Should NV3 just draw a line in the sand ???

I've fixed thousands of DLS items as a part of the DLS Cleanup, all by my lonesome. People do put tremendous amounts of effort into it. There are a number of factors of which you are probably unaware, not the least of which are the ever-moving goalposts of content standards set by N3V and the fact that they half-arsed the first round entirely.
RRSignal certainly got a point... Many thanks for all your effort to date...

Ben, I was kinda hoping you would respond to my last post. You made a bold statement that I don't necessarily disagree with, but at the end of the day, no matter what, either NV3 is going to take this current faulty/error ridden content DLS fiasco into T2, or they are going to put in the appropriate resources to get it sorted out SOMEHOW before we see "an updated game engine/next version of Trainz" (with some eye candy) that's hopefully coming out late 2014)...

Hey, if it not somehow sorted, it's going to be the same old, same old!!! - "Garbage in, garbage out"...

IMHO, we need to somehow get the current 1000's & 1000's of faulty/error ridden contents on the DLS sorted somehow before it's to late. Has anyone got any new non smart a_se suggestions???

Hey, hope ya all are having a great day/night
and let's be careful out there!!! - It's a jungle... ;)

Cheers, Mac (from the Amazon)...
 
Last edited:
Hi RRSignal:

I disagree - N3V didn't half-arse it - they whole-arsed it, lol. Constantly moving goalposts, no explanation as to why or what to do to comply, and the final insult - SP1. Why does a "fix" break more then it fixes? Why are extensive data repairs almost constantly required? Why does it ruin payware? Remember folks - Trainz is payware too. I can understand N3V not liking competition but competition in the form of items that enhance Trainz? That makes no sense.

Hi Meatloaf747:

I agree N3V will eventually take some sort of action the question is why. I've come the conclusion its all a plan to eventually get rid of as much as possible of the DLS that is not directly TS2012/SP1 and subsequent versions compatible. Why you ask? Simple - the DLS generates no direct income but must cost a pretty penny (AU) to maintain that N3V would like to use elsewhere. Years ago Auran was run by (mostly) Trainzers (or it certainly seemed that way). Today it appears to be under the control of bean counters (accountants). They have decided the DLS (or most of it) must go. What easier way to accomplish that then make compliance to the new requirements almost impossible. Its not the individual changes that are the problem - its the magnitude of the number of changes required. A content creator with a dozen items can fix them in a matter of hours (if not minutes). Its those of us who have dedicated a large portion of our waking hours for (literally years) to Trainz, Trainzers, and Auran/N3V who will (eventually) get the shaft. Apparently N3V more then understands the old adage "no good deed goes unpunished".

What's sad is many of the new requirements seem to be cosmetic rather then operational:
1. Consider the old way of category-region and category-era entries. Each on a separate line. Today they are on the same line separated by semi-colons. Let me be blunt: WHAT THE HELL DIFFERENCE DOES THAT MAKE! Will it increase frame rate, screen resolution, sound clarity? The only thing I can see it might do is reduce the size of the config file by a few bytes. Not kilo-bytes - - - bytes. Like that's really going to make a difference? What's worse is its usually a duplication. I always try to put that info in the description so it could be deleted in its entirety.
2. All the (now) obsolete tags. They could have been handled exactly the same way as the missing screen shot by N3V slightly modifying the code. If the offending tag is there but the item was approved before TS2009 ignore it. If it is submitted after TS 2009its a real error, the item gets rejected, and the content creator must fix it.
3. Ditto the mono-color texture change.

Frankly I think a lot of this is someone in down under land trying to justify their job. As I've said before there is absolutely nothing wrong with making Trainz better but:
1. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
2. New and improved isn't necessarily better.
3. Before making a change think about the overall effect as opposed to just the specific effect.

Ben
 
Hi Ben, I agree with all you say, especially your final points.
It seems ludicrous that we have had to wade through problems for nearly 4 years and then get a great slab of fixes that cause another slab of faults.
Why is it that faults weren't fixed on a regular basis, a few at a time?
It would have been a much better move to fix bad faults(like merging) when they appeared. As somebody else has said TS12 was rushed out when it wasn't ready for general use.
It reminds me of a well known electrical appliance manufacturer that a friend's daughter worked for as quality controller. The product was irons. They had a batch of thermostats come in that were faulty and her boss said put them in and if they fail we will fix them when they come back under warranty. The reason was that quotas had to be met. No thought of the inconvenience to the purchaser.
Sound familiar???
cheers,
Mike
 
Hi Mike:

Yup - very familiar. I used to work at a place that rather then use parts and sub-assemblies that worked just fine and incorporating them in the latest and greatest always started from scratch by re-inventing the wheel (and this was a major corporation).

