Log In
Register Now!
Help
A couple other things have occurred to me to throw out there:
-Support for non-4:3 displays, and even multiple monitors. I don't use the latter, but it'd be neat to have.
-A system for screenshots that places them in a dedicated directory inside the OpenRails main directory and that numbers them consecutively to whatever end, overwriting none.
-Something similar to the kneeboard as implemented on some MSFS airliners, i.e. that can access data or take notes. It doesn't have to be a moving mp display, but rather just something to type a note or, if you're at say MP144 and you're bound for Bedford Falls, Bedford Falls is MP78.
-A clock and stopwatch.
-Keep the MSTSbin cab and locomotive switching. That's nifty.
-Can passenger cars be rigged for steam heating (i.e. the leaking of steam) without making them steam locomotives?
-Brake shoe smoke, perhaps?
-The basic principle of the F9 operating window is great; please keep that.
-A scrolling display that will give you brake information (like we have now with the F5 display) so you'll know when all the cars have let off.
-Dynamic weather, whether it can be updated by Internet or not.
-Use American units! I haven't the slightest idea what a tonne, short ton, long ton or the like are. A ton, however, is 2,000 pounds; I can work with that.
-Multiple in-cab view, i.e. front right, rear right, front left, rear left; headout on both sides. Cycle these by key presses.
-A camera for the front and rear of the locomotive---perhaps a 'switching camera'---that can be moved to simulate being on the ground or on the porch of the locomotive. Paul Fowler's units have had things like this in the past, and once I figured them out, were kind of neat.
There are a few other things, but I'll save them for later.
"When we wish upon a star........."
Open Rails users' wishlist, please and thank you.
Rate Topic:
#22
- Owner Emeritus and Admin
-
- Group: ET Admin
- Posts: 15,350
- Joined: 11-January 04
- Gender:Male
- Location:United States
- Simulator:Open Rails
-
Country:
Posted 21 February 2010 - 11:30 AM
[quote name='NW_611' date='21 February 2010 - 09:48 AM' timestamp='1266774512' post='44043']
A couple other things have occurred to me to throw out there:
-Support for non-4:3 displays, and even multiple monitors. I don't use the latter, but it'd be neat to have.[\quote]
I run my copy of ORTS at 1920x1200 and it looks great.
[quote]-A clock and stopwatch.[/quote]
Stopwatch? Why?
[quote]-Multiple in-cab view, i.e. front right, rear right, front left, rear left; headout on both sides. Cycle these by key presses.
-A camera for the front and rear of the locomotive---perhaps a 'switching camera'---that can be moved to simulate being on the ground or on the porch of the locomotive. Paul Fowler's units have had things like this in the past, and once I figured them out, were kind of neat.
[/quote]
There is a desire to create multiple Windows viewers (note the phrase desire to create, rather than say, are presently creating). The idea as I understand it has is two parts: If multiplayer is feasible and implemented, why limit the Windows viewer to the traditional MSTS camfig solution (i.e., Locomotive Engineer)? What about a window for the Dispatcher? Tower Operator? Brakeman? The second part is why limit the solo player to just one Windows viewer? Maybe he needs the Dispatcher window too.
Now is that implemented as a set of Camfigs such that, say, the #2 screen for the Dispatcher camfig shows X view of the route while the #2 screen for the Engineer shows Y view of the route... or is it a completely unique visual setting, such as a long, narrow display of a CTC board? Or something else?
Ideas, ideas, and more ideas....
A couple other things have occurred to me to throw out there:
-Support for non-4:3 displays, and even multiple monitors. I don't use the latter, but it'd be neat to have.[\quote]
I run my copy of ORTS at 1920x1200 and it looks great.
[quote]-A clock and stopwatch.[/quote]
Stopwatch? Why?
[quote]-Multiple in-cab view, i.e. front right, rear right, front left, rear left; headout on both sides. Cycle these by key presses.
-A camera for the front and rear of the locomotive---perhaps a 'switching camera'---that can be moved to simulate being on the ground or on the porch of the locomotive. Paul Fowler's units have had things like this in the past, and once I figured them out, were kind of neat.
[/quote]
There is a desire to create multiple Windows viewers (note the phrase desire to create, rather than say, are presently creating). The idea as I understand it has is two parts: If multiplayer is feasible and implemented, why limit the Windows viewer to the traditional MSTS camfig solution (i.e., Locomotive Engineer)? What about a window for the Dispatcher? Tower Operator? Brakeman? The second part is why limit the solo player to just one Windows viewer? Maybe he needs the Dispatcher window too.
Now is that implemented as a set of Camfigs such that, say, the #2 screen for the Dispatcher camfig shows X view of the route while the #2 screen for the Engineer shows Y view of the route... or is it a completely unique visual setting, such as a long, narrow display of a CTC board? Or something else?
Ideas, ideas, and more ideas....
