Unlicensed Content

Am I the only person that thinks this? , but l8ly I'm seeing more and more unlicensed content and it's really bugging me , for me this is supposed to be a realistic simulator , well it used to be but seems to be straying away from that now these days, I remember when no content released used to be unlicensed but now we r starting to get unlicensed routes and dlc quite often, for me this ruins everything licensing is a massive part of the realism , talking that away takes away the overall experience, see I'm patient ide rather wait for licensed routes than have a bunch of unbranded trains run about my game, just My opinion of course , what does everyone else think ?

 

was the bold text necessary?

 

Doesn't really bother me at all. In terms of locos the Creators Club lot will get creative and for some routes, they're absolutely excellent in spite of the lack of license. Of course we'd prefer to have a fully licensed train and route but sometimes, things happen behind the scenes and a route that maybe had a license originally might have had it withdrawn halfway through development.

 

Do we know why the Class 20 in the Nuclear cargo pack is unlicensed? Obviously, I'd prefer branded, but if a license can't be obtained for this add-on (like with the 350 on WCML), then it's acceptable because I don't think they should scrap a whole add-on because of a license issue.

In terms of the unbranded stuff on GWE remaster and Mildmay Line;
*GWE remaster is free, so we can't expect new licences
*Mildmay is for AI only trains to make the route busier, so that's all good. (Although if the appropriate branded trains ever come, they should be replaced imo)

 

If it’s a case like the 350 where there’s no logo but the livery itself realistic I can live with that, someone will upload a livery to CC or make a mod. Unbranded content like the 484 is annoying but I’d rather have it like that than no train at all.

 

I don’t enjoy unlicensed content either, though I’m lucky being a pc player I can get mods and any unlicensed train soon gets sorted. But I sympathise with console players who can’t do that.

 

And as regards the OP it's probably not as simple as putting unlicensed content in the game. Some operators might still object if they are even hinted at and without a licence you are not going to get official access to trains or stations etc. for research.

 

if the choice is either a route I want being released unbranded or not released at all, I'll choose unbranded every single time.

If its not a route I'd buy then just adding branding to it wont make me buy it either.

 

Don't care at all - the main thing is that the color palette matches and the train coincided with the real one

 

You have two options....
1. Less content with proper liveries
2. More content with unbranded liveries in a few cases

I'm voting for the second.
It's the most fun for the most people.
With layers customizable in game, you don't HAVE to see anything in your game you don't want to, so it's a non-issue.
All "demanding" your viewpoint in the game is doing is denying other people freedom of choice because you don't like that the choice exists.
It doesn't actually gain you anything personally in the game.

 

I find it easier to read

 

Honestly with all the unbranded stuff for me it's ruined it doesn't look good in my eyes

 

Yeh being a console player it's very frustrating cos honestly it probably wouldn't bother me if I can just throw a mod on it that fixes all the unlicensed things

 

Did you just respond to your own post 3 times in a row?
Whoa there chief, let some other people comment on your question first =-)

 

Ide personally choose number 1 cos it's not a realistic simulator with unbranded stuff in it like not very authentic in my eyes , on PC u get the mods that can change that on console I have to look at unbranded stuff and just think we'll that's not right , I can see this game scrapping licensing altogether soon the more and more unbranded stuff we r starting to get

 

I doubt that very much

 

Was meant to reply to someone's post lol

 

But you don't see it in the game yourself.
How can something you don't have to see "ruin" it for you?

 

First and foremost I’d like to welcome you to the forums. Excuse the petty hostility from others, some of us are nice people

In regards to your question, I’d have to say it’s important for the sim to pursue and add licensed content wherever possible, as like you it impacts the overall experience for me. The only time I think it’s acceptable is when DTG doesn’t own the rights to the license or if it’s currently not in-game.

It’s been almost a year now and there’s no sign of 350/WCML branding ever returning. I still can’t believe that happened, how was LMS was able to backtrack on the agreement really blows my mind.
Luckily there’s CCC to fix the trains (on console).

 

realistic simulator it never was and it never will be
it is somewhat realistic

 

The DRS license for TSW only permits the representation of the Class 66 locomotive.
The existence of 'a' license for a brand does not automatically mean permission to reproduce any and all things related to that brand, or any more access to any of the prototypes operated by the licensor. Licenses can be incredibly general or very specific. It is wrong to assume their presence will open the floodgates to related content.
Why choose to do something with license issues? Because we wanted to bring nuclear traffic to TSW, and didn't want to include another 66 - taking on board the feedback from previous releases. We looked at several locomotives, including the 68 and even a 33. The Class 20 variant best fit the project budget.

 

Was it out of budget to obtain the licence for the 20? I don’t really understand how it all works, but I’m curious to learn more. Given SHGs work on MML, I’m sure there is a legitimate reason

 

Even if the current DRS license only attains to the 66, as Tracking Trains said, could another one not be obtained for the 20?
I'm not trying to be critical or anything, just curious.

