View Full Version : Trainz Dev Detail- are we trying too hard

January 10th, 2016, 08:25 PM
Was reading this thread and as I spend most of my time building routes to run AI
The only time I really take any notice of the track in detail is when i'm laying it & very close up on junctions etc.
When driving either in cab or follow mode in ( AI ) you don't really see the detail only the top of the track and the sleepers not the rail profile.
As long as the rail looks good i really don't care what shape it is
Detail is fine but if you drive cab the cab should have high detail.
When travelling by train ( driver or passenger ) how good is the detail you see normal view no zoom no change angles or directions ?

January 11th, 2016, 03:26 AM
Read that thread and with regard to track appearance would take issue that some of the track in TS2016 is less detailed, maybe some of the earlier track but it has come a long way since 2007! Possibly more is done via texturing and possibly more than a little green-eyed-god in the sentiment, too.

As regards Trainz and TANE specifically, it's a double edged sword for the route builder. We're constantly being urged to use the best possible items in a route so it doesn't look like MSTS from 2001 but that comes at a price of hitting performance. (I dread to think how those Romanian routes seen in the payware forum which are spammed with grass, trees and bushes everywhere actually run in the programme).

However it all comes back to N3V being too eager to please everyone. We could have had a brand new TANE with assets tailored to the "new" game engine, not trying to run all this old legacy carp. But no they decided to appease those who still want to run their content from 2003, built to 2003 standards and runs like a dog with the result that TANE serves neither end of the spectrum very well.

January 11th, 2016, 04:27 AM
Re: Track.

While it's true Trainz does have higher detailed tracks - and assets in general - than Railworks, I disagree that this necessarily translates to poorer performance. In fact it's quite misguided to compare the two as both are using different engines to render their respective content. Additionally, no amount of texturing mastery is going to cover the fact that rails in RW are nothing more than a box. It's really the little details that make the difference like fishplates and chairs and pandrol clips etc. An overused cliche; but JR content is still the gold standard in both detail and performance. Their track LOD blends nearly seamlessly, is highly detailed and can be deployed in abundance without worrying about tanking performance in a large yard.

Backward compatibility is not the problem here Vern. We've been refining the current content format for 15 years, redoing everything from scratch (especially when it's N3V - I'm sorry) is going to be more painstaking than you can imagine. Just because you can run 1.3 content doesn't mean you should. Instead of reinventing the wheel and throwing out everything, all we need to do is select the best assets that work well in TANE (as above) and pick it up from there. Carps grow old and die too, eventually. ;)