Something Sam said on the stream last night surprised me a bit. I’m not sure who he was referring to (may even have been me, who knows) but I was intrigued by the slightly dismissive way he talked of someone ‘on the forum’ who had questioned changes in the core of the game. Aware I’m sticking my head above the parapet to be shot at but hey ho. If you missed it, 26:25 in this video is where to see it; He remarks that “there are new features in core, it runs better than it ever has before, routes brought over onto the new game, looks better than it did last year, it’s got variable adhesion extra tools and that kinda stuff, so to say that nothing much has changed is....wrong”. I’m not sure what to make of that. On the one I hand I agree with his broader point that there have been some changes, but there is clearly a disconnect between what DTG see as core changes and what the players see as core changes. Aside from the change to UE4.23, from the players side of the equation I’m not sure I agree. Addressing his points; - Runs better than it has before - Well, not really. There is stuttering that did not exist in TSW2020, in 4K it really struggles in certain places and at the moment some people can’t play the game for more than 5 minutes without it crashing. As for the vaunted ‘4K support’, well TSW2020 worked just fine in 4K. As can be seen from these videos I made under the exact same conditions, TSW2 often kicks out worse FPS than TSW2020 and is certainly no better. TSW2020 - TSW2 - - Routes brought over to the new game - Yes, and DTG were rightly applauded for doing so. As we all know though, this has brought it’s own myriad of issues which now need fixing. Some of them are so bad that some aspects of these routes are barely playable in TSW2. I’m not sure how this is a ‘core improvement’ anyway. - Looks better than it did last year - Genuine question, how? Skies (only under certain conditions) aside it looks exactly the same to me. All the long standing graphical issues that were there in TSW2020 persist in TSW2. MP made a point of saying before release that no graphical changes had been made to the game. - Variable adhesion - Yes. Ok. However, the more I play the game the more I feel this is a fudge as it has a distinctly scripted feeling about it. By that, I mean in certain conditions you move the throttle past a certain point and the wheels spin (always at the same throttle percentage. RSN last night over the whole route - 61% no spin, 62% spin). In my experience sanding also has no effect on whether the wheels spin or don’t spin under acceleration. On some units it does seem to have an effect under braking. For me, the jury is very much out on that one. - Extra tools - A fair point and an addition indeed. Is it an improvement to the core though? Admittedly it doesn’t interest me one jot so I have not looked at them, but judging by feedback they’re extremely limited in scope and buggy. Good addition but some way to go I feel. So that would appear to be what DTG think of as the core. I get the impression that when the ‘community’ talks of the core, we’re talking more specifically about the graphics, sound, dispatcher and performance. I’m not listing the problems again as it’s been done to death. Was Sam right to dismiss what I see as genuine questions about issues that clearly exist in the game, and have purported changes to the core improved the game in any noticeable way? Got my tin hat on so fire away. DTG Protagonist , fancy the first shot?
