Beiträge von jstange

Can someone please tell me if this 1216 has the same "issue" as the 1116 had that the headlights could not be easily turned on and off by pressing a button (you could lower it, but not tuen it off completely, at elast not using keyboard)? Because having headlights on is so unrealistic (the way it lights things around you in broad daylight) I keep it tuned off and turn it on manually when in tunnels only. This could not be done with the 1116. Is it the same with this loco? Thanks a lot.

Thanks a lot for the info. This is terrible indeed...

Hi,

has the patch been relesed yet?

I'd have a few question about the 1216 if I may, any answers are much appreciated:

1/ Is the CD railjet guaranteed to be released? Some info posted by Stefan (fsclips) over at uktrainsim make it feel it won't be thaqt easy...
2/ Does this product come with an English manual?
3/ Running sounds seem to be of rather low volume in the videos...is it really that bad?

If I may ask - was my previous message taken into account and is the info on when the patch could be released known yet? At least rough estimate like days or weeks or months? I still have most of the scenarios unfinished, but I'd better wait for the patch to complete them if it's just around the corner.

Thank you very much.

Could you also add a new way to access the head out view - via pressing E when you approach the window while standing as some other models have? It is rather weird that when you are standing close to the window you have to sit down first and then use the arrow keys to look out...

@StS In some cases before, products were released on another platform with changes that were considered "minor" and "insignificant" by the developer (although it's always a matter of opinion). Example: Ko-Vi on Steam. Not everyone may understand "no changes" as strict as others do. Therefore I believe that a question whether this is indeed a 1:1 bit copy of the original still has some value.

Great, thanks a lot. Can you or anyone else in this thread please confirm that fps_g6_v2.rwp is indeed the latest vR version?

Is this release a total 1:1 copy of the latest vR release (fps_g6_v2.rwp) so there's no real reason to buy this - just the scenarios? Thanks!

I seem not to be able to move the seat forward and upward as Matt was showing in his video... anyone else having the same issue?

UPDATE: Please ignore, it's OK. While looking down you must press the right button to free the mouse pointer and then the adjustemnt points are on the left side of the seat.

@Kal000px Great decision indeed. Finally some CZ quality payware - there was a time when payware was a dirty word in the Czech RW forum and speaking about it (I mean the fact that some products could have been released as payware) could almost get one banned.

Are you going to start your own shop or use one of the large distributors?

@Schienenbus Thanks a lot, I installed the "neu3", the tank wagons disappeared, but it still requires the DB AG Eanos x052. Is it intentional, should I download these from somewhere?

Hi,

I've installed the new QD posted here and I'm getting both TankWagon and DB AG Eanos x052 missing in QD. Is it something I can download somewhere? I hope I installed all of the assets, had most of them from the v1.07 installation already...

thanks a lot for the reply. Is there any chance the developer could upload the fix here or to railworks austria just as it was first done with the sound fix? I fear it may take months for DTG to release it and it may also never happen... I know of such examples from the past...

Ok, thanks a lot for the key binding info. One more question though - was the 120 kph speedo fixed (it should go up to 140)?
Frankly I wonder how this could have happened - Stefan (fsclips) claims they have access to the real loco in his video and then such an obvious flaw gets introduced...

OK, you won't probably read this, but let me reply anyway. perhaps you may read this in the end...


My post says: If some functionality worked before (as Norweger claims), it does not work anymore with the newer version, this functionality is not guaranteed to work by the developer and it makes sense financially to remove it, it is logical to _theorise_ it could have been intentional.


Your reaction: You made an unfounded suggestion with no facts to back it up on a public forum.

It is a matter of opinion when you have enough information to come to a conclusion. I don't know what your current job is, but it's quite common to provide conclusions and suggestions with the information you have although you know they are not sufficient. That's why you then use words like "could", "probably" etc. In your world you always have to be 100% sure about something to post about it. This is the new world of correctness, but it does not work that way in real life.

I was not aggressive nor insulting towards anyone (including you) in my previous posts. If Ulf removed this intentionally, he has every right to do that and I'm not complaining. I just suggested a possibility that was meant for Norweger so that he understands his attempt to make the BR218 work with older products may be a lost cause. Nothing more, nothing less. If the result of this is that you block me, that makes me really sad, but won't talk you out of it, it's your right of course.

Holz, there's nothing libellous here: the message was specifically meant for Norweger, who apparently spent hours and hours trying to make it work; I merely state a possibility, which would, if true, mean that he should not be spending any more time on that. And one of the reasons I can say this is _exactly_ what you state: no-one promised any backward compatibility and I'm fully aware of that. vR could do this and no-one could complain. I certainly wouldn't.

Holz, please stop posting these "political correctness" type of replies. Please keep in mind every human being is entitled to have an opinion or state possibilities provided that it is backed up by facts, at least to a reasonable extent. If some functionality worked before (as Norweger claims), it does not work anymore with the newer version, this functionality is not guaranteed to work by the developer and it makes sense financially to remove it, it is logical to _theorise_ it could have been intentional. Please read my post again: I say it _could_ be intentional, not that it _was_. It is perfectly fine saying you don't believe it is and why, but speaking of a "potentially libellous statement" is a bit out of line.

Ulf, I do lose something... my time... download the package, scan it for viruses and trojans, install it, re-install my own changes on top of that (that might be incompatible), test it all. Only to do it all again if a new update is released in a few days, which already happened twice with v6.

Norweger, if it is old vR Stw that stopped working with v6, it could be intentional, perhaps Ulf is trying to make sure that only official Stw packages work to get more purchases? A speculation of course, but that would make sense if it worked before...

So is the English installation of the current v6 from March 6 flawed or not? Norweger seems to say the BR218 used to work with other vR Stw and it's not the case anymore... ?

Additionally, it's already the third "version" of version 6, perhaps the version number should be increased each time there's a change...? It's becoming messy.

Wait a second, Ulf claims the problems are now solely related to the Stw pack. I don't have the Stw pack, I only care about the BR218... from the above it seems that Ulf is not planning to release any further updates to the BR218... are you saying that the BR218 pack still has a problem?