 

We've seen before where "full licensed accuracy or nothing" inevitably leads, look no further than US freight. People pestered for years to have everything be 100% accurate, everything branded and licensed, and well, you got your wish. You got not a single new US freight route released since TSW3. Happy?

Let me be blunt for a moment. We are a bunch of gamers lurking on the internet, and are largely insignificant to those TOCs. Apart from, of course, when someone highjacks a train because a simulator taught them how. Or when someone posts a video of themselves ramming a Northern branded Class 323 into Manchester Piccadilly. Or when people start uploading crash compilations from games, all decorated bright and colourful with Union Pacific, CSX, BNSF ect...

True story, recently I visited a full cab Class 66 simulator. Every single piece of it was familiar and instinctive to me, because of how long I have been using the same exact loco in TSW. I was told that I was genuinely more comfortable in it and better performing with safety systems in particular than some of the actual trainee drivers who had used it in the past. Just think about that for a second.

The satisfaction of a few gamers on the internet is a very low priority to these companies. Their utmost priority is operational safety and brand image, and honestly, it absolutely should be. DRS for example is not going to want their brand and image plastered all over a video of a nuclear flask train barrelling full speed off a cliff. It may sound silly, but these are genuinely the things they have to consider.

Have you ever wondered why in several different racing games, take for example the likes of Forza Horizon 5, Test Drive Unlimited or Gran Turismo, you can't outright total the cars? You just get some light body deformation if you're lucky but mostly can only scratch it up? It's for the exact same reason I would imagine - Ferrari and Porsche don't want pictures and videos out there of their cars smashed up. They want their cars to be seen in good condition, because that is good marketing and promotes a good company image.

Certain TOCs out there have decided that it is not in their interest to license their branding out to games, maybe for safety concerns, maybe for brand image, maybe for something else entirely, but there is likely nothing anyone can do to change their minds. And even when a license does exist it doesn't mean that it will always be available, the Class 20 is a prime example of this considering we had a DRS branded Class 66 in the past. So ultimately the end statement is this: Do you want the modern Class 20 in the game? Do you want a Class 57? A 70? A 68? Any Class 66 alternative for the entire future of the game? If yes, then accept that unbranded trains are an inevitable part of the way forward. Because for some classes, for example the 70 which Freightliner and Colas have a total monopoly over, it may be the one and only way we will ever see it in the game. There's always livery designer...

 

If SHG were not able to receive the licence from DRS - this is fine and understandable. I suppose my main hope is that all possible efforts were made to receive licensing, prior to releasing unbranded content

 

Same here. Especially with Metra and CTA having no interest, it looks like unbranded would be the only way we can possibly get Chicago in the game (which is the reason I posted the unbranded question in the roadmap thread).

 

I had to smile the other week when another forum member suggested he might write to his Minister for Transport (not UK) to instruct the rail companies to grant DTG a licence.

In truth, with all the potential for misrepresentation I’m surprised that DRS and Sellafield Ltd (formerly British Nuclear Fuels) actually signed off on these wagons. Speaking from my experience in the rail industry (retired) movement of this traffic was nearly as hush, hush as the Royal Train. Very sensitive and kept very low key, particularly with the propensity for the Stone Age green welly brigade to come out and protest at its existence.

 

Which then brings us back to the point of whether they could still make a case for cease and desist if their operations and unique items were still recognisable but they didn't want depicting in a game. We don't know and probably never will, why LNW pulled the plug at the last minute on WCMLS but presumably, as it had been agreed previously, a settlement was made allowing DTG to release unbranded even though still quite apparent who and what was being simulated. That get out might not exist where an operator or organisation has point blank refused in the first place.

 

A Class 68 is very much needed in the game and I think it would do very well as it would open up a lot of options for people. I am really glad you did the Class 20 over another 66 though, unbranded or not.

 

To me it doesn't matter! A kind guy (or girl) with lots of free time will make a great mod.

 

Unless someone at DTG or SHG declares, “Reskins not allowed”.

 

I mean I certainly prefer branded but not at the expense of missing out on good content.

 

The moment they do that, I will... be extremely pissed but be able to do nothing.

 

Nothing to do with budget, DRS only want their logos on 66s it seems, same with TSC.

In any case, it's DTG who need the license, not Skyhook.

 

Doesn't bother me.

 

ScotRail clamp down pretty hard on anyone using their name in Content Creators club. I had a Scotrail liveried 20 that was removed because I dared to use the name lol.

 

Haggis Rail?!
Skirl Rail…
Or actually, Alba Rail.

 

I love when games use fictional companies/liveries to get around licensing. Some can be quite creative and get to be in-game jokes among players. Like Star Citizen's "Torpedo Burrito" or ATS's "Walbert" or GTA's "Cluckin Bell" or "Sprunk."

If you can't get a license, might as well have fun with it. The more "recognizable" but not "accurate" it is the better.

 

I think I called it north of the border 20 lol

 

Or the infamous “Brown Streak” Railroad in GTA…

 

Fictional routes and fictional trains are the poor man's choice. Out of necessity often, when the models have been built, but the license fell through. Fictional stuff at full price? No!

