What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

OpenTTD is a fully open-sourced reimplementation of TTD, written in C++, boasting improved gameplay and many new features.

Moderator: OpenTTD Developers

elgato9o
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 4
Joined: 19 Aug 2017 12:36

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by elgato9o » 19 Aug 2017 19:21

tbh, all i want is every new addition/mods in nice 32bpp graphics. like trams and all other kinds of sets. that's all

luxtram
Transport Coordinator
Transport Coordinator
Posts: 331
Joined: 10 May 2016 19:09

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by luxtram » 19 Aug 2017 19:47

I would like to include one additional data point.

For me more tools for the world building is the most important. Mainly placing individual houses in the scenario editor (and why not in the game).

More modular airports and docks would be also nice.

Double train tracks and diagonal roads would be also nice to have.

It would be also nice if some nice features in the patch packs could be moved into the main line.
California City Sets viewtopic.php?t=76786
1000 building set viewtopic.php?t=75250

User avatar
Zuu
OpenTTD Developer
OpenTTD Developer
Posts: 4553
Joined: 09 Jun 2003 18:21
Location: /home/sweden

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by Zuu » 19 Aug 2017 21:07

andythenorth wrote:Or we could have a tech ladder, and introduce vehicles by tech level, not date (I am serious) :twisted:
Oh.. tech ladder. Reminds me of NewGRF <-> GS communication.
My OpenTTD contributions (AIs, Game Scripts, patches, OpenTTD Auto Updater, and some sprites)
Junctioneer (a traffic intersection simulator)

User avatar
GarryG
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2991
Joined: 14 Feb 2015 00:44
Location: Newcastle, Australia

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by GarryG » 20 Aug 2017 00:04

Can I make a silly suggestion.

Wonder if could be coded into OpenTTD so that maps can be changed in size during a game or making a scenario.

For instance if you started playing a 256 x 256 game and it almost full .. save the game and when reload that game have the option to increase the map size to the next size.

Random towns and Industries would build in the extended map area.

When building Industries, objects and other items in game or scenario you click on the top corner where the building starts, so I imagine the new map size be similar. Your 256 x 256 game most like be placed in top corner and the extended map with expend down and to the East.

Cheers
Soot Happens
All my projects are GPLv2 License unless stated.
Auz Project Releases: viewtopic.php?f=67&t=84725
AuzTrains: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=74193
Auz Industry Sets: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=74471
AuzObjects: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=75657
AuzBridges: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=75248
AuzStations: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=76390
AuzTracks: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=82691
AuzSubwayStations: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=85335

User avatar
kamnet
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6643
Joined: 28 Sep 2009 17:15
Location: Eastern KY
Contact:

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by kamnet » 20 Aug 2017 00:15

andythenorth wrote:Toys are toys. Games are games. Realism is long established as not a goal for OpenTTD. :D
Not an established goal at all... until "Realistic" options were added into the trunk game settings. :)

The nice thing, of course, is that you can add "realism" as a configurable option without ruining the beauty that is Transport Tycoon Deluxe. Which is why if we can use NewGRFs to achieve it, then I like deferring to NewGRFs rather than modifying core programming.

User avatar
andythenorth
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 4889
Joined: 31 Mar 2007 14:23
Location: Lost in Music

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by andythenorth » 20 Aug 2017 06:08

kamnet wrote:Not an established goal at all... until "Realistic" options were added into the trunk game settings. :)
I picked my words carefully :D "Realism is not a goal" is different to "Realism will be rejected".

Current goals are here btw: https://wiki.openttd.org/FAQ_developmen ... _branch.3F

Some of that page could use an update, notably better guidance on getting patches accepted. I might get to that some time.

michael blunck
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 5269
Joined: 27 Apr 2005 07:09
Contact:

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by michael blunck » 20 Aug 2017 08:23

andythenorth, kamnet wrote: "realism"
Riding your ponies?

regards
Michael
Image

User avatar
Pyoro
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2467
Joined: 17 Oct 2008 12:17
Location: Virgo Supercluster

