A different view

LAST EDITED ON Aug-11-02 AT 02:29 PM (EDT)

On the Microsoft/Auran debate.I'm using MSTS. I didn't at first. I came in late, just as TRAINZ was being released in January. It looked impressive, so I downloaded the demo. Within a week, I had purchased the program.Not too long after that I sold it and bought a copy of MSTS. Why?Economic reasons. I could not get Trainz to run without disabling half the features. The software would not run properly on the two computers I had access to. One was a Toshiba Tecra 8100 laptop. The other was a 700 MHz Compaq Presario. I even went so far as to purchase an ATI expert card and additional RAM for the Compaq. I still was not happy with the performance. It never worked on the Tecra regardless of what I triedMSTS, on the other hand was a load & go. I used it the Tecra from January until just this month when I was able to buy enough parts to build a .9 Ghz computer. That was also a load & go install.It was not a matter of which software is BETTER...It boiled down to which software I could use.I came away from TrainZ with the following thoughts...
This software needs more computer than I can afford. While I may be able to scrape together a few hundred bucks, spending $1000 to $2000 is beyond some peoples means. Yes, Trainz is beautiful, Surveyor is light years ahead of RouteBuilder, whatever...But if I can't run it, it does me little good.So here I am, running, building, and downloading railroads to my hearts content. Because I didn't have to buy extra RAM and Terrabyte Video Cards I can afford plans for building locomotives like the Triplex and the Hiawatha using cheap, simple software like TSM. Someday, after I hit the state lottery I may buy another copy of Trainz and the 2.2 Ghz, 1 GB RAM, 100 Gig drive $2000 Alien system to run it the way I want. Until then, however, I'll just keep having fun with MSTS, using my $150 Soyo homebuilt.Frank Musick
Lehigh & Atlantic Railway, Canal Navigation Company

<www.KelticSylk.com>

Alert | IP

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

RE: A different view..., georgi55, Aug-11-02, 04:21 PM, (1) RE: A different view..., dgauci, Aug-12-02, 01:03 AM, (2) RE: A different view..., georgi55, Aug-12-02, 05:14 PM, (10) RE: A different view..., vince31874, Aug-12-02, 10:23 AM, (4) RE: A different view..., KeltikSylk, Aug-12-02, 01:36 PM, (6) RE: A different view..., vince31874, Aug-12-02, 03:34 PM, (7) RE: A different view..., KeltikSylk, Aug-12-02, 04:30 PM, (9)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

LAST EDITED ON Aug-11-02 AT 04:22 PM (EDT)

Just let me say this that you could have gotten GF2 Pro/GTS/Ti card for $50 and solve all the problems.
The card you bought was not suported by Trainz.
Another point is that Auran build Trainz keeping in mind future system because it's long term project.
When it was released non of systems could run it with all sliders maxed.
Now few system could do this but still non of systems
for home use can handle full potential in it.
I hope you can get better hardware someday an enjoy Trainz.
Just for info, it run beautefuly on AMD Althon 1.2Ghz and ATi Radeon 64MB DDR.
Also, if you have $280, you can get Althon 1800+ and Mabo for about $120, PC2100 256MB DDR for $50 and GF3 TI500 for $110.
But to get Trainz running on your system now, all you need is GF2 TI card for $50.
Georgi

Alert | IP

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

Not disputing anything your saying, but the same could be said about any simulation product. (Not built for today's systems, a long term project.) What software package does not benefit from faster proccessors, more RAM, faster drives or better video cards? This is nothing unique.

Alert | IP

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

I said what do you mean by that?

Alert | IP

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

Not to burst any bubbles... but I have had Trainz! run on lesser systmes than the one described above... but yes... just getting a 50 3d card will doo the trick.And never run simulation games that require 3D enhancement on laptops. Laptops are really not made for games, even if they have the "hardware" to support what the box says.Vince"BMT.... Going My Way....."

"BMT... Going My way...."

