PC [poll] How Do You Think Dtg Should Handle Branding?

Another contended topic in the community is how acceptable it is to have unbranded content. Though not brought up recently, the issue of having Heathrow services, but unbranded, came up. Surprisingly, many were open to the idea of unbranded trains there. I'm used to hearing a lot of anti-unbranding rhetoric. Probably because I like BNSF and BNSF is a prime example of 'messed up branding.'

That made me curious as to which of those sides is bigger in the community, and how DTG should respond to unbranded content. DTG is quite scared of doing unbranded content out of the negative reactions that come from unbranded stuff. (Frankly, those people who complain about no branding not meeting their expectations need to learn that branding is not always possible.) For example, BNSF, despite not being totally unbranded, is probably the biggest topic. Which is ironic that DTG appeases the complainers on it by not making BNSF DLC, despite most people who actually care about BNSF being in the USA...where it is licensed... This attitude in general (not just for BNSF) hurts a lot of possibilities for really great routes...
So, are those complainers that DTG is appeasing a vocal minority or vocal majority?


An, in general, what do you think is the right approach to branding?

I doubt anyone thinks this, but should unbranded content be chosen over branded content all the time?
Should DTG throw legal junk out the window and just make everything unbranded to save on legal work and free up route choices, then leave it to the community to repaint content?

Or, more reasonable, is the 'disadvantage' of unbranded content not very meaningful to you? Is a branded DLC pretty much equal to an unbranded DLC?
Should DTG just not prioritize branding as a consideration, and choose routes based on other things, only worrying about the branding issues after considering everything else? (Maybe even if that's because you don't like unbranded stuff, but are willing to get mods to make everything unbranded look branded-so it doesn't matter what DTG does.)

Are you one of the many that sees unbranded content as a small disadvantage that, though acceptable, is not the best idea?
Should DTG not go out of their way to make unbranded routes, but still do unbranding without hesitation if the unbranded content is requested often? Should DTG be willing to make things like BNSF DLC, where the fact that it is branded in some places is enough to justify it not being branded in other places [but still avoid entirely unbranded content a bit more]?

But maybe you see unbranded content as a pretty big disadvantage, yet one that could still be outweighed by other good things.
Should DTG try to brand as much as possible, but still be willing to unbrand if the brand involved is insignificant and unknown (thus not very likely to upset people)? Should DTG not miss out on an amazingly popular route or train, even if it has to be unbranded?

And, again, I doubt many think this, is unbranded content completely unacceptable and should be avoided in all shapes and forms?
Should DTG consider licensing first and foremost on a route? Is it better to have no DLC at all than an unbranded DLC? (Sorry if you think this, DTG has already unbranded a few things in TSW-see DTGX wellcars.)

 

In terms of the Heathrow trains; it is not just branding that is an issue but sound as well. It looks like that without a license that DTG are not able to spend quality time with the trains to get the correct sounds recorded. I think sound might be just that bit more important to people than the branding.

 

In my opinion branding is not that important and once the editor is made available those that are bothered about not having the branding will be able to add it anyway.

 

I love the real branding.. only unbranding when there is no other way..

 

I would say try get a branding license, if thats not possible, make a fakebranding. Like the carnumbers that are not CSX but DTGX. Or like the companys in Truck Simulator. Logos, names and designs that somewhat resemble the company but are not a infringement.

 

As far as branding goes, I most likely wouldn't buy any unbranded routes. It's important to me to have the branding for the railroad and the proper liveries.

As far as branding for everything else goes, that doesn't bother me too much. It would be nice to see other brands for the shipping containers on the intermodals but that isn't really a big deal to me.

 

I actually kinda like that idea. Might even make it easier to mod textures to put in real logos where the fake logos already are. DTG is doing this with DTGX instead of DTTX, which works well, but I wish they would do it for containers. I really like the way containers are on modern routes in TS2018 with things like "energy line" "RS transco" "wave" and wish they chose to do that in CSX and GWE. All CSX containers might be branded, but it actually feels less realistic as a result! Funny how fake brands can be enough to make things more realistic.

 

This sums up my view perfectly. I chose the "Avoid unbranding" option as the closest to this.

 

Branding is fine unless it means DTG avoids some operators and their maintained routes or manufacturers in general.