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by Pyoro » 20 Aug 2017 13:40

andythenorth wrote:Some time ago (ok, 25 years), I pointed out a minor unrealism in a model train engine to the guy who had built it. He pointed out, politely but effectively that nor did it have a real diesel engine, a real toilet for the driver, or a real little person driving it. Point made.
For all your dismissive talk about realism (why is everyone always putting this in quotation marks?) you seem to be rather careful to make FIRS realistic. What with industry introduction dates, their production chains, what cargo exactly is produced, where they can be placed and so on. It's definitely not NUTS. :p


Also, another comment on day length: original OTTD speed made some sense for a 256x256 map played from 1920-2050. It makes absolutely zero sense for a 1024xwhatever map or even larger maps. With more and more complex GRFs to use on top of that. Sanely playing with a bunch of GRFs in normal speed on a huge map will get you almost nowhere. Either you pause all the time (boring) or ignore half the map (pointless) or play kinda carelessly, just slapping down everything (unsatisfying).

So obviously people look for ways around that. Daylength is just the most obvious solution.

Auge
Transport Coordinator
Transport Coordinator
Posts: 367
Joined: 23 Oct 2006 02:07
Location: Berlin

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by Auge » 20 Aug 2017 14:55

Hello

I wish to have several UI tweaks and fixes for inconsistences.

- Vehicle group names in all vehicle lists (stations, depots, etc.) (in JGRPP).
- Train lengths in all vehicle/train lists (stations, depots, etc.).
- Train length in the details window of the vehicle/train (in JGRPP).

There might be several additional mini items ($something), that could behave more "general". It simlifies the use of functions if one must not search for the one window, where $something is displayed meanwhile several similar windows do not display the $something.

Additional I hope, that NRT at the end will make it into trunk. It's nice to see, that someone works on functions that are not railway-related. By the way, there are also ships, which get's IMHO only novercal attention. I wish to see:

- Ships not driving through each other (in JGRPP).
- Harbours with more than one dock.

Tschö, Auge

michael blunck
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 5269
Joined: 27 Apr 2005 07:09
Contact:

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by michael blunck » 20 Aug 2017 15:47

Pyoro wrote: For all your dismissive talk about realism (why is everyone always putting this in quotation marks?) you seem to be rather careful to make FIRS realistic. [...]
They´re either riding their ponies, or they want to provoke some reaction.

But o/c, there´s no use in this attitude, without any explanation what these r* terms should mean at all in the game´s context, since it should be fundamentally clear that a computer game cannot be and is not "realistic" or even a slight substitute for reality.

So, what do those detestable r* terms mean:

- using (real life) prototypes for (game) vehicles?
- larger maps?
- more height levels?
- including a kinematic model?
- timetabling trains?
- providing more detailed pixel graphics?
- rendering game objects in 32bpp?
- ...

In fact, the whole evolution of TTDPatch/OTTD can be seen as "guided by reality". Without it, this game would already be stone-dead.

regards
Michael
Image


User avatar
Pyoro
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2467
Joined: 17 Oct 2008 12:17
Location: Virgo Supercluster

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by Pyoro » 20 Aug 2017 16:13

michael blunck wrote:In fact, the whole evolution of TTDPatch/OTTD can be seen as "guided by reality". Without it, this game would already be stone-dead.
I have to agree with this. Neither TTD nor OpenTTD popped-up in some made-up vacuum where all rules are complete fantasy and everything is just utterly arbitrary.
andythenorth wrote:You can find me putting that in quotation marks? :shock:

I'll give you 50p when you find the example.
It was more of a self-reflective, musing comment, but -
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=44714&p=819015&hil ... sm#p819015

In the spirit of OTTDness I'll accept those 50p being donated to the forums or OTTD, whichever you prefer ;)

User avatar
andythenorth
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 4889
Joined: 31 Mar 2007 14:23
Location: Lost in Music

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by andythenorth » 20 Aug 2017 16:15

Pyoro wrote:In the spirit of OTTDness I'll accept those 50p being donated to the forums or OTTD, whichever you prefer ;)
I think there's another one somewhere too, arguing about ships.

