Open rails=Good development.

[conrail1]

Whats happening with other games is totally irrelevant.

Not irrelevant at all, actually very relevant. If you want any game/sim to use system resources properly you target a specific hardware spec. In this case if you want decent graphics while still being able to simulate realistic train handling physics along with AI among other things with fluid performance you program it to take advantage of up to date hardware that is available.

If a guy with a quad core and a $600 video card can only get 120 FPS instead of 425 FPS on account of compromises that also opens it up to people who cannot afford more than a $250 video card, then we compromise it. Its a pretty hard sell that the guy with deep pockets deserves 425 FPS at the expense of half the user base.

Again it is targeted at someone who is serious enough to spend money on decent hardware, nothing different then what I’ve seen happen with the racing or flight sim hobby.

With OpenRails being a “open” project it’s not a tough sell at all, it’s simple if you have other priorities or it’s not you’re cup of tea then don’t get involved.

It’s a hobby (entertainment) not a necessity.

I suspect there are a few people involved in the development of this who already have the super computer resources and have blinders on to anything else.

Nope, just a group of individuals that haven’t been oblivious to the shortcomings we’ve seen with other train games.

[OrangeBlossom]

Again it is targeted at someone who is serious enough to spend money on decent hardware, nothing different then what I’ve seen happen with the racing or flight sim hobby.

Your target audience is wrong. Your target audience is too "exclusive". Since when did the aim of this game become so exclusive? On whose decision?

It’s a hobby (entertainment) not a necessity.

If its only a hobby and not a necessity, then why target only the serious train physics guys and serious money spenders? Whats wrong with this picture??

Sounds to me you need to contemplate that sentence more than me.

[conrail1]

Your target audience is wrong.

Lol, the target audience is wrong? So I guess the target audience for flight sims and racing sims are all wrong also?

But how are they so successful?

Your target audience is too "exclusive".

You’ll have to take that up with the developers, lol.

If its only a hobby and not a necessity, then why target only the serious train physics guys and serious money spenders? Whats wrong with this picture??

Really, since when is a hobby one of life’s necessities?

[sniper297]

Okay, first of all;

https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/rules.htm

You come in here with a belligerent attitude and you're not going to last very long. Word to the wise, keep the debates civil.


As for the complaint itself, they never said they were developing for Alienware, just something up to date.

• Microsoft® Windows® 95/98/Me/2000/XP. Does not support NT
• PC with 266 MHz equivalent or higher processor
• 32 MB of RAM for Windows 95/ 98/Me; 64 MB for Windows 2000
• Approximately 1.5 GB of available hard disk space for a full install, 500 MB of available hard disk space for a minimum install
• Quad-speed or higher CD-ROM drive
• DirectX 7.0a video driver
• DirectX 7.0a or later compatible 4 MB video card capable of 800 x 600 resolution in 32K colors
• Sound card, speakers or headphones required for audio
• Microsoft Mouse or compatible pointing device

That's the original system requirements for the original MSTS, if you design the new game to run on a P2 266mhz with 32MB RAM and a 4MB video card, it's essentially going to look like and run like MSTS. In which case what would be the point of developing a new simulator in the first place? It's not about rich boys, it's about not crippling the program to make it run on a 10 year old computer.

[OrangeBlossom]

Nobody has been uncivil.

Likewise, nobody is saying this thing has to be developed to the original game's hardware specs. And nobody is saying it cant take advantage of high end equipment. But it had better be able to accommodate 5 year old equipment. That's not unreasonable.

Telling people "its only a hobby and you don't have to participate" simply because they cannot match your level of hardware expenditure is flat wrong. That is a "rich boys" attitude.

[sniper297]

Okay, I'm telling you you're being uncivil, you want to argue about that you can argue it with the admin.

[conrail1]

But it had better be able to accommodate 5year old equipment. That's not unreasonable.

It is unreasonable if you want decent graphics and good performance and again no different from any other new game titles.

Telling people "its only a hobby and you don't have to participate" simply because they cannot match your level of hardware expenditure is flat wrong.

Like I said earlier it’s very simple, if it’s not you’re cup of tea and you have other priorities or then don’t participate.

[twpol]

But it had better be able to accommodate 5 year old equipment. That's not unreasonable.

There are two parts to how I, working on the graphical side of OR, am approaching supporting hardware:

1. Require only the minimum needed to function. This means Pixel Shader 2.0 support, which takes things back to ~2002 for desktop graphics and ~2005 for mobile graphics I believe.
2. Enhance the experience if better support is available, e.g. Pixel Shader 3.0. That's ~2005 for desktops and ~2007 for mobile.

As for other games, a friend of mine working in the games industry says requiring Pixel Shader 3.0 is pretty normal nowadays; by that marker, we're already doing better to support older hardware in OR.

[geepster775]

Again it is targeted at someone who is serious enough to spend money on decent hardware, nothing different then what I’ve seen happen with the racing or flight sim hobby.

I think Train-Sim is very different from these other sims, in that content creators must model a significant amount of highly detailed, highly accurate terrain. That simply is not the case with the other sims. That time investment here does not exist there. Its a handicap unique to train-sim that will always be with train-sim, just because of the nature of the product. Any replacement game engine still has to work around that handicap.