From a content creators point of view there is little reason for much of what N3V has done. Improve Trainz of course but how much of what they have done is actually an improvement? Couldn't prove it by SP1. Improvements should enhance Trainz. Instead most have thrown monkey wrench's in various sizes into the works.

Add these to my list above:
4. Listen to your customers be they content creator or not - - - all matter.
5. Fix things when the problem arises instead of putting it off until the next version of Trainz (or later).
6. Stop breaking things.

Ben
 
Well Gentlemen: I agree with Ben, and I can see where Meatloaf is coming from..What I really don't understand, what does N3V really gain by doing what they did..I run TS12 very well without SP1, and I will continue to do so..It breaks my heart to see the Division coming between our Trainzers on this forum..I have seen entirely too much negative things said ..All because of the path N3V has chosen..Custormer satisfaction..Whoa..
 
Last edited:
I guess it all depends on where you're coming from. Been here since Trainz was just plain Trainz, before UTC and the rest of the acronyms and I must say there have been plenty of improvements along the way. Somethings became errors as the technology changed and others were always errors but hidden under the tracks. If we never used any of the old stuff in the latest routes, it would greatly lessen the error rate but we do like that stuff, me included.

To the point of thumbnails, they may not improve the performance of the in game play but they sure do improve the performance of deciding if I want to download a new object. Despite all the descriptions, seeing what it looks like can really help to decide that it is what I need. Why waste the time and bandwidth on something without a thumbnail only to discover it is not what I thought it was.

As for single versus multi-line config entries, I would guess that parsing a single line with values separated by semicolons is easier than finding multiple tags anywhere in the config file and parsing the value. One tag and one value might not make a difference but possibly dozens per config and potentially thousands of objects and the time saved adds up, especially if you are the one waiting. Code optimization is not easy and often left out but when done can greatly improve the user experience.

When wondering why some changes were done, I've got to believe that the coders are doing it for good reasons or else we may as well just pack it in. If they were really just wasting everyone's time them management needs ask some serious questions.
 
When wondering why some changes were done, I've got to believe that the coders are doing it for good reasons or else we may as well just pack it in. If they were really just wasting everyone's time them management needs ask some serious questions.

Like why they asked for the change in the first place?

Cheerio John
 
I don't see this as a conspiracy on N3V developer's part. This is more like overworked developers trying to come up with new products, patches, and support the product at the same time. I know because I worked in a company about the size of N3V for about 10 years. The code writers and hardware engineers not only worked on the product, they also provided support and wrote the documentation. The latter item wasn't exactly the best part of the package and eventually the company hired a copywriter firm to create the end-user documentation. The other thing too is these people are programmers. Programmers live in their own world. They create their programs, know them inside and out, where the bugs are, and what tweaks they can do to make things better. What programmers do no do is communicate. It's a rare thing to have a computer scientist that communicates superbly both in writing and verbally and can write programmers. If they have these skills, they generally move on out of that role into something else. Seriously, not to stereotype, but again because I've worked in the industry for close to 35 years. Don't get me wrong. A lot of these people have a great sense of humor and are really, really brilliant and creative, but they live in their own world usually with molding coffee cups and empty chip bags all over the place. :)

What we've seen with Auran and now N3V is a transition and survival. They lost their big support staff and copywriter when Fury melted everything down. N3V is the Phoenix that has risen from the ashes and is still picking up the pieces from what is left. They really are trying to get things in the right direction, but with limited resources still we are facing the bits and pieces instead of the whole package. Perhaps their Kick Starter will be the knight in shining armor for us and give us a newer and better product and company to support us and the products.

Now regarding the content. Ben. You make and have made some of the best content on the DLS. I think I have downloaded everything you have made. Martin, you too, and so has Malc has as well. Kudos for this this I extend my thanks to so have many, many other creators as well. Believe me I am a very discerning downloader, and pick my content carefully. Yes, I did make one item and a couple of routes, not counting the Sketch-up stuff I uploaded, and this doesn't do justice to what's been uploaded. I feel your pain and frustrations when you are forced to repair things because the details weren't documented.

