The truth behind MSTS vs ORTS

[R. Steele]

I know the title is provocative - but the statement is really not.

Learning Train simming by using Open Rails as the platform I've had to work with a lot of files...changing them to suit the rulebook of OR. Don't mind it, like it, don't have much problem with it at all, have a little bit of talent for it.

That sort of stuff was the norm in the early years...."hacking" files of train simming and the whole "V" scale world. You see all the digital world - to me - is V scale. We live in the 1:1 scale - normally just called reality.

I digress, anyway... in short MSTS represents the WILD WEST where most anything went (hacking files, trying anything that would half way work) just trying to keep the town out of the hands of the rustlers and desperadoes - AKA, non-trainsimmers. Also, I must note, that quite a lot of the stuff being done back then was inventive and skilled.

Now along comes the new marshall to TOWN -bringing law and order. ORTS (no it does not mean Oroville Redenbacher, Tucson Sheriff). Everybody has to play by the rules. Cue to townspeople: "Grumble, Mumble, Grumble"

IS it obvious I watch too many westerns?

[CSRX]

Sadly I see this post being nabbed quickly because certain individuals are going to come in screaming and raging that ORTS doesn't do what Bin can do, yadda yadda DBTracks yadda yadda, Something something the dark side something something.


In reality. I love Open Rails, and I love the direction it's going. I've been having a blast lately switching a paper mill on my route. A concept that ORTS does have, that MSTS and MSTSBin does not, is the ability to kick cars. With the allowing of closing the angle cocks, and/or bleeding off the cars. Sorting on a flat yard, or even a hump yard, is pretty fun. So as long as you get the right switch that you want.

If I was able to record, I would show the process of the kicking cars capability. But I sadly don't.

MSTS and MSTSBin alone is just not my cup of tea anymore. It's more for those that just want to run trains and run them asap.

ORTS is more the simulation aspect, of close to real world running.
MSTS/MSTS Bin, wasn't much a simulation, as it was just a game.

[ftldave]

I don't have the need to "run them asap", but neither do I want to spend hours configuring stuff that won't run correctly in ORTS, content that works A-OK in MSTS.

The extra file editing and extra work required to get things to work properly in ORTS has been a disappointment to me. I find myself running fewer trains, visiting trainsim.com less and, instead, flying more FSX planes these days. I think Nels' reports about trainsim.com's declining usage and thinning membership just might reflect that others share some of my views.

ORTS has somewhat become the Linux of train sims, I do believe. Lots of extra work for benefits that some truly love, but that others don't consider to be worth the effort. Sure, I could spend the time to alter .eng and .wag files, test and retest, but ... I could also make my own soap, if I was so inclined. It's just that I have better ways to spend my precious free time than editing configuration files every single time I want to run a new locomotive. That's excessive. When the ratio of time spent editing files, backing up files, working with files, etc., exceeds my time running trains ... well. I don't think the so-called new sheriff is going to win any elections, sorry to say.

I'm dreading a future project of mine to create some holiday trainsim videos for a local museum. I'd love to have the widescreen ORTS video, but I know the locomotives and rolling stock won't run right without lots of dickering and adjustments, stuff that will run just fine out of the zip with MSTS. Maybe 4:3 video will be good enough, as in "Good enough is the enemy of excellence."

If you think altering and editing config files is great fun, more fun than running trains, good for you, and to each his own. But I can't help but think ORTS and our trainsim hobby would have benefited greatly from a true MSTS-compatible mode option.

[baldwin]

To deliver a true MSTS compatible mode would mean having to create a whole physics set to mimic the flawed MSTS one. That said, there is no need to alter anything in your MSTS eng and wag files to run them in ORTS. All that will happen is you will not benefit from the much better physics that ORTS provides.

For diesel and electric you only have to adjust the MaxPower line to show the full power instead of the reduced one that MSTS uses. Wags need nothing done to them. The ORTS steam code will happily run a bog standard MSTS eng file, it just will not perform the same as a true ORTS steam eng file.

[R. Steele]

To deliver a true MSTS compatible mode would mean having to create a whole physics set to mimic the flawed MSTS one. That said, there is no need to alter anything in your MSTS eng and wag files to run them in ORTS. All that will happen is you will not benefit from the much better physics that ORTS provides.

For diesel and electric you only have to adjust the MaxPower line to show the full power instead of the reduced one that MSTS uses. Wags need nothing done to them. The ORTS steam code will happily run a bog standard MSTS eng file, it just will not perform the same as a true ORTS steam eng file.

Thanks baldwin, you have just highlighted one of the most common misconceptions of ORTS - The need to change files - NOT NECESSARY, choose all the MSTS compatible options, do not use "signal light glow" and you are ready to run MSTS with the OR platform. I have gone completely "Otto". (just kidding Otto ) Have I missed anything, besides what was already mentioned?

I plead guilty to contributing to that misconception.

I enjoy running trains very much, to me there is no competition between adjusting some file parameters and running trains - there are useful ( many are free) tools to do this efficiently and quickly. For instance, I adjusted all the DW locos I have in just about 20 minutes (I had to look up the correct HP for many types that you fellas would already know - that's what took so long.

[R. Steele]

I'm dreading a future project of mine to create some holiday trainsim videos for a local museum. I'd love to have the widescreen ORTS video, but I know the locomotives and rolling stock won't run right without lots of dickering and adjustments, stuff that will run just fine out of the zip with MSTS. Maybe 4:3 video will be good enough, as in "Good enough is the enemy of excellence."

Hi Dave, I'd be glad to adjust whatever files my skills allow. Let me know if you need help.

