Nice

[saxmusickman]

I just revisited the past with a trip to MSTS through Open Rails, and I must say that I am impressed with the progress OR has made. It didn't make MSTS (the CSX W&A Route) look any better, but it performed flawlessly. It was very nice to be able to run MSTS without having to lock up both of my computer screens. I didn't notice the ground popping up to meet me as the train went by. And, the controls and physics for the train were very realistic - having to struggle to get my long consist up to 50mph was a refreshing change from "some other simulator" that I am used to using.

I'm very intrigued to see what OR will be able to do in it's stable iteration with MSTS, and beyond MSTS. Will be watching you for future updates.

Almost forgot, one little quirk. I had trouble installing XNA, which also required C# 2008 Express. Microsoft has moved beyond v.2008 but XNA demands that it be installed. Will the program be upgraded to include using the 2010 version?

[wacampbell]

> Almost forgot, one little quirk. I had trouble installing XNA, which also required C# 2008 Express. Microsoft has moved beyond v.2008 but XNA demands that it be installed.

You accidentally installed the XNA developers tool kit. What you need is the XNA redistributable which doesn't need C# Express at all. The redistributable is at:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...displaylang=en

[OTTODAD]

I'm very intrigued to see what OR will be able to do in it's stable iteration with MSTS, and beyond MSTS. Will be watching you for future updates.

On that subject I was wondering how ORTS will be able to improve the appearance of some MSTS objects, the MSTS forests only using a cruciform shape of what they contain and ORTS is using a flat shape facing the players line of view.

What if forests are being used to contain other objects such as grass, weeds, bushes, people and animals, which can be superimposed onto other forests ?

People are flat and animals could be more rounded too. Tracks would have to be of the quality of Scalerail which can not be applied to the flat default trackbeds and box rail profiles ?

O t t o

[cwhense]

Otto,
I just taking a guess here but OR isn't going to be able to display MSTS objects any better then they are displayed in MSTS, unless they are redone or MSTS is somehow not showing all the detail to began with that was made into the object.

Now new objects made for OR using the more modern capabilities of the newer graphic cards and directx will hopefully look better, but then you would not be able to use them in MSTS.

Its a double edge sword there. I think that is the right saying.

anyway from what I have been reading about OR is great and will be a great addition to my harddrive once it is complete.

One of these days I will have to download a beta and check it out.

[conrail1]

I just taking a guess here but OR isn't going to be able to display MSTS objects any better then they are displayed in MSTS, unless they are redone or MSTS is somehow not showing all the detail to began with that was made into the object.

That's what the better game engine in OpenRails is for, higher poly models with smooth performance that MSTS doesn't come close to.

Now new objects made for OR using the more modern capabilities of the newer graphic cards and directx will hopefully look better, but then you would not be able to use them in MSTS.

Its a double edge sword there. I think that is the right saying.

Why would you want to import high poly models back into MSTS when it's game engine can't handle them? What's the “ double edge sword” here?

[burgerbern]

I must admit i have been following the various Open rails posts here and elsewhere but have never dipped my toes in the water, after seeing this thread earlier i downloaded the two required files and installed them, it was very very easy

i fired up one of the routes that my poor old PC has trouble with, the new West Colton yard, i can run in explore mode no prob, but if i run an act i can never keep it going for more than about 5 mins without being kicked back to the desktop. run it in open rails with a couple of acts that were crashing before and although you cant yet actually complete them due to lots of things still to be implemented i was able with all the sliders maxed, to run the alotted paths, have all the static consists and the AI pass or work in the yards at frame rates in double figures and up to the high 30s (before that was single figures) so it certainly reinforced my previous held thoughts from reading all about it that its going to do wonders at first for MSTS and later when it is able to use its own native content.


that was on a dual core PC and it was nice to see both cores being used, another thing i did notice is that run an act normally in MSTS and after a short time the PC fan goes up a notch, i guess because this was using both cores and the graphics card that did not happen at any time.

as far as the way things display remember this is still a beta and a fairly early one in the development, i am amazed by what has been accomplished so far.

[OTTODAD]

That's what the better game engine in OpenRails is for, higher poly models with smooth performance that MSTS doesn't come close to.

In order for a train simulator to benefit from a "Better Game Engine" there have to be higher poly models for it to process, many of the MSTS models used by ORTS not falling into that category.

Why would you want to import high poly models back into MSTS when it's game engine can't handle them?

Who wants to import high-poly models back into MSTS ?

O t t o

[conrail1]

In order for a train simulator to benefit from a "Better Game Engine" there have to be higher poly models for it to process, many of the MSTS models used by ORTS not falling into that category.

Routes originally created for MSTS are already benefiting from OpenRails game engine, the lack of the tile boundary/scenery/object stutters in ORTS that has plagued MSTS's archaic game engine is a perfect example of this.

Who wants to import high-poly models back into MSTS ?

Apparently it seems that cwhense does -

Now new objects made for OR using the more modern capabilities of the newer graphic cards and directx will hopefully look better, but then you would not be able to use them in MSTS.

Its a double edge sword there. I think that is the right saying.

[saxmusickman]

The last thing I was looking for was to start a debate about Open Rails and what it does or does not do. I merely commented that what they had done was nice.

I for one do not expect OR to "improve" anything in MSTS. To do so would require re-writting code that, even though it's been abandoned by Microsoft, still belongs to another company. What I understand OR to do is extend the life of the game by providing a stable under-platform to run on - much like the MAME emulators do for old video games from the 1980's. OR's creators have obviously made some improvments to the game, but to expect them to make the trees look better or put fish in the rivers is ridiculous.

What will be interesting to see is the day, far away it may be, OR starts building their own content.

