Real Routes and Fictional Routes

[[CT1660]]

i have over 1GB of photos of the 7 line that i need to upload.

[ipac]

I'm sorry if I alienated anyone, but I did have to voice the lack of an increase of quality in routes.  Its not merely the fact that people that make fictionals are lazy, just that they are lazy to actually create a fictional route worth downloading by others  Everybody either recycles objects, or refuse to make new ones.  I can understand if you want to do it to create non-fiction routes, on a "mass-produced" technique, but people are expecting more than they would have in the past.

Simply put it at this, if your going to make a fictional route, make it worth my time.  But I don't speak for the people, not in this case anyway.  If everybody else is fine with having yet another fictional route to drive for now, then so be it.

I didn't mean to say that people with fictionals are lazy, just merely the fact that the fictional routes seem to lack a sense of creativity.

As always anybody and everybody has a right to go ahead and develop, create,help, assist and release whatever they want.  Just stay within the respects of the copyright, or other licenses, and you will be fine, Nobody is going to stop you.

BVEStation is always happy to host content, but we wish to keep a certain level of quality on our downloads section, we are ultimately leaving that up to the developers, and we will not prevent anything from being put up there.  (unless your doing illegal things)

[EDawg]

That fact that objects are being reused isn't that bad, last I checked majority of the beams, tunnel walls, and platforms are pretty generic in the MTA system. There are some stations that are unique. So, yes in that respect there will or may be an need to make custom objects for those station. Perfect example is GC station, QBP, and Junction Blvd on the 7 line. The 7 line even has the viaduct between Bliss and Rawson. Now if someone had created a concrete track texture, that would be an object that could be reused from another route. Now would that make me lazy, I wouldn't think so if I could save time, especially if its excellent quality. All i can say is guys be patient. Pressuring developers to pump out routes or trains will only make us mad and put all development on hold or discontinue their projects. I've seen this happen on other forums with BVE and other Simulators.  Ok I'm done I've said me 2 cents on this subject.

[Dj Hammers]

Honestly we have gotten to a point where the developers are burning out. Some of us have been around for 3+ years, with only about 3 more people joining and really helping out over the last 3 years.

We need people to take the initiative to help work on these non-fictional projects with us, there is just too much demand for us to take care of right now, and all it does is wear us down even more.


So, seriously, if you wish to help, the best thing to do would be to learn to code OpenBVE routes and/or trains.
Here is the link to the documentation: http://trainsimframework.org/develop/index2.html
Also we host several tutorials on BVE development here.

If you are still confused, try tinkering with the existing content you have to learn how to work with OpenBVE. That is how I learned partially.

[ipac]

Honestly, I wouldn't care as much if generic objects are placed into the non-fictional routes, its what they were originally designed for and meant to be, and they look best with non-fictional routes.

And yes, the developers are more or less burned out, nobody took the reigns to replace the older developers.  So thats where the older developers basically have little time to do any development resulting in these delayed routes.

[BStyles]

Kevin does have a point. I think what he's also trying to say is that the quality of the objects used on most routes could use some tuning, but i'm not going to get into that.

While it may be a common factor that non-fictional routes aren't getting put out as frequently as the fictional ones, there's also the factor that no one has been here to aid in development. I've been hearing a lot about why we haven't put out routes yet, and why the ratio of real to fictional is on a 1 to 10 ratio, but I haven't heard about anyone helping us with the work load. Even this topic is a clear example.

Like EDawg said, this is a hobby, and we're not getting paid for it. You don't know the real meaning of the dollar until you're earning it, and setting your own free time aside for your work, or your family. Back when this site started, routes were being put out all the time, both fictional and non-fictional. Asking us to do that 5 years down the road, when we're all grown and have people and bills to support obviously isn't going to get you the same result. If you're being honest about what you do, and you know you don't have time to develop, or contribute, then it's fine. You're not at fault for being human.

This doesn't however, go the same for the crowd of below 18. At 18 you become an adult, so anything below that is still in his/her early adolescence. I'm developing because I love doing it, not because I want to appease you. If I lost interest in what I did, then in the blink of an eye, my work would be discontinued, and that would be the end of that, until someone else decides its their time to pick up the slack.

By the way, on the basis of the fictional routes, at one point in the site's history it was a rule that a fictional route be made first so that the developer get a feel for what they are doing, and obviously it's become a habit (one, because there's a limitless amount of creativity in the fictional routes than there is in the real ones). At that point, an accurate skeleton of a real route would be given to the developer to detail, and that should've yielded a similar output. You can't just jump into something and end up getting in way over your head. It's like thinking you know every single thing about a Windows PC  but when you get put to work in their technical department, one line of encrypted code may seem like hieroglyphics to you. It's a stepped process that needs to be taken very slowly.

BStyles

[streetriot]

Kevin does have a point. I think what he's also trying to say is that the quality of the objects used on most routes could use some tuning, but i'm not going to get into that.

While it may be a common factor that non-fictional routes aren't getting put out as frequently as the fictional ones, there's also the factor that no one has been here to aid in development. I've been hearing a lot about why we haven't put out routes yet, and why the ratio of real to fictional is on a 1 to 10 ratio, but I haven't heard about anyone helping us with the work load. Even this topic is a clear example.

Like EDawg said, this is a hobby, and we're not getting paid for it. You don't know the real meaning of the dollar until you're earning it, and setting your own free time aside for your work, or your family. Back when this site started, routes were being put out all the time, both fictional and non-fictional. Asking us to do that 5 years down the road, when we're all grown and have people and bills to support obviously isn't going to get you the same result. If you're being honest about what you do, and you know you don't have time to develop, or contribute, then it's fine. You're not at fault for being human.

This doesn't however, go the same for the crowd of below 18. At 18 you become an adult, so anything below that is still in his/her early adolescence. I'm developing because I love doing it, not because I want to appease you. If I lost interest in what I did, then in the blink of an eye, my work would be discontinued, and that would be the end of that, until someone else decides its their time to pick up the slack.

By the way, on the basis of the fictional routes, at one point in the site's history it was a rule that a fictional route be made first so that the developer get a feel for what they are doing, and obviously it's become a habit (one, because there's a limitless amount of creativity in the fictional routes than there is in the real ones). At that point, an accurate skeleton of a real route would be given to the developer to detail, and that should've yielded a similar output. You can't just jump into something and end up getting in way over your head. It's like thinking you know every single thing about a Windows PC  but when you get put to work in their technical department, one line of encrypted code may seem like hieroglyphics to you. It's a stepped process that needs to be taken very slowly.

BStyles

how could anybody put that in better words.......

[Rayvon]

And to add on to styles, it's totally different when you're developing a non fictional route. You know how many times I go out to get pictures for a route, then come home and realize that either a) the data is off orb) the pictures aren't useable? Added on to the fact that the new trend is to make everything as realistic as possible and development time doubles. It went from using a standard set of objects to not only creating our own stuff, but spending so much time on the objects alone that development itself comes to a standstill. They say that you never know what a person goes through unless you walk a mile in their shoes, which is why it's sort of our mantra here to say 'be patient', we don't have all the time in the world to tell you guys everything we do with a route every day.