Is the Theory About .ap Files Correct?

[PapaXpress]

To answer Peter's question, yes you can read a zip file as if it were a file system. An example of this is when an anti-virus software scans your .zip, .rar. and .7z files content.

Quick Update...

I can't believe I forgot about this prime example. JAR files. They are JAVA class files zipped up and read in place.

[pschlik]

"some of us that make changes need to figure out what to do as we go forward."

Totally agree Buzz and I wasn't trying to imply otherwise. As I said to Mike Simpson, if this .ap system is really designed to stop people modifying their TS2014 (as yet not proven), then it's up to "us" to figure out a way to get around it (legally of course).

What's puzzling me is why they implemented the .ap system. The only advantage I can see is that the Steam verify has one file to check instead of many small ones. After that there doesn't seem to be an advantage. If the .ap file needs updating for some reason then it's going to be a big download instead of a few smaller ones. It looks like it wasn't designed to help users retain their modifications (not something RSC would see to be in their interest anyway, therefore unlikely to do it for that reason). So what advantage can there be in it to RSC?

Phillip, when you changed the files and put them back in the .ap file, did it later re-download the whole .ap file?

Bob.

Basically, I didn't pay attention. I'll try different ways of doing it and see what happens. Whet I did do doesn't really matter, so trial and error, right?

Well, after totally extracting the files inside the .ap and moving the .ap elsewhere, I got it to work.

Screenshot_Pacific Surfliner_34.06249--118.22678_13-01-15.jpg

[mikesimpson]

Just my personal opinion, but the only reason I can see for the use of the .ap files is:-

To stop users modifying anything at all in TS2014 - If you can't modify your scenario files with something like RW_Tools, then you have to purchase any missing items from RSC. This has the added advantage to RSC of reducing service calls from people who damage their setup by bad editing. Recent texture file format changes have cut down the number of re-skins as well, thus forcing users to purchase new locos (with just livery changes) again from RSC.

There is no saving in file size with the .ap files, they are NOT compressed, so if an update has to be made, Steam has to send the whole .ap file again, in some cases this is over 1.3 gigabytes in size.

Although I have consistently supported Rail Simulator/RailWorks/TS2012/TS2013 since 2008 - when I asked RSC when I could expect a beta version of TS2014 so that I could keep RW_Tools up to date (as happened with TS2012 and TS2013), I was twice lied to by being told that beta versions would be rolled out to beta testers 'Next week' - I subsequently learned the other beta testers got their copies before I even asked. As this followed the problem last year with RSC Support telling users not to use RW_Tools ever (which they did rescind). I am convinced that the above is the case.

The fact that neither RSC nor Steam seem to realise that their system now has the ability to delete any/all files held outside of the .ap files in a normal folder tree is bad. The fact that in some users as shown above by Hack have even had 3rd party Assets deleted is appalling.

Mike

[peterhayes]

Mike
Would it be possible to use the Windows 7 permissions to "deny" a delete file option so that files we wanted to protect could not be deleted by a Cache verification or by starting TS2014.
Could that be a feature of RW_Tools to set a permission for a particular file/folder to NOT allow anything to delete it?
Just a thought
pH

[XDriver]

To stop users modifying anything at all in TS2014 - If you can't modify your scenario files with something like RW_Tools, then you have to purchase any missing items from RSC. This has the added advantage to RSC of reducing service calls from people who damage their setup by bad editing. Recent texture file format changes have cut down the number of re-skins as well, thus forcing users to purchase new locos (with just livery changes) again from RSC.

Mike

I kept out of this topic to this point. I think Mike is right. This is exactly what I think is happening. "To stop users modifying anything at all in TS2014"

[_o_OOOO_oo-Kanawha]

I think the integrety of the core asset base and RSC's DLC is protected by the .ap asset packs and their verification. And it needs to be for the Steam Workshop and future multiplayer to succeed. MP only works if all players drive the same trains, without any differences between them.
How MP is going to be done with dozens of asset packs being available I don't know. In Run8 there are garishly coloured dummy trains substituting for DLC not in a player's possesion if he participates in MP session. So at least he can see the other player's trains going by.

So in order to preserve that integrity ValveCorp or RSC ordered a rigorous clean swipe of user's folders and the outlawing or Mike Simpson's RW_Tools? Was that really necessary, and if so, where is the validation and reason given?

To answer Peter's question, yes you can read a zip file as if it were a file system. An example of this is when an anti-virus software scans your .zip, .rar. and .7z files content.

What file system is in use inside those stored zip files?

