To Dovetail Games.

This is an open letter to Dovetail Games.

I wanted to share a calm and genuine concern about WoS, more so the "Deluxe edition" of the game.

This isn’t about attacking the studio, and it isn’t about hating DLC. I understand licensed IP comes with financial pressures, and I understand development has to be sustainable.

My concern is about audience alignment.

If this game is primarily aimed at children, then I believe the DLC model should reflect that. Children engage with games differently than adult hobbyists, and heavy DLC structures can feel very different in a child-focused space than they do in a niche simulator ecosystem.

In hobbyist titles like TSW, TSC and Trainz, extensive DLC libraries and premium expansions are part of a known ecosystem. Adult hobbyists generally have the financial freedom and experience to assess any DLC purchases critically, understanding the costs and long-term value in a way children cannot. They can decide whether a £10–£20 add-on aligns with their interest level, budget, and commitment to the hobby. DLC in that context is discretionary expansion.

But when a child-friendly brand is involved, I feel that ethical expectations shift. Children do not interpret these DLC structures through the same lens of cost–benefit analysis. Their engagement is character-driven and emotionally immediate. When a favourite character or core part of the world is separated into paid content, it does not feel like an optional expansion, it feels like there's something missing. Even if purchasing decisions ultimately rest with parents, the emotional pressure often flows through the child.


I’d really like clarity from Dovetail on this:

* Who is the primary target audience? Older fans, or kids?
* Will this follow the traditional simulator DLC structure?
* Is there consideration for character drops or unlockable content?
* How is monetisation being approached differently compared to their core sim titles?

I’m not saying “no paid expansions ever.” A reasonable middle ground could exist — minor characters or small additions free, larger branch lines or substantial expansions paid.

What I’m hoping for is transparency and proportionality. If this is a child-focused product, treat it like one. If it’s aimed at older fans, market and structure it accordingly. And while I understand there might be things Dovetail can not say due to contracts with 3rd parties, any answer would go a long way in helping ease my concerns.

I feel that a clear discussion from Dovetail would go a long way here. Railways, whether historical, simulated, or fictional, represent craft, care, and thoughtful design. I hope this project reflects those same values in both gameplay and business philosophy.

Curious to hear what others think.
And thank you for hearing me out.

 

Thank you for the response, Jamie.

I completely understand that detailed post-launch plans may not be shareable yet. My main question isn’t about specific DLC announcements, but about philosophy.

Could you clarify whether this title will follow the traditional DLC model seen in TSW and TSC, or whether monetisation is being approached differently given the younger target audience?

Thank you.

 

Mate there are far worse targets out there in terms of monetisation aimed at children...

 

What was that Lego game back in 2015? Dimensions I think, where you had to buy actual mini lego sets in order to add more content into the game.

Then you had to port them through to the game via a stand.

Yeah I easily spent ove $1000.00 on that game for my grandaughter.

So yeah this would not be the first or last time.

Heck even commercials back in the day they said kids ask your parents on toy commercials.

 

I don't see the ethical considerations the OP does.
At the end of the day, it's the parents making the choices to spend money or not, and parents are adults.
It feels like you're skating around really SAYING what you are truly assuming in your own mind but don't want to outright accuse DTG of nefariously doing.
What are you actually accusing them of without the filler and circular talk?

 

I agree there are worse examples in the industry. But that* doesn’t automatically make more moderate versions above criticism

I’d rather see higher standards applied consistently than justify things by comparison.

 

Yes, monetisation aimed at children isn’t new. games like Lego Dimensions were expensive. But the fact that something has precedent doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be examined. My point isn’t that this would be the first example — it’s that when a product is clearly child-facing, I think higher standards of restraint and transparency are appropriate.

 

I haven’t accused Dovetail of anything.

I’ve asked whether a the DLC model seen in other train sims is appropriate for a child-focused brand, and whether monetisation is being approached differently because of that audience.

Yes, parents ultimately control spending. But marketing and design still shape how pressure flows. When characters in a child-focused game are segmented into paid content, the emotional driver originates with the child — even if the parent makes the final transaction.

