Trainz "Next" is announced...

How will these group effort routes be distributed, on the DLS? Since they are essentially always "open for editing", will you have to subscribe to this multi player thing or will they be usable by someone isn't taking "advantage" of this service or by someone who prefers to play offline? Will it be possible to just build a route by yourself and upload it to DLS, or a 3rd party site the "old fashioned" way?

At first glance this appears to be of zero interest to me. I don't subscribe to things at all and multiplayer of any sort is of no interest to me. There is a lot to still be revealed of course but right now I see myself on the platform waving "bye bye" as Trainz Next leaves the station. I do hope TANE gets fixed up as much as possible so those of us who choose to stay with it can enjoy it for a long time to come.

boc61 said:

How will these group effort routes be distributed, on the DLS? Since they are essentially always "open for editing", will you have to subscribe to this multi player thing or will they be usable by someone isn't taking "advantage" of this service or by someone who prefers to play offline? Will it be possible to just build a route by yourself and upload it to DLS, or a 3rd party site the "old fashioned" way?

Click to expand...

Without getting into too many technicalities- if you aren't participating in the online community, then you can't drive or edit the online routes, but there's nothing stopping the owner from uploading a version of the route to the DLS (regardless of whether it was created online or offline.)


kind regards,

chris

I have never used multiplayer for Driver but I can see the potential of a multiplayer Surveyor. As indicated in the original news release, the plan is to give the route owner, the person who started the route project, total control over who has access to view the route, who has access to edit the route and which parts can be viewed/edited. Any work that "invitees" do can be rolled back if it is deemed to be unsatisfactory. I see no problems with safeguards such as these in place.

Yes, there could be problems with finding volunteers interested in your group route building project. Not everyone will be interested in creating a hypothetical route to the South Pole, or recreating an historical NG logging route across the Onkaparinka swamp. Yes, there will be problems with people who will promise much but will deliver little, and some who will throw tantrums if the slightest change is made to their contribution. Anyone who has worked on group projects, over the internet or face-to-face, will know the issues here.

If, according to the original release, you do not want multiplayer Surveyor then you do not have to use it. Would I use it? It would depend on the project. I was recently involved in a group collaboration on a route that had a lot of confusion over which .cdp file was the latest version of the route, which scenery assets were on the DLS, amongst other issues. A multiplayer surveyor would have made the process so much simpler. On the other hand, I often like to create routes for my own personal enjoyment, at my own pace. So a standalone Surveyor will still be a major part of my Trainz experience.

Yes, those with slow internet access will have problems, as they do now with downloading from the DLS or getting updates. I don't know what can be done about that but this should not be used as an excuse to stop everyone else from getting access to the group share servers. I don't see "big brother" as being any more of a problem here than anywhere else (NSA take note!). A group of researches recently demonstrated the enormous quantity of personal data that can be gleaned about you just from your public FB and Twitter posts, so I am not concerned about anyone discovering my preferences for Beyer-Peacock steam locos over Baldwins from my multiplayer Surveyor activities.

As for the subscription option - it would depend on the price and what was on offer. I currently have no subscription software at all and have always preferred to have the full paid-up version, but that could change. I would have to see the final details. When Windows 10 came out there were rumours that Microsoft would be moving to a subscription based system for future OS releases so this may be the way of the future - a Linux version of T:ANE anyone?

So, my reaction is interested but looking forward to see the details and "a proof of concept".

Good Morning -- :wave:

Wow, I remember when I first suggested multiplayer so early in trainz life (2004), and folks back then thought I was crazy! __And before the suggest forum! Back then I played a lot of Medal of Honor, the first game, online, and I have always like how people can come together, united ...

So, reading what's "Next" is great news in my ears! Should have been call Trainz "United". :hehe: as these new-coming features place good friends together to built a route simultaneously!

I strongly think you got a winner here. Tony!

Kind Regards
Ish

WindWalkr said:

Without getting into too many technicalities- if you aren't participating in the online community, then you can't drive or edit the online routes, but there's nothing stopping the owner from uploading a version of the route to the DLS (regardless of whether it was created online or offline.)


kind regards,

chris

Click to expand...

