Trainsimulator 2012

[MontanaRails]

I wouldnt say 19-30 fps is considered 'barely playable'. 19 is a bit low. But 25-30 range, in my opinion is really is optimum. Television is broadcast at 29 (ish) fps. Honestly, its a very very fair tradeoff. Dont look at it like you're 'losing your fps' but that you're gaining the much improved sim.

Everything feels right about what the sim is doing. The calculations involved in lighting objects like this are huge. It makes total sense to me to go from 70 fps to 30 fps.

But, comparing your specs to my specs, and seeing that you've essentially got twice the computer I do, yeah, clearly it isnt making use of half of your hardware for some reason.

It would be interesting to see if they could implement a frame rate slider like FSX has, so you can tell the game where to put its resources (either the highest frame rate possible, or reduce it a little to increase scenery loading, AI, background stuff). With FSX (just for example) I have played around with every possible setting, and I like limiting my frame rate to a max of 25 (even though set at unlimited, I can get 50's). It just seems to help the whole sim run better.

Lets all just rest a bit and not get too worked up. Considering the scope of this release, it could be a while before RSC.com does anything to fix what may be broken with some people's systems.

[SMMDigital]

And one more thing - why is it that every time I start the game, Steam downloads and install the .net framework?

[MontanaRails]

And one more thing - why is it that every time I start the game, Steam downloads and install the .net framework?

I can confirm that's not happening on my end. It did it on initial start up, but now I click to launch RW and it comes up almost instantly.

However, Windows Update did download 2 files (about 65mbs) after steam installed Framework 4.

[MontanaRails]

My only question is what in the world is steam doing delaying this PRR route!?!

[barnez]

After reading through all of the complaints I've seen here (and at UKTS) I'm thinking that this is an intel/ ATI issue.

Based on my own experience last night with my OLD rig - AMD 2.2gHz dual core with GTS8800 video card - I've got the graphics set at medium in the settings screen with multi-core enabled. From options screen everything at high - and everything is silky smooth.

My CPU doesn't even meet the min spec and I'm doing just fine. Also, I've heard that RW2 didn't pay much attention to GPU, in RW3 the GPU is very important - so what cards do people have? I saw a lot of stuff at UKTS regarding ATI cards not being up to snuff and a few people that had board mounted video - which will not cut it the way RW3 renders.

Also regarding FPS - this is a SIMULATOR not a twitch-shooter - anything above 30-35 FPS is wasted. The important measure to look at is consistency - does your FPS remain constant in a densely populated area or does it drop significantly? A drop is an issue, not getting 60FPS really doesn't make any difference at all.

-barnez

[styckx]

For those who want better SSAA. Google "FXAA injector". It allows any Directx9 game to have FXAA which kills MLAA and with no performance hit since is a post process effect. Ctrl-s wont capture it though, must use prt-scr and paste into an editor. Only helps when using the SSAA settings. Use at your own risk, although it is as easy as copying or deleting files to install and remove.

It takes a scene like this

SSAA 2X2: http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g37/s ... k/ssaa.jpg

and turns it into

SSAA2X2 + FXAA: http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g37/s ... sxxsaa.jpg

[Toripony]

On my COA route in Ronceverte, I get 1 frame/sec with a 115 car train! But I have no doubt that will improve as I learn the optimum settings for my machine and RSC releases updates and I do some re-scening work in Ronceverte (using Block Assets instead of individual trees). Also, the time has finally come for me to put some 10,000 rpm drives in this laptop. My Windows performance index scores are all in the 7.x range except for my drive performance which is a paltry 5.9!

When doing a major software build or update, the first priority is to get all the code in place and working. THEN once the deadline is past and the pressure cooker the developers have been working in for weeks let's off some steam, there is time to tinker with detail settings/adjustments and come upon those "Eureka" moments when someone stumbles onto the perfect value for some new field. I am confident that is the situation here. There are a LOT of code changes involved in moving a product from version 1.17x to 6.2c.

I hate the depth of blue haze they have added to US routes, but I'll wait and see what can/will be done about it before I complain too much. Besides, complaints should come with suggestions for improvement and I'm not even sure myself yet exactly how the blue needs adjusted (but I'm getting closer to a bonifide suggestion for them to take a gander at).

Thanks for the free upgrade, Mr. Jackson. I think we are moving into the 21st century now (and starting to leave some competitors in the dust ).

[SMMDigital]

Last words before bedtime:

- Love the headlamps, thought I was going to have to do occlusion maps to make them shine off of trackside signals and such, but they do it without any further effort.
- Hate the blue water. The old water in RW2 was just the right shade for rivers and streams - and olive green sort of color. The blue is WAY unrealistic.
- Have noticed on buildings in which color was added to a texture through the asset building program (3D Canvas, 3DMax), the colors have been washed away and are white. Most noticeable are the tin roofs on two assets that i've built.
- Not sure if RW is reporting correctly the FPS numbers. I'm showing 15FPS on the screen through Shift+Z, but two trains are passing in front of me with no stutters?
- Going to update and test the program on my AMD/ATI laptop to see if the theory about Intel/ATI procs and Gpus are correct.

[barnez]

- Going to update and test the program on my AMD/ATI laptop to see if the theory about Intel/ATI procs and Gpus are correct.

I'm also seeing a lot of posts from ATI users that Catalyst settings can be to blame for poor performance

- Not sure if RW is reporting correctly the FPS numbers. I'm showing 15FPS on the screen through Shift+Z, but two trains are passing in front of me with no stutters?

Likewise - and helps illustrate what I was trying to say above - in RW2 I could never have another freight (esp with ES44-ACs) pass in front of me without major stutters.

I'm sure this will all get ironed out soon by RSC - the reality is that the majority of users have intel CPUs and the bulk of the performance complaints seem to be centered on intel CPUs

-barnez

[Toripony]

Well, my graphics card is finally getting utilized a little bit (still not a lot, though). For the first time ever, my GPU fan has stepped up a couple of speeds and there's actually heat coming from its vent!

[arizonachris]

Tori, even with two Raptors in a RAID 0, I get 5.9 on the Windows Performance score. Doesn't seem to change from what a single low RPM drive was. Can't afford SSD's.

Jerry, use FRAPS to check the frame rates. http://download.cnet.com/Fraps/3000-212 ... 41285.html I also use it for screen shots. Never have used the built in stuff with any game.

[mikeg1250]

I am unable to run TS2012 on anything higher than the low setting under basic settings. If I try to advance it to anything else I get the message "Unsupported resolution or multisampling options." Anyone know why I'm getting that error and how I correct it?

[Toripony]

In my ATI Catalyst Control Panel, on the Options-Preferences menu I chose "Restore Factory Defaults" which results in the following settings. I haven't begun to tinker with different configurations of settings to see if I can get better than 20FPS, but this works and looks pretty good (exc.too blue, too hazy, and a little washed-out):

CatalystFactDefSettings1.jpg

CatalystFactDefSettings2.jpg

[johnmckenzie]

I am unable to run TS2012 on anything higher than the low setting under basic settings. If I try to advance it to anything else I get the message "Unsupported resolution or multisampling options." Anyone know why I'm getting that error and how I correct it?

I have that problem too, except in the 10 minutes tinkering time I've had so far I couldn't get it to work on any settings at all!

EDIT - tonight, without changing any settings whatsoever, it's working fine....

[Bananarama]

- Hate the blue water. The old water in RW2 was just the right shade for rivers and streams - and olive green sort of color. The blue is WAY unrealistic.

New feature - the water's color and murkiness can be changed via the properties window while in editing mode.