That doesn’t make it illegal or uniquely evil. It just means ethical expectations shift when the primary audience includes children.

If this were a pure hobbyist simulator marketed squarely at adults, I wouldn’t raise the same concern. My point is about audience alignment, not villainy.

 

Please explain the supposed ethical considerations then.
You are making assumption it is, but not explained why.

 

monetisation is being approached differently given the younger target audience?

No because they don't actually expect children have any money and I'm pretty sure its more directed at the adults than the children to purchase for your child.

Also remember part of the team for the game is Mattel, a major toy company.

If you are at all familiar with Hot Wheels or Barbie I'm pretty sure you can the direction the DLC will take if the game is successful.

But ethically its not like they are selling fur coats for kids.

Yes we would all like living in a better world but its a capitalistic one we are in.

 

Children interact with media differently than adults. They are more attached to characters, less able to evaluate value, and more sensitive to content being segmented.

Because of that, I feel there should be greater care in how monetisation is structured if this game is aimed at younger audiences. That's why I asked for clarity about who the game is primarily aimed at and how those considerations are approached.

 

That still doesn't explain why you think it's unethical.
It's just a vague statement that "kids are different than adults."
It explains nothing.

 

That’s a fair point, and I agree that in practice it’s usually parents or grandparents making the purchases rather than the children themselves. And yes, that dynamic has existed in toys for decades, as you say with things like Hot Wheels or Barbie. I'm not arguing it's new or uniquely bad.

Yet my point isn’t that children are literally expected to spend money — it’s that the product experience is still designed around a child audience. The characters, the emotional attachment, and the way content is presented all target younger players.

So again, my question isn't really about condemning the practice. It’s about how Dovetail and Mattel handle DLC in regards to a younger audience.

 

I want to clarify something: I never actually said Dovetail was doing anything unethical.

What I said was that monetisation in a product that is aimed at children raises ethical considerations, which is different from making an accusation.

My question was simply whether the approach to monetisation will change when the target audience may include younger players, compared to Dovetail’s other titles.

the ethical question I’m raising isn’t “is DLC bad?” or “are they doing something malicious?”

It’s simply whether the same monetisation structures designed for adult hobby markets translate appropriately to a child-focused product.

 

Well considering its Mattel you can get a sneak preview on how they generally work by looking at Barbie and Hot Wheels games and their DLC.

 

Train simulators traditionally rely on a very large amounts of DLC designed for adult hobbyists. If that same structure were applied directly to a child-focused brand like Thomas & Friends, that's where my concern comes from.

Mattel obviously have a lot of influence over the brand and characters. But Dovetail still designs the structure of the game itself, including how content is delivered and expanded over time.

That's why I focused my question to Dovetail

 

Same with the other games they are done by other studios just like Mattel is working with DTG. So I'm pretty sure Mattel is also going to dictate price as well as content made.

You don't seem to understand that DTG are basically being contracted to make this game by Mattel. I'm pretty sure Mattel is paying DTG something to make this for them. And they are also probably getting a share of the sales as well

Have a look at Barbie and Hot Wheels games and the DLC and you will see basically the same strategy as an adult games when it comes to monetization.

And just like other products if it doesn't sell or do well, not saying it won't but if it doesn't, Mattel will drop production pull the license and that will be the end of it.

Read between the lines of Jamies reply, Mattel has way more oversight and control than you think. They are going to dictate DLC more than DTG are.

Also companies can focus on multiple groups at once, a game doesn't have to just be directed at children the can have multiple demograpics.

And I like to correct you that this is not a train simulator. They have already said that it will have simplistic controls( 2 versions) and is only partially using simulgraph the pvysics have been toned down which is how they are able to port it to the switch.

So pretty sure the are not focusing on train hobbyists first I think its more directed at adults for nostalgia, children and fans of Thomas.

They already have the train hobbyists with TSC and TSW and are looking to target a different audience with this and Metro Rivals. Otherwise they are jusr competing with themselves.

Just so you know I'm not discounting the value of your questions, I'm stating what I think from what history has shown.

