Previous Topic | Next Topic

Will TMTS have Multiplayer? I'm just wondering, don't want any trouble.

Sean Summer AKA Poltergeist
"The voices, the voices, I hear them, they're with me, so I follow I follow..." ~Eminem's "Guilty Conscious"

Alert | IP

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

RE: Multiplayer, wws04662, May-17-04, 04:39 AM, (1) RE: Multiplayer, Poltergeist, May-17-04, 02:15 PM, (2) RE: Multiplayer, RailDriver TS, May-18-04, 09:52 AM, (3) RE: Multiplayer, brucek, May-28-04, 03:25 AM, (4) RE: Multiplayer, xlspecial261, May-31-04, 03:34 AM, (5) RE: Multiplayer, djt, May-31-04, 01:30 PM, (6) RE: Multiplayer, djt, May-31-04, 05:42 PM, (7) RE: Multiplayer, CPR_Malice_96th, Jun-02-04, 10:53 AM, (8) RE: Multiplayer, OTTODAD, Jun-02-04, 12:26 PM, (9) RE: Multiplayer, CPR_Malice_96th, Jun-02-04, 12:32 PM, (10) RE: Multiplayer, djt, Jun-02-04, 02:06 PM, (11) RE: Multiplayer, CPR_Malice_96th, Jun-02-04, 02:36 PM, (12) RE: Multiplayer, djt, Jun-02-04, 03:13 PM, (14) RE: Multiplayer, CPR_Malice_96th, Jun-02-04, 04:26 PM, (15) RE: Multiplayer, djt, Jun-02-04, 05:21 PM, (16) RE: Multiplayer, Poltergeist, Jun-02-04, 07:03 PM, (17) RE: Multiplayer, djt, Jun-02-04, 07:38 PM, (18) RE: Multiplayer, Poltergeist, Jun-03-04, 08:05 AM, (19) RE: Multiplayer, drjoe, Jun-02-04, 02:48 PM, (13) RE: Multiplayer, wmalder, Jun-27-04, 08:59 PM, (20) RE: Multiplayer, cn_bayview, Jun-27-04, 10:22 PM, (21)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

>Will TMTS have Multiplayer? I'm just wondering, don't want
>any trouble. Let's wait until we see how development goes with this product and how the planning stages go before we start asking for all kinds of goodies and addons. We don't have the foggiest idea of what this product will be yet. Outside the inner circle at PI and its partnered developers, who are probably working with Non Disclosure statements, no one has seen anything other than a proposed list of goals. Let's see what materializes and then wait for reports from Alpha and Beta test team members. Once we know what has come from planning to finished coding, then we can ask for extra stuff. Multiplayer capabilities are becoming the norm in games today and I am sure that this has been or is being discussed by PI. There is no problem asking though. Bill

Alert | IP

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

Ok thanks for the reply.

Sean Summer AKA Poltergeist
"The voices, the voices, I hear them, they're with me, so I follow I follow..." ~Eminem's "Guilty Conscious"

Alert | IP

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

As Bill mentioned, its a little early for these kind of things, also referring to michaels post above, we are keeping down to earth about the feature list, another issue with production of these kind of things is continually adding features which constantly delay release of any product wether its a shoot em up or a Train Sim.We are listening to peoples wishesand will endeavour to provide the right kind of experience, what that experience is however, remains to be seen.Please keep an eye out though since we do intend to kep everyone informed of how things are going, both through here and on our site at www.raildriver.comTim

Alert | IP

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

Quote:- We are listening to peoples wishes and will endeavour to provide the right kind of experience, what that experience is however, remains to be seen.Just so long as the physics and dynamics are, at the very least, equivalent to those in TrainMaster 4.Please don't substitute dynamic realism for graphical gloss!Bruce

AustRail

Alert | IP

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

>
>Please don't substitute dynamic realism for graphical
>gloss!
>
>Bruce Exactly. I could care less if this sim looks any better than MSTS as long as it operates like a real simulator.

Alert | IP

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

brucek, xlspecial261,This is exactly why MSTS has had to rely on eye candy (and with MSTS’s graphic engine even the eye candy is not that good). The user gets board because no skill is required to run the train, so their attention wanders out side of the cab.When you are thinking two miles down the track at all times, studying the latest bulletin orders, obeying signal indication, listening to the radio for other traffic and the dispatcher, watching your airbrake, amperage and telemetry device displays, keeping in your head where the rear end of your train is at all times, remembering track profiles to plan your braking and when and where to add throttle your attention is soon directed away from eye candy and the task at hand, train handling.

Pentium4/3.4GHz
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe/Rev 2
Mushkin PC3500 Black Level II/1024 Mb
ATI 9800XT
Audigy2 ZS Platinum
2x WD Raptors/RAID 0
Plextor Premium CD-RW
Plextor PX-708A DVD-R
SilenX 520 Watt Power Supply
Coolermaster Praetorian Case

Alert | IP

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

Excuse my English. That should be “bored” not “board” in my second sentence.
Pentium4/3.4GHz
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe/Rev 2
Mushkin PC3500 Black Level II/1024 Mb
ATI 9800XT
Audigy2 ZS Platinum
2x WD Raptors/RAID 0
Plextor Premium CD-RW
Plextor PX-708A DVD-R
SilenX 520 Watt Power Supply
Coolermaster Praetorian Case

Alert | IP

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

LOL,Now ... to be 100% honest .. I'll take Multiplayer & Graphics over Physics anyday !!I think overall Multiplayer would be a MUCH larger selling feature than physics anyhow.Here's the theory on "why"Don't get me wrong ... I'd love the physics to be realisitc as well, BUT unless you physics guru's tell us different, we'd have no idea what physics were right or wrong anyways !!However ... Good graphics & Multiplayer the majority of the train sim community will take note of almost immediatley.Just my thoughts for this AMLater

Tim Kent – 96th_Malice - Winnipeg Canada

Alert | IP

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

I prefer activities I can enjoy without involving other people ! Software on my Computers, Ten-Pin Bowling, Golf, flying a real plane by myself, going out for a good meal, etc. ! Tennis is out and so are similar Multi-Player activities where I have to fall in line with what others want to do !But once again, everybody to suit themselves, but wondering what the percentage of train simmers of all ages and sexes would prefer a Multi-Player version ?O t t o

Alert | IP

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

>I prefer activities I can enjoy without involving other
>people !
>So you wouldn't want to sit a yard online and assemble a couple trains with one of your best freinds ?I can guarantee you have never done any online gaming to date !!This adds a WHOLE new aspect to the simulation.You 99% of the time can guess what a PC is going to do .... Humans on the other hand ... not so predictableLater

Tim Kent – 96th_Malice - Winnipeg Canada

Alert | IP

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

CPR_Malice_96th,I not sure you really want a simulator. Realistic physics are what differentiates a game (toy) from a simulator. I agree that the consumer version of the simulator should be toned down a bit, but if an individual wants to just play with trains they can model railroad.I think the whole point of this train simulator is to give the railroad enthusiast an idea of what it’s like to operate a real train. In addition if the user learns something about railroad operations in the process, that’s even better. Pentium4/3.4GHz
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe/Rev 2
Mushkin PC3500 Black Level II/1024 Mb
ATI 9800XT
Audigy2 ZS Platinum
2x WD Raptors/RAID 0
Plextor Premium CD-RW
Plextor PX-708A DVD-R
SilenX 520 Watt Power Supply
Coolermaster Praetorian Case

Alert | IP

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

LAST EDITED ON Jun-02-04 AT 02:38 PM (EDT)

>CPR_Malice_96th,
>
>I not sure you really want a simulator. Realistic physics
>are what differentiates a game (toy) from a simulator. I agree 100%, and I love sims. The more realistic the betterHOWEVER !!I am stating that if given the option to haveA - Awesome physics and NO multiplayerB - MSTS level physics AND multiplayerI ... and I can guarantee many others would choose BLike I said above .... If TMST were to put out a game with in-accurate physics but tell us they were accurate. Do you think 90% of the Train-Sim polulation would know any different ?Nope ... Only the hoggers would know the difference !!Later

Tim Kent – 96th_Malice - Winnipeg Canada

Alert | IP

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

CPR_Malice_96th,If in the future, there is a way have multiplayer capability where you have someone as a dispatcher controlling traffic, yardmasters controlling terminals and multiple users operating trains all in a realistic manner, yes this would be interesting. Actually, this feature in a commercial version of the simulator would be extremely beneficial for training purposes.I think that initially there are other more important features that have to be implemented in the consumer version. Like I said before, if you just want a group of rail fans (with no interest in real life railroad operations) to be able to get together and play with trains, that is what model railroading is for.
Pentium4/3.4GHz
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe/Rev 2
Mushkin PC3500 Black Level II/1024 Mb
ATI 9800XT
Audigy2 ZS Platinum
2x WD Raptors/RAID 0
Plextor Premium CD-RW
Plextor PX-708A DVD-R
SilenX 520 Watt Power Supply
Coolermaster Praetorian Case

