WROMG Interior... WROMG Locomtive

Since I made the model here, I figure I'll cap off this thread.
I literally thought this was a joke at first. "The interior should be a cinch" is quite literally a joke to me. It might take me a week to make a locomotive - for example, I took my WVRR 4-8-4 from first polygon to in-game in a week. By contrast, it took me more than a full day just to animate the fire on my RGW 70 cab. In many ways, it takes much longer to create a steam locomotive cab than it does to make the locomotive itself.
Not only that, but these aren't exactly new engines made by a professional here. The model for my V&T moguls dates back to - and yes, I checked this - July 4th, 2013. I was in between 8th grade and my freshman year of high school at the time. The drivers are almost 9" too large, all piping is made with the default 32 polygons because I didn't know how to change it, etc. Wrong locomotive? Yes. Wrong cab? Aside from the fact that Curtis included an air brake lever in locos not originally fitted with them, the cab is more accurate to the locomotive than the locomotive itself.

The purpose of this thread eludes me... not sure if serious or joking...

trainboi1 said:

Since I made the model here, I figure I'll cap off this thread.
I literally thought this was a joke at first. "The interior should be a cinch" is quite literally a joke to me. It might take me a week to make a locomotive - for example, I took my WVRR 4-8-4 from first polygon to in-game in a week. By contrast, it took me more than a full day just to animate the fire on my RGW 70 cab. In many ways, it takes much longer to create a steam locomotive cab than it does to make the locomotive itself.
Not only that, but these aren't exactly new engines made by a professional here. The model for my V&T moguls dates back to - and yes, I checked this - July 4th, 2013. I was in between 8th grade and my freshman year of high school at the time. The drivers are almost 9" too large, all piping is made with the default 32 polygons because I didn't know how to change it, etc. Wrong locomotive? Yes. Wrong cab? Aside from the fact that Curtis included an air brake lever in locos not originally fitted with them, the cab is more accurate to the locomotive than the locomotive itself.

Click to expand...

And strangely enough its the enthusiastic amateur content creators that make Trainz what it is. Over time some develop the skills to build more complex and more detailed models but I must confess cab building and the associated scripts are not something I'd even begin to tackle.

These days it almost takes a team to create content. I know EverTrainz for example works very closely with what I call a texture specialist. Ron I think was one of the first to get the highly detailed bogies sorted out with LOD so you got high detail and good performance. Waiting for him to decide its good enough to release though is something else. Getting the right plans and putting it all together often recycling what is in the bit box means what you get often isn't quite right but I think it comes down to if its fun then fine.

Cheerio John

davesnow, wrong is spelled with an n, not an m. You really need to go back to school and learn how to spell properly.

hholdenaz said:

davesnow, wrong is spelled with an n, not an m. You really need to go back to school and learn how to spell properly.

Click to expand...

I think he knows that,it isn’t easy to edit thread titles once created. He’s expressed regret that he posted the thread, given that Dave’s produced huge amounts of content , I think we could cut him some slack here, I’ve regretted some posts I have made . Having said that I think we also should be thankful to all content creators , I am amazed at the time and energy spent on creation and the fact they give this stuff to us for free is one of trains biggest strengths, yes it can be annoying when it doesn’t work, but hey, it’s free, it didn’t cost you anything!

davesnow said:

the interior should be a cinch!

Click to expand...

yeah maybe if you're okay with laughable accuracy or primitive shapes with solid color textures and no functioning controls.

wait- some people actually are okay with that.

Therock said:

wait- some people actually are okay with that.

Click to expand...

OK here.

Especially if it means getting stuff into the sim within the next decade.

pware said:

This thread has brought back to life some old arguments regarding the quality of some assets. Vern does make some valid points in his post ...



That said, I would add the rider that for virtually all users, Trainz is a hobby not a profession. I don't know of anyone who is making a living from creating and selling Trainz assets. We may have the tools to build life-like looking worlds and train interiors that are totally authentic but how many of us have the time and talent to use those tools on everything we create. As a content creator (routes and sessions plus a minuscule number of other assets) I know how difficult it really is and the steepness of the ever changing learning curve.

Vern's comparison of Trainz with MSTS (which I once did own but quickly abandoned when Trainz was released) and Railworks (which I have never owned) are perhaps a bit unfair. With MSTS there was never a large base of fans creating freeware assets or if they did exist I could never find them. Purely from the posts in these forums I believe that the situation with Railworks is similar. One of the great strengths of Trainz is its huge base of amateur but enthusiastic freeware creators who will often produce "sub standard" products but at least the products are there and free.

Like Vern, I also occasionally groan when I look at a newly downloaded free asset and I have also seen plenty of "generic" cabs in locos. But I look at the price tag and, in the vast majority of cases, the hours of work that went into the creation of that asset, and accept it for what it is - a gift horse. Eventually something better may come along.

Click to expand...

Well Railworks/DTG TS is maybe a bit different as frankly not much of the created train and rolling stock assets is freeware. If you're selling it on Steam for £11.99 or part of a £24.99 route pack then I guess the author goes that extra mile to source an accurate cab. In fact at least one of their published DMU's had a rather huge blooper in that they had left the label with all the railway confidential contact and hotline numbers clearly displayed on the cab wall (quickly told to get it sorted). I couldn't say what the numbers producing freeware are for Trainz vs. the other sims, but it still seems strange to me that Trainz seems unable to attract the people who could actually produce quality cabs and sounds.

In fact I did kind of have a "WROMG" moment myself a day or two ago. Dabbling with an Australian prototype which I was toying with turning into a UK branch line. First of all I downloaded and Australian DMU just for the hell of it. Should have had alarm bells ringing when it said "works in TRS2004/2006" but sure enough, on placing in the route defaults to UTC era cab and Alco sounds. Next up thought I would download a GWR hydraulic loco, don't think I got as far as the cab because once again it was playing the 2003 era Alco sounds. So basically, I despaired and had a rage uninstall of TANE and TRS2019. It will probably go back on today as just an hour spent trying to build a route in DTG or MSTS is sheer frustration, but the question needs to be posed - What can be done to encourage the construction of up to date loco and rolling stock assets, both as a community and on a corporate level by N3V? From the UK standpoint it probably peaked with the S&C pack but even that is starting to look dated (can't comment on the Stoke add on as I never bought it for TANE and it's not available for 19).

Vern said:

What can be done to encourage the construction of up to date loco and rolling stock assets, both as a community and on a corporate level by N3V?

Click to expand...

We are working with members of the community where possible to introduce new/updated cabs. A good example of this has been the new Deltic and Class 37 cab views; plus a new SW1500 cab (admittedly at the moment it is a stand-alone, although I have put in a request to make a version that obsoletes the old UTC era one as well) and GP40 cab (I think it was a GP40). This should help a bit with assets that use generic cab views, but they will still be generic cab views...

This may also be an option, if any community members are interested, with the older Auran enginesound and hornsound assets. It will still be generic, but it might be possible to make the enginesound sound better with newer standard sound files. If anyone is interested in this, please contact us.



As to making custom cab views, it simply depends on how long people are willing to wait for the content to be released.

Based on the time I spend on all of my payware steam locos, the time to make a cab view is about 1/3 to 1/2 of the project time. Because the player is so close to everything, the whole thing needs to be made with much finer detail than the outside. Then there's the animations, config setup, and anything else that the cab view needs.

At an estimate, my last release (not yet on the Trainz Store, just on my website) has probably 240-280 hours in it. At an estimgate, about 100 hours of that was in making, mapping, painting, animating, exporting, and scripting the cab view.

Diesel loco cab views are, in some ways, a little easier. But this really depends on the locomotive. There are still a lot of details, and for modern locos a lot of scripting and animating, that is needed to make it realistic.

And either way, you need to take a lot of care to make sure it actually looks good; in particular with shading/weathering/texturing otherwise it looks very flat. Despite having 'world' lighting, any cab view that has shadows enabled will still appear very flat if not done properly, as the majority of the cab is in shadow.


So if you're willing to see only 1 new loco a year per creator (if made to current PBR standards, with LOD, etc), then it'd be possible to see more cab views done along with the locomotives. Some creators, if they really push themselves, could possibly release 2 new locomotives a year, but IMO they'd be really pushing themselves if doing it in their spare time. That's not counting reskins/mods of those locos to create new variants, but even then there's still going to be a fairly low number that can be done. If you cut corners on textures, or LOD, or other things I'm sure you could make more, but at a sacrifice to the quality of the models.

OTOH some would prefer to see a wider range of locomotives, with generic cab views, become available. Either because they don't mind generic cab views, or they don't use the cab view, or because they'll swap the cab themselves anyway.


As to myself, I do enjoy making cab views as part of making the loco. It's a surprising change in work process compared to the locomotive. In particular, it's satisfying making a lot of finer detail that the player gets to interact with directly. Even more so when you get to do some fun, or unusual, animations (my last loco has a working whistle cord that 'bends' when you pull on it; and working try-cocks to check the water level, among a few other things). But it's still time consuming to do right, which does limit how much I can do unfortunately.