It does look better. It’s not immediately obvious until you go back to TSW2020 and see what that looks like now in comparison. As for it running better, I can’t agree with that. Going back to TSW2020 also shows that. The biggest difference with lighting in TSW2 is that the overall light level of what’s in view affects the exposure of the image, but as much as this improves things it can also make areas in shadow far too dark if you have a lot of bright sky in the field of view. The contrast of the image is better too. Other aspects of the lighting may not gave changed, the trains still glow in the dark. Over the time I’ve had TSW, 15 months, there have been some new features, going back to the introduction of Mastery (not a good feature), headsway, which was a brilliant addition, and more recently the variable adhesion and new tools brought by TSW2, which Sam listed. TSW2020 performance did improve slowly over that time but took a big step back with TSW2, with all the stuttering and stuff, and the fuzzy image loading of the trains. A lot of game crashes going on and xbox players are having a right nightmare with the implementation of preserved content, and most of that content runs much better in TSW2020 and that is mainly sound issues but not exclusively. Some content that worked in TSW2020 is broken in TSW2, mainly seen in the scenarios of Sand Patch Grade. If the core worked better, that content would work better, not have to be radically altered and truncated to make it work at all. Camera functionality has been restricted in TSW2, that’s not an improvement, it’s worse than it was. I think DTG see more improvements with the core from inside the company than we see on this side as players. A lot of improvement are to do with the way they create the routes, rather than what we see on the screen or in gameplay. Not that much has changed there. The dispatcher, the passengers, the scripted nature of everything, the sound mixing, not much of that has changed for the better, it’s still the same as it was when I first got it. That’s what most people are referring to as the core, including whoever posted what Sam read on the forum. The core doesn’t really include livery and scenario tools in that sense. I think Sam was maybe a bit too dismissive of what he’d seen on the forum but if he’s looking at it from the ‘inside’ view he will have been responding with that view, and referring to the tools as part of the core as well, not as peripheries to the gameplay. In that sense, he was right in the amount of stuff they’ve added to the game, but I don’t think he can seriously say at this moment that it runs better in TSW2. That’s the only bit I wasn’t happy with in his response because I just don’t agree with it.
I personally felt the same when hearing the answer during yesterday's stream. Yeah there were definitely changes to core for TSW2, biggest one the engine version push of course, but many other things got worse, like the terrible UI, or had no changes (an entirely new game, doesn't anyone remember?). I personally still feel that DTG should balance better their development time on the core and on new DLC and internal tools. There are still, even tiny, things since the TSW beta which are not addressed.
I mean there has certainly more been done to core than what EA did with Fifa and Madden in years, yet people buy these every year because of "new functions" One could also wonder who is wrong, the developer for marketing something as improvements where the customer can't usually see them on a surface level, or the other way around - where the customer is wrong because they can't understand the improvements because they are below the surface. At least I can understand that if there has been done a lot of work, it is a bit unfair for the developers who committed weeks of work time to say that barely anything has been done...
No one is denying that there has been work to the game, bringing everything from 4.16 to 4.23 was clearly not a small undertaking. The point I'm making is that DTG see the above as work to the core of the game (which it is), but they also seem to be completely missing that when we, the customers, are hoping for 'core improvements' it’s likely we’re hoping to see something completely different. If they said that upgrading the engine to 4.23 was necessary for work to start on fixing the AA and the shadow draw distance (to pick 2 of the many issues) and that as it was now it was complete they were getting on with that task then brill, bring it on. To my knowledge however, they've not done that. In my opinion from a customers perspective, despite what Sam says, the upgrade to 4.23 has thus far heralded very little in terms of actual improvements, including graphics, sound and performance.
Hoping it refers to something completely different than what DTG means might lead to a lot of misunderstandings? Perhaps you are expecting specific improvements that they weren't referring to regarding changes they made to the core? I suspect the work they did will help facilitate a lot of things they want to do that they previously couldn't do, so that's a big improvement in itself even if some of those things are not achieved yet.
Don’t forget, I believe TrainSim-Adam has said on stream that he has an environmental artist as part of his team. As his team deal with existing routes, why would he need an environmental artist? Maybe there are plans to upgrade the scenery and make it more efficient and better able to take advantage of the new engine. Either that, or I’ve dreamed the whole thing.
Please don’t take this the wrong way, but I think you’re missing the point of what I’m saying. I’m not really sure how else to put it.
It's seriously all good. (I feel like I'm in good company, since both DTG and I apparently missed the point!) The reality is that expectations differ regarding how much of a disconnect there might be. I think that's why references such as "we, the customers" might stand out to some of us, because we all are capable of having very diverse opinions and interpretations.