#23
- Conductor
-
- Group: Status: Active Member
- Posts: 425
- Joined: 17-August 08
- Gender:Male
- Location:Surrey B.C.
-
Country:
Posted 21 February 2010 - 12:12 PM
Use metric units. What the heck does 5280ft/mi have to do with anything?
#24 Inactive_NW_611_*
Posted 21 February 2010 - 01:13 PM
Dave:
Glad to hear you're able to run that. Does it dodge the model distortion that MSTS is reportedly prone to?
The stopwatch would be useful to display elapsed time or other similar functions, like ETA. I've found myself wondering "How long have I been doing this?" on various runs and it might be helpful.
I would say, in defense of the default MSTS camera configuration, that I think it works reasonably well to convey a sense of in-the-cab and at-the-controls. Are you familiar with Flight Simulator? It allows/ed one to open a variety of "secondary" windows or displays and see other views, etc., separate from opening another panel (which served as the flight engineer's station) or the like. That sounds great, but it tends to bog the system down if you don't clear out (temporarily) say the cab gauges while looking at the CTC board. The computer is left to think about and display speed, TE, etc.---even though you're not looking at it---in addition to the new task of the CTC board.
I'd recommend some way to idle or otherwise not use CPU/GPU cycles of the cab and other things if looking at the CTC board. Perhaps a compromise: Relatively easy dispatcher moves, like "line the switch so I go to platform 6" can be handled through menu options, whereas other, more complicated things go to the CTC board and switching away from having to render the cab and its view.
As for the system of units, North American railroading runs, more or less, on the system I want.
Glad to hear you're able to run that. Does it dodge the model distortion that MSTS is reportedly prone to?
The stopwatch would be useful to display elapsed time or other similar functions, like ETA. I've found myself wondering "How long have I been doing this?" on various runs and it might be helpful.
I would say, in defense of the default MSTS camera configuration, that I think it works reasonably well to convey a sense of in-the-cab and at-the-controls. Are you familiar with Flight Simulator? It allows/ed one to open a variety of "secondary" windows or displays and see other views, etc., separate from opening another panel (which served as the flight engineer's station) or the like. That sounds great, but it tends to bog the system down if you don't clear out (temporarily) say the cab gauges while looking at the CTC board. The computer is left to think about and display speed, TE, etc.---even though you're not looking at it---in addition to the new task of the CTC board.
I'd recommend some way to idle or otherwise not use CPU/GPU cycles of the cab and other things if looking at the CTC board. Perhaps a compromise: Relatively easy dispatcher moves, like "line the switch so I go to platform 6" can be handled through menu options, whereas other, more complicated things go to the CTC board and switching away from having to render the cab and its view.
As for the system of units, North American railroading runs, more or less, on the system I want.
#25
- Owner Emeritus and Admin
-
- Group: ET Admin
- Posts: 15,350
- Joined: 11-January 04
- Gender:Male
- Location:United States
- Simulator:Open Rails
-
Country:
Posted 21 February 2010 - 01:17 PM
dantheman, on 21 February 2010 - 12:12 PM, said:
Use metric units. What the heck does 5280ft/mi have to do with anything?
Ease of use for some.
FWIW, I'm complete agnostic on the issue. If things can be made such that either method works equally well at no real extra effort, fine. If not, then whichever units are chosen by the team is it. I'm perfectly comfortable using whatever unit is called for in the task at hand.
#26
- Owner Emeritus and Admin
-
- Group: ET Admin
- Posts: 15,350
- Joined: 11-January 04
- Gender:Male
- Location:United States
- Simulator:Open Rails
-
Country:
Posted 21 February 2010 - 01:27 PM
NW_611, on 21 February 2010 - 01:13 PM, said:
Dave:
Glad to hear you're able to run that. Does it dodge the model distortion that MSTS is reportedly prone to?
Glad to hear you're able to run that. Does it dodge the model distortion that MSTS is reportedly prone to?
It's a perfectly normal presentation, exactly what you'd expect. If I can figure out how to get my PC to display on my big screen TV I'm going to wheel it over and run ORTS on a 60" screen exactly like it was HDTV.
Quote
The stopwatch would be useful to display elapsed time or other similar functions, like ETA. I've found myself wondering "How long have I been doing this?" on various runs and it might be helpful.
Ok, I understand.
Quote
I would say, in defense of the default MSTS camera configuration, that I think it works reasonably well to convey a sense of in-the-cab and at-the-controls. Are you familiar with Flight Simulator? It allows/ed one to open a variety of "secondary" windows or displays and see other views, etc., separate from opening another panel (which served as the flight engineer's station) or the like. That sounds great, but it tends to bog the system down if you don't clear out (temporarily) say the cab gauges while looking at the CTC board. The computer is left to think about and display speed, TE, etc.---even though you're not looking at it---in addition to the new task of the CTC board.
