Frame Rates and Smooth Running

[OTTODAD]

Here is an example of how I like a train simulator to run, even smoother with no stuttering and better looking in the sim than recorded and shown by the Fraps video, displaying tracks at their best and all in the scenery is visible in its correct colors as far as the eye can see !

Frame rates averaging at 30 fps and no Moire on tracks, having re-mipped them.

https://www.otto-wipfel.co.uk/video/...th-running.wmv - ORTS
https://www.otto-wipfel.co.uk/video/...ning.night.wmv - MSTS

Compare with this, Moire, constant flickering of catenary masts in the distance, scenery having a blueish tint and part of the overhead wire being used by the train showing gaps in front of it:

https://www.otto-wipfel.co.uk/video/...ing-ts2012.wmv - TS-2012

This tread having been moved from the TS-2012 forum, where I would have thought it should be of more of interest, ORTS being aware of what is expected from a Train Simulator and are working on achieving it, FOR FREE !!!

O t t o

[kox]

And it runs like this on a virtual machine (.net), while rw have native core code which ought to be faster.

[Griphos]

Just watched the first (Open Rails) video, but wasn't impressed. Colors may have remained static into the distance, but they were cartoonish, in my opinion. And there was noticeable stuttering (perhaps caused by Fraps, though). I think whatever advantage in smoothness there is is bought at the price of realistic looking graphics. There are aspects of RW that are less than desirable, like the moire, for instance, and stuttering when loading tiles, and poor FPS in scenery heavy areas. But, overall, the experience is much more immersive and enjoyable for me than any other train sim I've experienced. Let's hope the update being beta tested now will bring some improvement to some of those problem areas. But, even if not, there's no better alternative out there, it seems to me.

[boleyd]

That FREE simulator is based upon the ancient Microsoft Train Sim. NO ATTEMPT has yet been made to add 21st century levels of graphics. Functionality improvements are the objective. The Microsoft stuff is simply a placeholder. Stutter was not from the program.

[longiron]

Just watched the first (Open Rails) video, but wasn't impressed. Colors may have remained static into the distance, but they were cartoonish, in my opinion. And there was noticeable stuttering (perhaps caused by Fraps, though). I think whatever advantage in smoothness there is is bought at the price of realistic looking graphics.

Be aware that Open Rails software can only display the quality of the underlying graphics. Most of MSTS objects (scenery, trainsets) were developed at a time when full color fidelity and high resolution graphics weren't an option. To compare that to RW is kinda unfair. RW is displaying brand new objects built to much higher graphical standards. However, there's nothing preventing the community developing much higher graphics options for existing content. Take a look at what a community member did with 2D cabview, leveraging Open Rails ability to use very high resolution graphics designed for a wide screen monitor.

Anyone can get these results, if they are willing to upgrade the cabview graphics.
http://www.elvastower.com/forums/ind...post__p__79605


Plus take a look a multi-monitor support (three 24" monitors displaying OR simultaneously) that's available today! The community just needs to build the cabview graphics to take advantage of an aspect ratio that was never considered.

https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showthread.php?305721-Dual-monitor-support-for-OR&p=1725227#post1725227

The team is experimenting with what's the next generation of graphics (mesh support, texture support and shaders). I must say the early experiments are very encouraging.

[lindsayts]

A point a would like to bring on "good graphics". I am the author of the high resolution cabview that Longiron has reffered to, there is over 100 hours work just in that one cabview to get it that good. This brings me to the point such good graphics require ___MUCH___ work. judging a rail simulator ONLY via the graphics shows a limited understanding of the problom. Take Alan Lownboroughs Adelaide hills and SE route. There is over 600 miles of main line. Alan in a post on another forum stated there was 1000's of custom objects in the route, from complete buildings to small signs. One person has only a limited amount of time so in this case simply cannot spend the many hours on each item to make it top class. To condem such work as this as below standard is simply wrong. I would like to make it very clear I am not against high detail work (take the cabview for instance) but all work must be judged on what the author wished to acheive. I much prefer Alans route than a lot of newer "high detail" routes for a number of reasons, first I know the area of SE South Australia better than a lot of othe areas of Australia,but mainly the route has a REAL feel of a railway, after all this is a train simulator not an scenery or architecture sim.. I have spent and will spend many hours of driving on this route.

Calling for VERY high graphics standard will almost certainly reduce the number items particularly routes, which already take an emormouse amount of work and a lot of people do not have the time or patience for such detail. This is NOT what I wish for that is for certain. I judge a route by its feel as a railway not by graphic detail alone.

Its possible I sound a little harsh here is this is something that greatly concerns me.

Lindsay

[jmguyer]

Be aware that Open Rails software can only display the quality of the underlying graphics. Most of MSTS objects (scenery, trainsets) were developed at a time when full color fidelity and high resolution graphics weren't an option. To compare that to RW is kinda unfair. RW is displaying brand new objects built to much higher graphical standards. However, there's nothing preventing the community developing much higher graphics options for existing content. Take a look at what a community member did with 2D cabview, leveraging Open Rails ability to use very high resolution graphics designed for a wide screen monitor.

Anyone can get these results, if they are willing to upgrade the cabview graphics.
http://www.elvastower.com/forums/ind...post__p__79605


Plus take a look a multi-monitor support (three 24" monitors displaying OR simultaneously) that's available today! The community just needs to build the cabview graphics to take advantage of an aspect ratio that was never considered.

https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showthread.php?305721-Dual-monitor-support-for-OR&p=1725227#post1725227

The team is experimenting with what's the next generation of graphics (mesh support, texture support and shaders). I must say the early experiments are very encouraging.

The whole ORTS-MSTS thing reminds me of creating a "new" train sim with a giant drawing pad and oversized crayons..oh..but the train physics will be on the mark..whoopdee doo.

[longiron]

The whole ORTS-MSTS thing reminds me of creating a "new" train sim with a giant drawing pad and oversized crayons..oh..but the train physics will be on the mark..whoopdee doo.

There's no need to disparage the hard work of volunteers who provide the software for free. If you want to support whatever train sim you like ... go ahead and help and support community members who share your interests. But remarks like above are not necessary nor helpful.

[baldwin]

The whole ORTS-MSTS thing reminds me of creating a "new" train sim with a giant drawing pad and oversized crayons..oh..but the train physics will be on the mark..whoopdee doo.

That line reminds me of how useful a chocolate teapot is.

[muskokaandtahoe]

There's no need to disparage the hard work of volunteers who provide the software for free. If you want to support whatever train sim you like ... go ahead and help and support community members who share your interests. But remarks like above are not necessary nor helpful.

I take it is a criticism of most MSTS routes (done w/ crayons), not the OR software (train physics on the mark)... and understood in that light the guy has a point: there are a lot of ugly routes out there. There are many gems too.

IMO the real issue here is once you improve the clarity of what's presented on the screen (e.g., 1920x1080 today vs. 1200x800 when MSTS was in it's prime) your expectations of the quality of the content increases as well. IMO many locomotives, esp. payware, were made w/ such high standards that they still look good. Cars and vegetation... less so... some good many just ok. But when you come to structures they're almost universally average to bad (or worse). And no matter how it's skinned, Kuju railheads are still 6" across.

To step up from that will require either a whole lot of work or better tools. Or both. In the meanwhile Chris, let's continue our efforts on what OR does best: High performance software and realistic behavior. New features and enhanced capabilities of old functions is what makes for a real sim; eye candy just goes along for the ride.

[OTTODAD]

And no matter how it's skinned, Kuju railheads are still 6" across.

Not if you are using Norbert Rieger's DB-Tracks !

www.otto-wipfel.co.uk/video/orts-db-tracks.wmv
https://www.otto-wipfel.co.uk/video/...cks-switch.wmv

It will take time but looks like it will be worth it for all of us to support ORTS wholeheartedly, like I am doing, considering what the ORTS team has achieved already !

O t t o

[kox]

Colors may have remained static into the distance, but they were cartoonish, in my opinion. And there was noticeable stuttering (perhaps caused by Fraps, though).

Did you think the MSTS models and textures will improve themselves under OR?
BTW that update isn't beta tested now, there is just silence. Probably it was meant to attract the users attention (again), rs.com do this since years. They say the will release an update that will fix this and that very soon, then after a half year there is still nothing. Note that they've talked about TWO updates before Christmas at october, which delayed to january after beta testing, but now at january 9 they didn't even started the beta testing! Probably they will delay that to february... and then march then april.

The funniest, one of the RSC developers told me at another forum at late 2010 that they will fix the physics issues very soon. Until today, they didn't touched it.

[GoGoran]

Did you think the MSTS models and textures will improve themselves under OR?

In fact, they already did improve a helluva lot by OR's enabling of 24-bit color depth for all textures, instead of MSTS' 16-bit (24-bit is available in MSTS but solely for cabviews - all other textures are displayed in 16-bit, no matter whether you chose 16- or 32-bit in the MSTS options menu).

That being said, there is lots of room for graphical improvement in OR, nevertheless.

I like the way how MSTS manages the display of the scenery and how it fades into the distance, it just looks so realistic.

And Distant Mountains is a key feature which is still missing in the current OR beta -- but I'm sure the developpers are already cracking their heads over how to implement it in one of the next versions.

[GoGoran]

Calling for VERY high graphics standard will almost certainly reduce the number items particularly routes, which already take an emormouse amount of work and a lot of people do not have the time or patience for such detail. This is NOT what I wish for that is for certain. I judge a route by its feel as a railway not by graphic detail alone.Lindsay

Dear Lindsay,

I guess you're mixing up the development of OR with the development of objects and rolling stock there. OR should provide as good graphics as possible, as a state of the art simulator.

It is then up to the people to develop content that makes use of OR's possibilities. Some will take their models up to new standards, others will continue working as before - it is entirely their choice. But the simulator itself, OR, should provide a platform which does not limit developpers, i.e. force them to make foul compromises, which are unnecessary given today's technology.

I am confident that many developpers will make use of OR's new possibilities, and for years - even years prior to the advent of OR - developpers have e.g. created objects and rolling stock with 24-bit textures, though MSTS was not even capable of displaying them (other than in a mixed-down 16-bit view). I most certainly will take advantage of everything OR has to offer, since my high-resolution repaints (e.g. the "Stand with Wisconsin"-hopper car) will profit a lot from it.

[apco25]

The sooner we stop developing routes content under the extremely outdated restrictions of MSTS and utilize what OR can do now and will in the future the better off we will be.