[Looky1173]

Thanks to the admirable efforts of the developers and the community, Open Rails v1.5 has been released a month ago now. I think it is time to consider what's in store for v1.6 and what should be pushed back on the roadmap.

The following is what I think should be tackled for the next major release. Of course, Open Rails is maintained by a few dedicated volunteers and these suggestions should not be interpreted as obligations or criticism, just as constructive ideas.

Revamp the website of Open Rails (openrails.org): The website gives the first impression of the simulator to new users, thus it is vital to keep it up to date and easy to use. In my opinion, the website would benefit from some updates:

• some pages are outdated, some elements are broken: the widget in the footer is no longer functional and could be removed; "Changes since last visit" does not work; many commercial vendors' websites are no longer online as listed on the Trade page; etc...
• the code is duplicated: there are two GitHub repositories which both contain the code of the website, one could be eliminated
• the website has not been translated into languages besides English: if the website was translated into more languages, potentially more people would discover it

I have created several websites and I could potentially rewrite OR's website in Next.js with all the updates listed above. Please let me know whether I should attempt to do this.

Improve the quality of the water: The visuals in OR are quite good and well-crafted routes look stunning, however, the quality of the rendered water is a let-down. I know that the primary objective of a train simulator is to have realistic physics - which OR already excels at - yet I believe some "eye-candy" (as others call it in some threads on ET) is needed to make the simulation more immersive and realistic. I'm also aware that there are very few active OR developers left - and practically only a handful of them are at ease with the 3D part of the code - but I think that some minor improvements should be doable. Unfortunately I'm unable to help here because my underpowered laptop cannot handle Visual Studio and compiling OR in a timely manner (my C# knowledge is pretty lacking as well). However, I have found a tutorial (chapters 7 to 14) that implements fairly realistic 3D water in XNA (which could be converted to MonoGame - AFAIK, there aren't many breaking changes introduced by the latter framework). The guide even covers ripples influenced by wind direction. The results look promising:
https://github.com/simondarksidej/XNAGameStudio/raw/archive/Images/Riemers/3DXNA4-14Specular3.jpg?raw=true

Adopt new file formats: There have been plenty of discussions on ET about adopting new, more efficient and more flexible file formats for OR. The old, rigid MSTS SIMIS file format is limiting the development of the simulator. I believe now is the time to consider supporting new file formats at the expense of breaking backwards compatibility with MSTS with regard to new routes. When OR was started, MSTS compatibility was crucial to the success of the project but now, two decades later, I don't know why anyone would prefer MSTS over Open Rails. What's more, most routes and rolling stock made recently are already incompatible with MSTS (for an example, see this thread on .eng files).

In my opinion, implementing a replacement for shape (.s) files should be prioritised. Thanks to Péter Gulyás' remarkable efforts, the unstable version of OR already supports glTF files, which could one day replace .s files. glTF is an industry standard in 3D modelling, therefore, route builders would be able to find more freeware 3D models and create routes faster. Moreover, all modern 3D editors support glTF, notably Blender. Finally, glTF adds support for Physically Based Rendering (PBR) and is optimised for fast loading.

Multiple MSTS files could be merged into one new file format too, as suggested by Ryan in this thread. JSON looks like a good option and the developers may also consider supporting JSON5, a superset of JSON that is easier to write and maintain by hand (very useful for configuration files). The .NET libraryJson.NET by Newtonsoft can handle JSON5.

One caveat of adopting new file formats is that we will need new editors but AFAIK Goku has stopped working on TSRE5. This is why I have started to develop a new Tauri program to fill the gap. Currently, I'm implementing a conversion tool between .s and glTF files and I would like to build a simple consist editor as well in the future once we agree on a new file format to use.


That's all for this post! Please share your reactions, ideas, and propositions! http://www.elvastower.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sign_thank_you.gif

[Looky1173]

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 07:25 AM, said:

I already have posted translated texts of some site's pages, as well as offered some top banners with local content on them, so if You would make some work on enhancing the site, You are free to use my materials.

Thank you, I will PM you when I get around to rewriting the website (if the developer team wants me to do it).

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 07:25 AM, said:

As for water, it's not a global thing: all water textures belong to particular route and are managed (or not in ORTS?), by route's *.env-files.

That's true. I think a new entry could be added to world files to define planes of water and some general parameters on how it should be rendered (tint colour, transparency) and then the simulator could take care of rendering the water based on these parameters. Let's be honest, a simple texture file for water is never going to be much realistic.

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 07:25 AM, said:

Compatibility: I hope, You mean, the old content WOULD still run under ORTS? Otherwise, it will be a greatest disappointment for many former MSTS users.

Yes, of course, old content should continue to work. I'm just suggesting that OR could add support for more flexible and modern file formats.

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 07:25 AM, said:

Yes, Goku left us with source repo on github and present version of TSRE: would be some continuation, or no - nobody knows.

I think a fresh start would take less time than trying to get Goku's code to work (no offense intended, it's just that the repository on GitHub contains an enormous heap of unorganized files, most with no comments or written in a language I do not understand).

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 07:25 AM, said:

Member Amtrak 115 (right?) have started writing advanced consist editor, so maybe it has sense to contact him for discussion...

Okay, thanks for directing me to him.

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 07:25 AM, said:

Robert Roeterdink is looking for successor, who would continue his timetable concept development, so it could be interesting for You too.

That would be roeter, right? What aspect of timetables is/was he working on?

[Looky1173]

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 07:48 AM, said:

Upd^

^ I have updated my response too.

[Looky1173]

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 08:02 AM, said:

Texts are here on ET, but if You'll really start, I could translate more recent variants, or other pages/interface text on demand, what was not yet translated.

That's great -- I could also translate the website into Hungarian (because I'm Hungarian but I currently reside in France, thus the flag under my username) and French.

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 08:08 AM, said:

Ha-ha:
It wasn't an occasion - M4x on Your avatar :)
Sarkozy too, IIRC.

Yes, that's correct! http://www.elvastower.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/derisive.gif

[Looky1173]

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 08:15 AM, said:

Yes, that's roeter.
He is an author of timetable concept for openrails, but time goes :( and he said, he would help to someone to start continuation of development that project farther.

I will reach out to him then. Indeed, time is always ticking, and sometimes it goes very fast... but that's all the more why we should continuously strive to enjoy the moment and make the best of life. :-)

[Looky1173]

A question about the website: is the source code of the API available? On GitHub, "/api" is in the .gitignore file...

[Looky1173]

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 08:24 AM, said:

Before, that were TIMES - now moments.
Before dick risen - now blood pressure.

Well that's both a humorous and a sad way to put it. http://www.elvastower.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

[Looky1173]

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 08:38 AM, said:

For Your information, when you'll have spare hour to read, try and search "developing the developers" thread over here.

Oh yes, I have read that thread a few times now... I believe that the best way to attract new developers would be moving beyond MSTS limitations (while keeping support for old standards, of course) which will attract new railfans and perhaps some new developers too. After all, it is those who extensively use the simulator who contribute back to the code.

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 08:38 AM, said:

There are translated pages:
http://www.elvastowe...post__p__262350

Thank you, I will use these translations if I get around to updating the website.

[Looky1173]

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 08:48 AM, said:

I can see two sad things: national disruptiveness and total weakening of interest to rail simulators nowadays.

By national disruptiveness do you mean the small, national clusters of railfans around the world who often don't interact with each other because of language barriers or because there isn't a common online place for them to gather?

Unfortunately, it seems as if the younger generations are more interested in train games (with outstanding graphics) and not simulators.

[Looky1173]

Weter, on 28 December 2022 - 08:51 AM, said:

I mean, some eastern-European versions of ORTS are either not welcome to merge their new features into official branch, either not willing to collaborate.
As a result, they loose in other sides.

Ah, I get it! I always wondered why lots of the improvements in the ORTS-NY fork haven't yet been merged into the upstream OR simulator.