Alert | IP

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

LAST EDITED ON Aug-12-02 AT 01:37 PM (EDT)

I think that's just my point...MSTS DID run on my laptop. It also ran on the other computers, without any modifications. I did not have to buy anything. No 3D card, no extra hardware of any kind. I bought the software, placed the CD in the drive and ran trains. Because it was on a laptop I could carry it everywhere and work on routes, models, even DEMs and DLG's anytime I wanted to.The only "major" issues I ever had were:A) MSTS would not come back after the laptop went into standby (either because I forgot to plug it in, or the dog unplugged it) This is a pretty common problem with most of the graphics intensive applications I've had experience with.B) Terrain Generator "zoom" was absolutely the worst, but still workable. The tile selection was clunky, but also workable.C) Documentation on how to get MSTS to work is all very vague. Few, if any, documents are written or illustrated well enough to follow very closely. That's a common fault found through out the software industry in general.As for my ATI card, while it may not work with Trainz, it does an awesome job for MSTS. AND...there was no "device not supported" blah, blah to deal with. ATI is a pretty common vendor and half the price of NVidia GEforce whatever it's called. My question would be "why wasn't it supported in Trainz?"It boils down to personal preference. I personally prefer NOT spending an entire weekend trying to get hardware/software/drivers to work together. I want to spend that time using the application.MSTS fit that requirement.Frank Musick
Lehigh & Atlantic Railway, Canal Navigation Company

<www.KelticSylk.com>

Alert | IP

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

I hear ya...The reason I mentioned the laptop though is because I first installed MSTS when first got it, on my laptop. It works great... however, there are alot of things I did not see scenery wise, and route editor would always crash.Of course when I installed it onto my regular PC, I saw traffic, animals... fences... alot of graphics I had never seen before.As personal preference... I love MSTS... but they definitly have to release the next version to get me back. Its great, but alot of the things I prefer, Trainz has right now. Of course, the next version I would imagine will have all the features that Trainz does, and more... but until then... I guess I will settle with Trainz.

"BMT... Going My way...."

Alert | IP

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

You bring up a very valid point. I would like to see both sims move toward each other. Auran should, if possible, make the program more adaptable. The direction of their Service Packs, and feedback in general, indicate something along these lines is already occuring. An example is the optional control interface. Although I have not seen it, I understand the model railroad style of control can now be replaced with an interface similar to MSTS. The adoption of "route" building as well as "layout" building options also bodes well. Off hand it looks like Auran wants to be all things to all people.MSTS on the other hand, has received nothing more than a bugfix in all the time it's been available, and a minor one at that, a year or so after first release. Auran seems actively concerned with their product, witness the rapid progression of upgrades and the fact that Auran representatives will answer posts in this forum! Microsoft, or KuJu for that matter, have done hardly anything that would lead anyone to believe they know their own product exists. While it seems there was some interest on the part of Redmond early in the game, it's hard to tell. There are rumors of activity at Kuju, but nothing substantial. Not a good way to create interest in your product amongst the general public.I would like to see MSTS become as user friendly as I understand Auran to be. I would not, however, like it to become a clone. I remember a similar situation with Sierra's Red Baron. The original flightsim had a huge following, with an almost overwhelming variety of user hacks and additions. When Red Baron II was released all of that was swept away. In an effort to compete Red Baron became something other than what it was. Plain old fun, even without the 3D accellerators. Of course it didn't help that the "II" release was also broken. Users had to go on to Red Baron 3D if they wanted a decent program. The original magic, however, was nowhere to be found.I'd hate to see a fiasco like that happen to MSTS.Perhaps the companies involved or the train sim community in general could orchestrate something similar to the NMRA. Creation of "interchange" standards that the manufacturers adhere to. In "hard" modeling there are coupler standards, track standards, wheel standards, etc. It's rather like the real ICC standards for the prototype roads. The industry as a whole benefits and thrives because users are not saddled with dozens of incompatible concepts. Hell, it could even provide interface standards for soft and hard model railroads. A lot of opportunities present themselves. Multiuser simulated railroads, multiuser remote layout operation, and a few wilder concepts. Wahat about two hard maodel railroads connected by a virtual trunk line, all run by different groups. Model railroading in general would become something more than it is now. We'd have a national network of miniature transportation systems. At least until the mergers started ...Speaking of mergers, and given Microsoft's track record, I'm not sure a cooperative approach is possible. It's more likely we'll see Auran assimilated first. Even as an MSTS user, I can't help but feel that would be a bad thing for Train Simming as a hobby.Good we had this talk....
Frank Musick
Lehigh & Atlantic Railway, Canal Navigation Company

<www.KelticSylk.com>

Alert | IP

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