No need for technicalities, that is a good straight answer, Thank You.

amigacooke said:

While I haven't seen a reason to get excited about Next yet, I don't think this is a fair description when a pricing structure hasn't been announced.

Click to expand...

OK lets Speculate seeing as that's what happens a lot on this forum.
Say $2 a month, that equals $24 a year and over the current 4 year product life that equals $96 and I doubt N3V would make much if any profit at that low a rate given it would require additional servers of better quality than those available at present. Current Cost of TANE deluxe being $89 or Standard $49.90.
OK so you don't have to subscribe all the time if you don't use it which would suggest to me the subscription would have to be much higher to keep the scheme sustainable.

Can we conclude from this that the purchase version of TANE next or whatever be a supported version of TANE and be compatible with the existing version of TANE. IF so all of the fuss is about a version of TANE that some people would not be interested in.

Ken

Vern said:

...

As regards "co-operative" route building, well to repeat what I posted on the announcement page I had two experiences working with commercial groups for MSTS. Neither was particularly satisfactory as you are either waiting for someone to produce the required content, or you end up as team leader to a bunch of prima-donnas. Most route builders work alone and Trainz already has an excellent "co-operative" facility via assets on the DLS, which we can select and use as necessary.

...

Click to expand...

When we created the TTR54 we would have loved to have this feature. Only one person could work on the map at one time. And then there was the waste of time packaging it up and sending it to the next person so they could add there bits, etc. Having multiple people working on different aspects of the map at the same time would have made the whole experience much more fun and efficient.

As for the new pricing model, let's wait for the details to be revealed before going into chicken-little mode.

Is it too early to start wondering about the copyright situation of creating routes on N3V servers, under N3V's terms and conditions?

(I suspect the answer will be yes)

I have no interest in Multi-player and I have no interest in paying for a subscription.

There are a lot of people in Trainz that are retired or on fixed incomes that might not have the extra money to pay a subscription. How is this going to effect them?

It's early, but at this time, I'm not interested.

Regards,

Hello my fellow trainzer ...

I can't stop laughing from all of the speculation, and how folks feel about it already; However, it doesn't surprise me, since this is what always happens in trainz world! --- Oh, in humorous manner@ LOL :hehe:

I think people are forgetting that you have a choose here!

If online, and working with others not your cup of tea, (Tony did said in his announcement, in especially FAQ), you still can do your trainz-thing offline as usual! No harm. No foul!

This is how I feel -- If you're the type of person that likes working with others on a project, within the project itself this is great news ... if not, well. sit back, wait and see how it pans out --- Trainz always be trainz in that, it's there to do what you like to do on it offline!

Subscription service, for me, it's one of those things that I will take a back seat and see how that pans out first for others! --- No one can't make a judgement on that until you see what the offers are... etc etc ....

All in all, I guess speculation from all corners of the world will pour in here, and it'll be fun and interesting to read for the next year, and beyond!

My only concern is, get the product right, please ... and since Tony said in the newsletter that they are not bound by deadlines, then they should get this right the first time out of the gate!

Ok, let the speculation begin! :wave:
And have fun with it, don't go crazy, folks!

Kind Regards to all
Ish

martinvk said:

When we created the TTR54 we would have loved to have this feature. Only one person could work on the map at one time. And then there was the waste of time packaging it up and sending it to the next person so they could add there bits, etc. Having multiple people working on different aspects of the map at the same time would have made the whole experience much more fun and efficient.

As for the new pricing model, let's wait for the details to be revealed before going into chicken-little mode.

Click to expand...

That's the issue Mike (Steamboateng) and I run into now with the Hoosac Tunnel route. Then add to that a pressure with a deadline to get stuff done, and burnout sets in very quickly as the parties attempt to get stuff done quickly for hand-off to the other party.

Chris B (Windwalkr) mentioned there's nothing stopping someone from working in multi-user mode then making the route available later as a standalone version. This seems to be the way things will probably go for those involved in bigger projects.

I agree... Let's sit back and see what happens. It's too early to tell.

John

Multi-user surveyor sounds like a great idea! It certainly would beat isolating individual baseboards for different people to work on, then merging them back together. I'm not sold on the subscription model, but without details I won't rule it out entirely. I do tend to purchase rather than rent, however - I've just seen too many companies / products go away for me to be comfortable with renting.

Curtis

Subscription model? No chance. I will neither buy into it, and my content license forbids my content from being used with any product that can be activated/deactivated. Period.

The collaborative tools is a worthless exercise. Content creators have long had the ability to collaborate and group build projects. Most of the time, it doesn't pan out for reasons unrelated to the technology: Interpersonal relationships, or people just get tired of doing it. No amount of collaborative tools can fix that.

Plus, users will be even more put off when they lose work due to the frequent server outages or internet drops.

NEXT - over before it started.

ish6 said:

Hello my fellow trainzer ...

I can't stop laughing from all of the speculation, and how folks feel about it already; However, it doesn't surprise me, since this is what always happens in trainz world! --- Oh, in humorous manner@ LOL :hehe:
...
Ish

Click to expand...

Likewise, isn't about time for some popcorn?

RRSignal said:

...
The collaborative tools is a worthless exercise. Content creators have long had the ability to collaborate and group build projects. Most of the time, it doesn't pan out for reasons unrelated to the technology: Interpersonal relationships, or people just get tired of doing it. No amount of collaborative tools can fix that.

Plus, users will be even more put off when they lose work due to the frequent server outages or internet drops.

NEXT - over before it started.

Click to expand...

Leaving aside people issues, how have you been able to do simultaneous collaboration? I'm sure many of the large route builders would like to do it now.

Many seem to misunderstand the collaborative Surveyor mode descibed in the NV3 email. It offers tools to control versionality of a collaborative route or session as well as tools to control access in terms of who can do what. It doesn't stop any creator from continuing to make a route or session all by him or herself. But where there is co-operation, it seems to offer a far more efficient way for mutiple creators to contribute to a single product without all of the confusion caused when such products are managed "manually".

I speak as a one-time configuration manager of large software products made by multiple designers, programmers and testers. Without such tools for controlling access and versionality, such multi-contributor software projects are impossible beyond a certain level of complexity. Routes can be very complex entities. Collaboration could shorten production time from years to months or even weeks. Collaboration may also naturally expose who is better (and who not so good) at particular aspects of creation.

To be honest, my hope is that this mode of route creation will become available and widely employed. I'm also hoping that it will work to dilute the sometimes ridiculous copyright effects that prevent a good product from being improved because the original author thinks it's already perfect or will suit everyone as-is - when it isn't and doesn't.

I want to hear more about the ideas for how collaboration will work. Is it confined to allocating sub-sections of a route map to one person for one period? Could it be implemented via a layer-based distribution of access rights? Will the creation cycle include design and testing as well as "coding"?

***

The subscription mode of selling is, in my view, not a good model for any consumer - for anything. The logic of subscription-only goods and services (renting) is that a tiny few end up owning everything with the vast majority hostage to their whim or ability to continue providing the rented item (or not).

Lataxe

First thing to do is dispel the multiplayer connotation.

This is COLLABORATIVE CREATION not multiplayer DRIVING. A completely different concept and a good one.

I'm with Pc_Ace at #22 and LATAXE at #58.

I'd prefer to have a flexible pricing. Sort of top up the credits of how many accesses you can have. Buy yourself a $10 or $20 pack and use on what you want and where you want subject of course to the Route or Session owners access approval.

However, this will need a different approach to licencing. Maybe one of the Commons Licences would be more appropriate.

Question - I have a lifetime FCT so I can always access DLS and Surveyor. Will the subscription service recognize this, or is it a PAY as YOU USE?

Question - Will legacy and TANE assets be useable and accessible in NEXT?

NO SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE REQUIRED:

https://www.teamviewer.com/en-us/download/windows/

Yep, NEXT.................

Pencil42 said:

It certainly would beat isolating individual baseboards for different people to work on, then merging them back together.

Curtis

Click to expand...

Yep, this is one reason that I think it's also a great idea.

Ish