Article: Open Letter to the Trainz Content Creator Community

You can view the page at http://forums.auran.com/trainz/content.php?110-Open-Letter-to-the-Trainz-Content-Creator-Community

Thank you, I was not one of the vociferous ones but I do appreciate the change back to 3.5.

Peter <narrowgauge>

Thank you Tony.

I only have a small comment.

Why do users want to build to older content validation requirements?

Click to expand...

So that users of older builds can use their content. They are not necessarily building to older "requirements"; an asset built to 3.7 standards but uploaded as a 2.9 means that everyone from TS09 and up can use the asset.

Thanks Tony, but a couple of points.

As Mac Tainz 1 had no documented method of creating content I'm not sure keeping build 3.6 is going to make a massive difference.

Also can I ask whether the upload figures include 'beginners' content from mobile users?

3.5 is in, therefore 3.6 is in.
I'm not sure on the iOS figure but a search in CM for 3.8 routes and sessions would give you a good idea

Give the man cigar - restores some of my faith in N3V

Much appreciated Tony, thanks for listening.

nicky9499 said:

Thank you Tony.

I only have a small comment.

Why do users want to build to older content validation requirements?

Click to expand...

So that users of older builds can use their content. They are not necessarily building to older "requirements"; an asset built to 3.7 standards but uploaded as a 2.9 means that everyone from TS09 and up can use the asset.

Click to expand...

Only so long as you actually test that asset in 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7...

The most important ones (depending on asset type) are to test in 2.9, 3.3, 3.5, and 3.7. Especially if you use tbumpenv, as this simply doesn't work in 2.9 and will likely produce unexpected results. As we've said for many years, ALWAYS test in the lowest build that you specify in the asset. If you only have access to (say) 3.2 or 3.3 (TS2009 SP3 or SP4 respectively), then make sure to specify these builds. If you only have access to TS12 'vanilla', or pre SP1, then you'll need to set it to either 3.5 (TS12 'vanilla') or 3.6 (the last updates before SP1).

This is especially important if you wish to use tags, or features, added in later versions. The '.m.tbumpenv' material is a great example, since it was not available in TS2009 'vanilla' (you MUST set a build of 3.0 or higher if using this; as the asset will not function properly in TS2009 'vanilla'). Another example is using the new enginesound tags for enginesounds in TS12, these tags will show as faulty in earlier versions; as such if you want the sound to work correctly in TS12 it'll need these tags, and hence will need to be set to a build of 3.5 of higher.

There are other examples as well, but these are two that are most likely to occur with newer content...

EDIT: Also, yes, I do understand the desire to provide to the largest user base possible. However, personally, I always found it a lot of, often tedious, work trying to ensure actual compatibility between the current version and earlier versions. Often because I ended up having to drop functions I wanted, or just have to put in hours of testing in each release to get it running right (mainly due to making use from improvements from newer versions, and finding they didn't quite work right when backdated). Cross testing in pre/post SP1 versions of TS12 is a little different, as the changes between the two are relatively minimal for content (although some bug fixes in SP1 can be rather handy on steam locos... Physics are also a lot better for them IMO...). But having to back test in TS2009 and TS2010 often leaves me with more work than focusing on TS12, due to having to either cut back features, or work around old bugs that were later fixed... At least, that's what I find with my own content

Regards

It seems to me that Tony made some very good and seemingly much needed points about validation and I thoroughly praise him, his speedy reaction and his abilities to both summarise the real issues and take the hit "on the chin".

For me his best point was




I am not wanting to start an argument on this issue, but having all the dependencies of a route or session available as either built-in assets or on the DLS (and validated properly) is probably the single biggest factor in the success and popularity of a well made route or session. It will also give route or session creators far less work supporting their content.


Peter.

If the engine specs had their DLC payware tag removed in particular stovepipe's ones then much of the problem with TS12 SP1 / DLC would disappear. It is extremely frustrating to have practically all my rolling stock not available because the DRM server is hiccuping again and stovepipe's wagon engine specs are locked out taking with it any wagons or vans that use them.

Cheerio John

Good Morning Tony, sir ...

As I have expressed my opinions over and over again in the forum, change is necessary, because everything in life changes, so there's no surprise there. but the lack of communicating with the content creators is what effected me, sir! I've suggested a 90 days window, and you will offering that to us, no more lack of communication, and at the end of the day, sir, we just want to be informed!

Thank you for your letter, well said!

Ish

Good Morning Tony, sir ...

As I have expressed my opinions over and over again in the forum, change is necessary, because everything in life changes, so there's no surprise there. but the lack of communicating with the content creators is what effected me, sir! I've suggested a 90 days window, and you will offering that to us, no more lack of communication, and at the end of the day, sir, we just want to be informed!

Thank you for your letter, well said! :wave:

Ish

PS To All -- Curious, what's TANE Built # ... ?

I cannot agree more with Peterwise. I know there are many reasons why people don't put their items on the DLS but, when I go looking to download a route if it can't be downloaded with all builtin or dls items. I 80% of the time just delete it and move on. Very few Route builders, actually I can think of only one (Dermmy) go to the trouble of listing every single item that is not on the DLS and give links to those items. This more than even the looks of the item is a make or break for many people. Nothing is more frustrating that downloading a route and then find there are a dozen unknown kuids in the route. I venture that most just delete and move on. Yes I know there are kuid seeking database websites out there but most people don't care to go to that much trouble. I hope with this new post from Tony we will see content creators move to putting more on the DLS.

Thanks Tony.

A common sense solution to the issue.

Just one more request. Please ensure that all of the built-in assets that are in TS12SP1hf4 are built-in to T:ANE.

Cheers

Thanks Tony- a very fair and considered response to recent events.

R3

Everyone wants better content - higher quality content that performs better than before. BUT, most people also want this to happen without any effort on their part and they don’t want anything to change. Level of detail is a classic case where the advantages are enormous yet the desire to work around the issues is also high. Hopefully better documentation and communication will help reduce this feeling over time.

Our goal moving forward will be to help educate our content creators how to take advantage of all the new features, especially the latest changes for T:ANE through more complete documentation and tutorials.

Click to expand...

Thank you Tony for updating us. Lets hope what you wrote in the quote above bears fruits and we will see better documentations and instructions as needed for all the new tags and other features etc. required now for good content creating reasonably soon as these are needed for good content creation. Classic example of how NOT to do things were the recent new way made bridges and tunnels with new tags, where you people (Rob) uploaded a 3DS mesh file each to study from BUT nowhere any informations of all the new naming conventions needed to construct such meshes could be found. Neither did CMP knew how to construct/make a config.txt file for these, hence we content creators were left in the dark how to build these.

If I had not pestered James Moody for an example of the config.txt for these as Rob simply could not upload at that time an example of a CDP each of a new tunnel and a new bridge to the DLS but which he later did (thank you Rob!), we presently would still not know how to build these damn things.

So you see, your input of information and good tutorials of how to construct proper up to date content is as important to us content creators as it is for us to output correct, proper and good content for everyone to enjoy.

Lets hope, we will see these new content creating inputs from your crew sooner rather than later and thank you again for your response. Long live TANE :wave:.

Cheers

VinnyBarb

Thank you, Tony.

I only wish that Auran/N3V would have continued to support GMax. It is an easy program to learn and since it is/was created especially for Trainz content, it makes it easy to create and save for the DLS. I know I'm probably just crying in the wind, but I truly believe if you guys would have continued to support GMax there would still be a bunch of content creators still out there.

I have tried MindBlender and just couldn't get my poor old brain to understand it. I have 3DsMax, but have yet to figure out how to add a texture to a creation.

Anyway, until a better Train sim comes along, I will use Trainz. It's truly user friendly, in spite of all the complaints about updates and stuff. I for one have never had a problem with updates. I have been running Build 61388 ever since it was released and I love it. Everything seems to run smoother and I haven't had any problems. I suspect some people don't have enough patience to allow the updater to "do its thing" and just leave the computer alone while it's updating.

Well, thank you again and if I said anything about N3V not caring about its customers I take it all back!

Cheers,

Dave Snow

Tony,

While I'm glad you're fulfilling your legal and ethical obligations to TS12 purchasers, I have a feeling this thing is going to pop up again with T:ANE. N3V should have changed the Lifecycle Policy (a.k.a. Service Level Agreement) ***BEFORE*** you put T:ANE up on KickStarter. I would not have pledged knowing of these changes in the SLA/Lifecycle Policy, because, as most of us who've been around awhile know all to well, patches often break stuff. Often, they may break something important to a particular user. I don't expect N3V to write custom patches for every possible scenario, but, if your SLA calls for terminating free DLS service or preventing the upload of lower-build items, then, yes, it'll be a serious problem.

With that said, as long as future patches don't introduce some new DRM or break stuff, I don't think most folks will mind patching.

Tony, many thanks for your message. I'm greatly relieved and feel whole and reunited with the Trainz world again! Now I can get back to my route and dependencies and get them up to the Download Station as I always hoped to. I remain committed to TANE and look forward to the release in May (though I'm sure it'll be a bit of roller coaster).

One question - is the roll back already in place and is it OK to upload build 3.5 items to the DLS?

Paul

Just one more request. Please ensure that all of the built-in assets that are in TS12SP1hf4 are built-in to T:ANE.

Click to expand...

I agree with this, as some content, like Bdneal's wonderful locomotives, require them, and look quite fine in TANE.

Personally, I think all built-in content should be on the DLS for redundancy's sake.

-Jon