and let it sit for a few months on the version its on now, and you want to release a second one only a few months later? I've been noticing a pattern. Every 2 years, you guys come out with a new game. Even though TANE hasn't been out for 2 years, it's close to 2 years since you people got the funding. I'm starting to notice that you guys are literally profit driven, and nothing else. Taking an already existing game, giving it a few changes here and there, fixing a couple of things, then selling it as a new product. I'll give N3V credit for one thing - this is the only simulator out there that has a community that creates so much content and shares it. Being honest, this is the only solid thing to N3V anymore. Other than that, this game is literally turning out to be another Microsoft, Failworks, whatever you want to call it simulator. Sorry if I sound pessimistic as all heck, but this is ridiculous. The last 2 versions of trainz (tane and 12) are not stable in any way, shape, or form, so what am I to think of this new version? I like the new ideas, but you guys need to stop making new versions right after another comes out.

 

[PerRock]

Since i started my rant over on Trainz.net and am too lazy to keep both threads up, here is a link to my thoughts so far.
http://www.trainz.net/index.php/topic/292-trainz-next/#entry6185

peter

 

[ish6]

Taking an already existing game, giving it a few changes here and there, fixing a couple of things, then selling it as a new product.

Except in TANE's case, this isn't true! The bridge between T12 and TANE are oceans apart .... TANE runs on a 64bit platform, where as T12 on a 32. TANE, at least for me, before SP1 rand superb, beautifully ... Due to video card drivers, etc I can't say how SP1 runs NOW, except the community has embraced it! Friends have express their joy of it, etc!

Ish

 

[pware]

Is it just me, or does 'the next direction' say 'we are giving up on the direction we are currently heading in and we are choosing a new direction to go in'?

Unfortunately, SailorDan, you and a few other posters seem to have gone off on a tangent. Reading the original announcement in the Q&A section ...

Q. What happened to the remaining Kickstarter stretch goals?
A. The core stretch goals that were funded have been implemented. Improvements to these features is ongoing and the other stretch goals are all still features that are planned for future updates to Trainz - possibly some of these will be included in Trainz "Next".

Q. Will this project result in no further updates for TANE?
A. No, quite the opposite. We will be making regular updates to TANE and also working on other product releases while working on Trainz "Next".

 

[ish6]

Since i started my rant over on Trainz.net and am too lazy to keep both threads up, here is a link to my thoughts so far.
http://www.trainz.net/index.php/topic/292-trainz-next/#entry6185

peter

You know what, sir, I went there and read a few comments ... OMG ... Tony's words are being twisted in every wish way they can!

It's pointless to point out some of those, except one ... and this is started in Tony's FAQ, clearly ... From the newsletters folks:

Q. Can I just view and explore a route rather than edit?
A. Access is granted by the Route Owner. We expect that most Owners will allow people View Access, but this is a personal choice.


Q. Who owns my Route edits?
A. Each Route is owned by a single user. All edits made to that Route by other users are contributed under the understanding that the Route Owner may use the edits in any way that he or she sees fit. Owners may create their own "share" agreement with users, for example.

Ish

 

[nathanmallard]

Subscription service?
No. Just no. Don't even think about going there.
For a start, customers are not paying less at all, are they? Of course their not, otherwise there would be no point in it!
Let's see- I've been using TS2010 now for about 4 years. I payed roughly £20 for it. If I bought Trainz Next or whatever for, let's say £10 new, with a monthly subscription of £4 and used it for four years, how much would I pay?
4×12=48
48×4=192
£192+the initial tenner=.... £202.
If you're really that blatantly interested in making a profit, why not just sell it at £200 from the outset? Look how many other hugely successful games use the subscription system...that's right, none! Don't forget that a big portion of the 'gamers' market you now seem to be targeting are children with little disposable income. Not to mention the fact that one day, you could just cancel the subscription one day and force us to spend £200 on another version.
Yes, T:ANE was a bit of a letdown, but look at some of the screenshots, it clearly has potential. If you truly want "Happier Customers", throw your primary-school flow charts in the bin and set about improving T:ANE until it lives up to the promises you made to all of those kickstarter backers.
Not happy with this. At all. And who actually used multiplayer?