Regards
Zec

I think we are talking about three different animals.

I suggest that 'Cab view' can mean at least three levels of complexity:
-
1) Driver view from the cab with no working controls,

2) Driver view that provides access to simple controls that allow some driving control,

and finally

3) Driver view that offers total control of all the necessary functions.

Perhaps some sort of grading like this as a required entry in the description would prevent the situation which Dave found and started this thread.

For the record, all my internal views are type 1.

Peter

Vern said:

... the question needs to be posed - What can be done to encourage the construction of up to date loco and rolling stock assets, both as a community and on a corporate level by N3V?

Click to expand...

I had weighed my options a few times in the past for the extra functionality and scripting power of the DTG sim to create content. Ultimately I have stuck very strongly with Trainz because I have faith that N3V will eventually (someday, maybe decades later) revisit everything and quite literally give game systems a total, complete overhaul. PBR materials are a great first step, but functionality is simply lacking.

No vacuum brakes or guard van support, and handbrakes on individual wagons. Physics and animations aren’t exactly up to date, if we are comparing to the supposed “cream of the crop” of train simulators. It still does feel very much like a model railway simulator, rather than the real world.

To some extent there is a get out with steam locos as, for visibility reasons, it is sometimes preferable to use the hanging out the window view, if available.

Thanks for your input Zec and glad this sort of thing is under notice.

And Ron, yes I would hope now N3V have got the graphics more or less up to date, the next update will go under the hood of operations and functionality a bit more. The jewel in the crown of Trainz remains Surveyor and it would be great if all other aspects of the game could be brought up to that standard.

Vern said:

What can be done to encourage the construction of up to date loco and rolling stock assets, both as a community and on a corporate level by N3V?

Click to expand...

Simple and easy answer. Raise the requirements. This is 2019, and that's great that people still enjoy their Trainz 2009. I understand people are on fixed income, older, etc but their PC is below the specs of a toaster oven, but it's time to stop making low quality stuff. The scary part though? People. Do. Not. Care. Lots of people are fine with the most basic looking things that are just hideous. Reskins that look like they were made in GIMP in 5 mins. People running Ultra Low GFX. Using assets and sounds that are beyond terrible.

The fix is simple, N3V must enforce asset design requirements. The same way DCS:World enforces the 3rd party teams to build by strict guidelines. Ex: Poly Count, LOD, High-Res textures, PBR, proper lighting. There must be a page that says this is the X Y and Z requirements, if you want it published on the DLS for Trainz 19. Lower level requirements for each past game, T:ANE, 12, etc to go along with the spec of that game/year time frame. Levels as someone else mentioned.

There should be no encouraging, you shouldn't have to dangle a carrot on a stick for people to make higher quality assets. It needs to be a rule. Yes, that will mean to those who don't care what it looks like, long as it's 'content' and something new to their sim, they happy. Sadly you will have to break some hearts. Wargaming (World of Tanks) had the same problem as well. A Russian dev, who for years refused to update the game further to higher quality due to most users running low toasters oven in Russia. They finally snapped years back when they came out and said, Tech is improving, Prices are cheaper, it's time to move on and upgrade. You can still run it at potato settings sure, but it wont run on a toaster anymore.

Some users may just go OK that's fine, I'll stick with my Trainz 12 and never upgrade then. That is something N3V will have to swallow. Those people will cave eventually. I also understand why some may not like the latest version, and go back to previous game. 19 does have its flaws that is for darn sure. But it is still miles ahead software wise than 12 or even T:ANE.

TLDR- Restrict higher requirements for assets to be uploaded to DLS when its uploading to its respective game. (19, should have standard 19 features at bare min to be allowed, etc etc) If you must, offer a 'Upgrade Sale' that makes it even cheaper for those who even refuse to play T:ANE. At the end of the day though, people will have to learn to adapt and change. This is not Trainz 2004 anymore. This is 2019. TRS19 still lacks many standard things in the AAA industry, but it is progress compared to what I left that was Trainz 12 last year for 19.

Upgrade people. Upgrade your rigs. Learn that quantity is not always good. Quality must not be forgotten. By now there is every loco, every rail car ever built on the DLS. We don't need another F unit that is reskinned from 2004 and still looks from 2004 from its reskin job released in 2019...

OH!!! ONE last thing.

The DLS? Needs to be changed. That is a horrible, horrible, horrible system. I cannot stand the DLS webpage, and the built in one to 19 is even worse. There needs to be thumbnails, and more ways to show off the route then 1 single small thumbnail. Or 3 pics if looking in-game. The DLS is still straight from mid-2000s. The DLS will have to be modernized as well.

Kilrbe3 said:

Simple and easy answer. Raise the requirements. ...

Click to expand...

An interesting post. I'm not sure I fully agree with you but....

N3V have raised the technical requirements but that doesn't guarantee quality. If you are building something for TS19 then the validation requirements are way steeper than they were. That, in my opinion, helps those assets be more efficient on lower capability machines. It doesn't mean an asset looks good.

I'm not sure how you would ensure a user provided asset is suitable for the DLS. Those who build assets for sale by N3V do go through a quality process - ordinary content creators do not. You would need a system that either employs people, or is formed from enthusiastic volunteers that does some quality control. As the person who set up and managed the CRG for a few years I can ensure you that this isn't easy. The CRG does have a quality management system and I'm proud of that but our rules prevent us from changing the author's intent. You would not believe how many low res boxcars I have fixed.

I believe in the Trainz community. Most of the assets we use were created by the community to the best of their ability and in good faith. We could scrap all that and make everything payware. I imagine the quality would improve but at what cost?

Making high quality assets for Trainz can be expensive or they can be cheap. I've spent much of the last 12 months trying to find tools that can be used to produce models that use PBR materials. It can be done on the cheap but its way faster by using expensive tools.

You might take a look at the Trainz Discord content creation channels. There are folk there that are producing models that are simply amazing. Some is going to be payware but that's ok in my book. I just like watching the talent of some of the younger creators.

I think some content creators are still catching up with TANE, let alone TS19.

Kilrbe3

You already have what you want, and it is available to you. It's called 'payware' and allows you to specify whatever model you want and the level of detail you want and can afford to pay for.

If you don't like it don't buy it.

This axiom applies to the current situation, if what is freely available on the DLS does not suit you, don't download it.Trainz has flourished because it does not require extreme levels of detail, created by someone with commercial artistic skill levels.

I suggest that if NV3 imposed your stringent requirements on their unpaid creators, their sales would plummet and Trainz as we know it would cease to exist.

Peter

narrowgauge said:

Kilrbe3

You already have what you want, and it is available to you. It's called 'payware' and allows you to specify whatever model you want and the level of detail you want and can afford to pay for.

If you don't like it don't buy it.

This axiom applies to the current situation, if what is freely available on the DLS does not suit you, don't download it.Trainz has flourished because it does not require extreme levels of detail, created by someone with commercial artistic skill levels.

I suggest that if NV3 imposed your stringent requirements on their unpaid creators, their sales would plummet and Trainz as we know it would cease to exist.

Peter

Click to expand...

This is such a backwards way of thinking.

"Just go buy it"

No.

This is how I know a lot of this community has never touched another game or sim, ever. Or even experienced what true modding is for games. Yes, creating any asset is a mod. Any mod is fantastic for a game. But saying "just go buy it?" Horrible argument. I can counter that and say, heck, even the Pro's are not making things. I am still waiting on JR to release a butt load of locos that have been teased for a year now. There is tons of free content out there that is high quality, that doesn't require a masters in design gfx or modeling. A lot of it is people just refuse to get with the times, and update/upgrade to latest. So you are then offset by a bunch of lower quality assets because people are still stuck in time. It's okay, some of you wont get it, as you just showed me, it's sad, but is what it is. Cannot change everyone's mind.

created by someone with commercial artistic skill levels.

Click to expand...

I agree. This is why Trainz has flourished and has a community over more much closed off, other titles who restrict you. BUT, at some point you must realize, you cannot still create assets that look like they from mid 2000s, when we about to break into 2020 here. I am sorry, but if you cannot see that, and cannot be willing to accept that, then you are stuck in the past. You can only polish a turd so much, but at end of the day, it's still a turd.

I suggest that if NV3 imposed your stringent requirements on their unpaid creators, their sales would plummet and Trainz as we know it would cease to exist.

Click to expand...

Nope. They are not the type to go and buy latest version anyway. As most of them are happy with their MS Paint created loco and playing on a toaster oven from 2004 with Trainz 2004. Who haven't even bothered to care to upgrade to 12 or T:ANE. Those aren't lost sales, because they never were sales. You'd get more IMHO, with more higher quality assets. Railfans or gamers. Hard core sim guys, or the most casual. Times change and practices change. People don't want to spend $70 for a product, and still see assets from mid-2000s. Cough. Which 19 still has built in for some. Those who wish to create low quality stuff that does not meet DLS requirements, still can. Just release on their own time. Even N3V has to stop support for the older ones eventually, as have. Eventually the tech will be so updated, it wont be backwards compatibility Heck even 19 suffers this from its own versions of 19.