[rdamurphy]

Unfortunately, Sax, some people just have to slam things they don't like. Personally, unless the subject is "what's wrong with" I avoid criticizing in threads meant to be positive.

I don't see how comparing ORL to MSTS or RW or Trainz or any combination thereof makes one better than another one. They're all different.

As far as "low-poly" objects in MSTS, well, the default cars and locomotives on Marias are rather low-poly, but individuals have built new and better replacements for almost all of them. As a matter of fact, people even made better trees to replace the default trees.

Thanks to MSTS's simplicity and folder structure, one doesn't need to be a computer techy (or imagine oneself to be) to simply replace older flat trees with newer trees. Just download (or make) new ones, and drop them into the shapes folder. No muss, no fuss.

Criticizing OR because folks used low-poly objects in MSTS because of computer limitations in the past is pretty, well, OK, silly.

But, as my wise old Grandfather used to say, before he passed: "Some people just like to hear themselves talk..."

Robert

[cwhense]

I think I didn't explain myself to well, while I haven't tried OR it seems that a few posts. how many I haven't counted, seem to say that just using Or right now makes the assets from MSTS look a whole lot better.

you can not make a low poly model look any different when its in MSTS or if its in OR.

Now I understand that OR will allow you to use higher poly count models once they are made and that will show in the game.

As far as using the higher poly count assets in MSTS, I wouldn't try but you will have folks that will try mainly because they are using the same file format as MSTS. Unless I am mistaken here and OR is going to use its own file format for the high detailed assets and routes.

anyway I not criticizing OR or MSTS, I was just trying to wrap my head around why there are a few folks who are saying that x route and models look so much better in OR when they can't unless they have been redone before being used in OR which I doubt.

Now I do understand that in operation that OR is running them same routes at a faster FPS and that the stutters are gone, they are very minor for me now on my current system and getting 40 to 60 FPS on most of the routes I drive now anyway.

I will follow the OR development to open eyes and ears. I think that they are doing a great job, but also hope that they do not just limit themselves to the MSTS file format as from what I have seen it has it limits also

[conrail1]

The last thing I was looking for was to start a debate about Open Rails and what it does or does not do. I merely commented that what they had done was nice.

I don't think it was a debate but more of a response to the misconceptions of what OpenRails is capable of and why it's capable.

I for one do not expect OR to "improve" anything in MSTS. To do so would require re-writting code that, even though it's been abandoned by Microsoft, still belongs to another company.

That's just it, it's not improving anything in MSTS it's just running MSTS content in a new more capable game engine that also can take advantage of up to date hardware.

OR's creators have obviously made some improvments to the game, but to expect them to make the trees look better or put fish in the rivers is ridiculous.

Their not “making trees look better” or “putting fish in the rivers”, they are providing a train simulator with a more up to date game engine so that content developers can make objects like trees look better without bringing the game to a crawl.

It's no different then what we've seen with a few of the developers that used to create content for MSTS move on to creating content for RailWorks. The better more up to date game engine just allows the developer the freedom to create a lot more detailed content/higher poly models.

[conrail1]

Now I do understand that in operation that OR is running them same routes at a faster FPS and that the stutters are gone, they are very minor for me now on my current system and getting 40 to 60 FPS on most of the routes I drive now anyway.

MSTS performance does'nt and can't compare to the fluid performance in OpenRails when run on decent hardware.

but also hope that they do not just limit themselves to the MSTS file format as from what I have seen it has it limits also

That's something that has come up in other discussions and I think it would be interesting to hear a response from actual OpenRails game engine developers on whether it would be possible read content from other games like say RailWorks or Trainz.

[rdamurphy]

OK, folks, seriously. The content for MSTS, Railworks AND Trainz is created WITH EXACTLY THE SAME SOFTWARE! You can take ANY piece of MSTS rolling stock, and with the right converter, put it into RW. They're all based on Microsoft's DirectX and Autodesk's 3DMax.

A model built in 3dMax, in .3ds format, could be used to create content for any of the four simulators using existing convertors.

Now, what is displayed on the screen DOES have something to do with what program is displaying it. Quite frankly, the MSTS engine is a decade old. Trainz is not quite that old, but does go back a few years. RW and OR are both brand new. So, yes, an object in MSTS WILL look better in OR than it will in MSTS.

If anyone would like, I'd be happy to do some screenshot comparisons, but I would rather folks download OR and check it out for themselves.

After all, it IS free. I don't know if RW makes a free demo, but there was one for RS, and there is a Trainz demo available.

There never has been an MSTS demo.

What I'm trying to say, seriously, is just try them out, see which one YOU like, and quite frankly, don't denegrate and insult other people because of their choice of game. There are an awful lot of decent, generous people working on bring a free simulator, OpenRails, out, and with so many people involved, I'm positive that it will eventually become what everyone wants it to be.

But if you prefer RW, great! No problem with that at all.

Robert

[conrail1]

What I'm trying to say, seriously, is just try them out, see which one YOU like, and quite frankly, don't denegrate and insult other people because of their choice of game. There are an awful lot of decent, generous people working on bring a free simulator, OpenRails, out, and with so many people involved, I'm positive that it will eventually become what everyone wants it to be.

But if you prefer RW, great! No problem with that at all.

Robert

I think you missed the point. Sure you can go and create a model from the ground up for OpenRails but there is already high poly models available for RailWorks and Trainz that's why the question was brought up.

As far as OpenRails route development goes it's going to be a while before any new editing tools are created so the dreaded MSTS route editor is still going to be the only way to create new routes. Again it would be a lot easier if OpenRails could read routes created in Trainz or RailWorks.