Everytime I verify the one single virgin TS2014 install I keep under Steam, thousands of files fail and are re-acquired. However, a search by Windows Explorer doesn't find the same number of changed files.
Are the downloaded workshop files also verified?
Are the files within the asset packs also verified and updated? If so, are their time stamps changed?
Looking for a corrected F59PHI from the supposedly fixed brakes thread, I couldn't find any changed time stamps inside the Surfliner asset pack and the brakes are still off, so?

I think I have been clever with my working and playing TS2014 installs outside the Steam folder, by packing each asset and route folder into an .ap file and putting all my hacks and mods in the required file structure besides the .ap file.
Will see how that works out in housekeeping and asset dependency.

[artimrj]

I don't think they are trying to stop us at all. We got a new BE2 and a new SERZ, we have new functions in scenarios, even though we still don't know how to use them. I see that you can pull out a folder of a train, rename it and do what you want to it. Only 2 reports I see here so far of non RSC stuff being deleted. Whether that is a fluke or not we will know soon enough I imagine. All my stuff is still intact. There are only a small number of people at my NERW site and none of them have experienced this problem. One guy could not find scenarios for Surfliner until he went into the Career ones. Before that he reinstalled, verified and you name it to get them, when they were already there. He is a good friend of mine, but has the rep that if something can go wrong, it will happen to him.

[wacampbell]

Railworks provides developers with tools, documentation and support for extending the program with addons. Even as of their most recent update, they provided new and improved developer tools, an indication that they continue to support addon developers. Addons developed with their tools and following their guidelines don't get damaged or break the program during updates. Other train sim's completely block community addons. These days its quite generous for Railworks to allow addons, and even to allow commercial addons for which they get no compensation.

The problems begin when developers ignore the Railworks supported methods for addons, and instead directly modify the .bin files in the Assets folder. Developers do these modifications without documentation, or support from Railworks, and are just guessing at the correct methods and how it impacts other parts of the program and the upgrade mechanisms and future plans RSC might have for those files. It results in program bugs, upgrade issues etc.

... the only reason I can see for the use of the .ap files is:-
To stop users modifying anything at all in TS2014

I doubt if that is the reason. I suspect it brings other benefits wrt to loading speed or verification etc. I have found Railworks is careful about ensuring their updates don't break properly built addons that follow the developer guidelines. But addons that ignore the guidelines and directly modify the .bin files are at risk.

Of course the user community doesn't know which addons are built properly and which are not. All they know is the upgrade broke some addons. I could see some benefits if Railworks were to build in more defences against the unsupported addons. It might mean a fallout where a bunch of these addons cease to work or get removed. But in the long run the community would be better off with some enforcement of proper addon building practices. And Railworks would be better off as they would not be inhibited in improvements - graphics, multiplayer, etc - by not having to dance around damaging the unofficial addons.

[latimers]

Earlier I reported on sending the following to RSC Support:

"I’ve contacted Steam and they aren’t able to give me any more details on the way it’s supposed to work.

It seems to me that the implementation of the .ap file structure is either:

1. A Steam thing, which RSC knows nothing about (as implied by your message).

2. An RSC thing where the RSC developers have not filled in the support people.

3. An RSC thing where everyone at RSC knows what’s happening but isn’t prepared to share the knowledge with the users.

If it is any one of those three then I would say RSC definitely has a credibility problem with its customers."

and the answer was:

"We are a software studio we do not handle distribution of content or indeed any transactions, that is what steam does, in fact even if we wanted to access your steam account for any reason, we could not, only steam has the access.

You are obviously an intelligent man, I will leave it to your judgment, who do you think will be better placed to resolve your problem?

Especially a problem that involves the distribution and installation of software content?"

So RSC is denying any knowledge of the .ap file system. I find that very hard to believe.

Bob.

[mikesimpson]

Railworks provides developers with tools, documentation and support for extending the program with addons. Even as of their most recent update, they provided new and improved developer tools, an indication that they continue to support addon developers. Addons developed with their tools and following their guidelines don't get damaged or break the program during updates.

Where did you find documentation for the developers tools? The last thing I have is the RW Creator Manual-Web.pdf which was for RailWorks 2 and is copyright 2010. There has never been any documentation even for the use of Serz.exe, and virtually no documentation for the Blueprint Editor - Their tools don't even have a built in Help file.

As for 'Addons developed ... following their guidelines' - Which guidelines? They don't appear to have ever published any. It was only the hackers on here and other user forums who discovered early on that .TgPcDx and .GeoPcDx files were actually just .bin files with a changed suffix which enabled us to produce re-skins by editing the texture files, and to change the terrible LODs which were set up in their early models.

Mike

[Ericmopar]

"We are a software studio we do not handle distribution of content or indeed any transactions, that is what steam does, in fact even if we wanted to access your steam account for any reason, we could not, only steam has the access.

You are obviously an intelligent man, I will leave it to your judgment, who do you think will be better placed to resolve your problem?

Especially a problem that involves the distribution and installation of software content?"

So RSC is denying any knowledge of the .ap file system. I find that very hard to believe.

Bob.

Well now. If they didn't know about it, they certainly do now!
It would require an enormous amount of bandwidth to run a outfit like Steam, so one would have to imagine that they would want to figure out a way to speed up downloads and file verification processes.

[buzz456]

"Well now. If they didn't know about it, they certainly do now!
It would require an enormous amount of bandwidth to run a outfit like Steam, so one would have to imagine that they would want to figure out a way to speed up downloads and file verification processes."

That is the simplest explanation therefore the most likely. But not conclusive proof at this point.

[wacampbell]

Where did you find documentation for the developers tools?

The RSDev tools package, available here ( http://www.railsimulator.com/support.php ) has over 50 doc files describing the process.

There has never been any documentation even for the use of Serz.exe,

Its not documented because its an internal utility used by the Blueprint Editor. The developer never needs to run it directly. I've built many addons for Railworks, and never have needed to serz anything.

and virtually no documentation for the Blueprint Editor

There's enough info in the RSDev tools package to get started.

It was only the hackers on here and other user forums who discovered ....

But thats the point. The Assets folder contains private internal data for the program. There has never been any documentation for it because its not meant to be changed by the end user or the developer directly. The changes that various community members have made are great, but those changes were done without complete knowledge of the spinoff impacts wrt caching, future upgrades that railworks might want to do, etc. Nowhere does Railworks ever say that a developer should go in and hand edit .bin files in the Assets folder. Clearly the end user can do what they want, and some of these unofficial mods are very enticing, but they are always going to be fragile and should be discouraged, or at least provided with warnings about the risks of using them.

I think its time to shift the community away from hacking the Assets folder, and towards development using the BPE and the guidelines in the RSDev package.

[mikesimpson]

The RSDev tools package, available here ( http://www.railsimulator.com/support.php ) has over 50 doc files describing the process.

There has never been any documentation even for the use of Serz.exe,

Its not documented because its an internal utility used by the Blueprint Editor. The developer never needs to run it directly. I've built many addons for Railworks, and never have needed to serz anything.

and virtually no documentation for the Blueprint Editor

There's enough info in the RSDev tools package to get started.

It was only the hackers on here and other user forums who discovered ....

But thats the point. The Assets folder contains private internal data for the program. There has never been any documentation for it because its not meant to be changed by the end user or the developer directly. The changes that various community members have made are great, but those changes were done without complete knowledge of the spinoff impacts wrt caching, future upgrades that railworks might want to do, etc. Nowhere does Railworks ever say that a developer should go in and hand edit .bin files in the Assets folder. Clearly the end user can do what they want, and some of these unofficial mods are very enticing, but they are always going to be fragile and should be discouraged, or at least provided with warnings about the risks of using them.

I think its time to shift the community away from hacking the Assets folder, and towards development using the BPE and the guidelines in the RSDev package.

The above is totally wrong, the RSDev tools package was copyright 2007 (and has never been updated) - it was intended for Rail Simulator, a program by Kuju which has been reissued as Railworks/Railworks2/TS2012/TS2013 and now TS2014 - it bears little or no resemblance to the current program. Many of the instructions contained in the Devtools are now totally incorrect and would be totally confusing to someone who has just started using the program.

You are quite entitled to you belief that you don't need to change anything in the Assets folder if you wish to live in a bland beige world peopled by rolling stock which looks like a lot of toy trains, (so what are you doing on a forum like this?). However there are a lot of users out there who do like to tamper with their trains, to get the brakes working correctly, not just as RSC think they should operate. I get emails on virtually a weekly basis from users (many of them ex loco engineers) who say that they would have given up on Railworks a long time ago if they did not have tools like RW_Tools to enable them to alter things to act as they should, you can't do that without editing the .bin files.

Of course there are a lot of people who should not even try to do this, there are far too many people with too much education but no common sense.

Mike

[buzz456]

Mike,
Calm down. We will probably work this out. Take a deep breath.