Now, this brings up another point, which I've been discussing quite often offline, and I mean on the phone or in person, with another Trainzer. He and I feel that the upload or perhaps the download system, or maybe even Content Manager its self could be setup to automatically parse and repair the simplest errors instead of flagging them for repair. The simple config.txt file repairs, such as incorrect tags, spelling errors, non-binary values for binary tags, could be auto-applied to the asset. We may have to commit the asset(s) afterwards if this is done on the download end, but the errors could be repaired automatically.

The other thought we had is content version deprecation. Instead of trying to update older content to a new version, leave the old stuff as is and ignore the non-fatal errors in them. By non-fatal I mean those that will not cause performance issues or crashing. What could or would happen in this case is the asset would be scanned on download and installation. If it is, for example, an asset less than 2.9, it would receive a scan for errors. If any non-fatal or performance-causing errors are not found, then a tag is added to the config.txt marking it as old but okay to use. A warning or message could be present like is already stating that the version is old and the asset should be upgraded. This process sort of works now but not to the extent I am trying to explain here. By doing this, it will help by removing from the repair process the shear number of older assets that we still have on the DLS. Those that definitely need repairing should be flagged by N3V and then repaired by either their staff or the community. This is where an online scanner on their server would do the job.

John
 
Hi John:

I love your idea of making CM correct cosmetic and inconsequential errors and warnings. It would almost certainly have to be done in the next versions of Trainz as I wouldn't think a SP or HF would be adequate (be nice to be wrong though, lol).

I've noticed an increasing number of folks asking why N3V doesn't produce a new engine to replace AuranJet. My understanding is (please keep in mind I'm not a programmer) it would be difficult, time consuming, expensive, and would quite possibly negate everything on the DLS and elsewhere - new and old. N3V simply can not do that so they keep trying to "push the envelope" with what was once a very good engine but now days is probably considered somewhat outmoded. Making changes to whatever can be changed no matter how small based on the idea "every little bit helps" does extend its lifetime but it is subject to the law of diminishing returns. At what point will changes no matter how small make no difference? At that point everyone (self included) is in deep doodoo, lol.

Ben
 
Last edited:
... This is more like overworked developers trying to come up with new products, patches, and support the product at the same time.... A lot of these people have a great sense of humor and are really, really brilliant and creative, but they live in their own world usually with molding coffee cups and empty chip bags all over the place. :)
:hehe: touché
...

Now, this brings up another point, which I've been discussing quite often offline, and I mean on the phone or in person, with another Trainzer. He and I feel that the upload or perhaps the download system, or maybe even Content Manager its self could be setup to automatically parse and repair the simplest errors instead of flagging them for repair. ...

John
I think this point has been made several times in the past and usually bogs down in the morass of ownership and copyright. I think its a great idea, but all the trackside lawyers will raise endless objections. Yea, slippery slope and principle but if someone can't or won't make the necessary corrections, should everyone else's enjoyment suffer? Apparently yes.

I suppose if the CM corrections were strictly local, a case could be made that it would be just as if someone did it all manually. The original would still be unchanged on the DLS but everyone would benefit from an automatic correction when it was downloaded.
 
As an end user, the tact N3V took with errors after the release of 2009 was nothing but a headache. Tons of errors with no viable way to fix them without learning to be a content creator and learning 3D design. Until PEV came along.
I have learned Blender, got my textured box in game, found out I don't enjoy it at all. Trainz is a pass time. An amusement when I have the time. I have no desire to be a content creator just to use it.
For those who create, enjoy and thanks. For those who just want to build routes and "play" this error thing is beyond banal and frustrating to the point of dumping the program or reverting to older versions as I have done. I have enough content on disc to keep me busy for a lifetime in anyone of the versions I own.
Just giving a perspective of an end user who doesn't want to feel he is attending an N3V board meeting by coming to this forum.
 
I've noticed an increasing number of folks asking why N3V doesn't produce a new engine to replace AuranJet. My understanding is (please keep in mind I'm not a programmer) it would be difficult, time consuming, expensive, and would quite possibly negate everything on the DLS and elsewhere - new and old. N3V simply can not do that so they keep trying to "push the envelope" with what was once a very good engine but now days is probably considered somewhat outmoded. Making changes to whatever can be changed no matter how small based on the idea "every little bit helps" does extend its lifetime but it is subject to the law of diminishing returns. At what point will changes no matter how small make no difference? At that point everyone (self included) is in deep doodoo, lol.