No. I'm not quite sure how DTG would even end up with this, because in reality almost everything is branded.

However, I'm not someone who is obsessive to see a specific logo or letters on rolling stock in the game.

I can live without or an let's say adapted name or logo. It wouldn’t mean the end of the world to me.

If Livery Designer would be more capable, sure thing.

But just with the limitations it has, it's not possible. And I think DTG does that by intent. Just like they didn't gave us an opportunity to disable the safety systems on LIRR Commuter 2.0.

They don't want us to replicate authentic and real logos and liveries because DTG is afraid of a copyright claim by the owner.

However, if I were DTG I would evaluate what type of content is in "the freedom of the user" to create and what not.

In Forza Horizon for example, users are able to replicate and use brand logos on the cars although Microsoft Studios ain't got licenses for these brands and they're not even deleting these designs.

Of course a branded DLC has more value than a not branded one, but that doesn't mean an unbranded DLC wouldn't have any value.

The question for me is, would it even be possible to use a route like LIRR for example without the agreement of the maintaining operator?

I guess that's what they're doing all the time.

And it makes sense to not get into trouble later. Also of course, it facilitates many things like getting proper reference material to rebuild routes and locos and of course the chance to make authentic sound recordings.

No, not at all it is unacceptable or it is better to have nothing instead of anything. It should be evaluated per case and is definitely plausible and even logical in some specific cases where problems with obtaining licenses is a serious concern.

 

And the winner for the oldest necrobump goes to ...

 

In Germany we say "Who can can. Who has has."

But still an up-to-date topic. I think the OP is really elaborate and probably the most detailed one you can find in the forums. I see no reason why not to.

 

Bros fully bumped a thread from December 2017

 

2017??!!!

 

I would like to have all the trains branded.
I know this will be complicated, but the most DTG can do, it will be appreciated.
Branded makes trains more "real".

Searching at Creator's Club I noticed there some "MOD", that adds logos to some wagons and locomotives.
But this is for PC owners only.
The ones we are on console, can not get that.
Or I am wrong?...

 

It’s still a relevant topic despite the necro-bump.

 

By "some exceptions," though, I really mean "restricted to minor freight stock as is already the case," e.g. the fictional DTGX reporting mark on US well cars.

 

Couple of thoughts:

1) There's also that great intangible called respect. If DTG started working around licenses that aren't granted, even if technically legal, would it affect relationships with the railroad companies?

2) Making the assumption that the chances of a company that has not granted a license still allowing access to their trains for pictures and sound would be zero, are the people who are okay with fake branding also okay with fake visuals and sound?

 

Im to the point now where maybe some unbranded trains should be added .example CN oakville since no GO transit license just add unbranded commuter time table those poor passengers waiting on the platform s for a train that will never show up..would like to see create my own shipping containers in livery designer and have them show up random on stack trains that would make for some colorful consist

 

I think DTG not being able to get licences is holding the game back some especially US routes there are a lot of routes that have coumumuter and freight traffic .for exampl make the racetrack BNSF freight Metra commuter DTG has BNSF but cant get Metra there is lots of others where licence for 1 but not other.

 

If you do this already when you have a licence then I don't see that being a big issue unless the quality of the 'made up' sound is poor.

 

I think "fake" brands can get interesting for more liveries on a train that is already in game that's all. Like the multiple Class 66 variants (Freigtliner, etc)

 

One thing which would interest me is this. Does an operator has any kind of rights for his route, which need to be obtained first by DTG to even use this route?

Or is there a freedom to just replicate every route on earth without the permission by the operator?

A bit of weird question, but it basically in other words, what if the operator does not want to give license. Am I still allowed to replicate their maintained (at let's say "owned") route virtually for a commercial product?

 

Except of course it's a bit more complicated than that, because it may be possible to get access to the same train by a different operator...

 

Except every RR's version of the same nominal model includes bespoke features, especially in the cab, that aren't like any others'. Imagine trying to build the Taurus with no OBB access, and trying to derive it from the 182!

 

I voted, "avoid unbranded with exceptions".

If DTG are pretty sure the branding will never happen, i'd rather unbranded than them just avoiding it forever.

 

I would take an unbranded METRA and SEPTA train if it means I’m able to be driving down their routes in game

 

I mean, thats part of the whole point WHY I play this game, to kinda feel like the real thing, like the trains I ride or MIGHT be riding, but as a virtual engineer... I want to drive OBB trains, DB trains, Amtrak trains... driving Amorak trains to me would be like wearing Adiads instead of Adidas

plus, if a product receives a brand license for the game, that probably means that it will have to meet certain standards as not to damage said brand - in case of LIRR/MTA, it gave us pretty much the best ATC/ASC/ACSES implementation to date... and I want good implementation of safety systems, as without them the game gets boring real quick for me, and I want them to work as prototypically as possible, so I dont have to do guess-work as to if sth is a bug or a feature

also, branding also means that we get proper real life liveries and such, and community can have fun afterwards creating all sorts of things... the other way around, like having unbranded locos and such, and community creating unlicensed branding... nah, no thank you

 

To add to that. with a license DTG or other developers can go on trips to do research on the content they want added in the game. Branding might be a difficult and long process sometimes. but sometimes you have to take a bit more time and effort to get something good.

 

For me it depends just how far developers go with “Fake branding”

For those familiar with TS Classic, West Coast Mainline Trent Valley was released in an unbranded/altered state slightly from the real thing. Whilst you could immediately recognise the livery on the class 350, the shades and colours of the actual livery were altered slightly to differentiate to avoid any infringement + lack of operator branding.

I wouldn’t mind if something like this were to happen, but personally anything which would require a more ‘extreme’ alteration would just be a huge no go

 

Don't bother with branding in the UK. Just create and release British Rail addons.

 

But that is branding. Having British Rail requires the various British Rail brands.

 

But in this case it would be just the logo. It's not like you get a fake product of less quality like with the Adidas comparison.

If the underlying vehicle would be the exact same, just with a variation to the logo to not get into the license issues, than it wouldn't make a difference.

Eyerything else is "Brand cult" like those people just buying overpriced Apple devices simply to have "an Apple" while the competitors offer much more for less money.

Of course, everyone can bought what they want and if they need a certain brand in their life to feel better, that's absolutely okay. But we're speaking about the logo, not a change to the actual vehicle.

And yes, do not have permissions might also say that the source material is not exactly the same, but if only the logo were the problem and DTG had a good other opportunity to get material from a similar or even exact same rolling stock, I see no problem why the quality of the actual product shouldn't be the same.

Well, that's one interpretation of it. Here's another.

MTA forced DTG to always have safety sytems on. This circumstance on the other hand requires that the safety systems should work absolutely fine and have no flaws in order to even use the DLC. So exactly this point of LIRRC, had to be perfect and working correctly.

I doubt that MTA really took care on the exact replication of the safety systems, as in this case, they also could have been disabled.

Here are two things. A good implementation/replication is always my pick of choice, too. However that doesn't have anything to do with that they should be enabled all the times. There are a lot players (and not only starters), who at least once in a while want to enjoy a ride without an alarm ringing every few seconds.

As long as you aren't an engineer of the real counterpart or a real experienced driver having knowledge about it, you'll never know exactly whether something is a bug or a feature.

Not a good option, yes, but way better than having nothing.

 

that's not entirely true. I really prefer a windows or linux machine over a mac and I daily drive windows. yes I know linux and MacOS are both unix based. but apple isn't just an overpriced brand anymore. you don't spend double on intel hardware because they have their own pretty good silicon now. and if you integrate it into an ecosystem plus the extra security it's a real benefit for some users. easy to set up too.

but for the TSW branding argument. it really depends how big the brand is, but from the outside if there's just a little bit of text missing on the train so be it. most people won't notice it. and if you do notice it well personally it'd annoy me a lot so I'd like to keep the brands. For branding a color scheme or pallete is also included usually. so will the whole DB row of trains just be a full red box or a full white box? don't think anyone likes that. I don't think we are "brand cult" as you say. I personally don't care if I drive an SBB, BLB, NS or any operator's Flirt. but this is a simulator after all. with licensing comes the access and oppurtunity for the developers to see and work with the actual thing to make it as real as possible. this includes the plans to when possible source the 4024's sounds when the depot opens. without a lisence and acces to research we might get trains that look like the correct model. but sounds, colors and how the thing works driving it, the physics, controls, safety systems and anything special will be guesstimates. do we really want a lot of rolling stock so bad we're willing to throw everything that makes it a simulator out of the window? I know it sounds harsh but I expect that with no license that's how far companies are willing to go to say no you can't use our stuff. and even like the people who want a mod removing safety systems for LIRR a possible request to pull the product if they can do that.

