.
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 44

Thread: Edinburgh - Dundee Route Test

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, VIC/Melbourne
    Posts
    416
     

    Default Edinburgh - Dundee Route Test

    Session - Endinburgh to Dundee Sleeper

    Route installed successful. First impression was that it looked good and the opening sequence was impressive.

    Drove to 1st stop at Haymarket Central. Very difficult to maintain schedule, certainly on 1st attempt!

    After leaving Haymarket the following messages appeared before arriving at Inverkeithing:

    Unable to plot route - Junction is missing lever after junction KIRKCALDY SOUTH J10

    Unable to plot route - Junction is missing lever after junction 1935996

    After travelling across the Firth of Forth bridge and driving through North Queensferry you enter the tunnel. The North portal of this tunnel is sitting too high.



    At Inverkeithing you are asked to stop train just short of signalbox. Mileage stop at 13.6 miles. However there is no indication of trip log, that used to be in the HUD, that indicates just how far you have travelled.

    When allowed to depart Inverkeithing, signal 88540 does not give a green so if you try to pass it you receive a SPAD and the session finishes. Looking at the junction, 298512 in Surveyor, just after the signal, it is just noticeable that the trackwork has been incorrectly installed such that if the point motor is showing to the right you actually travel onto the left branch which is occupied. This needs to be corrected before the session can be completed.



    If you look closely at the screenshot you can actually see 2 tracks going from the point motor and the one on the right finally goes back across to for the branch line.

    Will now try the Dundee to Edinburgh session.
    Last edited by Pug; November 26th, 2018 at 11:48 PM.
    Geoff

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, VIC/Melbourne
    Posts
    416
     

    Default

    Session - 1E52 09:10 Dundee- Kings Cross

    The 1st time I started this session it was very jerky /stuttering while the scene was being established. I figured this must be due to caching so when I restarted it was much smoother and quicker in loading the set scene.

    Finally underway and discovered that this session is not like the other session in that there was no point score and stars showing at the top of the screen. I was told I either added points or lost points during the run but I had no continuous indication of what the total points were. Interestingly I was awarded 5 stars and a perfect run when, as far as I was concerned as it was only a 1st run and I had no idea of the route, it was a pretty poor run!

    Several items on note that I noticed were.

    1 The 2 level crossing on the track just north of Ladybank appeared to be sunk into the track until you got close and then they appeared at the correct height but they did not open.








    Eventually arrived at Inverkeithing and found that around 5 consists had banked up due to the inability to continue further north.

    Crossed the Firth of Forth bridge an noticed this group of light headed passengers waiting on the up platform.

    Geoff

  3. #3

    Default

    I'm not in the beta test, but has this seriously been pre-released with such glaring errors? Has the route builder not done a snagging drive and fly by of the route before offering it up for testing? I would be ashamed to put a freeware route out in that state, let alone something which will become a payware component of a commercial product.
    Building In TRS19, Driving Trucks In Snowrunner

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, VIC, Lilliput
    Posts
    4,129
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vern View Post
    I'm not in the beta test, but has this seriously been pre-released with such glaring errors? Has the route builder not done a snagging drive and fly by of the route before offering it up for testing? I would be ashamed to put a freeware route out in that state, let alone something which will become a payware component of a commercial product.
    Seconded Vern I am really looking forward to this one being not from the UK I was expecting big things from this Route, If the community has to re-build it we may as well of made it from the start.
    Cheers Mick.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, Queensland, Brisbane
    Posts
    297
     

    Default

    Has this route been constructed to TRS19 standards? I do not see any PBR textures or Turfx etc in the screenshots. If this is the case then I have to ask what is the point of having this route as built in TRS19? And further, many of the assets (ie platforms) are really dated now. Seriously, with the capability of TRS19 why is there not PBR standard assets like platforms at the very least?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, Qld
    Posts
    6,516
     

    Default

    Firstly, note the name of the form you are posting to... "Beta"!

    The team who have been working on the route for several years would be disheartened to hear these comments from people who (I think) haven't even seen the route yet. I personally think the route captures the feeling of the area perfectly.

    The whole concept of beta testing is to find these things prior to release (and the reason it isn't released to "the masses" yet is so that they cannot pick holes in a yet=to-be-completed product).

    More info:

    It was a late decision to include the route as originally it wasn't going to be ready by our deadline then after the deadline slipped, Stuart requested that it now be included.

