How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?

We all know MSTS lacked key features such as banked curves and steady gradient changes, but whats the word about changes to these features in MSTS2? I just hate going round a corner at 100MPH and the train is flat on the ground. I hope this wont cause outragous comments, but look at BVE for example, It simulates exact movements which a train undergoes, such as increased swaying when air brakes are applied, and real AWS signalling systems. If these features where incorporated into MSTS2 then it would be truely amazing......::Retro Kid::..
Visit Southern BVE, home to the new fictionous Southern electric route, and also the Brighton - London Victoria route!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, chucksc, Jun-21-03, 01:39 PM, (1) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, jtr1962, Jun-21-03, 01:55 PM, (2) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, Macster, Jun-21-03, 02:13 PM, (3) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, retro_kid, Jun-22-03, 08:54 AM, (4) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, adamw, Jun-24-03, 09:53 AM, (6) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, adamw, Jun-24-03, 09:46 AM, (5) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, thomil, Jun-25-03, 01:34 PM, (7) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, IcyFire, Jun-25-03, 01:46 PM, (8) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, thomil, Jun-25-03, 02:48 PM, (9) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, IcyFire, Jun-25-03, 03:25 PM, (10) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, adamw, Jun-25-03, 04:37 PM, (11) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, IcyFire, Jun-25-03, 05:04 PM, (13) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, thomil, Jun-25-03, 04:38 PM, (12) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, IcyFire, Jun-25-03, 05:05 PM, (14) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, plainsman, Jun-25-03, 07:51 PM, (15) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, adamw, Jun-26-03, 01:20 AM, (16) RE: How much will the physics engine improve for MSTS2?, plainsman, Jun-26-03, 04:01 AM, (17)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Your guess is as good as ours....Right now I make it 60/40 that some improvements will be made but it will not be 100% prototypical since no one at Kuju appears to understand or like trains... In My opinion based on various statements by their management and shills its just a game!This is not the Bruce Artwick organization MS has partnered with here so it may not be anywhere near as steap an improvement curve...
FWIW, a lot of the original fight sim developers that MS got in that deal were either pilots or loved flying and consequently the code improvement curve reflected their intuitive knowledge of the subject.
I think Kuju's code monkeys are part time Al-Quida operatives and race goat carts in their villages during their time off! LOL!
They sure as $hit don't know trains!Chuck Schneider
(Virtual) CEO
North American (Virtual) Locomotive Works

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I'm glad someone finally asked that question instead of obsessing over what routes or trains MSTS2 will include. The underlying game engine is way more important than the default rolling stock or routes. Besides, since it seems you'll be able to import everything except activities, we'll already be able to use the current huge selection of routes and equipment in MSTS2.One thing I would like to know is whether or not MSTS2 will require Win2000 or XP. I'm running Win98SE and have no plans to upgrade so this is very important to me.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

One thing i REALLY hope for is the Physics engine will support AC traction...

Brian E. Bundridge
Seattle, Wa

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I dont see myself buying MSTS2 if it is simply an eye-candy game. If you really are a hardcore train simmer, you'd stick with BVE, or the other realistic sims out there. I think physics is far more important than graphics ..::Retro Kid::..
Visit Southern BVE, home to the new fictionous Southern electric route, and also the Brighton - London Victoria route!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>I dont see myself buying MSTS2 if it is simply an eye-candy
>game. If you really are a hardcore train simmer, you'd stick
>with BVE, or the other realistic sims out there. I think
>physics is far more important than graphics
>I have all of them (or at least most)but finally I always return to MSTS. No BVE, nor Trainz have the same level of feeling of driving train as is exhibited in MSTS, especially in the new commercial add-ons like Pro Train 3 or German Railroads 2.
Finally, what is hard core train simmer. Maybe you mean a Cab Simulation, not Train Simulation. Try Zusi.Adam

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>One thing i REALLY hope for is the Physics engine will
>support AC traction...I wish to remind you that we are talking about a GAME, not profesional simulator, so please, be reasonable...
Adam

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

>>One thing i REALLY hope for is the Physics engine will
>>support AC traction...
>
>I wish to remind you that we are talking about a GAME, not
>profesional simulator, so please, be reasonable...
>
>
>Adam My thoughts exactly!! Above all, MSTS is still a game, and if things are TOO realistic, it might actually sacre off potential customers, rather than attract new. Take me for example: Before MSTS came out I never paid that much attention to trains. I just cared about whether they were on time, and whether the cars were comfortable or not. Only after I had seen the SCREENSHOTS of MSTS 1 did i start paying attention to railroads and actually buying the game.
MSTS does not yet have the same 'aura' that MSFS has, so making it too realistic....well, I'm repeating myself.Greetings from Germany
Thomas

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

simulator1. device that simulates something: a device, instrument, or piece of equipment designed to reproduce the essential features of something, for example, as an aid to study or training.game 1. something played for fun: an activity that people participate in, together or on their own, for fun. Is Microsoft Train Simulator not sold as a simulator?
Is there motto not "As real it gets?"Then why is having a request for AC traction so bogus? AC acts different then DC, and many road are starting to embrace ACI want to see a sim so hardcore, only true railnuts will want it. If it scares people off, theres always Trainz

Shawn Kenselaar, shawnssk@yahoo.com
Screen Shot Forum Mod; Repainter for TKW & YLW
The NYO&W is Gone, But never forgotten!!!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

simulator
1. device that simulates something: a device, instrument, or piece of equipment designed to reproduce the essential features of something, for example, as an aid to study or training.The things that Deutsche Bahn AG (German Railways) use are Real simulators, using full-motion technology borrowed from EADS.Training is the right word. With MSTS, while being quite realistic, is definetely not designed for training purposes. It is designed for people who want to have fun, which therefore makes it a GAME.'As real as it gets' is used for the Flight Sim series. I did not see any reference to it in MSTS, not in the German version anyway.
What is the point in having a simulator that only 'railnuts' will use?
Answer: None!Reason: When using a truly 'hardcore' program (trainsim), you immediately narrow down the possible user community, which means that you reduce the amount of available third party content. Just to remind you, it was third party content that created the MSTS community like we know it today.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