In the end businesses are just around to make money. If they don't they die.

It obvious that the TSW DLC was a test bed to show Mattel what they can do to get a contract to make a stand alone game.

 

I'm already looking at this as a replacement to the OO model sets and figures. Even if there's £32.99 route add-ons it will be much cheaper too build the entire collection out and far more interesting for the vast majority of children.
I won't lie it might still be expensive for some but it's far more affordable than most toys now anyway and I bet it'll be longer lasting, and a huge saving on space
But I'm a big kid with too much money, but I remember being a broke kid in a poor family and I'd only ever have owned the base version

 

I think you raise a good point about Mattel likely having a lot of oversight, especially since it’s their brand, and I agree that the game has multiple audiences — nostalgic adults, Thomas fans, and younger players. To be honest even my nostalgia was peeked at the announcement.

The reason I mentioned younger audiences specifically is because a lot of the design choices we’ve seen so far seem to emphasise accessibility for younger audiences: simplified controls, toned-down physics, and a UI style that feels very approachable.
That suggests younger players are clearly part of the intended audience, even if they aren’t the only one.

My point is more about consistency between the audience the game seems designed for and the way content is structured.
The simplified controls, presentation, and overall style suggest younger players are part of the intended audience. In that context, I wonder if the DLC structure should also be simpler and more accessible than the heavy DLC model typically seen in similar train simulators

For example, the Deluxe Edition already adds James as a £10 extra character, which makes me curious how future content will be handled.

And I understand the distinction you're making. I agree it's not aiming for the same level of simulation as Train Sim World or Train Simulator Classic. But that to me is even more reason to question if the DLC model will follow suite from more serious train sims

 

That's actually a fair way of looking at it and it's a good point. However I feel that physical models are more tangible. It's physical, you have it there in front of you.

Whereas digital products are usually tied to a specific game and platform ecosystem.

I understand, I was a broke kid in a poor family too, That's actually one of the reasons I'm paying attention to how the DLC is structured.

If a lot of kids are only ever going to have the base version, then the base game needs to feel complete on its own. Locking popular characters or major content behind extra purchases can make the base version feel like it's missing things.

DLC isn't inherently bad, but the way it's handled matters a lot more when the primary audience includes kids.

 

If your whole concern is "I only want to buy the base game, so give me everything in the base game" then you could have just said that rather than pretend to vaguely care about "ethics" and "structure."
The way DTG is doing things IS the "normal" way to do this for video games.

 

I don't think you understand licensing. I don't think Mattel is paying DTG a penny.

 

I don’t think I’ve argued that everything should be in the base game. DLC is normal in games and I’m not disputing that.
But having said that, I also don’t think the DLC structure used in train simulators is typical of the wider games industry. It’s much closer to a hobby ecosystem where players collect lots of individual pieces of content over time instead of large bundles.

And That works well for games like Train Sim World because the audience is largely hobbyists and rail enthusiasts. My question is whether that same structure makes sense if this game is primarily signalling a younger audience through its UI, controls and presentation.

 

Again, entirely unsupported by anything just your "feeling." You have not given counterexamples or any details at all. More vague statements. No one will take you seriously if you don't make a case. Not only haven't you given a solution, you haven't even explained the supposed "problem" that exists in your head to be "solved."

Just vague "maybes" and "could bes" with nothing to even look at or discuss. Again, if you want to say something then simply say it. Hinting and suggesting without substance out of some vague sense of virtue signaling is pointless. Just say what you actually mean.

 

DLC is just the digital equivalent of what we used to have when I was very young in the 1970s. There were many toys where you could build up a collection of things. I was definitely nagging my parents for more Lego sets when I was 5 or 6 because I wanted more pieces to build bigger things. There weren’t as many brand tie ins with Lego back then but there were already modular sets where you built up a city if your parents were rich enough, with lots of different buildings and vehicles etc. You could also make whatever else you wanted with the pieces. It was physical DLC. When I was 7 there were Star Wars figures and spaceships too, none of which I got because my parents were poor and they thought Lego was a better investment for future play. They were right. I built some magnificent things. Some of my friends had all the Star Wars toys. This is just that but 50 years later and it’s TV characters in a game to collect, not physical toys of movie characters or an ever growing city of imagination. I could name many other collecting things for children from the 70s and 80s and it all cost money. It’s nothing new.

