The payware scenario watch continues ...

[OldProf]

I bought Doug Smith's "Default Duties" payware scenario pack when it first came out, but have been rationing the scenarios, so I just loaded in his "Always play your hopper first" effort today. The scenario begins with a drive to a loader at Victorville, and that's where the first oddity occurs, which could be dubbed "the emperor's new coal": the hoppers fill up with something black, but nothing comes out of the loader -->



The little load that couldn't certainly isn't Doug's fault, but what follows can't be blamed on anyone else. Evidently, he didn't take the time to count before putting this scenario on sale:



Since this is a Standard scenario, the driver/player is left unable to fill the remaining hoppers. So which is more frustrating, not being able to carry out this task or realizing that you actually paid for this?

I have often appreciated Doug's scenarios, but find this kind of sloppy work very disappointing. To his credit, Doug is usually very attentive to comments from his customers and often willing to take the time to remedy a situation like this and send out a fresh version of the faulty scenario. In the meantime, however, buyers have paid for it and found it lacking.

Caveat emptor!

[Heavy Chevy]

Hey Tom

A couple of points about this scenario I see. As you stated the invisible coal coming down from the loader, well that is an issue with the model not something that I have done. I am sure that someone knows how to correct this animation but then everyone would need to instal the corrected model or route on his or her own system to see the coal drop. I do find it odd that some loaders do show coal and others do not. The same loader is used on the Castle Rock route and it always shows coal falling into the hopper. As for the instructions, were you able to load the remaining four hoppers and were you able to complete the scenario and obtain a green check mark for your efforts? The last of the four load instructions has a text box that instructs the player to load the last four hoppers in the same manner but does not use pick up freight instructions. The reason for this is simple. I do this to cut down on the total number of instructions within a scenario. Take a look at default scenarios or those included with most DLC. Very few instructions and rather simple in the way they play out. Not that this is wrong and in many ways it makes sense. The less complex the scenario is the more likely it will survive updates and other changes that may otherwise require some reworking in order to function properly. The problem for me is I am a sucker for complex stuff that feels more real than what is considered default. Feeling like you have more to do is what drives me to write scenarios that have many instructions. One other reason that may or may not make sense to those reading this is time. Some folks may not enjoy watching coal load for 10 minutes. By having only half the instructions the option to load only half the cars and move on is available to the end user. To find out if this is something folks do I would need you the members here to tell me what you think. Would you rather see load instructions for every last car or would you rather have the option to bypass some and save time? It takes literally seconds to add a "pick up freight" instruction so I certainly do not do it to save time or because I can't count.

You guys and gals are the ones playing them and supporting my efforts and I am forever grateful for that. Perhaps this one would be a good idea to hear your thoughts on. To add all load instructions or not to add, that is the question. It makes no difference to me. As I said earlier this takes seconds per to add as many as I want.

Thanks again to everyone for supporting my work and for all the kind words and encouragement over the past year.

Take care and chat soon.
Doug

[arizonachris]

I have been buying Doug's scenarios (and waiting for his route) since he came on the scene in Railworks. Never found a fault with his work or his support. I think his explanation makes total sense. You would have told him it took too long to load all the cars, eh? Cut them in half? Pffffffftttttt I'll leave it at that. The animation is on RSC, not Doug.

[7r41ns]

Tom, is it more likely that it is Railworks that is causing your problem, and that Doug's scenario has nothing to do with it? Doug is an experienced guy, and I always checks before he posts his content. Check your computer and your game before you trash talk the developer. Think.

Have a nice night Tom,

Carter

[PapaXpress]

Guys, Old Prof did say that the model was at fault and out of Dick's control.

The little load that couldn't certainly isn't Doug's fault ...

[Jack4864]

Yea! Old Prof pointed out some interesting,and very legit questions,and Doug answered in a straightforward manner.That is the mature way to vastly improve this already great sim.Pointing fingers, and forum-fighting won't help anybody.I applaud every one of You guy's that do the QA,testing,skinning,and model and route builders.If it we did'nt have ALL of you,this would be a boring sim.Anyway,that's my worth.THANK YOU ALL!!!

[NDORFN]

I'm gonna put my worth in too. I bought a $5 scenario pack once. Won't say who from. The great thing about it was that it was so crap, infact none of them worked initially, that it inspired me to fix them, and in doing so hypothesised that scenario creation is infact childs-play. So I had a bit of a jam on them for a few weeks and came to the conclusion that not only is it super easy to create the most complex and engaging scenarios, but it only takes a couple hours and it's almost as fun creating them as it is playing them.

[Griphos]

Well, I'll answer the question Doug asks. I like it this way, with more complex instructions that mimic operations better. That's one of the things I've enjoyed the most about Doug's scenarios: the way they play and feel. I've had problems with a couple of scenarios. Hey, this is TS2012 after all. We tinker with it to the point it's surprising anything works. An email to Doug is quickly answered and he'll work with you until the problem is resolved.

[Samwolf]

Well, I'll answer the question Doug asks. I like it this way, with more complex instructions that mimic operations better. That's one of the things I've enjoyed the most about Doug's scenarios: the way they play and feel. I've had problems with a couple of scenarios. Hey, this is TS2012 after all. We tinker with it to the point it's surprising anything works. An email to Doug is quickly answered and he'll work with you until the problem is resolved.

What he said. Been with Doug since day one and never been disappointed.

[OldProf]

To Doug Smith: read my initial message! I clearly stated that the lack of coal falling from the loader is RSC's responsibility, not yours. I also clearly stated that I was unable to load the last four hoppers. I tried everything: clicking the loader, clicking the load-unload icon in the F4 HUD, and pressing the <T> key. And, yes, I waited for the hopper to fill. In free-roam scenarios, loaders will always work at will, as long as there's a car in range; but in my experience that is not true of Standard scenarios. The scenarios included with the Hagen-Siegen route provide several examples of this. As to the number of instructions involved, in my opinion both as a scenario writer and as a scenario player, if 8 hoppers are to be loaded, 8 instructions are appropriate. What does it matter that they occupy more space in the F1 list than 4 instructions? Yes, putting them into the editor takes more time. Again, so what? And in regard to the work to be done, if the consist contains 8 hoppers and the order says load 8 hoppers -- whether by means of individual or collective instructions -- then loading 8 hoppers it is. Yes, of course, this may bore lovers of long runs to death: so let them avoid switching scenarios. You are quite correct when you point out that some of the loaders on the B to SB route produce a visible falling load and others do not: again, that is RSC's responsibility and I did not state or imply that it is yours.

You asked for players' opinions, so here's mine: I'm not as enthusiastic about loading multiple cars as I used to be, but if that's the declared task, I prefer the correct number of loading instructions to a mixture of individual and collective ones, especially if the latter do not work.

I also stated at the end of my post that your scenario writing and your service are generally good. I'll add here that they are above average. However, I reserve the right to point out errors in anyone's work, in the interest of improving the overall product.

To others: I submitted my opinions of one particular segment of one of Doug Smith's scenarios, which I believe any forum member is entitled to do. I hope that those who find fault with my scenarios will post their criticisms, not just so that I can fix an individual problem, but also so that I can improve my scenario writing in general. As to this particular situation's being the fault of my computer or my RW installation, that's useless speculation. My computer is more than adequate for running RW3 and I regularly defragment and verify the RW cache. Besides that, the number of instructions contained in a scenario is not and cannot be affected by anyone's computer or installation.

Ora basta! (Enough already!)

[Eric165]

Personally, I have never had problems with Doug's scenarios, her scenarios is very good, but Railworks is sometimes strange with scenarios

[Machinist]

I second Doug, not always is essential to show all instructions, it's an author option, as happens for instance with Marshall instructions. Imagine a scenario in which is at cranes a consist with 8 cars but only 6 are loaded (say 2nd and 7th are empty, for some reason). You can instruct to unload (only) the loaded cars (of course, or not?) and follow to the next crane to load all 8 cars, in this case is not needed 6 unload instructions nor 8 load instructions. Anyway if player accomplished (or not) correctly all of pick up operations this won't make scenario to fail, so...

[OldProf]

This is a public apology to Doug Smith. I was wrong about the necessity of having a separate loading instruction for each car being loaded. I just completed "DD 16: Back and forth to get somewhere", which begins with loading 6 coal hoppers. Doug put in one loading instruction followed by a message telling the driver-player to fill up the other five. That stupid coal tower at Victorville still refuses to produce even the illusion of dropping black stuff*, but the hoppers did all fill. Please accept this apology, Doug.

{Just for the record, I still prefer using a separate instruction for each car to be filled or emptied, but I can see the merit of the single instruction, which lessens the scenario writer's burden and could make a long list of instructions easier to manage within the editor.}

* As I stated earlier, the lack of illusion here is the route creator's fault, not that of Doug or any other scenario writer.