TLDR - It will require change and people hate change and being told they have to do things differently now, especially after a decade plus of time with the same mentality.

Kilrbe3 said:

This is such a backwards way of thinking.

"Just go buy it"

No.

This is how I know a lot of this community has never touched another game or sim, ever. Or even experienced what true modding is for games. Yes, creating any asset is a mod. Any mod is fantastic for a game. But saying "just go buy it?" Horrible argument. I can counter that and say, heck, even the Pro's are not making things. I am still waiting on JR to release a butt load of locos that have been teased for a year now. There is tons of free content out there that is high quality, that doesn't require a masters in design gfx or modeling. A lot of it is people just refuse to get with the times, and update/upgrade to latest. So you are then offset by a bunch of lower quality assets because people are still stuck in time. It's okay, some of you wont get it, as you just showed me, it's sad, but is what it is. Cannot change everyone's mind.



I agree. This is why Trainz has flourished and has a community over more much closed off, other titles who restrict you. BUT, at some point you must realize, you cannot still create assets that look like they from mid 2000s, when we about to break into 2020 here. I am sorry, but if you cannot see that, and cannot be willing to accept that, then you are stuck in the past. You can only polish a turd so much, but at end of the day, it's still a turd.



Nope. They are not the type to go and buy latest version anyway. As most of them are happy with their MS Paint created loco and playing on a toaster oven from 2004 with Trainz 2004. Who haven't even bothered to care to upgrade to 12 or T:ANE. Those aren't lost sales, because they never were sales. You'd get more IMHO, with more higher quality assets. Railfans or gamers. Hard core sim guys, or the most casual. Times change and practices change. People don't want to spend $70 for a product, and still see assets from mid-2000s. Cough. Which 19 still has built in for some. Those who wish to create low quality stuff that does not meet DLS requirements, still can. Just release on their own time. Even N3V has to stop support for the older ones eventually, as have. Eventually the tech will be so updated, it wont be backwards compatibility Heck even 19 suffers this from its own versions of 19.

TLDR - It will require change and people hate change and being told they have to do things differently now, especially after a decade plus of time with the same mentality.

Click to expand...

Different people have different ideas about what is important to them and what is acceptable. If you're running TANE on a conventional laptop, not a gaming one, then you may well be happy to accept a lower level of detail than someone with a high end machine. If you have an interest in showing how logs get turned into furniture and the various stages involved your interest might be more in the product queues than in the visual side of things.

Some content creators have high end machines, I suspect the OP does, and typically their view is if it runs on my machine then its fine. Others spend more time and create good looking models that perform well. What trainz has is a very wide range of content, some is better than others but its the range that is its secret.

I know of a group of historical modellers who are quite happy with MSTS and its been a while since new stock was available for that one.

Sketchup used appropriately can bring in a new building quickly. Inappropriately it can bring any system to its knees.

As you say people hate change and since this is a hobby and people do it for fun why impose it on them. Payware, well I still have a payware loco on which the wheels weren't animated.

Cheerio John

Well my thoughts are maybe not quite as radical as Kirkbe but I do recall discussions around the release of TRS2019 that it was time to think about slamming the door on backward compatibility to force the situation. There was the usual outcry this would alienate thousands of customers but given N3V have themselves made changes which render much older content (e.g. trees) useless, the approach is at best ambivalent. More likely they knew most of the so called default/built in content in TRS2019, itself relied on assets going back to the UTC era (including cabs and that awful generic Alco sound).

Cutting off backwards compatibility in favor of newer/more modern features is a good step that is necessary at some point. Or else the same TRS2004 assets will keep popping up in the newer versions.

Enforcing content standards would turn Trainz into a payware-heavy simulator, which is not what anyone wants I imagine.

The reason why the old stuff is still available is due to user demand, even people with up to date hardware still seem to like using old stuff.

As for raising standards, try creating things to TS12 standards or lower in TRS19 and give it a 4.6 build version and watch the warnings and errors appear when you try to commit it, won't get away with no Lod for a start.

Unfortunately while N3V are still allowing 3.5 Version uploads for TS12, we are going to get stuff not up to current standards, that's not to say that some of it is not of a high standard, however some isn't.

Incidentally creating Steam Locomotive cabs is a black art, far to involved for my liking, I've tried and failed abysmally. Hats off to anyone who can do it!