[cjakeman]

Csantucci, on 15 July 2021 - 12:28 PM, said:

So for me this option box may disappear and the option can be always set to true, but maybe some insider knows better about the usefulness of the option.

Thanks for this, Carlo. Perhaps I will set the option to true and remove it (just from the Unstable version) and see if that causes any problems to anyone.

roeter, on 16 July 2021 - 01:12 AM, said:

So, in my view, if we are looking at improving the menu structure, than it is about time that these options were moved to where they belong - which is the activity definition.

I agree with you about this (and with Peter's argument too). I'll take it up with James as I remember he had reservations.

roeter, on 16 July 2021 - 01:55 AM, said:

So far, this thread has only been about specific variables and their merit (or otherwise) to the simulation and/or to the users.
However, I feel that the structure of the menu is just as important an issue. A proper menu structure will help to understand the scope of options, and will also help to understand the relation between these options.. . .
So I would like to suggest the following options tabs:

You are ahead of me, Rob. I want to drop the Experimental tab too, and also the Updater tab could be replaced by a drop-down selection. I have some ideas about the categories too, so perhaps we can visit this again once we've explored all the individual controls.

roeter, on 16 July 2021 - 01:55 AM, said:

So, there no longer is an 'experimental' tab. If it is deemed essential to identify an option as experimental, this can be done by placing a red box around this option, with the text 'experimental' displayed in the boundary of that box. But by placing that option on the proper tab it is immediately clear what the context of that option is. Also, promoting an option from experimental to standard is made much more easy - just remove the red box. Presently, such a promotion requires rewriting half the menu.

Very nice. That arrangement would save us all time and trouble.


Moving on then to the next control:




The Manual has "When the option is checked, in cases where multiple instances of the same object have to be drawn, only a single draw call is sent to the GPU. This means lower CPU load. It is suggested to always check this option."

Does anyone know whether this control is still needed? Could it be like the Fast Alt Tab - always active and removed from these options?

[Weter]

What for Fast full-screen Alt-Tab...Well, if so, this can be merged to set of parameters, being switched for low-grade machines increased performance, or sub-tab for that, if such parameters have sense to be applied separately.

[YoRyan]

cjakeman, on 16 July 2021 - 11:08 AM, said:

The Manual has "When the option is checked, in cases where multiple instances of the same object have to be drawn, only a single draw call is sent to the GPU. This means lower CPU load. It is suggested to always check this option."

Does anyone know whether this control is still needed? Could it be like the Fast Alt Tab - always active and removed from these options?

Enabling this option has been known to introduce graphical glitches, so some people prefer to turn it (or keep it) off. Unfortunately, such glitches vary by content, by hardware configuration, and even by driver version.

[Weter]

About instancing
I asked about how it works last autumn and Derek explained to me.
That time I ran 2009-dated laptop and this option, being turned on slowed-down performance even more.
As I understand, that makes less work for GPU, but demands more CPU resources for computing, so Derek adviced, that as long as I have only 2GbRAM, that would be useless for me to turn it on.

[EricF]

If some options are re-worked into sliders, it may make them more intuitive in terms of increasing/decreasing and effect or value, which is good. But make sure there's some sort of clear description and scale on the control so that it's understandable.


Don't do this (Example from Euro Truck Simulator 2):
https://i.imgur.com/K3s3SQHh.png


The sliders to adjust force-feedback settings on a steering wheel are all very functional, but poorly described and there's no scale on the sliders. Just more/less depending on position. But yet their positions correspond to defined numeric values in the configuration file for the game. It's very difficult to change settings and then return them to prior values with nothing but vague visual reference.

A numeric reference display that changes with slider position would allow the user to know (and record or share) the set value. Even a set of tickmarks along the slider would help.

[Laci1959]

jonas, on 15 July 2021 - 03:57 PM, said:

Sorry Chris, for jumping a little back again in this thread. I hope it will not disturb the systematic discussion of the individual options that is going on here right now.

It's about the option "Forced red at station stops".[size="2"]

The player train now has to wait in front of its red signal after completed the passenger change, because the freight train had already occupy the track ahead the player train and simply overtakes the player train. The player train now has to wait until the freight train has reached the next station (the next signal).

Hello
Keep in mind the fact that MSTS has always given priority to the player. It was bad sometimes, in this case good.
Regards Laci1959

[cjakeman]

YoRyan, on 16 July 2021 - 11:36 AM, said:

Enabling this option has been known to introduce graphical glitches, so some people prefer to turn it (or keep it) off. Unfortunately, such glitches vary by content, by hardware configuration, and even by driver version.

Thanks, Ryan.

In that case we ought to keep it. Perhaps a slider than goes from low spec PC to high spec PC would set it appropriately. I reckon that sliders will make configuration much easier but access to individual settings will still be needed.

EricF, on 17 July 2021 - 07:18 AM, said:

If some options are re-worked into sliders, it may make them more intuitive in terms of increasing/decreasing and effect or value, which is good. But make sure there's some sort of clear description and scale on the control so that it's understandable.

Indeed, Eric. Point taken.

-------------------------------------

It seems to me that this exercise is very valuable, (provided it goes beyond forum posts to code changes for the better). So thanks for all your continued input.

-------------------------------------

Moving on then to the next control:



The Manual has "When this option is selected, the OR update rate cannot be higher than the monitor vertical sync frequency (typically 60 Hz). This reduces CPU energy consumption in fast PCs."

This statement suggests that there is no downside. Is that really the case?

[Weter]

@EricF
Even better: ORTS menu gives tips and comments, while you dragging sliders, telling you about default value and effect strength.
See experimental adhesion sliders for instance.
As for force feedback, I think, it's not a crime, as far as different wheels has different vibrator's strength and perception of the vibration of control devices is altering in very subjective way from player to player.
We did discuss earlier, how cool that would be, but for now we have no vibrating chair for playing ORTS with force feedback. :D

[YoRyan]

cjakeman, on 17 July 2021 - 10:23 AM, said:

This statement suggests that there is no downside. Is that really the case?

No, there are downsides. One of them is that vsync introduces input lag. And if your system cannot render as quickly as your monitor's refresh rate, vsync will cause an annoying graphical stuttering effect.

In general I would say most, if not all of the video options need to be left independent. Players need precise tunables to accommodate every possible hardware configuration and personal preference. That's why even commercial video games have complex video settings screens.

[R H Steele]

YoRyan, on 17 July 2021 - 10:53 AM, said:

No, there are downsides. One of them is that vsync introduces input lag. And if your system cannot render as quickly as your monitor's refresh rate, vsync will cause an annoying graphical stuttering effect.

In general I would say most, if not all of the video options need to be left independent. Players need precise tunables to accommodate every possible hardware configuration and personal preference. That's why even commercial video games have complex video settings screens.

Perfect explanation! I almost replied to that exact point earlier this morning, but decided I did not know how to clearly explain what I saw with my older desktop ( until I upgraded some components, graphics and such ) --- this effect does not appear on my alienware laptop.