Page 2 of 2

Posted: 08 Aug 2006 12:26
by WWTBAM
thats what patchman told me.

Posted: 08 Aug 2006 12:27
by m3henry
jonty-comp wrote:They still use the DOS version of TTDPatch, which is slowly disppearing due to the fact that anyone who has XP has to do much tweaking and installing of programs to get it to work. :( For people on 98, though, I think it's a bit faster than the Windows version. (Correct me if I'm wrong)
explains, is there a dos coder around?

Posted: 08 Aug 2006 14:18
by Patchman
Adding CC support to the pylons would be relatively straightforward. Since no elrails graphics would be using company blue in the pylons anyway, I can add that without difficulties.

Posted: 08 Aug 2006 20:20
by uzurpator
That would be jolly :)

Posted: 08 Aug 2006 20:35
by Patchman
Actually, it's not that easy after all. There is no owner information available for bridges, not without searching the map array for a matching bridge head.

Posted: 08 Aug 2006 21:52
by uzurpator
Well - bridges obscure the view anyways - so maybe the pylons on a bridge could use a default color - say grey?

Posted: 09 Aug 2006 06:09
by HaroldV
The grammar-fiend within me wants to query the use of "intrusive" instead of "obtrusive". No matter ... ;)

I've got huge respect for you as a graphics artist, uzurpator, but even I have some doubts as to whether it is really possible to produce a catenary that is less obtrusive than Michael Blunck's erails, while still retaining an appropriate/convincing graphical "presence".

Still, options are always welcome, so I look forward to seeing what comes of this.

Personally, though, I'd prefer someone worked towards a less obtrusive tram catenary system. Even though such systems in real life are no oil-paintings, the present grf strikes me as excessively bulky and obtrusive -- or intrusive, if you prefer. ;)