That’s fair enough, but by ‘we, the customers’ I’m talking about the overwhelming body of opinion, not just in here but other forums, Facebook groups, YouTube, Discord and so on. Everyone is of course entitled to their own opinion and take on things, but very clearly when the majority of players think of core upgrades they think of the areas I’ve already described. DTG seem to be talking about something else and last night Sam glibly dismissed people making those points as ‘wrong’ (just to be clear, I’m not for one minute suggesting he shouldn’t have said it or retract it. It was the seeming disconnect that intrigued me). I don’t see a number of the areas that Sam described as ‘core’ changes or improvements. The ones that are ‘core’, well I’m not seeing much, if any, difference. If DTG think they have improved some of these areas then great, tell us what is better. Demonstrate it. Many people on the customer side of the fence are not seeing things the same way, hence the disconnect.
I suspect a lot less people agree with us than what we like to think. I suspect it's a minority of customers, not a majority of customers. Anyway, we both have our heads above the parapet, but I hope we're merely agreeing to disagree. (My tin hat cost me seventeen days wages, and I can't afford to have it knocked off of me, friend.) Yeah, we probably shouldn't (intentionally or unintentionally) do that to each other (but I'm not asking Sam to apologize either).
But how do you determine what the overwhelming body of opinion is? Certainly not only by what you see being posted on these websites since that would hardly be representative but a biased view on personal agenda. You can hardly ever talk about the majority of players when the majority is evidently not active on any social media platform. And I would argue it is not even the majority of people active in the forums who share your opinion, thus I always get slightly triggered when people start to make facts by opinion.
I for one, thinks TSW2 runs better ON MY SYSTEM, then did TSW2020, graphics are more pleasing and I removed some post-processing I had installed on TSW2020, my framerates are better across the board and I seemed to be blessed and do not have the stuttering problem others are reporting. That being said, I am not going to discount how others report TSW2 runs on THEIR systems. But I do caution one taking the pulse of forums to be what the general customer base thinks about a particular title. Participation on forums rarely captures more than 10 - 15 % of the customer base and most forums are predominated by those having difficulties and seeking advice on particular problems they perceive they are having, or something not meeting their expectations. Unless you have conducted a well balanced survey with properly worded non-leading questions, the projections you obtained might not meet reality. So using the Forums and Discord as your source - the best you can say is that of the 10 - 15 % of the customer base that utilized the forums and discord, the majority state such and such. Even that must be weighed against the opinions of frequent posters such as myself with the lurkers that don't post in the forums or those members of the forums that do not participate in that particular discussion. The only "trend" I feel I can talk about is my opinion on the matter and I try to shy away from projecting what the masses feel or think based on very limited sampling as provided by the forums.
Maybe want to clarify this... Where the community think of "core things to be fixed" I think they're meaning the more important things that other issues in a DLC are based on, whereas DTG may well be thinking of "core issues" being those with the base software, and there may well have been improvements in those, but the DLC are not up to spec as yet, and they know this too Issues such as sound, dispatcher, signalling etc are DLC based rather than core software based
That's a good distinction, thanks! How should we classify something like skies? Would it be dependent on the core software, yet controlled by the DLC?
Of course, some might say your numbers are a complete guess too. Whilst I understand and respect what you’re saying, I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest your 10-15% is plucked from thin air. Yes, what I’m saying regarding opinion is anecdotal, but it would be a fool that ignores it. I’m basing my summation of ‘we, the customers’ on the overwhelming majority of opinion that is there for all to see on almost every single interaction DTG has with TSW players. The DTG staff spend almost all of these streams answering the same questions over and over and over again from different people, and those questions almost all relate to these same points. With that said, I can’t help but feel we’re getting into a debate about semantics, rather than the original point of the post, which is that when we talk about ‘core’ are we all on the same page, and are DTG right to dismiss their player base’s concerns?