[R. Steele]

Sadly I see this post being nabbed quickly because certain individuals are going to come in screaming and raging that ORTS doesn't do what Bin can do, yadda yadda DBTracks yadda yadda, Something something the dark side something something.

I fear for those who read my post and have no sense of humor...a dangerous territory for a mind to occupy.

[OTTODAD]

I fear for those who read my post and have no sense of humor...a dangerous territory for a mind to occupy.

Depends what mood I am in, my health problems easing !

Being happy running my MSTSBin DB-Tracks routes, I can see no advantage having to edit much to make it look and run in ORTS like it does in MSTSBin !

[R. Steele]

Depends what mood I am in, my health problems easing !

Being happy running my MSTSBin DB-Tracks routes, I can see no advantage having to edit much to make it look and run in ORTS like it does in MSTSBin !

Glad to hear that the health problems are easing, Otto. And...any way you want to look at it, MSTSBin was a major advancement in MSTS, some mighty fine work was done with that.

There's enough trainsim to go around for all, MSTSBin, (are there still folks running plain vanilla MSTS?) ORTS, RUN8, TS2016, etc.

[R. Steele]

...If you think altering and editing config files is great fun, more fun than running trains, good for you, and to each his own. ....

Dave, I've been thinking about this since I first read the post. Couldn't you look at it like this: working with digital files in "V" Scale is analogous to tinkering/tweaking models in scale modeling railroading. Models makers create the physical models - purchasers then can tweak them, just as "V" scale model makers create our digital models and then we tweak them. It is not more or less fun than running trains, but simply another part of the whole process.

I cannot count or remember the number of times I have read threads dealing with people tweaking routes that they have downloaded, adding buildings, changing ballast, changing forests, the list is endless.

To single out OR to labor this point against, that altering and changing files should be unnecessary - when it has been going on constantly in all aspects of train simming since day one is a little silly to me. But I like silly. SO, no worries.

[CSRX]

I have to laugh at some of the replies.

Altering, editing, fixing, etc seems to be a no go when it comes to ORTS.

Except, isn't that was MSTS was all about? It sensed one tiny thing wrong in an engine file, and the program would go haywire.
ORTS doesn't give that. There are some files I know, didn't work in MSTS, because I goofed them, but they work just fine in ORTS.

It's strange how some will alter, tinker, edit, etc to have what they love in the MSTS world, but the moment it can be done in ORTS, it seems as if the world has ended.

Obviously I prefer ORTS, but to be fair, I prefer the real deal. I also prefer ORTS due to this, it works perfect on my computer, MSTS, honestly, doesn't even work on my computer. Thanks windows 7, and needing an appropriate graphics card apparently. Oh well. No loss, more like a gain for me, I can finally step away from that buggy MSTS program.

[derekmorton]

For diesel and electric you only have to adjust the MaxPower line to show the full power instead of the reduced one that MSTS uses.

One more alteration is required IF you upgraded the dynamic brakes so they worked properly, setting the max speed to 500kmh of so.
The settings need to come back to the MSTS default settings, the ORTS code runs the dynamic brakes correctly.

[R. Steele]

One more alteration is required IF you upgraded the dynamic brakes so they worked properly, setting the max speed to 500kmh of so.
The settings need to come back to the MSTS default settings, the ORTS code runs the dynamic brakes correctly.

Derek is there any information about this in the OR manual? Thanks, Gerry

[derekmorton]

I don't think so, Gerry, It was reported as a bug.

The programmer used a 2002 eng file ( as he should ) to do the dynamic code.
So any changes made to the MSTS dynamic brake settings need to be regressed.

MSTS Version 4.5 Physics
Revised .eng and .wag files to give cars and
locomotives more realistic performance. Updates
several issues and provides a performance
standard for over 70 locomotives, and several
different freightcar models.V4.5 Modifications to
.eng files by Bob Boudoin.

Bob's version 4.5 from 2003 had the changes to the dynamic settings.

[qballbandit]

Even though the replies in this thread are repeats, ad-nausea, I'll provide my response.
I can completely sympathize with FLTDave's response. I have run both Flightsim (since FS98) and Trainsim for 10 years.
One can get to a point of exhaustion when it comes to "tweaking" your own virtual world. It took me years to get my FS2004 just right. Tweaks for game performance, tweaks for model performance, replacing every conceivable default object with much better freeware and payware offerings, etc. When FSX came out, I just couldn't fathom starting from scratch. I had (and still do ) this fantastic FS2004 world that kicked ass visually, ran flawlessly, and took a ton of time and effort to get it there. No denying that FSX and P3D (or whatever) and all the new versions offer more, have come further in technology - that ain't the point....it's ENERGY. Starting from scratch. THE POWER USER SYNDROME!
No different with Trainsim. As a power user, I edited and modified almost everything for MSTS. One MAJOR thing I found that sucked when I started running OR was that so much of my self-added and edited vegetation for MSTS looked HORRIBLE in OR - especially my set of trees edited for hard winter/no snow. What did that mean for me? One, hundreds of of hours of edit time down the drain, and two, do I have the energy to do it all again now just to get it to look pretty in OR? It's been and agonizing and slow process to redo just some of my routes. Energy. Mindset. TIME. NOT fun!

And let me talk about time. For one who has a full time job, a family, and other interests and athletic commitments - time is at a premium!
So it is very easy to run an excellent looking, and great performing MSTS route vs. a crappy looking, needs some work MSTS route in OR.

That said, the routes I have had the energy to revamp for OR, look stellar.

Don't ever assume you know why the next guy isn't running OR.

Maybe the whole key is - complete content for OR. Routes, trains, objects etc. When you can just drop items in specifically designed for OR, the migration headaches will not be a factor.