TTTE, do the konsole kiddies really care whether Thomas misses a few rivets, bolt and nuts? As long as he has a face and grimaces, it's probably OK.
Thomas is a boy, so he is blue, Thomasina, his fictional sister, will be pink. Because in every toy shop, the gender the toy is meant for is marked by colour. blue is for boys, pink is for girls.

The thumbstick warriors who treat TSW as just another game to score points and ranks running their plastic one handle EMU's on bus stop routes, do they care whether their cab interior is branded and the few trains and more or less well done station signs he meets are in the correct livery, typeface and colours?

TSW is just a train driving game, or a locomotive control desk simulation at best. It is removing itself from a rail transport simulation more and more in every new iteration of the game. Only JT for UK content and TSG for DB content seem to strive for a more authentic simulation withing the constraints of TSW's game engine and it many deficiencies.

DTG itself provides what the majority of players want, and their market research has proven to be infallible, hasn't it?
Just compare the endless suggestions and polls with what is in the pipeline and notice the continuing discontent between what is wanted and what is being delivered, and that's not even mentioning the quality or lack thereof given the budget and time constraints.

Slow USA freight operations through dark mountains and sunbleached deserts seem to have fallen victim to commercial decisions already. But perhaps HIS and consorts will port the many 'up the mountain-down the mountain' routes from TSC into TSW along with the same cut-copy-paste locomotives from DTM, TBT and whoever of those guys makes the transition to develop in UE4 for TSW

 

One thing I could go with is an enhanced timetable to buff routes with an otherwise scant train service. For example Kyle line, have a regatta which requires several additional relief trains well over and above the normal 3 or 4 a day. That's the only way lightly trafficked routes will make it in the sim. Or Central Wales with through services from West Wales to the North West diverted due to engineering work at Hereford.

 

Wasn't that a reference to the 1976 movie the silver streak?

 

I suspect it was a homage, albeit a slightly crude one. "All you had to do was follow the damned train, CJ." The first mission where you realised this game wasn't going to be a cakewalk!

 

Branded or unbranded makes no difference.
Take the 350 for example, wether you use the branding pack mod or creators club livery, it looks pretty realistic too me.

 

I remember it well. Was thinking of giving it another play thru, although I can't find the disc and the remaster trilogy is nearly 60 quid.

 

So what if they dont get a licence for it then? Youll be waiting a while for it, possibly never. Chances are that if a piece of content is released with no logo on it then I suspect someone on creators club will do one. No big problem really.

I saw similar people throwingtheir trains out of their prams when it was announced that the Class 350 would have to have no LNWR branding on it in the upcoming WCML route. Now look.... we have CC created liveries. Not that I would use them, my preference. The same goes with the 484 in SWT livery. I dont really see it as a problem.
I would rather have it with out a non fictional livery over not having it.

Hentis

 

Mark Moraghan has narrated a parody of this in Thomas the Tank Engine style animation. Its excellent. Anyhow I digress.... lol

Hentis

 

For me at least, I'm perfectly happy with fleshing out a timetable with unbranded similar stock where appropriate but it is rather more jarring when it's one of the flagship bits of rolling stock.

Obviously, sometimes things happen and a surefire agreement falls through at the final hurdle when a new piece of content is just on the cusp of release, and there's nothing you can do in that moment. But it still stings a bit when ypu're left with a slightly less than authentic experience as a result. I do to some extent agree that the pricing should reflect that (for route / loco DLCs at least, maybe not for a wagon add-on where the loco is not the focus).

Personally, I would 100% take an unbranded livery over fictional ones. Unbranded liveries are seen fairly often on the railways, obviously, not in every case. Fictional / tongue-in-cheek fake brands meanwhile would feel like TSW shifting too far towards the 'game' end of the 'game'-'sim' spectrum, and genuinely could put me off a purchase altogether, even at a heavy discount.

That being said, I've not found the 'modern' British routes particularly compelling for a fair while now, (especially since JT have seen us finally broadening the BR era horizons of the game), and that probably won't change unless we get a modern route of particular personal relevance to me, so the whole branding conundrum is all a bit hypothetical to me currently.

 

The idea of some 'third party' moving from TSC to TSW to port routes or rolling stock from TSC to UE4 is likely to be close to fantasy. The learning curve for a vastly more complex engine, especially with Simugraph, makes it unlikely to be commercially viable. The effort would be almost the same as a ground-up development. The reference to 'up mountain and down mountain routes' is a slight exaggeration of the apparent attempt by DTG to provide interest in US freight routes in a service which, by its nature in the US, is a long slow-medium speed slog across a vast landscape. So they try to release sections of routes (unfortunately for TSW in 50 to 80 mile chunks) which have a varied or challenging topography. I quite like the existing US freight DLCs, but have to say that TSC is better suited to US freight and it has some very accurate rolling stock available. For those wanting in-depth rail 'operations' on US freight, then Run8 is your thing - if you have a thick wallet (and the time).