Alert | IP

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

>Like I said before, if you just want a group of
>rail fans (with no interest in real life railroad
>operations) to be able to get together and play with trains,
>that is what model railroading is for.
>First off What makes you think a group of online train-simmers aren't going to adhere to real life railroad operations online ?Next !You seen the price of model railroading recently ?Next! You seen how much room a model RR takes up recently ?Next ! Have you ever seen the scenery or track work change @ your local model RR club as easy as it does in a Sim ? Hey lets run trains in Canada today - and Europe tonight ... try to do THAT on a model RRNext !You ever model Railroad with someone that lives 1500 miles away ?Nope ... I didn't think soSorry your " That's what model railroading is for " holds absolutely no ground in this situationLater

Tim Kent – 96th_Malice - Winnipeg Canada

Alert | IP

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

CPR_Malice_96th,

“What makes you think a group of online train-simmers aren't going to adhere to real life railroad operations online ?”-Your comment about making multiplayer capability priority over physics is what made me think of that.
“You seen the price of model railroading recently ?”-Not recently, since I have not looked at model railroading since before I went to work for the railroad in the early 1990’s. Before that I did however spend $500.00 on brass locomotives, so I can’t imagine that prices have gotten better.
“You seen how much room a model RR takes up recently ?”-Yes, one really good model railroad that once was a member of took up the whole basement in a college dorm.
“Have you ever seen the scenery or track work change @ your local model RR club as easy as it does in a Sim ? Hey lets run trains in Canada today - and Europe tonight ... try to do THAT on a model RR”- Unless you are trying to model a specific time period of a particular route how is this prototypical or realistic? Again this seems to go back to playing with trains, but with a good track editor yes a train simulator can do this very well.
“You ever model Railroad with someone that lives 1500 miles away ?”-No, never had a desire to.
“Sorry your " That's what model railroading is for " holds absolutely no ground in this situation”-Sounds like model railroading to me. Have you tried TRS2004?Getting back to the subject of multiplayer capability, did you ever think about the performance issues that would have to be addressed with this feature? With a FPS game it works, but with a train simulator, until we can get our hands on 10GHz CPU’s, I doubt its going to be feasible right away. Performance is going to be something that a lot of people will be interested in, that is one area that MSTS is definitely lacking.Pentium4/3.4GHz
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe/Rev 2
Mushkin PC3500 Black Level II/1024 Mb
ATI 9800XT
Audigy2 ZS Platinum
2x WD Raptors/RAID 0
Plextor Premium CD-RW
Plextor PX-708A DVD-R
SilenX 520 Watt Power Supply
Coolermaster Praetorian Case

Alert | IP

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

>Getting back to the subject of multiplayer capability, did
>you ever think about the performance issues that would have
>to be addressed with this feature? With a FPS game it
>works, but with a train simulator, until we can get our
>hands on 10GHz CPU’s, I doubt its going to be feasible right
>away. Performance is going to be something that a lot of
>people will be interested in, that is one area that MSTS is
>definitely lacking.
Ok lets say that we get the performance, would it really matter? I play Flight Simulator, I fly the 737 and the 747. Do I know how they feel in real life? No! The only aircraft I know how they fly in real life are Piper Cherokee 140, and the Mooney Bravo. Performance is good but it should not be the selling point. Like it or not Graphics and Multiplayer are selling points of games now and days. FYI: Multiplayer virtually have no effect on the machine performance. So unless your machine handles the game poorly offline, then guess what its going to handle it poorly online. My 2 cent.

Sean Summer AKA Poltergeist
"The voices, the voices, I hear them, they're with me, so I follow I follow..." ~Eminem's "Guilty Conscious"

Alert | IP

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

Poltergeist,

I don’t know of a machine out there that can handle AI or a yard full of freight cars well in MSTS. Even TRS2004 with its better graphic engine, does not do a good job at handling other rail traffic, static or not. Turn up the AI aircraft in FS2004 and see what you get.Your right if there was a way to have multiplayer capability in a train simulator with out the performance hit it would make things interesting but I don’t think that it should be top priority. Is this a game or a simulator?Pentium4/3.4GHz
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe/Rev 2
Mushkin PC3500 Black Level II/1024 Mb
ATI 9800XT
Audigy2 ZS Platinum
2x WD Raptors/RAID 0
Plextor Premium CD-RW
Plextor PX-708A DVD-R
SilenX 520 Watt Power Supply
Coolermaster Praetorian Case