No logo's and branding will look weird but is viable. for example the RRX KISS has just a bit of text on the front. the rest is a very interesting color pallette. if the train works correct and the livery is possible. but just a bit of text gone sure, get me the RRX KISS on the routes it drives. if we get a purple or even just a bland gray box that looks like a KISS with just a general throttle and reverser and copied sounds and physics from something completely different in my eyes better to just leave it out until a license is managed.

but I think there's a fine line between acceptable and not acceptable. I wouldn't mind ÖBB nightjet coaches on a NJ even if it's just a reskinned Bmz (yes also for the non Bmz NJ coaches) because the spam of IC Bmz is a bit much for the different services. Since I would never get into the coaches as a driver anyways that's ok. but yeah the RRX example above is a different story. you can't really just make a 146 with some DoSto to say it's a KISS.

 

That depends on the model in question.

 

In my opinion, I agree with all the examples made by Matt, and other community members.
I believe we can accept some issues on the trains features, and other details.

As mentioned before, I like trains branded.
It is reasonable to think have all of them, is not easy or even complicated, even on the costs point of view.

The particular case of Metrolink route, -where after Covid-, DTG have the chance to go to that train company in California -, and they have the chance to record every sound, and take lot of pictures of the details of the locomotives and passenger cars.
That was really great!.
The sounds of the EMD F-125 are fantastic.

Hopes that kind of "realism", could be applicable on future trains.

 

Again, the underlying vehicle won't be the exact same, because without access the model would be based on guesswork, speculation and grainy old photographs

 

I agree with matt. Everyone here has their own preferences and limit to what they find acceptable or not. The same will show with the expert 101 I bet. With all the suggestions and these threads it’s interesting to see how the community feels about prioritizing extensions or rolling stock and other stuff. But I think with whatever DTG does they will never appease to everyone at the same time but they still enhance the “world” aspect with every release good or bad, big or small. We can play and experience hours of content somewhere on the world with every release

 

I think you are underestimating the amount of material you can get without access. Certainly if the vehicle exists today you'll have better quality photographs at the very least...

 

That’s true. However you are limited to what’s already available, and in some circumstances there may be a lack of available resources for a specific thing

Having access means DTG can be thorough and take all the information and photos they need from as many positions / angles as required.

Whilst I am not a huge developer personally, there have been times where I have dabbled into creating objects or even liveries, and had to rely on pre-existing source information on the internet, and in some cases it can be more difficult than if you were to obtain the source information directly yourself

 

Ah yes, another necrobump world record. December 2017. Lets remember that guys next time someone bumps an old thread!

 

Not a problem if the issue has become a matter of present concern again. Kind of informative to see what the board thought about it back then.

 

the elders have spoken \m/

yes, Antelope Valley was great, I just wish those safety systems actually enforced sth yes, it is a bigger challenge then, but I like learning such things

 

Enthusiast photography is not the only available source of data...

 

as for the roof and stuff, sth I think is absolutely brilliant and should be included on OBB routes at stations this is 100% real life information/safety campaign by OBB going on for a while now... I always have a good laugh when seeing this around stations in Vienna

 

don’t think he said it was.

it certainly makes up a big selection of available to view by anyone photos.

 

We need an audio recording/setup tutorial, as well as a Simugraph tutorial. The basics, at least. I've got an idea brewing and, while it'll be a small miracle to pull off, knowing where to even start audio-wise is a must before I start reaching out and trying to make a reference trip of my own.
I know that's a mighty ask, especially given each traction type is going to be treated differently (I'm specifically going for D-E on my first project), but when I hear you say that you strap an entire soundbooth's worth of mics to all conceivable areas of a loco to source your audio, my first question is how? Then additionally, what kind of audio equipment? Where exactly is it placed? What's the "routine" that a locomotive is run through to get the most complete soundset? How's the raw audio "mixed" into Simugraph? Etc.

I've dabbled in music creation/editing as well as audio capture and mixing, but nothing on this scale or for this particular implementation. It'd be great to get some pointers from the people who've done it a time or two.