TurfFX - need for a simple users guide

Paul_Bert

Train Enthusiast
I love TRS2019. It exceeded my expectations.

Having said that I have spent many hours trying to understand and use TurfFX to its fullest potential. I think we need to have a user manual written in non-geek language that explains in clear English what each setting in the effect layer does.

For instance, as just one example, the "geometric scale" option it appears to me really just adjusts the height of the grass as far as I can see. So why not just label this setting as grass height instead of the techno babble label of geometric scale.

I am still trying to figure out what the real difference is between the 80 m setting versus the 20 m versus the 2.5m setting is in the Turf Density and TurtFX height scale settings. What is the purpose of the default values for each setting. What difference is there between a "0" and a "1". I have read the Wilki on this and it takes three paragraphs to talk about stuff which only a software engineer could understand and love but doesn't really tell you what specifically what each parameter does. For instance if I set the parameter for 80m I will see this, however if I set the parameter for 2.5m I will see this.

I don't know whether the effect layer parameter page setting design is an nVidia layout or one designed by N3V. In any case the parameter headings are very obtuse and the explanations provided don't shed much light on what they do. So I guess what I am asking for is a simple one sentence description for each parameter setting. If you vary this number this is what you would expect to see on the grass layer.

Several of these controls I think decide how dense your grass will appear. The labels however talk about expansion constants and multipliers and lots of words in the Wiki which add nothing to the understanding of the practical application of these variables.

Many people who use Trainz I am sure are very knowledgeable about programming and the inner workings of all this stuff. But their are other, including me, who really are not into the tech side of all this and just want to enjoy creating and running routes and sessions. I hope that down the road there is someone who takes pity on us mere mortals and writes and understandable user friendly guide to TurfFX .
 
..the parameter headings are very obtuse and the explanations provided don't shed much light on what they do..

..The labels...talk about expansion constants and multipliers and lots of words in the Wiki which add nothing to the understanding of the practical application of these variables.

This is unfortunately so typical of N3V and the Wiki. I agree with you, the lazy technical obfuscation should stop.

I suspect it results from assigning only technical types to design the interfaces and write many of the Wiki entries. If N3V would formally engage a few ordinary people who actually play the game (or make content for it) to review these things before they get published, the final result could be both technically correct and understandable to more users (or content creators). It might be one of those rare instances where getting the views of a "dummy" or a "newbie" could be an advantage.
 
This is unfortunately so typical of N3V and the Wiki. I agree with you, the lazy technical obfuscation should stop.

I suspect it results from assigning only technical types to design the interfaces and write many of the Wiki entries. If N3V would formally engage a few ordinary people who actually play the game (or make content for it) to review these things before they get published, the final result could be both technically correct and understandable to more users (or content creators). It might be one of those rare instances where getting the views of a "dummy" or a "newbie" could be an advantage.
Seconded . I can remember a reply to the group for one of NV3s techs regarding the reasons why erstwhile freeware was suddenly transformed into payware was utterly incomprehensible to the vast majority of the readers. I think half the problem is that they describe in their own technical language what a tool does but then they do not show examples to illustrate the technique , i've had this problem with apple manuals and adobe stuff too, nothing beats a good descriptive tutorial in plain language , broken up into steps. However having written these myself for students i know how hard it is to cover every possibility and at the same time , make it easy to understand. .
 
There is an old adage - "Never let the programmers write the user documentation". Programmers (in general) usually hate writing documentation as it takes away from the "purity of their work". "Programs should be 'self documenting'" and "if it has to be explained to you then you shouldn't be using it" are two more programming adages I have come across.:D

One of the things that I like about the Wiki is that ordinary non-geek users, such as ourselves, can add content to it. Perhaps someone might like try themselves. Heck, when/if I get into using TurfFX I might even "have a go".
 
This is unfortunately so typical of N3V and the Wiki. I agree with you, the lazy technical obfuscation should stop.

I suspect it results from assigning only technical types to design the interfaces and write many of the Wiki entries. If N3V would formally engage a few ordinary people who actually play the game (or make content for it) to review these things before they get published, the final result could be both technically correct and understandable to more users (or content creators). It might be one of those rare instances where getting the views of a "dummy" or a "newbie" could be an advantage.

I agree with all the above. I have posted on many occasions about N3V and the technical explanations they use. Much of it is pure techno babble. If I had the enertgy I would give you some examples.

I have given them my wisdom on this (please, don't laugh) and I have suggested that they are doing major damage to themselves.

TRS19 has now reached the stage where it is a first class simulator but end users, particularly newbies to Trainz and the unskilled or geriatric will need more help to get things moving.

N3V might perhaps consider some major behind the scenes consolidation, changes, improvements, time and money to pick up on this theme
I
 
In several companies I worked for we used “laymen” to write stuff in English. We used “laymen” to write warranty agreements and terms and condition contracts in plain English and had a lawyer review it to make sure it accurately stated the case. The same on writing technical manuals, we had laymen do the writing and then had it reviewed by the technical people to make sure it was accurate. In some cases we also would bring in “outsiders” to read the instructions or manuals to see if ordinary people could understand it.

Trainz is a wonderful game/ simulator, call it what you want. But as it incorporates more and more features it becomes a challenge to newcomers to jump right in and use it versus trying to figure out how to use all the features and where to find information on them.

Those of us who have used Trainz for a while have an easier time because with each new version we only have to learn to use the “new” features. But for the non-technical new comer it can be over whelming at times to try and decipher the “secret” code of the write ups and seek out the instructional videos that are scattered all over the place.

There is a steep learning curve with TRS2019 to get the most out of it. There needs to be a better way to have a help screen link integrated into Trains which actually provides user friendly help as opposed to a technical discussion which is what the TurFX help pages appear to be.
 
In several companies I worked for we used “laymen” to write stuff in English. We used “laymen” to write warranty agreements and terms and condition contracts in plain English and had a lawyer review it to make sure it accurately stated the case. The same on writing technical manuals, we had laymen do the writing and then had it reviewed by the technical people to make sure it was accurate. In some cases we also would bring in “outsiders” to read the instructions or manuals to see if ordinary people could understand it.

Trainz is a wonderful game/ simulator, call it what you want. But as it incorporates more and more features it becomes a challenge to newcomers to jump right in and use it versus trying to figure out how to use all the features and where to find information on them.

Those of us who have used Trainz for a while have an easier time because with each new version we only have to learn to use the “new” features. But for the non-technical new comer it can be over whelming at times to try and decipher the “secret” code of the write ups and seek out the instructional videos that are scattered all over the place.

There is a steep learning curve with TRS2019 to get the most out of it. There needs to be a better way to have a help screen link integrated into Trains which actually provides user friendly help as opposed to a technical discussion which is what the TurFX help pages appear to be.


Paul, you've expressed it perfectly.

The only thing I would have added is that I think N3V need a change of attitude.

I'm sorry to say that I think they are a bit arrogant in how they treat the customers - especially new ones. Some of the explanations and guidance notes are so technical and utterly incomprehensible that my son and I have genuine and real LOL moments over them.

It would be a big job to make it easier to use but it should be on the agenda.
Y
 
In several companies I worked for we used “laymen” to write stuff in English. We used “laymen” to write warranty agreements and terms and condition contracts in plain English and had a lawyer review it to make sure it accurately stated the case. The same on writing technical manuals, we had laymen do the writing and then had it reviewed by the technical people to make sure it was accurate. In some cases we also would bring in “outsiders” to read the instructions or manuals to see if ordinary people could understand it.

Trainz is a wonderful game/ simulator, call it what you want. But as it incorporates more and more features it becomes a challenge to newcomers to jump right in and use it versus trying to figure out how to use all the features and where to find information on them.

Those of us who have used Trainz for a while have an easier time because with each new version we only have to learn to use the “new” features. But for the non-technical new comer it can be over whelming at times to try and decipher the “secret” code of the write ups and seek out the instructional videos that are scattered all over the place.

There is a steep learning curve with TRS2019 to get the most out of it. There needs to be a better way to have a help screen link integrated into Trains which actually provides user friendly help as opposed to a technical discussion which is what the TurFX help pages appear to be.


One of my many jobs was to translate Geek to user for many of the procedures and processes we would do. Then one day my manager approached me to assist on a project. We had a roll out of some home grown sales support software that needed some kind of guide. The developer had me sit down and go through the program as a user after I had a bit of training. The interface was horrid to begin with and after a few changes ironed that out, I then set out to write up the documents. I got an award in the end for doing that and then got other projects to do. This is probably why I still write out the step-by-step procedures here as I do.

But anyway back to topic. I agree with everything said above, and Paul is right. The TurfFX interface is way to geeky. Why not use simple language instead of the mathematical and program-code names? The English language has a gazillion ways to say something and they had to find the most difficult one!

I hate to say it, but the EIT stuff isn't much better. As much as I would like to use those, my brain shuts down and reboots as my eyes glaze over as I go through the documentation. Way back when these first came out I said that, and the TurfFX is yet another iteration of more geek-speak. If they continue this path, Trainz will no longer be a game for the people and instead will be a command-line driven C++ code scripting interface that only MIT graduates can understand.
 
I agree with all the sentiments expressed abpve. It seems to me that not only do we need a readable tutorial, but the actual UI (User Interface!) needs an overhaul so that it intuitively makes sense. Rather than type in meaningless figures between 0 & 1, perhaps a slider with meaningful vocabulary along its steps would be helpful. I suspect, sadly, that these thoughts will fall on deaf ears.
 
N3V is doing itself a disservice. As pointed out, they have created a SIMULATOR that has gaming overtones. Unfortunately, their instructions way too technical. I came from a pure technical background and have never done anything but technical work and activities. About 3 years ago I decided I was tired of learning about every new thing that came out. I wanted to be a CUSTOMER not an unpaid technician.

It is not difficult to organize technology in a rational format. Something is made to do something. Your users are non-technical. Fine - first explain what the thing does. Then take EACH ELEMENT IN THE EXPLANATION and fashion an "understandable by a lay person" set of How-To instructions. One stumbling block is that many educational systems have become so narrowly focused that the student can make great things but can't explain them because they have not had a good foundation in their own language. They simply do not have the vocabulary and the understanding of cogent thought that is gained in a proper language course.

When I was quite young, and using my first shortwave radio, I picked up Israeli radio. Speaking was Abba Eban, who had held many high positions in the Government. I did not understand the subject but the way he delivered his thoughts was almost like music.Churchill was another speaking "hero". I wanted to be able to talk like that.

In the very old days of corporate computers we had user groups. We were selling what might today be called cloud servicesy. I was tasked to give a speech to maybe 50 customers somewhere in California. The purpose was (as is N3V's today) explain this new technical service. When you see the blank faces there is a rapid realization that I was not connecting. Well, Tony can't see our blank expressions when we read about parallax geometry supporting the new product. However, given his background we can hope that he realizes that, as previously noted, there is a real probability that some percentage of customers shy away from his product since there are no good instructions. A quick step might be "mouse-over" popups with short explanations. Sometimes two or three items can begin to make sense just from those little things.
 
I agree, too. I messed with it for a long time, too, and my results indicated the only way I could even SEE the TurfEX was to zoom in really close. So I decided if I can't see it from the cab window of a locomotive, it isn't worth it.
 
I agree, too. I messed with it for a long time, too, and my results indicated the only way I could even SEE the TurfEX was to zoom in really close. So I decided if I can't see it from the cab window of a locomotive, it isn't worth it.

I also ran into this issue but I found that if I use a value of 0.4 in the "geometry scale" option I get grass that is pretty visible. I also found that a value of 1 with the grass around a pond makes an interesting marshy look when the right ground texture is also used.
 
BUT, many customers want to use the feature as a TOOL. Experimenting will eventually allow you to get something that is acceptable. A challenge can be fun but spending hours untangling the inter-related variables is simply a puzzle game. Many enjoy puzzles and the personal intellectual reward they receive with success. It is fun to beat the system. But isn't it more fun to have a proper tool and see the anticipated rewards?

Note: I do not like any games. I like to make, improve or fix. It is simple, I prefer a tangible result with as little fuss as possible.
 
I agree with all the sentiments expressed abpve. It seems to me that not only do we need a readable tutorial, but the actual UI (User Interface!) needs an overhaul so that it intuitively makes sense. Rather than type in meaningless figures between 0 & 1, perhaps a slider with meaningful vocabulary along its steps would be helpful. I suspect, sadly, that these thoughts will fall on deaf ears.

Not at all :)

Simply put, we are a small company and have to pick our battles. We spend our limited resources where we think we can offer the most benefit to users. That inevitably means that some things that we'd really love to spend more time on get put onto the back-burner, especially in cases where we know that we're going to have rework regardless of what we do.

The Surveyor Effect Layers UI (including, but certainly not limited to TurfFX) is one of those areas. What we have now is a first pass at the technology; we learned a lot in getting it to where it is now, we already have a lot of ideas on where it should go from here, but we don't have enough time to do it justice right now. We've known from the start that certain changes and additions will be necessary, and we're limiting the amount of rework we do on the current UI until those are in place, to avoid spending resources on throw-away tasks. Instead, we're investing in the underlying technologies, knowing that once the groundwork is in place we can update the UI without everybody having to throw away the work that they've already integrated into their own routes.

That said, while the TurfFX configuration UI is perhaps a bit arcane, it's certainly not hard to use. I'd encourage people to watch Paul's videos on the subject, and follow along at home to get the hang of it.

Completely agree with everything said regarding the state of our documentation. The reality is that we don't have a Technical Writer on staff, and can't currently justify the expense of bringing one on board. Like any profession, it takes relevant skill and experience to do a top-notch job, so our current approach of simply seconding our development staff to write documentation is always going to be limiting.

chris
 
I would like to be able to D/L a route and be able to copy TurFX and reuse it. Look at how it was made and learn from that. Why do I have re-invent the world?

I was a software developer and doc. was what I hated most. I was blessed with a co-worker who would proof read it hand it back looking like a blooded mess (red ink all over it). Do this until it was understandable.
 
Thanks for the response Chris and I take your points about priorites and resources. No offence intended and I am re-assured that it hasn't 'fallen on deaf ears' and the overall issue has been noted. On a positive note - I personally (even with the outstanding issues) am delighted with TRS2019 and in the process of moving over to it completely and updating all my YMRz modelz railway layouts into the new format. I think it has a great future.
 
No offence intended

None taken at all. I just didn't want to leave you all with the impression that you were being ignored when the reality is a little more complex. I'm glad that you're enjoying TRS2019 - it's taken a lot of "blood, sweat and tears" over the past few years and it's always great to hear when that's been worthwhile. We can't wait to see what everybody makes of it.

cheers,

chris
 
Back
Top