Too Many Versions Of The Same Loco Is One Reason We End Up With Things Like This...

This is the class 66 from WCML and the headlights are so annoying when viewing from external view, as they dip in and out when moving in and out. That also happens with one of the Cargo Line versions, but not with the many other versions that I have checked.



The other thing was this version, is that the train/auto brake is so sensitive compared to other versions. The lightest dab to give you 1.0 BC or less and you still drop so much speed.

There has got to be a better way right, but I guess when you have so many 3rd party devs it is inevitable?

In an ideal world, surely there would be a master version and a dev would have to get permission to update/add to it and these changes would have to be tested before being approved and therefore the model would only ever get better and never get worse.

 

This was a case of six of one, half dozen of the other. The problem was that with a single master loco, any change has to then be tested on every single DLC that loco touches. With each DLC being a self-contained ecosystem, changes to a loco in one only need to be tested in that one.

 

Yeah, that is a very fair point actually.

The theory is great, but because the routes and tech have developed over time, there is no guarantee that the 'fully updated' 66 would still work on GWE for example.

 

I also think in the beginning the idea was that by coming with its own class 66 you wouldn't need to own anything else to use that pack. You could get the free starter pack and the Cargo Line Vol.2 for example and then the Frankfurt S-Bahn and spawn The HOA train and it's 66 without needing any shenanigans or editing of formations with the TTC class 66.

The idea being that no DLC is locked behind or requiring of another DLC for it to work,

 

I didn't mean that exactly. I meant that the loco ip would be 'owned' by DTG and then that version would ship with any relevant content that released with it.

Changes could obviously be added but they would have to be checked and tested first.

I see pros and cons now.

 

Although thinking about it, they must share quite a lot of the same model, because the 66 has had the headlights indicators mislabelled on every version and this is not something you would keep getting wrong if it was not a copy and paste job!!

 

They got it wrong even on the class 66s with unique modelling changes soo....

 

Yeah, there must be a core code that everyone can tap into for some bits.

But why in almost a decade no one could be bothered to change a label that says Head Night/Right to Head Day/Right is beyond me!!

 

I will admit I am part of the problem here and I think I need to shift my attitude a bit as to me I see that and just think "head down and get that yingyingying"

A lot of this stuff I will, well not ignore but not *really* care about too much

 

I think that's real, as you can decrease the braking by tapping and the bar will go up in small increments. I remember this happening on the old AP66 EP (dunno about new, haven't bought it yet).

 

The 66 has been done to death in all honesty. Bring on the 90.

 

It's not the theory or the technique, it's the application on this particular model.

Works great on the others.

 

If updating rolling stock renders it incompatible with a route there's something fundamentally wrong with the design of the game.

 

Yeah that's what I was arguing months ago too. There is no reason why a (fixing, incremental) update to a loco should break how it works in older routes. And if there currently IS a technical reason for such silliness that is a big game design flaw.

 

Two things come immediately to mind:

1) While IRL you can pretty much drop a loco on a pair of rails and it will roll if it has power, in a game it's all programming, and the systems do have to interact with each other. It's easy to sniff about "bad game design" from a distance, but it doesn't have to be a design thing, just one domino somewhere that knocks over another one. That's just software development.

2) Even if this game is in fact carefully designed to keep the two systems separate, where a loco change shouldn't affect the route it's in, you still absolutely have to go through the testing process. Not doing that just invites Murphy's Law to stick its foot out.

 

I think they will keep supporting the game for another 4–5 years, then they’ll release TSW New Generation, stop bringing old routes over, and everything will start from scratch again. That’s why nobody will invest serious effort into fixing bugs in old routes or locomotives.

 

They were not doing it before they started talking about Train Sim World Next and they still not doing it after.

There is no difference.