 

I think there’s been a misunderstanding of my point. I’m not accusing Dovetail of doing anything unethical, and I’m not arguing against DLC existing. There is no problem at all.

My question is simply about structure. Other DTG games like Train Sim World use a very heavy DLC ecosystem designed for adult hobbyists who gradually build a large library of locomotives and routes. Look at TSC, how much DLC does that game have? Hundreds?

If Wonders of Sodor is aimed more toward children and casual players, I’m interested in how that model might be adapted to suit that audience.

That’s the clarification I was hoping to hear from the developers. Because I don't think that style of of DLC releases works well with younger audiences. As I feel that I've already outlined.

 

I think my point has been getting misunderstood, so let me restate it more clearly:

train simulator titles tend to follow a very recognizable structure: a base game containing a few core routes, followed by a large ecosystem of DLC over time. Both Train Sim World and Train Simulator Classic are good examples of this, where the number of route packs, locomotive add-ons, and freight packs eventually becomes very large. Other Train Sims do the same, and there's nothing wrong with that. That's the industry standard.

And that model works well for hobbyist simulators because the audience generally understands the format and how it's built around adults choosing locomotives based on technical interest.

However, children don't engage with the technical side of a locomotive. Younger audiences will engage with this game primarily through emotional attachment to characters. That difference makes me wonder whether the same DLC structure is appropriate here.

My question comes from the fact that Wonders of Sodor appears to be presented very differently. Based on the UI, art direction, and simplified controls that have already been discussed, it seems to be targeting a younger audience alongside nostalgic fans of Thomas.

Because of that, I'm curious about two things:

1. Will Wonders of Sodor follow the same long-term DLC structure as other Dovetail train titles?
Given the large number of characters and locations in Sodor, it would be easy to imagine things like branch line packs, character add-ons, wagon packs, and so on. Half this forum is already just speculation on what characters and routes are coming.

2. If that is the plan, has any thought been given to how that structure might be adapted for a younger audience?
Train simulator DLC ecosystems are typically designed around adult hobbyists gradually building up a large library of content. If this game is aimed partly at children, I’m simply interested in whether the approach to expansions will be different.

This isn’t meant as an accusation or criticism — it’s a genuine question about how the design philosophy might change when the audience changes.

That’s the only point I was trying to explore.

 

Id also like to add; Other Thomas games aimed at younger audiences have often made characters unlockable through gameplay or bundled expansions. That approach fits a character-driven franchise well rather than individual character DLCs like what we've already seen with James.

 

Still not seeing the problem here.

There's literally nothing wrong with DTG's approach.

 

You've still failed to show any real difference between "expansion" and "expansion." Just repeating the same thing over and over and failing to "explore" anything. Again, go into DETAIL and explain/show what you suggest they should do instead.
How is your ideal "expansion" different than the "TSW style expansion?"

 

If you want people to engage with you, maybe don't post AI slop.

 

Ok.

As said; train simulator titles tend to follow a very recognizable structure: a base game containing a few core routes, followed by a large ecosystem of DLC over time. For example, TSW4 came with the: Antelope Valley Line, East Coast Main Line: Peterborough - Doncaster, and S-Bahn Vorarlberg.

But DLC wise, it had:

• LNER Class A3 60103 Flying Scotsman,
• Railpool BR 193 Vectron,
• Blackpool Branches,
• RhB Arosa Aggregates,
• Maintalbahn
• Cargo Line Vol. 1: Petroleum,
• Centro Regional Railways Class 323,
• Berninalinie,
• Engineering Express,
• Bahnstrecke Salzburg-Rosenheim,
• London Overground Suffragette Line,
• Fife Circle Line & Levenmouth Rail Link,
• Semmeringbahn,
• LIRR Commuter,
• Cargo Line Vol. 2: Aggregates,
• DB BR 218 Diesel
• BR Class 380,
• ScotRail Class 158,
• And Expert DB BR 101 & IC Steuerwagen.