Ben

Ben, where have you been for the last week? there is going to be a new engine.
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/content.php?68-TWOR-E2-TANE-Kickstarter-Nov-13
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/show...NE-(T2)-Questions-what-would-you-like-to-know

That more than explains the changes and tightening up on error checking in my book.
 
they live in their own world usually with molding coffee cups

The only time I've ever actually seen a coffee cup grow mold was one that Henk left on his desk while out doing ToTR. It was long gone by the time we found it, and by memory we kept it around for a few days because it was the only real culture in the office ;-)


I think this point has been made several times in the past and usually bogs down in the morass of ownership and copyright.

That's one of the major concerns, yes. So far we've limited ourselves to repairing content available through our Download Station. That process has been quite successful; of more than 200k assets, only about 5k have currently detected faults.

We're well aware that this doesn't extend beyond the reach of the DLS, so people messing around with content at home who are unwilling to re-download the fixed versions, or people who rely heavily on non-DLS content, are not benefiting from the current repair process.

What to do about that is an open question. There are many suggestions and they all have downsides. That doesn't mean we won't implement some of them anyway, but it's definitely an area where we need to step lightly.

chris
 
Hi Sparky15, like you I have enough assets stored to keep the versions I use going for years. At my age that will be all I need.
I run 3 versions of Trainz with multiple versions of 2010 on the one machine. I have around 150 gig of assets stored away.
I still download assets that are pre SP1, there are still plenty of creators that go to the trouble of making their assets work in both.
We thank those kind people for their efforts.
cheers,
Mike
 
Hi Malc:

Apparently out in the middle of the Sahara dessert counting grass blades by braille, lol. Never saw that. Its definitely long overdue. Will definitely be interesting to follow its implementation.

Ben
 
I see 'backward compatibility' is starting to come up in one or two of the T2 threads...

The big question still remains if NV3 incorporates backward compatibility into T2 (& personally I hope they somehow do) what's going to happen to all the "still showing faults" DLS content late 2014. Should it just stay on the DLS, or should it ALL be deleted by NV3, say late Nov 2014? If it's got to be fixed to stay on the DLS by Nov 2014, what version should it be updated to? Eg; 2.9 - 3.3 - 3.6/3.7 ???

We can all keep our heads in the sand and say; "we'll worry about this problem later", or "closer to Dec 2014" or "it's slowly being worked on". Sooner or later a decision has to be made as to what is going to happen to all the "still showing faulty/errors content" **-* -** Fixed/repaired/updated or deleted???

I don't profess to know the answer/s & I certainly don't want to upset any contents creators that have put years and years of hard work into building this content!!!

What I personally can't understand is guy's like Ian Woodmore (& many others) having put 100's (possibly 1000's) of hours into repairing/updating/error fixing thousands & thousands of faulty content manually/semi automatically/automatically, as to why they then can't just re-upload that repaired/updated/error fixed content/asset under the original creators kuid number!!! (with some sort of comment/acknowledgement that "so & so's" repaired/updated/error fixed an re-upload the "now fixed/updated" content).

Ian Woodmore gives a clearer overview in posts 26 in this thread; http://forums.auran.com/trainz/show...ng-Backward-Compatibility-Pros-And-Cons/page2

Your thoughts...

Cheers, Mac...
 
Last edited:
I think the answer to your 'why do they not just reupload the content' question is that that's only possible with content they have claimed on the DLS Cleanup list, and even then there are issues with that method for example negative KUIDs cannot be uploaded via normal methods.

Shane
 
The big question still remains if NV3 incorporates backward compatibility into T2 (& personally I hope they somehow do) what's going to happen to all the "still showing faults" DLS content late 2014.

Relative to the volume of content on the DLS, not very much is actually flagged faulty.

kind regards,

chris
 
Relative to the volume of content on the DLS, not very much is actually flagged faulty.

Yes, but sometimes the criteria used to make faulty assets available for repair under the DLS Cleanup program just puzzle me. By way of example, gjvh made a series of articulated container flatcars, each one of them consisting of two assets (A unit and B unit). Why only a single B unit is eligible for repair? What's the point in repairing it, if the matching A unit will remain faulty?
 
Someting Id like to see - as someone who struggles to repair faulty assets, is some tutorials - all in one place - which will walk us through the various errors. For instance the other day I looked at the black 6 by blue. It only gave one red error and I thought that cant be difficult to do. The error was: Unable to load mesh file:'black5_shadow.pm'.
I have no idea how to correct this or even what program will help. But I know Im not the only one to baulk at repairing assets when we have no idea where to look. And constantly asking for what may seem really easy stuff to solve must get tedious for those who know how to do it.
So is there a single place we can go to to find such basic tutorials? If so where? If not - why not start one?
 
Back
Top