FYI, The back of the train sim box says "As real as It gets" in bold print, its the first line on the back of the box, On the north american versionWe could argue for months weather it's a game or sim, But the simple fact that it MSTS proves that its a simulatorAnd if people didn't want it be as hardcore as they could, We wouldn't be up to version 4.5 of enhanced physics. To some it may appear to be a game, But IMHO, the community for the most part treats is as a sim, and thus tries to make it as realistic as possible, If it were a game, we'd leave the kuju crap in it and just call it a game, and this site would probably be www.train-game.com but it's www.train-sim.comSo really asking for support for features of modern locomotives really isn't too much to ask for.And yes I know all about the 3rd party content, I do repaints myself
And if the game was so hardcore as to scare off others, then so be it. The ones who are interested would make a far more realistic add-on anyway.You know maybe it's just me, But I have been known to be a prototypical nut, I never did really care for fictional addonsAh well. To each his own

Shawn Kenselaar, shawnssk@yahoo.com
Screen Shot Forum Mod; Repainter for TKW & YLW
The NYO&W is Gone, But never forgotten!!!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Shawn,
Forgive me for my ignorance and stupidity, but could you explain me how AC or DC traction equipment should be implemented in train simulator, but the different sounds.
The commercial expression "As real as It gets" is rather a gimmick since this expression works like a magnet on those looking for realistic simulation. But how much is realistic simulation, how the potential gamer would know if this loco exhibits a three phase AC asynchroneous drive or simple tap changer controlled AC motors while even simple rail /wheel generated sounds are so badly implemented by Kuju programmers.
So, with all my respect to your hard core desire, be reasonable,it will never be taken into consideration by Microsoft to make this or such a program to be too complicated or sophisticated. Even MSFS 2004 has its operational limits.Adam

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Well Im no hogger, so honestly dont know the prototypical differce between AC and DC

Shawn Kenselaar, shawnssk@yahoo.com
Screen Shot Forum Mod; Repainter for TKW & YLW
The NYO&W is Gone, But never forgotten!!!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Now don't nail me if i screw up the figures, but i think only a small fraction of MSTS users actually downloaded the enhanced physics files. I am not one of them. If you reread my earlier posting, you may find that i did not in fact critizise the AC/DC (NOT music) topic, simply because I couldn't tell the difference between the two.I admit that extremely realistic simulations can in some cases draw a wide audience. Take Orbiter for example, an ultra realistic space flight sim (I never even managed to get to the moon, much less execute a successful docking, and ive been literally trying for years),and a world wide fan community has started up around it. However the main reason for it: It is freeware. And there we have the difference to MSTS. It is a peyware product (as my wallet found out in January 02), and so making it more realistic will only scare of potential customers who would like to see something else then for example Railroad Tycoon. Trainz as far as I can tell is not really an alternative, so any try to tune up realism could cause MSTS2 to flop big time.Microsoft wouldn`t like it, Kuju wouldn't and I certainly wouldn't!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Point taken. never though of it that way

Shawn Kenselaar, shawnssk@yahoo.com
Screen Shot Forum Mod; Repainter for TKW & YLW
The NYO&W is Gone, But never forgotten!!!

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Everyone is ignoring a very simple solution. Just add a setting for easy game play, and another for maximum realism. This would be a super easy implementation, and those of us that want a simulator and not a game would have the ability to work as we wish without bothering those of you that want a simple game.
Now on AC equipment, some facets are really not possible to simulate in the current version. AC TMs don't have their performance measured in amps, and the sim engine will not replicate the very low speed lugging ability of AC TMs. The current antislip option is not a good model for the way that works in reality. I think many of us want a sim we can at least get to replicate real world performance, even if the default set up is at a much more uncomplicated level.
I don't berate you if your goals are for a game, but don't berate my desire to have a simulator. Each is equally justifiable.
Bob

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LAST EDITED ON Jun-26-03 AT 01:21 AM (EDT)

Bob, You have to understand one thing. It doesn't matter what are your wishfull desires, it matter how much it will take (and cost) to release any kind of product and especially this one. There are many limitation imposed on the projecting team by Microsoft which probably paying their salaries and cover every expense, those limitations are based on very extensive financial calculations taking into consideration how much the project will success commercially.
The choice of maximum reality can probably be involved with additional expences, maybe hiring additional software developers and in the final cost, there is also a limit how much price you can ask for your product in order be attractive in every aspect.
With Flight Simulator they have less competition as with Train Simulator, because a new and strong player came to the rather limited market, it's Auran with its Trainz.
So, finally Bob, you can write whatever you want, but it will never change the situation and Microsoft/Kuju strategy for looking for the widest worldwide market.Adam

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

I am sorry, but I really think this is a really stupid smoke screen to avoid the problem. It wouldn't cost a penny more to get most of the things needed to get a very realistic simulator. The basic engine is already written, but a few things have not been implemented, and just getting advice from MANY free sources could be used to augment the limited technical knowledge of the KUJU staff. Having multiple settings for ease of play is not rocket science. I am sure that would more than offset any additional cost for that one feature, with a much broader market (including a lot of folks in the US that want to run realistic models of trains they see every day).
BTW thanks for the permission to write what I want..
Bob

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | File Library ] Copyright © 2002 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.