And already we have Wonders of Sodor releasing with the Main Line and Thomas's branch line as core routes, plus James as an deluxe extra.
Are we going to see the exact same pattern with:

• Edward's branch line
• Little North Western branch
• Toby
• Bill & Ben
• Donald and Douglas
• The Narrow Gauge engines
• More troublesome trucks
• Coach packs
• Diesel 10 and Lady

And potentially more.
And that's fine, there is nothing wrong with this style of expansion DLC. My concern isn’t the existence of DLC itself. My concern is fragmentation — dozens of small character purchases in a game aimed at younger audiences.

My question was

A seasonal expansion model could provide the same long-term content while keeping purchases simpler and more predictable for families. I think that would be more ideal given younger audience.

 

I struggle to get my thoughts and feelings out clearly in writing. My words are often time taken wrong or just misinterpreted. The ideas and questions are still mine though. I don't see an issue with using something to help me structure my thoughts better than I can alone.

 

It doesn't seem very different from the current way of doing things... I mean DLCs are released regularly, and this is predictable.
But whatever happens, we don't really know in advance how much the complete collection will cost us...

 

You make a good point. Whatever happens, we don't really know, and I've already been thinking of doing the stats after a year of release.

But I never had an issue with the DLC structure as is. I never really thought of a solution to it because I don't have an issue to solve.

My question was purely if Dovetail was considering changes to the system in regards of the younger target audience. An audience that can't consider "Is this route worth £15 to me" Compared to "I want Edward!".

 

You know, that reminds me of something...
When I was young, we had booklets sold in bookstores, models sold in pieces across countless issues. Anyone who wanted to see it through ended up with a very expensive model.
In the early 2000s, a law was passed requiring sellers to indicate the number of magazines required to have a complete model...

Capitalism will exist as long as there is value. What we must avoid is letting the market dictate the rules (the invisible hand).
Why should Dovetail consider they have a responsibility to change things ?
Isn't only the parents one involved there ? Isn't it a matter of individual responsibility at the end ?

 

I like this, you raise some really good points. I feel that yes, there is a level of personal responsibility. Parents have responsibility for purchases, but Dovetail also have responsibility for how they design systems aimed at children.

 

That interests me, but it's difficult to define concretely.
Where do we draw the line between profit and ethics ?

 

That's a fantastic question, and it's one that I'm struggling to answer.

If a game appears aimed at children, should the DLC structure reflect that audience?

I think the line is drawn at an age where it's reasonable to assume that the target audience has at least a general grasp of monetary value. In which case my original question comes back:

Who is the primary target audience? Older fans, or kids?

 

But what your saying sounds like you want DTG to teach kids about value?

Or that you shouldnt advertise to kids because the may not understand monetary value.

Thats up to parents. Just like if your child wants something thay you can't afford its up to the parent to say no.

There is absolutely no way to do that if a child wants something they will bug parents for it. Ifnits advertised or not. But I'm pretty sure they are not going for the 3 or 4 year old market.

And if you haven't taught your child monetary value by the time the are 8 then you have an issue.

You teach your child the value of things so that they understand that they can't have everything. That is and will never be a companys responsibility for that.

Sorry but the request is pretty ludicrus to me.

 

I’m not arguing that companies should teach children the value of money, and I’m not saying parents aren’t responsible for purchases. The idea of a company teaching value is honestly dystopian in my eyes.

But that was never my point:

We have the base game,
We already have a deluxe edition with one extra character,
What's next?
A single character add-on?
A branch line add-on similar to a new route addon in TSW (with a new character and timetable)
A pack of rolling stock from the show (Scruffy, Hector, Old Slow-coach etc) similar to the cargo line add-ons?

The question I’m asking is simply whether that structure — which can grow into dozens of paid add-ons — is the right fit for a game whose core appeal are beloved characters. Not just engines.

I’m not saying the current model is wrong.
I’m asking whether it’s the best fit for this audience.