Any response to that at all, As i do want to play this simulator and build the map I have always wanted (One of the reasons for my new machine when i knew 2010 was coming).
Trs2010 Very Poor Draw Distance! Driver Mode Even Worse
- Thread starter jjeff1955
- Start date
Any response to that at all, As i do want to play this simulator and build the map I have always wanted (One of the reasons for my new machine when i knew 2010 was coming).
Sorry, but there's not much I can do regarding general technical support on the forums. You'd best take that up with Helpdesk. If you haven't had a reply in a while, it would be best to send a follow-up email - we have been known to lose messages every now and again.
Hope you get it sorted out quickly,
chris
john_goddard
Steam freak
http:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF1QzJtENLs
I know that there are problems with the draw distances but it does not effect me as much as it seems to affect others on this thread. See above video taken in Ts2010 build 42203, John.
I know that there are problems with the draw distances but it does not effect me as much as it seems to affect others on this thread. See above video taken in Ts2010 build 42203, John.
Although I find the 'pop-up' phenomenon very annoying I can understand the Chris/Auran position on this - they want to impose a new, higher standard for 'efficient' content creation so that, in future versions of Trainz, we'll enjoy smooth, high FPS action with long draw distances.
That's the future, but unfortunately where we are today, there appears to be a lot of 'inefficient' content around that causes the limiter to kick in and the draw distance to go in and out like you've had 20 pints of lager!
However, using the stats option in Surveyor (as mentioned earlier), it is possible to identify the worst offending assets and remove them. Earlier in this thread I mentioned the dreadful pop-up I was experiencing with lord-claud-hamilton's Cootes Lane layout. Usually the offending 'inefficient' asset is track, but in this case the following were identifed as the culprits:
This leads me to think that maybe we need 'health warnings' that identify inefficient content (is it only track and spline that's the problem?) and warn users about the likely impact if used in layouts for TS10. Maybe these warnings could be added to their entries on the DLS or in the asset description?
Alternatively, Auran should be identifying the worst offenders and asking their creators to update/modify them or face their removal from the DLS.
My final thoughs on this issue. We seem to have a real problem with track in TS10. In my experience, all the advanced track (ver 2.9) seems to show up in the surveyor stats as the most 'inefficient' asset and I've had to to retreat to chunky mesh track to avoid 'pop-up'. Sadly, I can't use the Rumour3 Bullhead UK 09 track for this reason, even though it's the best track going.
Please, please can Auran give creators of track and splines definitive advice about how to avoid 'inefficiency' when making these assets to ver 2.9 standards, and not buried in a wiki, but stated boldly on these forums. Then perhaps we can banish the curse of pop-up for ever!
Paul
That's the future, but unfortunately where we are today, there appears to be a lot of 'inefficient' content around that causes the limiter to kick in and the draw distance to go in and out like you've had 20 pints of lager!
However, using the stats option in Surveyor (as mentioned earlier), it is possible to identify the worst offending assets and remove them. Earlier in this thread I mentioned the dreadful pop-up I was experiencing with lord-claud-hamilton's Cootes Lane layout. Usually the offending 'inefficient' asset is track, but in this case the following were identifed as the culprits:
Once these were removed from the layout, the pop-up effect stopped. Note that the second item here is built-in to TS10 and is a much loved and used fence for UK Trainzers! Sad to see it is now deemed 'inefficient'.
This leads me to think that maybe we need 'health warnings' that identify inefficient content (is it only track and spline that's the problem?) and warn users about the likely impact if used in layouts for TS10. Maybe these warnings could be added to their entries on the DLS or in the asset description?
Alternatively, Auran should be identifying the worst offenders and asking their creators to update/modify them or face their removal from the DLS.
My final thoughs on this issue. We seem to have a real problem with track in TS10. In my experience, all the advanced track (ver 2.9) seems to show up in the surveyor stats as the most 'inefficient' asset and I've had to to retreat to chunky mesh track to avoid 'pop-up'. Sadly, I can't use the Rumour3 Bullhead UK 09 track for this reason, even though it's the best track going.
Please, please can Auran give creators of track and splines definitive advice about how to avoid 'inefficiency' when making these assets to ver 2.9 standards, and not buried in a wiki, but stated boldly on these forums. Then perhaps we can banish the curse of pop-up for ever!
Paul
john_goddard
Steam freak
Perhaps because the route is still being built and there is still a lot of detail to be added I have been able to manage with the Bullhead UK track ( see above video), no doubt as the route is improved I will have to think about replacing it, John.
Passing the buck to those content creators, who have spent many unpaid hours to create these "inefficient" splines that make the "limiter" kick in, is truly a cheap shot. It's the same as saying, "Hey! It's not our problem...it's your problem!" Anyway...5000 meters? If you could get it...it's still too short! How about 12 km? From my experience, that's what is needed to make this virtual model railroading program even begin to look realistic.
Cheers,
Fred
Cheers,
Fred
I was curious about real view distances, so I looked it up. Apparently the most you can sea at sea level is around 5km, assuming a nice clear day.
In my layouts it is the stone walls and fences that cause the frame rate hit. Unfortunately the only 2.9 or later versions I'm aware of are payware.
Charles
In my layouts it is the stone walls and fences that cause the frame rate hit. Unfortunately the only 2.9 or later versions I'm aware of are payware.
Charles
I don't know where you looked it up, but that simply isn't true. Anyway...what does sea level have to do with it? I suppose if the only routes you are interested in modelling are flat and at sea level you might have a point.
Cheers,
Fred
Windwlkr skirted around the problem of ground ground textures turning to large squares well below 5000m. In my case in was at 1800m, now at 2800 with new vid card driver. The video card is Nvidea Geforce 9800GT. Directx will not change the problem as large light blue squares flash in the ground.
Contacted Helpdesk about this, but suggestions didn't fix this. Also was told that this wasn't normal, but quite a few people seem to have this problem too. As the routes I have made are either outback Queensland or US desert routes, using good weather fog to hide the square textures doesn't seem appropriate. My PC meets required specs so should not have this problem.
Doesn't seem much point producing a game with a 5km draw distance if for a lot of users it isn't working even on PC that should be able to run at max specs. Maybe the real problem is trying to make this all work on the old Auran Jet engine. Only so much making over and plastic surgery will hide the cracks in the old girl! I doubt that I'll be lining up to buy the next TRS edition if its still using Jet.
Contacted Helpdesk about this, but suggestions didn't fix this. Also was told that this wasn't normal, but quite a few people seem to have this problem too. As the routes I have made are either outback Queensland or US desert routes, using good weather fog to hide the square textures doesn't seem appropriate. My PC meets required specs so should not have this problem.
Doesn't seem much point producing a game with a 5km draw distance if for a lot of users it isn't working even on PC that should be able to run at max specs. Maybe the real problem is trying to make this all work on the old Auran Jet engine. Only so much making over and plastic surgery will hide the cracks in the old girl! I doubt that I'll be lining up to buy the next TRS edition if its still using Jet.
If I am standing on the earth on a hill?
Stovepipe I can see over 1 mile away looking down the hill of a street and can see the ground and roads and then some. Trainz2010 can not even see 2 blocks away! I live up on a hill in Denver, Colorado and can see the downtown buildings that are over 8 miles away. The fun of a 3D game is having a stable map that does not pop in and out textures, ground and roads. I will not be buying anymore Trainz from Auran if the 3D engine is not replaced with up to date standards. I removed all of the TRS2010 off of my computers and went back to the TRS2006 so as I can use the Trainz Tuner.
Stovepipe I can see over 1 mile away looking down the hill of a street and can see the ground and roads and then some. Trainz2010 can not even see 2 blocks away! I live up on a hill in Denver, Colorado and can see the downtown buildings that are over 8 miles away. The fun of a 3D game is having a stable map that does not pop in and out textures, ground and roads. I will not be buying anymore Trainz from Auran if the 3D engine is not replaced with up to date standards. I removed all of the TRS2010 off of my computers and went back to the TRS2006 so as I can use the Trainz Tuner.
norfolksouthern37
what's a normal map?
it appears that i owe an apology to Chris. i am sorry i doubted you... ok i said that. now to the explanation...
in the route in development that was being tested i replaced a telegraph spline that always showed as the worst index with one i made 'efficiently' using the latest spline techniques... the results were astounding. just replacing that one asset yielded draw distances that were at least 4 times the amount they were previously. i wonder just how far we can push it with new assets.
in the route in development that was being tested i replaced a telegraph spline that always showed as the worst index with one i made 'efficiently' using the latest spline techniques... the results were astounding. just replacing that one asset yielded draw distances that were at least 4 times the amount they were previously. i wonder just how far we can push it with new assets.
Lol Stovepipe good point
If I am standing on a hill or Mountain about 2000m down in trainz 2006 I can see my town with the Trainz Tuner activated and in Trs2010 the ground is gone. I wanted to thank you Stovepipe and all others for the great support you have given me in this thread.
Maybe Auran will have some concerns and a matter of pride in his software and to fix these problems for us.
Norfolksouthern37 that is a great Discovery! Maybe the content needs to be focused on and that would help us all out. But I did make a test map in the TRS2010 with no heavy content. Just default roads and a few trees and a stretch of default train track about 1/2 a mile long with a mountain about 2000m away and that mountain is gone until I am right up on it. The trees are gone in driver mode until almost up on them also. Default trees and track still no draw distance worth of making the map look good.
If I am standing on a hill or Mountain about 2000m down in trainz 2006 I can see my town with the Trainz Tuner activated and in Trs2010 the ground is gone. I wanted to thank you Stovepipe and all others for the great support you have given me in this thread. Maybe Auran will have some concerns and a matter of pride in his software and to fix these problems for us.Norfolksouthern37 that is a great Discovery! Maybe the content needs to be focused on and that would help us all out. But I did make a test map in the TRS2010 with no heavy content. Just default roads and a few trees and a stretch of default train track about 1/2 a mile long with a mountain about 2000m away and that mountain is gone until I am right up on it. The trees are gone in driver mode until almost up on them also. Default trees and track still no draw distance worth of making the map look good.
