Train Simulator Twenty Thirteen Podcast

[SuperTux]

Rich, to my view, is simply lowering expectations down to basically nothing and to suggest enjoying what Railworks errr Trainsim has to offer, however there had been talk of different dispatchers in the past, but its not likely to be a high development priority.

With the upcoming Steam Workshop I will certainly making as much use of that as possible, including uploading of scenarios, but as people know whatI want to do within the scenario is not always possible unfortunately.

Finally, I do suggest taking a look at Derek's blog from time to time:

http://dereksiddle.blogspot.com/

[peterhayes]

MattW
I used to agree with this:

I've been saying for a while now, and I'll keep saying that I'm not convinced that RSC is out to "get" the hard-core enthusiasts

.
But take a look at Flight simulators from Microsoft. In FSX they did have the serious simmers market and FSX was authentic enough to use to initially train real world pilots (and now reincarnated as P3D by Lockheed Martin). But what happened - MS introduced MS Flight a newer but more mass appealing Flight simulator and within 3 months they canned it, possibly due to poor sales.
So I don't think catering for either hard-core enthusiasts at one end of the scale or arcade junkies at the other is necessarily a good move. You have to cater for the simmers in the middle - people like me who feel that the realism is good enough (It could always get better) and we like the way the sim is being developed. I don't think that RSC would be continuing in this business if they had not discovered this niche market, which seems to be quite successful. Sure we would all switch in the blink of an eye lid if another "better" rail sim appeared. That's business.
I admired what Rich Garber said, it was good plain speaking, but I did not agree with his sentiments. As is my wont.
I like the way RSC are developing the sim and I'm looking forward to the 20th.
Regards
pH

[MattW]

I think I mispoke a bit when saying "RSC is out to 'get' the hard-core enthusiasts" I meant "get" as in "they're out to get me" rather than get as in to acquire. But I think the difference in RSC and MS with Flight, is that with Flight, the elements that had the realism of FSX were removed, whereas with new versions of RW or TS or whatever, the realism isn't being removed.

[peterhayes]

Mattw
Thanks I misunderstood!
Regards
pH

[OldProf]

Since so many folks seem disinclined to read beyond this forum, here's the full text of Derek's 8 September blog post (hope Derek doesn't mind):

Seems to be some confusion over TS2013, who what why when where etc, RS.com Facebook page is the place to watch for more info.

However in simple terms, if you do nothing and just carry on as you are, you will get your game code/look/new features etc updated for free, like any other update RS.com have done.

Your game will become TS2013 but with the content you currently have and enjoy.
If you pre order the steam version of TS2013 (this has different content to RWs/RWs2 and TS2012) you will get the 4 advertised routes (SH, IOW, NEC and B to V) added to your current content list at a discounted price.
New users who buy TS2013 (and do not own a previous versions of the sim) Will only have those 4 advertised routes in their list.
New users will be able to obtain the old core content from Steam, more information on this to follow from RS.com

Any questions please email Support@railSimulator.com

cheers
d

Wouldn't it be nice if we could find all the news regarding TS at a single website?

[EmanuelSumm]

I've been saying for a while now, and I'll keep saying that I'm not convinced that RSC is out to "get" the hard-core enthusiasts. Mr. Garber is right that they have to make money, and frankly the improvements some of want, wouldn't make as much money as appealing to the broader "gamer" base does. I'd like to point out that the features pointing toward simulator that we do have, aren't being removed. RSC has to have a stable income source, to do anything on the game whether that's adding "gamer" features, or adding "hard-core" features. Frankly, hard-core features as I mentioned, wouldn't make them much money. "Now Featuring 100% accurate Dynamic Braking effects" as a tagline on Steam won't generate as much cold hard cash as "Now compatible with XBox For PC controllers." But they have fixed issues. Didn't multiple locomotives not contribute power individually until RW3? Didn't headlights used to not light up the terrain? Didn't AI used not to be able to touch other consists at all?

I don't develop for Railworks, so I can't speak from that side, but I do develop addon spacecraft for the Orbiter Spaceflight Simulator. When I produce a new space craft, I can't just get my features generally working, then kick it out the door. I have to test, re-test, re-write, test some more, then write the documentation. Adding something like sun-tracking solar panels is easy, but making them work reliably in a varied user environment, is hard, unless I want a 9 mile long list of dos and don'ts that I can reasonably expect the end-user to follow. Now making spacecraft is arguably easier than adding physics to trains (wait, WHAT!?), so the fact remains, that RSC can't just throw some new physics into the game, then push an update to Steam, otherwise we'll end up with the physics equivalent of Donner Pass. Bottom line, RSC has to balance their reach, and then they have to do a quality job on what they do reach to, and they do not have infinite resources with which to reach.

Were you able to complete the new space craft project? It seems very exciting to me..Can you share some more details about the project?