    It has been extensively updated with TRS19 features, so I'm not sure where the idea has come from that it isn't. There were a couple of junctions shown in the video that had been missed during the procedural track update and given the route was begun over 10 years ago, yes, there are still some older assets included (although many also have been updated).

    Our decision was that it is better to add more content for a route that will be very popular, than it would by withholding it.

    Youtube trailer:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBlgGtsHoRU

    We'll be posting screenshots of the route when we get some time.

    Lastly, we could have gone down the "$49.99 for one route" road, but decided that $69.99 for 6 routes was a better option for our customers. We hope that people who understand the magnitude of creating routes of this scale understand that a few passengers ending up higher than planned (or perhaps it was the platform lower than planned) is not an unusual occurence - quite likely due to an attempt to fix some other bug in the area.

    Ultimately, commercial realities dictate that if you want complete perfection, you will need to pay more than $15 per route.
    Tony Hilliam

    Got questions about TRS19? Click here for TRS19 FAQs

    Looking for answers to in-game functionality? Click here for help

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, VIC, Lilliput
    Posts
    4,129
     

    Default

    You should run for politics Tony, And yes i do know what section i am posting in Beta for TRS2019 not Beta for a Route that has been supposedly years in the making by a supposed team who cant get a crossing correct or has a couple of American cowboys on horse's waiting to cross at that crossing, Let alone their track work correct.
    Give Joe ( Socal ) a call or Andy Turnbal ( Dermmy) and get them on board this stuff is just route building 101 I would of thought.
    But please don't try to sell me this we only paid so much but should of paid a whole lot more to get the proper route rubbish Tony.
    Cheers Mick.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, Queensland, Brisbane
    Posts
    297
     

    Default

    Tony,

    This is a screenshot of my QR Route taken near Gatton ( I just happen to be working on it now). I do not claim to be a great modeller and I have been working on this route for many years as well. But you can see that I have updated to TRS19 standard as much as possible. My question is why in the screenshots above do we not see any of the materials available in TRS19? forgive me if the screenshots are not indicative but I see splines for grass, not turfx for instance.

  9. #9

    Default

    Second that about the PBR etc. While noting Tony's response, the version of Edinburgh to Dundee released for RW/TS20xx by Just Trains quite some years ago, incorporated quite a few of the older Kuju assets. However it still managed to convey an up to date and largely error free impression when it came to driving. It's not like this is a huge route for length. Not belittling the builder(s) at all, but if you are going for commercial level content then you need to be on top of the game. That means checking, re-checking and going over every inch of the thing until you may be sick of the sight of it, but are content it's ready for the spotlight.

    All this beta exercise has done is indicate that standards at N3V and among their associates are not quite what they ought to be (IMHO).
    Building In TRS19, Driving Trucks In Snowrunner

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, Qld
    Posts
    6,516
     

    Default

    I'm just trying to provide the facts here. N3V spend the majority of our resources on development, testing, support and marketing. We have content partners who provide the majority of the content. We do provide support to those creators and this does include creating sessions, updating assets, polishing, updating routes etc.

    Would we like to have a team of 10 people working on each route - absolutely. Can we afford to do that? No.

    We're more than happy to receive top quality content from anyone, and you can make a decent amount of money from it too. So rather than providing us screenshots of your work, why not become involved in the next version of Trainz now and have your route included?

    Check our site at: contentcreators.trainzportal.com
    Tony Hilliam

    Got questions about TRS19? Click here for TRS19 FAQs

    Looking for answers to in-game functionality? Click here for help

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Massachusetts, Haverhill
    Posts
    29,537
     

    Default

    Tony,

    As someone who does beta testing, although due to some major time restrictions here I did not sign up for route testing this time, I do know what a beta is. Beta means it works, but it might be broken too, and it's best to report the faulties now before they make it into the final product.

    With that said. From looking at the screenshots above, I do see the route creators need to fiddle and fuss with the details. Among them are the usual candidates that get caught up in the process of route building. The same crossing needs a bit of straightening out too if possible. It's a couple of degrees out of alignment causing the tracks to swing a bit as the cross through the crossings.

    Looking at the roads some more, there are some that are floating and need tamping down. This is more obvious now with the shadows appearing under splines. Believe me these were always my peeve with my own routes, and with the shadows it's more obvious.

    If I were working on the route, I would not only check the roads, but also buildings too. There's nothing worse than noticing levitating buildings, or those that are sitting precariously on the edge of a slope. A little tapping down, tamping, squishing there, and that takes care of that. The same with fences, walls, and other splines. There's nothing worse than seeing the underbellies of spline objects, and houses without cellars floating in space.