 

[geophil]

Because it's a real pain to delete the extraneous baseboards to trim the route down to the one board you are working on. Although that could be mitigated, there's still overhead in importing and exporting baseboards, as well as keeping track of who is working on what; which baseboards are 'checked out', and what the status of those boards is.
What this new multiplayer (may?) offer would be for different people to work on the same area of the route at the same time. For example, one person could be adding vegetation at the same time someone else is working on the track and a 3rd person is building a city. A baseboard wouldn't have to be 'checked in' and merged for someone else to do some work on it.
It could be analogous to having a work party for your model railroad.

Curtis, the fundamental challenge for route building in a team is organization, management, motivation etc. It's about the human resources involved. Tools to exchange data are a niceness, no more. Without the former a project will never succeed, without the latter, it may be painful, but will go through, largely unharmed. Some people here suggested it would be the other way round. Speaking with a tiny bit of background in this field, such an assumption could be naive, I'm afraid.

And should two people actually work on the same baseboard at the same time? Something you never do in software development. Two people on the same source file? Heaven forbid! The merger may solve the conflicts technically, but resolving the logic mess created will take long enough to learn the lesson.

The Trainz route files aren't ideal for team development but technically it would work, by simply employing off-the-shelf repository technology. No new tool required.

However, far better would be a modular approach to route building, small modules, like they do it in Zusi, with only temporary merging during runtime. The individual modules retain maximum independence while still keeping well defined interfaces between adjacent modules, including cross-module signalling/interlocking. That would be an architectural change for Trainz, but one that does not have to rely on server-based solutions. (No new revenue source then, unfortunately.)

 

[nexusdj]

What I want to see is the management write back to the eight year old lad and explain to him that they've taken on board his idea and they are going to implement it in a new version . then at the bottom of letter in tiny writing they can write "PS : We are going to charge you every month to use it !!"

As for subscriptions , give it a few months for users to get roped in and working on combined routes and then they'll put up the price , few more months down the road and the price will go up again and again and again !
Excuses will be : hiring more coders , overloaded servers so we've added extra ones , implementing new and unwanted (by most) features , Had to get the office cat shaved to stop it clogging up the computers etc. !!

How can we fleece more money from our customers , those delightful people who are stupid enough to fill the DLS with content for free , I know lets introduce a subscription scheme and the idiots wont realise after about 14 months that they've paid more money than buying a hard copy outright !!

 

[ish6]

The Trainz route files aren't ideal for team development but technically it would work, by simply employing off-the-shelf repository technology. No new tool required.

You can't say that, sir. And you need to trust the developer in this case to do that, who are N3V's!

Unless, your mean something more deeper from a technical point of view, fine, but out here, it's simple.... So, let's put all this technical stuff you're saying aside ... no doubt, you got skills in that field, but the bottom-line here is to have fun ... And if surveyor online to edit routes bring out the fun in folks, why not? ... no more late nights doing this alone, etc etc ... It's worth it ...

All in all, from the very first trainz until it now it has grown .... And we just need to leave it alone so it can continue to grow ... sometimes in small steps like the Classic Series, and sometimes in huge leaps like from T12 to TANE! ,,, one-step at a time, sir!

Regards
Ish

 

[SailorDan]

A. No, quite the opposite. We will be making regular updates to TANE and also working on other product releases while working on Trainz "Next".

Then why does the blurb use terms like 'the next direction' and 'we have announced just what that direction will be'? That clearly implies that we are changing what we are doing, stopping development in the current direction, and taking up a new direction.

Sure, reading down through the rest of the description makes it clear that's not what's happening. So they have to go around saying 'No - it's not really a new direction at all, it's all things going on just as before, we are actually looking at other product releases to supplement what we already have'.

Anyone who's been involved with marketing will tell you that if you send the wrong message in the first sentence you will have a battle to turn around the perception down the track.

Why do you think the discussion has gone off track? Because a term like 'new direction' sends the wrong message, and that's what grabs people's attention.