Alert | IP

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

>Poltergeist,
>
>I don’t know of a machine out there that can handle AI or a
>yard full of freight cars well in MSTS. Even TRS2004 with
>its better graphic engine, does not do a good job at
>handling other rail traffic, static or not. Turn up the AI
>aircraft in FS2004 and see what you get.
>
>Your right if there was a way to have multiplayer capability
>in a train simulator with out the performance hit it would
>make things interesting but I don’t think that it should be
>top priority. Is this a game or a simulator?
>I have traffic turned up in FS2004, and I also have Project AI traffic installed. I have every American, European and Japan based airline on my simulator. I only got like a 2 FPS drop in airports like O' Hare. Now remeber I uninstalled FS default traffic first. One of the things Project AI do is create these low res. models. Its not gmax, no moving part, you know nothing fancy. Maybe we can do that here. Maybe AI trains and online train can be low res.

Sean Summer AKA Poltergeist
"The voices, the voices, I hear them, they're with me, so I follow I follow..." ~Eminem's "Guilty Conscious"

Alert | IP

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

Isn't the "mass market" a toughie!! I am sure that there are many different "ideas" about what a train simulator should be. "Versatility" has been incorporated into many successful "game" software. First-person "shooters" can be played individually, but many are capable of online play as well. My Nascar Racing allows for driving from an arcade type view as well as the more realistic in car view. But, it also featured "network" play, and the latest racing games are online capable. Even MSTS attempted a sort of versatility with the "simple controls" option. I am sure that PIE is smart enough to learn from the past, both success and failure of other products. As long as the right graphics engine is chosen, many of the "features" we all have on our wish lists can be incorporated into the software. Certainly not in the beginning, but later versions most certainly will have "expansion" of the features.

Joe Morris CRR #2
Senior Engineer
Vice President, Equip. & Physics, OVS
Gen. Manager, Canton Railroad
http://www.or4c.com/Canton/

Alert | IP

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

I sympathize with the problem of balancing "realism" with "playability". I got into computers purely as a hobby (it didn't hurt me when I got into electronics for a career for a while) to play the games. Specifically simulations. Just as an illustration, I loved MicroProse's Strike Eagle sims in part because they weren't too heavy on the "realistic" flying. The skill if necessary was in the operation of the weapons systems not the minutiae of flying. By the same token I could never get into the Falcon sims even though I loved the graphics but the flying skill needed to not die every landing let alone actually drop a bomb or fire a missile was daunting and I eventually gave up.I hope the same problem doesn't crop up with this new crop of train simulators. I guess I'm saying that I want the experience of driving a train with enough details to make it feel real enough to me without bogging me down. Even with a RailDriver controller there are things we're not going to be able to duplicate as if in the real world. So given that let's either keep it reasonably simple or let us choose some level of realism between toy and sensory overload.wmalder

Alert | IP

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

I agree with you Tim.Chris(CPR_9102), Jake(ATF1224), Matt(CPRfan1) and I tried to create a multiplayer type enviroment for MSTS years ago by creating seperate activities for each train and having them meet the same trains, but we eventually settled for the current method, that way you're not waiting on an MSTS AI train, your waiting on your friend hundreds of miles away, going slow on hills, making setouts and calling signals. If we had MSTS style physics and multiplayer I'd be in hog heaven.Imagine firing up the sim, with a yard full of cars. Meet online with your friends build up a consist one guy as engineer and other as your conductor. Hit the road, just talk over Teamspeak or whatever. Have an actual RTC for multiplayer runs. He can look at his own little board and line trains up like TD2. People make lifts and set off's. RTC's do logical meets, not the horrible MSTS ones.Actually see the trains you meet. Tim's right, modeling is nice, but its VERY expensive, you can't do it with friends thousands of miles away and its just not the same.Who says you can't have realistic physics and multiplayer? With time it can be done. Imagine multiplayer where your engine dies, and the train your meeting comes to the rescue and pulls up up the grade. Or a Rogers Pass, where you stop and cut in 4 SD40-2's to shove you up the hill. Now THATS a simulator Railroading is just not keeping to yourself, its interacting with people, be it signal maintainers, dispatchers, other trains and the rest of your train crew. That would make it even more of a sim then a solo MSTS type sim. Yes, it would eat up your machine, but as technology advances, there will be room for something like that. Rob

TH&B Van #68
www.greatlakesrail.com

Check out my train photos!http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=472

Alert | IP

[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | How To... | File Library ] Copyright © 2004 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.