Well yeah, it's more work on 1 PC so of course things could bog down. Open Rails does use multiple threads and so the more CPU's you have the more designated work can be pushed away from one CPU unto the others. Whether enough can be spread around such that multiple rendered views of a route could be displayed w/o a noticible loss of performance... well I think that's technically possible but not likely on today's multi-core CPU's -- you see it might need more than 4 cores. I could be wrong about that tho... we'll just have to wait and see how things unfold.
#27
- Chairman, Board of Directors
-
- Group: ET Admin
- Posts: 13,927
- Joined: 21-February 06
- Gender:Male
- Location:Way, way, way, South
- Simulator:MSTS & OR
-
Country:
Posted 21 February 2010 - 04:16 PM
Don't today's GPUs take some of the load off the sys CPUs?
Cheers Bazza
Cheers Bazza
#28
- Owner Emeritus and Admin
-
- Group: ET Admin
- Posts: 15,350
- Joined: 11-January 04
- Gender:Male
- Location:United States
- Simulator:Open Rails
-
Country:
Posted 21 February 2010 - 04:40 PM
captain_bazza, on 21 February 2010 - 04:16 PM, said:
Don't today's GPUs take some of the load off the sys CPUs?
Cheers Bazza
Cheers Bazza
Sure, but you still have to have the CPU pass it all sorts of data for everything in view for each frame you see. What the GPU does is figure out how to translate all of that 3d data into a 2d flat image for display on the screen. That's a whole lot of work. But it still has to get all of the data from the CPU first.
Roughly speaking, the frame rate is how many times per second the CPU can pass all of the data to the GPU. Less work, the more times the CPU can repeat itself (remember the camera can be moving so what the GPU shows you in the next frame has to change). More work, the fewer times.
Now if what you are looking at is the interior of a cave or a closed room (shooter gmaes)... that's not really a lot of data when compared to what you'd see in any MSTS scene. IOW the very nature of our SIM is going to be extremely demanding of CPU simply because there is so much more variety in view. All of that stuff, polys & textures for each placed object in view, have to be passed once per frame. That too is a whole lot of work.
Want better performance? Build models with fewer texture files and fewer primitives. Make sure you isolate material types. Build whole forests or as one big object rather than one small, simple object placed many times. All of that cuts the number of times per frame the CPU has to pass data to the GPU for that specific object.
There are some technical "tricks" that can help... I'm not well versed on them so I cannot speak to any.
#29
- Chairman, Board of Directors
-
- Group: ET Admin
- Posts: 13,927
- Joined: 21-February 06
- Gender:Male
- Location:Way, way, way, South
- Simulator:MSTS & OR
-
Country:
Posted 21 February 2010 - 05:20 PM
Yeah, I'm always amazed at what we get away with in MSTS. Sure it's showing its age, but it's still a classic.
Cheers Bazza
Cheers Bazza
#30 Inactive_NW_611_*
Posted 21 February 2010 - 08:53 PM
Here's another one:
Will OR have an expanded set of signals? The way I understand it, MSTS has a fixed number of signal aspects which is less than the usual set of aspects employed by the Class I carriers. Is that something that's fixable in OR?
Secondly, what about an enhanced track monitor? (Being a good Eastern railroading fan, I'll be the first to suggest cab signals, but only where accurate.) What I had in mind was something that might read the signals ahead at a higher level of detail than the existing track monitor, at least as I understand it. The experience I've had is that, on various CPR routes, what the track monitor says and what the indicated signal aspect means are often two different things. (Often like proceed v. proceed at limited speed.) One could always take that a bit further and integrate the signal aspect into the allowed speed on the track monitor, too.
In other words, where the MSTS track monitor would simply show a freight and passenger speed that was absolute, the OR monitor might say, "This block is cleared for 100MPH running but the signal ahead means you're capped at 30MPH, so that's your effective speed limit" with 30MPH being displayed on the monitor.
Just a thought; it might be a considerable amount of work.
Will OR have an expanded set of signals? The way I understand it, MSTS has a fixed number of signal aspects which is less than the usual set of aspects employed by the Class I carriers. Is that something that's fixable in OR?
Secondly, what about an enhanced track monitor? (Being a good Eastern railroading fan, I'll be the first to suggest cab signals, but only where accurate.) What I had in mind was something that might read the signals ahead at a higher level of detail than the existing track monitor, at least as I understand it. The experience I've had is that, on various CPR routes, what the track monitor says and what the indicated signal aspect means are often two different things. (Often like proceed v. proceed at limited speed.) One could always take that a bit further and integrate the signal aspect into the allowed speed on the track monitor, too.
In other words, where the MSTS track monitor would simply show a freight and passenger speed that was absolute, the OR monitor might say, "This block is cleared for 100MPH running but the signal ahead means you're capped at 30MPH, so that's your effective speed limit" with 30MPH being displayed on the monitor.
Just a thought; it might be a considerable amount of work.