 

[ish6]

I don't want to quote anyone on this subject, but it's everywhere, etc ... So, generally speaking ....

For subscribe service!

For me, this is a wait and see approach. No harm. No foil. But to knock it now, so very early it just doesn't make sense.

Also, I have not read from Tony anywhere that you are require to ship-in .... are not require to subscribe....

So, what's the big deal if N3V offers such a service? .... At the end of the day, it is YOUR choice to subscribe to it!

And since this is all at the planning stages no one knows what's going to be in it, until it's public release, obviously over a year from now, etc.

Regards
Ish

 

[pware]

Then why does the blurb use terms like 'the next direction' and 'we have announced just what that direction will be'? That clearly implies that we are changing what we are doing, stopping development in the current direction, and taking up a new direction.

I did not read that interpretation into their news posting but I agree that words can be interpreted differently by different people. To me "next direction" simply meant "new features", "new opportunities" growing out of the existing product and not a complete abandonment of that product.

 

[weevil]

. . . the bottom-line here is to have fun ... And if surveyor online to edit routes bring out the fun in folks, why not? ... no more late nights doing this alone, etc etc ... It's worth it ...

The bottom line is to have fun, yes. But late nights working alone in peace and quiet doing my own thing my way is exactly what makes it relaxing for me. I can't think of anything worse than having to share a surveyor session with a load of 9 year old newbies trying to install rollercoaster and ski-jump tracks all over my route!

Fortunately, it seems we are not having this forced upon us so that is a good thing. What concerns me is the amount of developer resources that will be expended on this feature, no doubt to the detriment of other worthwhile and long sought after features and fixes.

The last Trainz I bought on release was TS2010. After years of buying each latest version straight away I couldn't justify carrying on like that. Auran (and now N3V) have repeatedly failed to deliver important features and fixes, whilst breaking and altering things that didn't need touching and adding new features I wasn't interested in.

I got a free copy of TS2012 as a peace offering due to a built-in content mix-up and I just bought T:ANE after the release of SP1. After reading the forums and looking at all the screenshots I decided it was worth risking as it was on sale for about 20 euros. I shall be treating any future offerings in the same manner. Wait and see what it's like, read the forums and then buy it 6-12 months after release once they've fixed it up a bit and dropped the price.

Stuart

 

[nathanmallard]

The more I read in to this, the sillier it gets. So we're just going to let every user from every corner of the globe randomly edit our routes now, are we? I can't see this being popular. Did anyone actually ask for this, or the subscription service, for that matter?
I think whoever came up with this needs to go back to the drawing board and rethink.
I have seen a comparison Tony made on another thread, basically stating that in 2008, nobody wanted phones with big screens, but they do now.
Put it this way- in 2014, nobody wanted 'smart glasses'. Nobody wants smart glasses now, either.

 

[Smitening]

I would like to establish something right away. Trainz NEXT sounds great except for a few things, which can easily be fixed (*cough cough* offline surveyor *cough cough*). However, the subscription model does not. Even though you market it as "paying less" and "opt out at any time," we pay more in the end, and 99% of people aren't just gonna decide to pack up and leave randomly. The subscription model WILL NOT WORK. I understand that it is designed to pay for the cost of maintaining servers for an online game, but the aforementioned servers could easily be run if you just made good sales up front. Also, you dont need a lot of servers if you *gasp* MAKE IT AVAILABLE OFFLINE. Also, if you want to do a multiplayer route thing, just have them pay, like, $10 a year to maintain JUST THAT PART, not for the whole game. That was the system employed for, say, Minecraft servers, and it works just fine! Pay more dollars per year depending on number of people allowed online. Simple as that. That way the payments of the people are actually being applied to what they want them to be, and so they can pay much more selectively. Thanks for your time.

 

[PerRock]

Put it this way- in 2014, nobody wanted 'smart glasses'. Nobody wants smart glasses now, either.

I wanted smart glasses back when in the Early '90s and I still do to this day! I would have leaped at getting a pair of Google Goggles, except I didn't have the money when they were available and still don't sadly.

peter