Meanwhile, I'll send Owen one of these.
British_fifty_pence_coin_2015_obverse.png
British_fifty_pence_coin_2015_obverse.png (123.47 KiB) Viewed 1280 times

Kruemelchen
Traffic Manager
Traffic Manager
Posts: 130
Joined: 18 Feb 2017 17:47

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by Kruemelchen » 20 Aug 2017 21:22

While we're at it, what I'd love in the game are

mentioned above:
- harbours with several docks (ships would seek the closest, or could be routed via buoy)
- two train tracks on one tile (like tram track)
- NRT (really looking forward playing this with JGRPP :) )
- diagonal roads (no zigzagging roads anymore)

other things:
- ships with several refitable cargoes (doesn't make sense to only have 1 cargo slot available)
- one-way bridges and tunnels (so vehicles can overtake each other)
- one-way road with one tram track (just awesome for city avenues)
- overtaking by articulated vehicles (let's make horse carriages overtake the steamers :lol: )
- road decorations for NRT (crash barriers, trees etc.)
- diagonal bridges and tunnels (even sim city failed with that ...)

and lust but NOT least:
- constant sound emitters for vehicles and buildings/industries or objects (let's have an automatic shoo-shoo effect for our beloved steamers that doesn't get you a dry throat in long play sessions :mrgreen: )

Those are probably tiny bits that require a huge impact in code changes, so I think neither are coming too soon.
But, that just means that there will still be things to add in the future, so it shouldn't get boring in the future :D

User avatar
sevenfm
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 68
Joined: 25 Jul 2016 23:44
Location: Soviet Russia

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by sevenfm » 20 Aug 2017 21:55

1. When there are several ships loading/unloading at the dock, the load/unload speed is decreased accordingly to number of ships loading/unloading at the same dock.
2. When ship is ordered to move to a dock and there are several docks that are combined in one station, decide to move to a dock that has less ships currently loading/unloading.
I like trains. They are soothing.


User avatar
kamnet
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6643
Joined: 28 Sep 2009 17:15
Location: Eastern KY
Contact:

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by kamnet » 21 Aug 2017 17:02

andythenorth wrote:I guess if we keep this thread going, we eventually achieve replicating the entire OpenTTD Suggestions forum, eh? :D
We can stop once we get to the BAD FEATURES. :lol:

User avatar
Ailure
Route Supervisor
Route Supervisor
Posts: 435
Joined: 26 Apr 2005 19:06
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by Ailure » 21 Aug 2017 20:05

andythenorth wrote:Or we could have a tech ladder, and introduce vehicles by tech level, not date (I am serious) :twisted:
This could be quite fun if it's done right, I'd love to see it. :>

But yeah the number one reason so many people want daylength is that it adds a lot to multiplayer unless you want the majority of the game be with the endgame vehicles. Being able to go to bed, have the game still going and wake up with your trains not too obsolete is a nice thing too. Actually having distinct eras of various trains is in particular quite nice too.

Problem with daylength is that admittly none of the patches I seen so far have introduced it in a clean manner that is safe for trunk. Even some of the simplest (but also less buggy) daylength implementations messes up with some of the game animations too, making it look like everything is stuttering forward and also slows down the game economy somewhat (when production per month is unchanged but more ticks per day is added), I don't mind this though from what I played, at least with FIRS as it encourages vast networks to make up for the lower production rate.

ino
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 102
Joined: 09 Apr 2017 14:58

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by ino » 21 Aug 2017 23:48

Ailure wrote:slows down the game economy somewhat (when production per month is unchanged but more ticks per day is added
I believe this was the intention from the start? IIRC there was a patch that does not do this, but it was not preferred by community. I also prefer to slow down the economy too.

User avatar
orudge
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 23995
Joined: 26 Jan 2001 20:18
Skype: orudge
Location: Banchory, UK
Contact:

Re: What changes would you like to see in OpenTTD?

Post by orudge » 23 Aug 2017 13:27

JGR wrote:
  • Moving to C++11 and binning support for older platforms
  • Refactoring to use C++11 features which tend to improve code quality (e.g. std::unique_ptr instead of manual new/delete malloc/free everywhere, using C++11 containers, better type safety).
Having recently written a fairly substantial project in C++11 (with bits of C++14 too), this could well be beneficial from a developer point of view. Given mingw32/mingw-w64 can spit out executables for Win9x still (I think!), and that even DJGPP has gcc 7 (as does OS/2), I'm not sure there'd be a great deal in the way of loss of platform support.

Post Reply

Return to “General OpenTTD”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests