Frame Rates and Smooth Running

[OTTODAD]

The sooner we stop developing routes content under the extremely outdated restrictions of MSTS and utilize what OR can do now and will in the future the better off we will be.

How are we going to create routes and objects for ORTS which can make use of all the graphical improvements it can provide ?

O t t o

[longiron]

How are we going to create routes and objects for ORTS which can make use of all the graphical improvements it can provide ?

O t t o

Otto,
You can develop objects (trains and scenery) that take advantage of OR's ability to handle much higher detail (poly counts) and 32 bit ace files, today. Until there's an OR World Editor, you are correct about routes.

[GoGoran]

Otto,
You can develop objects (trains and scenery) that take advantage of OR's ability to handle much higher detail (poly counts) and 32 bit ace files, today.

Which is precisely what I have been doing for more than a year by now.

[OTTODAD]

You can develop objects (trains and scenery) that take advantage of OR's ability to handle much higher detail (poly counts) and 32 bit ace files, today. Until there's an OR World Editor, you are correct about routes.

Using which graphics program and having done that and replaced their equivalents in MSTS will they then show in MSTS and better in ORTS ?

O t t o

[OTTODAD]

Which is precisely what I have been doing for more than a year by now.

Can you show us a route running in ORTS which is using your creations, pointing out which they are, mentioning the graphics program you have used to create them with.

O t t o

[lindsayts]

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.

Yes, the improvement in OR's graphic abilty will result in improveing the abilty to render better objects.

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.

If one looks at the forums on Railsimulator/railworks it is not hard to find comments on the difficulty of doing high quality graphics. Now there is nothing wrong with such work I am currently doing a DMU and a Heisler loco to am improved standard but such work does take much time and in a very large route one is unlikely to have the time or the inclnation to do EVERYTHING is massive detail. Such work should not be penalised as its the route developers wish to do it that way.

Given a specfic amount of time you can have a short high detailed route or a long low detailed route one makes the joice, you cannot do both.

Sorry for this quick reply, early sunday morning and a number od appointments breathing down my neck,

Lindsay