This supposed audience of serious simmers who spend serious money who are sitting there twiddling their thumbs waiting for a new game engine.... that audience....seldom ends up being the same people who invest 2 years to build and deliver a route. So I have to question why a non-contributing serious user base believes their needs are so paramount in the design process. That is a valid question for the managers of this project.

There are content creators who develop some really good content using fairly old equipment. Maybe they are college students and can't afford the best computer. Are we going to jettison their future contributions simply because of their status as starving artists? A highly efficient game engine running outrageously dated routes because we sent half the route developer pool packing due to hardware requirements really isnt anything that floats my boat.

Its rather ironic that a replacement sim designed to accept older route and rolling stock content apparently will not be very friendly towards older hardware and the contributors who are locked into older hardware.

[conrail1]

This supposed audience of serious simmers who spend serious money who are sitting there twiddling their thumbs waiting for a new game engine.... that audience....seldom ends up being the same people who invest 2 years to build and deliver a route.

I highly doubt that any “serious simmers who spend serious money” is going to be “sitting there twiddling their thumbs waiting for a new game engine”. There are plenty of well done simulation games (not rail related) out there that use up to date, efficient game engines if this is your hobby.

I think OpenRails is looking at creating more than another “route/scenery building” game; there are other train games that already fill that niche. Train handling physics and operation from what I’ve read is going to take precedence over eye candy.

Are we going to jettison their future contributions simply because of their status as starving artists?

If they are “starving artists” then I imagine that contributing to OpenRails would represent a hobby not a necessity and if someone is “starving” their last priority is going to be hobbies.

A highly efficient game engine running outrageously dated routes because we sent half the route developer pool packing due to hardware requirements really isnt anything that floats my boat.

I don’t think toy train physics and poor representation of actual rail operations is anything that “floats” the OR development team or the target audience’s boat either. Isn’t that reason behind OpenRails to begin with?

[Train-a-Mania]

If they are “starving artists” then I imagine that contributing to OpenRails would represent a hobby not a necessity and if someone is “starving” their last priority is going to be hobbies.

As a college student who also happens to be an artist, I can assure you that I am not starving. However, I do not have the cash for a $5k computer, and I still want to enjoy and contribute to the hobby.

The problem is, making assumptions about what Open Rails is and isn't about is a bad idea, along with assumptions of who this product is for. That isn't likely to help build a community if one decides in advance who can and cannot be part of "Open" Rails.

[conrail1]

However, I do not have the cash for a $5k computer, and I still want to enjoy and contribute to the hobby.

What’s stopping you from contributing? Who said it requires a “$5k computer”?

The problem is, making assumptions about what Open Rails is and isn't about is a bad idea, along with assumptions of who this product is for. That isn't likely to help build a community if one decides in advance who can and cannot be part of "Open" Rails.

I don’t remember seeing any outline in the OR documentation of “who can and cannot be part of Open Rails”.

It’s like any other sim/game that uses an up to date game engine, depending on your hardware like always your mileage will vary.

[geepster775]

I think OpenRails is looking at creating more than another “route/scenery building” game; there are other train games that already fill that niche.

That's a rather strange choice of words, and it leads me to believe you haven't spent much time with this particular sim, much less know anything about the editors and what it takes to build prototypically accurate routes.

I think its premature for continued debate with anyone who hasn't "been there, done that".

[chucksc]

And I think you are all nutz for banging on the developers at this point! - You don't need a 5k investment to meet these specs - in fact you can do it easily with a 1k dell or hp...
Or roll your own from New Egg... As a long time systems engineer (over 40 years) I can assure you that these specs are pretty close to trailing edge if you are talking about high power desktop computing....

a 5 year old computer is almost irrelevent in todays world...

According to Moore's Law, available computing capability doubles every 18 months or so...

run that equation backwards if you want to see what 5 year old hardware and software gets you....

the only reason you can run MSTS on junk that old is that the underlying engine in MSTS is essentially junk by today's standards... That is one of the reasons that, even with bin, the capabilities of MSTS and stability thereof is less than optimal...

Sheesh! Get a life......

I fully support the OR team in their efforts and if they had asked me, I would have suggested strongly that they compile using 64 bit...

And before the flat earthers on here whine about that - it is hard to buy a CPU less than 5 years old that doesn't have 64 bit capability.

All the geeks and rich bouys I know are running WIN7/64bit and have a min. of 4 gig of memory and directX 11 (Right Sniper?)

[conrail1]

That's a rather strange choice of words, and it leads me to believe you haven't spent much time with this particular sim, much less know anything about the editors and what it takes to build prototypically accurate routes.

I think its premature for continued debate with anyone who hasn't "been there, done that".

Really, actually I’ve been providing data from the prototype to a very well known MSTS add-on developer for years now, so yes I know how hideous MSTS editing tools are and I also know from my railroad back ground what is needed to create an accurate/prototypical route.

Creating new editing tools for OpenRails down the road has been mentioned which from what I see right now is the biggest issue with OR.