.
Page 1 of 17 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 245

Thread: collisions

  1. #1

    Smile collisions

    :mad: :mad: the most boring bit of trainz is trainz just couple up even at 100mph they just couple....

    anychance of a collision system?

    it would make a nice update for trainz 2006

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    hmmm... not close enough to wales
    Posts
    383
     

    Default

    what if the cars didnt go flying all over the place when the train derails... how about some realism there... its annoying to see slate trucks go flying down an inclne slope hit the buffers and go flying all the way across the map... its bothersome.... I dont like it..
    removing rubbish from narrow gauge lines

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, Meriden, CT, USA
    Posts
    582
     

    Default

    Exactly!
    TRS04 and 06 both need a real collision model. It should model real world physics. I'm surprised this was not included in TRS04 or 06.

    But they sure did include derailments at switches. If Auran included switch derailments, what happened to collisions??? Should be easy to implement in a patch.

  4. #4

    Default

    Yeah,It would be nice if you could make big crashes in Trainz
    Head to Head collision at 200MPH ..LOL

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, VA, Chester
    Posts
    175
     

    Default

    I think if you go into the settings button or that button with the yellow paper on it and click edit on the driver settings or something....and go to realistic........

  6. #6

    Default

    Collisions aren't the main part of Trainz, so I don't think Auran should have to waste their time for something that usually doesn't happen.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia, NSW, Stuarts Point
    Posts
    1,214
     

    Default

    The short answer to not having a collision system is that it is not the focus of the simulator. Driving, operations and route building are.

    I would hope other potential real world type physics would be a priority if the Program was to be further patched or developed.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United States of America, PA, Upper Black Eddy
    Posts
    677
     

    Default

    well the wey the TRS could improve is to improve there train derailments like to make the train cars interative when they come off the rails instead of haveing them just go thro each other. kind of like how the trains on MSTS that's the olny way i can see TRS geting better besides adding new trains to it. other wise in my mine it is the best train simulator out there.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Waterloo - Weymouth mainline, Poole Dorset England
    Posts
    55
     

    Default

    From what I recall the whole idea of trainz as mentioned above is the operations side of things and routebuilding. As with most railways accidents do happen. ----> http://timsrailpics.fotopic.net/c1139908.html

    No one was injured it was an ECS move that went awry.

    Now if Auran were to build a new crash model of TRSxxx then it would mean each item of rolling stock would have to have collision detection paremeters in the config. Which I am sorry you wont find coming anytime soon in a simple SP2 fix for TRS2006, Judging by Trainz classics release next year then I would say any further service paks for TRS2006 are a no no, but thats just my opinion and I could be wrong. Basicly if you want collisions MSTS style (and they were good, I once had the UP DD40x end up on its nose!!!) then expect a complete re-write of the code, Which I personaly dont think will happen.

    Hentis
    Last edited by Hentis; November 22nd, 2006 at 05:20 PM. Reason: 'Cause I canna spell correctly!!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom, South Yorkshire, Sheffield
    Posts
    1,955
     

    Angry What do you mean not the focus?????

    Quote Originally Posted by Forest_Runner View Post
    The short answer to not having a collision system is that it is not the focus of the simulator. Driving, operations and route building are.

    I would hope other potential real world type physics would be a priority if the Program was to be further patched or developed.

    If there were a decent collision program It would be far more of a challenge to run the game, which would make for a better sence of reality
    in stead of running in to trucks in a shunting yard at 50mph with no after after-efects.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    UP Joliet Sub Mile Marker 45.8
    Posts
    500
    Blog Entries
    1
     

    Default

    trainz is rated g u know but its life so i think its ok so i think that to.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    926
     

    Default

    all we need is bounding boxes on the trains, buildings, and track items =)

    mike.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom, Kent, Canterbury
    Posts
    594
     

    Default

    and a whole host of horsepower extra available to run the collision monitoring.

    When I have a derailment in TRS, even when the program is minimised and I'm doing something else, It locks the machine for the next 30 minutes while it tries to work out which way is up...

    and then there are all the code issues.

    prolly best that TRS stays being exactly that... a simulator.

    IT is worth pointing out that if you put the new train physics rule into a TRS06 session and config it right, when another train takes a hard smack up the back end, it can break the couplers and that is as good as derailing.

    regards

    Harry
    Owner of AD427 and six chat bans. Config file modifier/creator. Oh btw... I'm gay. Kuid No. 427

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Waterloo - Weymouth mainline, Poole Dorset England
    Posts
    55
     

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sfrr View Post
    all we need is bounding boxes on the trains, buildings, and track items =)

    mike.
    So who is going to put all those bounding boxes on the trains, buildings and track items + rolling stock, let alone the extra programming umph that goes with it , which will probaly include a re write of the code yet again which just happens to break several other things in the process. Nah I think you might have to wait till Trainz 2... but please for the love of god DOnt hold your breath

    Hentis

  15. #15

    Default

    This debate has been on the forums for years. Heck even in here, we cant agree on this issue.

    Trainz is a Train DRIVING simulation. Not a Trainz crashing simulation.

    Explosions, violence and destruction etc, would ruin this great game.
    Not to mention change the family G-rating.

    Say NO to collision detection.

    Alan

Posting Permissions

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