    Tunnels again... Is it a tunnel spline issue, or is it a route issue? I've come across this in a few places here and there on various routes I brought into TRS19, and I'm not sure if it was my fault, the content creator's fault, or the program, thus, nothing was reported in that area.

    Other things like grass splines. They could be replaced with procedural Turf-FX grass. This is a big undertaking on older routes, I know since I started this on a route of my own and yikes that's a lot of grass! With that said, perhaps Stuart and the crew can plan on that in a future update.

    But... it's the attention to the little details such as these which really make or break the quality of a product no matter what the cost. If the route, or whatever it is, is done well it will stick out in the consumer's mind, and the purchasing public will be more willing to go back for more. Take Jointed Rail's various routes for instance. The Coal Country and Eagle River, for example, are two truly outstanding works by Rich (Scratchy). There's a lot of attention to the details here to ensure stuff isn't floating, too obviously among other things.

    And finally, during the beta, a critique is a critique, and use this opportunity to get these things fixed. We know it's hard work, and the better the quality in the long run will mean that you can justify the price that you really want to charge for the route and fewer qualms will be made over the price.

    My two cents...
    Last edited by JCitron; November 28th, 2018 at 12:18 AM.
    John
    Trainz User Since: 12-2003
    Trainz User ID: 124863
    T:ANE Build: 94829
    TRS2019/Trainz-PLUS: 109641

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,918
     

    Default

    Vern --

    Just to throw in my two cents worth. I'd actually be happy with no included routes. I've always been slightly disappointed by all of them and these long routes I find incredibly tedious.

    All that I want is the tool box that provides me with the equipment to do my own routes and layouts.

    Having said that, though, the absolute minimum requirement for routes included in TRS19 should be:

    • All TRS19 procedural track.
    • All PBR textures.
    • All TurfFX grasses.
    • All SpeedTrees.


    My instructions to any individual or group offering a route for inclusion would have been "Make it so."

    Phil
    Last edited by philskene; November 27th, 2018 at 08:36 PM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    was in the Netherlands
    Posts
    5,354
    Blog Entries
    1
     

    Default

    Opened the route, created a new session and went for an end to end drive from north to south using the default switch settings. That worked everywhere except for one place where I ended up in a siding. I don't know what the real route looks like but the one I drove looks and feels real. The landscaping is very well done with many small touches that add to the experience. Adding the extended runway lights at the end of the runway, the flowers in little corners, etc., it all adds up.

    One area I feel needs some work is the track alignment or rather the lack of it at many turnouts. My vehicle would suddenly lurch sideways when traversing many of them indicating that two sections of straightened track were placed without a non-straightened section between them. If the two straightened sections are perfectly aligned, it would not be noticeable but any skew in the alignment makes it very obvious.

    I also noticed the elevated tunnel portal but not any of the light-headed people along the route I traveled. Obvious but easy to fix.

    The new PBR ground textures are nicely used near the tracks which really adds to the overall look. Too bad that in some of the higher embankments, the "lava flow" because of those textures is a bit visually jarring. I suggest that it would be better to use the older textures in such places to give a more stable ground at the expense of a less aesthetically pleasing look.


    70337:
    TRS19 Platinum, build 110491 SP2, Win10 Pro 64 bit, i7-7700 3.6GHz 16 GB, GTX 1070 Ti

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    United States of America, PA, Scranton
    Posts
    3,547
     

    Default

    Somehow, this route looks worse than Kickstatart County. That's impressive.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, Qld
    Posts
    6,516
     

    Default

    Phil - those instructions are pretty much the way it is right now (and in fact, pretty much the way the routes are being delivered).

    Regarding the "include no routes" that would work for the route builders like yourself, but that's still a [albeit significant] minority.

    I have taken a close look around the route today and I agree that there are some areas that need more work (which was already ongoing, but has now been allocated further time).

    Chris - while I totally disagree, do you really need to say that? Please consider how to make constructive comments or don't make them at all.

    To those providing constructive feedback, thanks - it's easy to fix "track aligment at crossings" but impossible to do anything with comments like "looks worse than Kickstarter".
    Last edited by Tony_Hilliam; November 27th, 2018 at 11:28 PM.
    Tony Hilliam

    Got questions about TRS19? Click here for TRS19 FAQs

    Looking for answers to in-game functionality? Click here for help

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •