What's happening to the TS2010 Wiki?

PEV

Active member
I just checked the the ex-TrainzDEV Wiki for and recent changes....NONE in 7 days and two in 30 days and one of those was mine. So nothing is happening to the Wiki..

I think it's time to bite the bullet on the Wiki..

The general lack of enthusiasm for adding to, or maintaining it shows there's not the motivation or skills in the community to build such a thing.

I believe that the CCGTC as a PDF document is far more accessible to the average Trainz enthusiast who wants to create some content. It may not be a perfect document but just about every thing you want is in it, and isn't too hard to find, especially when you use it a lot like I do.

I do admit that I use the Wiki for the finer details of scripting and normal mapping etc, but it always seems to take me ages to get to the right page.(and I am not a computer dummy)

I think that N3V Games should invest some time in amending CCGTC to bring it up to TS2010 standard. This also would mean having TS2010 examples for us to follow as the CCG did in the TRS2004 days.. Unfortunately those 2004 ones are still the same examples we have in CCGTC (with a few minor exceptions).

It's really up to the game's makers to keep the documentation up to scratch..it should not be left to the user community.. It should be costed into the product, as it used to be.

We, the community, are consumers of such documentation and we do it enthusiastically to improve our modelling skills. For us knowing where to start without documentation is too hit or miss, we need guidance to acquire the necessary skills. The trs2004 examples were great for this, BUT NOW WE NEED TO MOVE ON, as Chris et al keep telling us. So where is the TS2010 documentation????

Team N3V Games it's time to lay an egg on this one, or we, the users, may not have the skills to keep up with the content build quality that the TS2010
game requires.. and that would be bad for you, seeing as you rely on us for so much of your content.
 
10000000% agree with you on this one PEV.

Auran, an updated CCG when you get the chance please! I find myself referring to the TC CCG and it's outdated...

:wave:

Gisa ^^
 
Completely agree with every single word PEV, but it's not going to happen.
We've been here before.

Auran see the Wiki as the way forward, even though most Wikis on the Internet are poor, simply because they need a lot of time and effort put in to make them worthwhile, and that hasn't been done.

We keep getting told that it's a priority, and that examples (IMO the most important part of a tutorial or reference) will be added too, but that hasn't happened either, as Auran's goals change more often than a floating voter's opinion. ;)

A Wiki should be used as a selling platform for the software, showing off it's new features and what they are capable of, not as an afterthought.

Smiley.
 
A simple solution would be for Auran to put all their relevant non intellectual property sensitive internal documentation online.

John
 
I agree with you PEV.
With previous version you could also download example files.
In my view Auran should try to mend fences with content creators and be more responsive to their requests.
I say again that without PEV support Trainz 2009 and 2010 we would have lost a lot of excellant content from older versions of Trainz.
Trainz has been supported by me from UTC days and you will therefore appreciated how much content I have.
 
A simple solution would be for Auran to put all their relevant non intellectual property sensitive internal documentation online.

John

You honestly think it's been documented? We are talking programmers here and none of mine ever liked doing the documentation.

Cheerio John
 
NV3 has to spend the same amount of time updating the WIKI as they would have to do with a CCG - if they don't have time to update the WIKI, they certainly don't have time to write a CCG. At least with the WIKI, we can get information in pieces; whenever they have a few spare minutes.

Curtis
 
Peter, I'm with you 100%. I've brought this up before, but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. I've given up on a CCG. If N3V really wants us creators to begin using the new features, they need to give us documentation and examples that we can read. It seems that half of the things that I try to find on the Wiki give me a message that it's under development. That's not much use when I'm trying to figure out how to do something. It's one of the reasons that I've just given up on creating anything. I'm probably not alone in this.
Mike
 
I agree completely with Peter. As one of the lesser breed of creators/modifiers I find the Wiki concept completely useless as I can never find what I want, either because it is buried deep down or more usually because it is not there. An updated CCG or even just the promised list of new tags etc. for 2010 would be helpful as apart from the new bogie tags I still don't know about any others.

I agree with johnwhelan. Programmers hate doing documentation or even adding adequate comments to their code. That is why companies employ technical writers. I suspect that half the trouble with code being broken etc. is because of the lack of internal documentation of the original code so that now that all the original programmers have left, the present generation find it hard at times to sort out what is going on.

Like others I am not holding my breath. However I do predict that come September there will be a dramatic drop in the number of new items on the DLS because average creators will not understand how to comply with the new stricter modelling requirements.
 
Perhaps all N3V resources are focused on Tiny Trainz.... with an estimated release in May.

*******************************************************

Introducing Tiny Trainz!

Here's what you'll get:
  • You're the designer! Build winding, climbing tracks and build it over, under, around and through more objects than you can poke a stick at!
  • Build Team-Work! Your kids will never get along better than this as they work together to build tracks that will WOW you.
  • Nine realistic trains to drive! From old chugging steamers to shiny bullet trains.
  • Let your childrens (and your!) creativity run wild. Four huge rooms, Countless Items to build on / through / under, Nine Trains and a Track Builder mean that there is virtually limitless gameplay!
  • Developed by the company that has been making the very best Train Simulation games for over 10 years!
Tiny Trainz is due out for release on PC in May 2010. Click Here to visit the www.tinytrainz.com

****************************************************

The need to generate some cash flow may take priority at this time.

Have fun,:)
 
They certainly had time to screw up the program though now didn't they!
To each, their own :)


Examples? There are plenty of examples included in the game - Auran provided at least one example of each new asset. Just open it up in CM and look at it. This gives you the advantage of having a complete, working asset that you can clone and change if you want to experiment with some of the parameters.

New feature documentation?
New features for each version are listed at http://online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/index.php5/Trainz_Release_Versions

The new track method is described at http://online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/index.php5/KIND_Track

There's also documentation about the new steam physics (although more can be added here, there wasn't much in the way of documentation in the CCGs for this, either) and documentation about the new signaling logic.

There's a very nice discussion about best practices for modeling at http://online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/index.php5/Modeling - these give us much better guidelines than the old 'a house should be less than 300 polygons' we had in the past.

For the scripting API, have you looked at: http://online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/index.php5/TrainzScript_Library_Reference ?

I agree there are still areas that need fleshing out, but I think we're much better than we have been in the past.
 
Be it as it may, a Wiki as documentation is just not good enough for us content creators. Why this is so has been trashed out often enough here in this forum, there is no need to rehash all of these reasons again. I fully agree with PEV here, I often voiced my displeasure here in the recent past of having now just a Wiki as reference guide for TS09/10. It is not good enough of anyone saying, this is the way it is going to be (Wiki wise), us content creators do the creating or want to do this. They, N3V (AURAN) know what needs to be done creating wise as they rely on us completely for new content. So why place this stumbling block in our way?

At the very least they should supply us content creators with the information we need to create in an easy to access format with ALL NECESSARY details needed for this. It is in THEIR OWN interest to do this as without us content creators to create new content I am sure this simulation is doomed to die.

As was referred to by Peter, by adding on a small cost to the price of the simulation to cover the costs for a person to write a Content Creators Guide in an easy to access format, say, in a PDF format like the older CCGs were, would be a way to do this. Why haven't the powers that be thought of that? I am sure, no one would complain by having to pay say, one extra dollar for this simulation to cover the cost of producing a CCG? In the end, all of us, users of the simulation and content creators alike will benefit by such a decision. This would be more than amble to cover the costs for doing this.

Wake up N3V (AURAN) or you will kill the goose that at the moment lays a somewhat cr@p covered wooden egg.

My thoughts.

VinnyBarb
 
I think the information for the most part is available. I've certainly seen a lot more information recently than I have when creating for earlier versions.

Wikis have strong points and weak points. The strong point is they are reasonably up to date. The weak point is finding some one to document. Documentation has always been a problem at what level do you aim it for a start?

The other part of it is I noticed the TS2009 trainzdev forum seems now to be closed. OK but could it have been left as read only because there was some information buried in there that I haven't come across anywhere else. One issue about people cleaning it up is will the current Auran wiki be closed as well at some point in the future as has the Trainzdev wiki? If there is a perceived risk of this then I suspect people aren't going to contribute quite so readily.

Perhaps Auran can hire a part time technical writer to better organise the wiki?

Cheerio John
 
One issue about people cleaning it up is will the current Auran wiki be closed as well at some point in the future as has the Trainzdev wiki?

No, because it is linked directly from the game. That's why we moved the information from TrainzDev to the TrainzOnline wiki.


Perhaps Auran can hire a part time technical writer to better organise the wiki?

I'd also like to see this happen.

chris
 
I think the information for the most part is available. I've certainly seen a lot more information recently than I have when creating for earlier versions.

I would dispute this, John. Most if it was teased out of Auran in the TrainzDEV forum which is now closed, as you note later in you post. All that good stuff, disorganised as it was, is now lost to us.

Wikis have strong points and weak points. The strong point is they are reasonably up to date. The weak point is finding some one to document.

True, but some one HAS to do it, and for a start it shouldn't be us.
Anyhow let's not argue amongst ourselves about this; Our gripe is with our supplier!!.

Perhaps Auran can hire a part time technical writer to better organise the wiki?

It's good to see Chris agrees with us here. Lets hope he can get the ball rolling for us.

I suppose if the Wiki is really well organised it may end up being easier to use.

Later Edit:
Something else just occurred to me..
I wonder if N3V Ganmes have done a cost comparison analysis of the one off cost for updating the CCGTC plus the server cost for its downloads
AGAINST the cost of updating and maintaining the Wiki, along with its ongoing server and bandwidth costs. Wikis are such that one person may use it dozens of times to look up the same thing, so server and bandwidth usage would be higher, assuming a user would download a CCG once..???
 
Last edited:
Chris

Can we please have access to the Trainzdev forum, just for reference, not for new comments. A lot of your posts and explanations gave us good guidance but all that was some time back and the Wiki does not really help. It does not give the detail that we had then.

Peter
 
Can we please have access to the Trainzdev forum, just for reference, not for new comments.

Might be best to talk to helpdesk about this. If a few people ask about it, that might be enough encouragement to allocate time to move it across to the new servers.

chris
 
I wonder if N3V Ganmes have done a cost comparison analysis of the one off cost for updating the CCGTC plus the server cost for its downloads
AGAINST the cost of updating and maintaining the Wiki, along with its ongoing server and bandwidth costs. Wikis are such that one person may use it dozens of times to look up the same thing, so server and bandwidth usage would be higher, assuming a user would download a CCG once..???

The bandwidth cost for the wiki is miniscule. The reason for keeping it as a wiki is because of hyperlinking and collaborative editing, not cost or other factors.

chris
 
Now is the time to try for the Trainzdev forum.

Might be best to talk to helpdesk about this. If a few people ask about it, (the TrainzDev forum), that might be enough encouragement to allocate time to move it across to the new servers

Don't miss the opportunity.

Peter
 
Back
Top