Last edited:
socalwb909
Photo Creator
-Don't forget that most of the content built into 09/10 is content from ts06/04 and probably earlier! just because its built in doesn't mean its efficient.
-I too have to say sorry Chris. Very simple, if the content is built correctly and efficiently we get the distance that we want! Thanks for the support!
-Joe
ZecMurphy
Community Assistant
Hi All
I apologise for not posting this earlier, the helpdesk is still extremely busy.
However a test on the S&C pack's map showed similar results. The first was to replace the fence splines with a somewhat more optimised spline (build for 09+). The second was to delete the river spline. Unfortunately, as the river spline was made as 'dual track' (or something similar), it couldn't be replaced.
Once these two were done, I was able to get 5KM draw distance quite easily.
Personally, I'm going to be looking at my Healesville map now... As, so far, that has been limited to approx 3KM.
One thing to note with this.
'old' splines (note - not sure about MRT splines) tend to have a short repeat distance. For example, a spline repeats every 4m, and is 10 polygons. For as far as your draw distance goes (say 5KM), your object is repeated multiple times with those same 10 polygons. Over 5KM, you end up with 1250 repeats (5KM/4m), which is 12500 polygons. Thats for a relatively basic object (a box without the base - e.g. a brick fence). Most splines will be a minimum of this. With MRT you can put a second lower detail mesh, however you are limited with how far you can reduce this. Of course, a way to help this is multiple length splines (e.g. 2m track, 4m track, 8m track, 16m track, etc) which will reduce polys (less repeats in the ballast and rail mesh, and less repeats over all).
'new' splines can get around this. You can have as many LOD's as you want/need. For example:
Mesh1 = 2m long, 200 polys, 1 segment
Mesh2 = 4m long, 350 polys, 2 segments
mesh3 = 4m long, 300 polys, 1 segment
mesh4 = 4m long, 200 polys, 1 segment
Mesh5 = 8m long, 200 polys, 2 segments
Mesh6 = 8m long, 100 polys, 1 segment
Mesh7 = 16m long, 18 polys, 1 segment
Mesh8 = 16m long, 6 polys, 1 segment
That is just an example of how a track/spline LOD might work. Not one I've used in practice, just an example of the basic idea behind the track LOD's.
Personally, I would try to make the longer lengths a little longer (thus reducing repeats), possibly get them to the 20m mark in the distance. For track, you may want to make a matching 'short' track that has shorter LOD mesh lengths (e.g. max of 8m), to allow curved tracks to be kept smooth.
@Jjeff1955
Have you tried contacting the helpdesk regarding this as well?
I apologise for not posting this earlier, the helpdesk is still extremely busy.
However a test on the S&C pack's map showed similar results. The first was to replace the fence splines with a somewhat more optimised spline (build for 09+). The second was to delete the river spline. Unfortunately, as the river spline was made as 'dual track' (or something similar), it couldn't be replaced.
Once these two were done, I was able to get 5KM draw distance quite easily.
Personally, I'm going to be looking at my Healesville map now... As, so far, that has been limited to approx 3KM.
One thing to note with this.
'old' splines (note - not sure about MRT splines) tend to have a short repeat distance. For example, a spline repeats every 4m, and is 10 polygons. For as far as your draw distance goes (say 5KM), your object is repeated multiple times with those same 10 polygons. Over 5KM, you end up with 1250 repeats (5KM/4m), which is 12500 polygons. Thats for a relatively basic object (a box without the base - e.g. a brick fence). Most splines will be a minimum of this. With MRT you can put a second lower detail mesh, however you are limited with how far you can reduce this. Of course, a way to help this is multiple length splines (e.g. 2m track, 4m track, 8m track, 16m track, etc) which will reduce polys (less repeats in the ballast and rail mesh, and less repeats over all).
'new' splines can get around this. You can have as many LOD's as you want/need. For example:
Mesh1 = 2m long, 200 polys, 1 segment
Mesh2 = 4m long, 350 polys, 2 segments
mesh3 = 4m long, 300 polys, 1 segment
mesh4 = 4m long, 200 polys, 1 segment
Mesh5 = 8m long, 200 polys, 2 segments
Mesh6 = 8m long, 100 polys, 1 segment
Mesh7 = 16m long, 18 polys, 1 segment
Mesh8 = 16m long, 6 polys, 1 segment
That is just an example of how a track/spline LOD might work. Not one I've used in practice, just an example of the basic idea behind the track LOD's.
Personally, I would try to make the longer lengths a little longer (thus reducing repeats), possibly get them to the 20m mark in the distance. For track, you may want to make a matching 'short' track that has shorter LOD mesh lengths (e.g. max of 8m), to allow curved tracks to be kept smooth.
@Jjeff1955
Have you tried contacting the helpdesk regarding this as well?