I think skies actually are core unless there's something I don't know about how the clouds are generated. I think "how the rain flows down a windscreen" may well be DLC based but the cloud shapes, sun etc are core
I doubt it If you're not talking about the same things then you don't know they're dismissing your concerns... Of course dismissing anything "out of hand" isn't good practice and I'm sure Same didn't mean to dismiss anyone's valid concern, but the way the comment was stated on the stream was also dismissive and vague, so it works both ways. They did address the issues with sound, graphics etc on stream so maybe they answer your question better than "core issues" which is lacking in clarity
To be honest I think of "core" for everything described as "TSW2" the rest are DLCs, so everything which requires an update of the game itself is a core update (this includes scenario/livery editor). It's either "core" or "dlc" nothing else... but I think there is no standard definition and I can understand why some people could mean something else. Adding the DLC locos to the livery editor is a core update to me for example*, because it's the livery editor that gets upgraded, same as every add-on/fix to the scenario/livery designer. Also everything that is not DLC specific I would call as a core change. Also any change to SKA, BKL or SPG is core for me. *no it's not, because it's the trains that are getting changed, not the livery designer itself, maybe a better example would for example be adding the Werdohl-Everlingsed power plant to the scenario designer (please do it DTG).
I agree with the original post. On my machine, TSW2 runs smoother than TSW2020 did, but there's still the occasional fps hicup at times. Preserved collection is basically... well... preserving. It's not an improvement in any way. Actually, it has been mentioned in streams often enough that the development of core stuff was halted until preserved collection was done. Additionally, many preserved collections came out worse than they were in TSW2. It costed several months and brought us something that was worse than we had, aside from the more smoother gameplay. I don't see how this can be counted as an improvement, and I don't see how this is related to any 'core'. Nevertheless I'll add that bringing DLC over to their new game was the only right thing to do, and while we applaud DTG for making the right decision, lets not forget that any NEC-related DLC didn't get preserved. Agreed. Aside from a more smoother gameplay, I don't really see any visual improvements. Variable adhesion brought it's issues too, with trains now having insufficient power to complete certain services, or locomotives providing less power than they should. In general, it's a nice little feature, but only once it's completely working as it should. Agreed. A scenario editor and a livery editor, with limited tools. Ok they're new features, but I personally can't be bothered with them as long as liveries and scenarios cannot be properly shared with a workshop-like feature. I don't know how many people are actually enjoying these features. Any new editing tools the dev team might have to help them build new routes and locos are nice for them I guess, but like all behind-the-scenes improvements, not something we as player can consider new features or improvements. No. I'm happy you created this topic.
It's not the livery editor framework that get's upgraded. The locos must be recreated to be a blank canvas rather than repaint specific to work in the editor. That's DLC level rather than updated to the core. If they wanted to add in blending, shaders, new shapes or 3d wraparounds that would apply to everything in the editor then that's a core update
You realize that cognitive biases influence our summations? To quote Wikipedia's confirmation bias article, "People tend to unconsciously select information that supports their views, but ignoring non-supportive information. People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. The effect is strongest for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues, and for deeply entrenched beliefs." I think it's more a case of the same people repeatedly bringing up the same issues over and over and over again, but those people on the chat streams (or forums) aren't even a majority of TSW's player base. Yes, it's semantics, but that's exactly the point. I don't have concerns and DTG are not dismissing them, and I am not on the same page, regarding what is or isn't 'core.' In general, none of us are ever on the same page (and DTG seems to generally be listening rather than dismissing concerns, even if improvements don't come fast enough for those concerned about a given issue).
So you are basing your post based on biased perception and agenda. Fact by opinion is still not a solid fact. So I will do the same and say this: You can all clearly see that the amount of threads about core issues is just a tiny fraction compared to overall amount of threads, so we the players are happy with the core features and improvements. Also on the streams people mostly ask about new routes, new locos and the progress of other dlc, so this cannot be a big issue. Do you see now where the problem lies if you only assume? Why can one not just state their opinion and see how this fares with other people. I don't need people to speak for me. Instead of talking about "we the players" just say "I" or "personally". If you feel to include the player base just by mere guesstimation in order to further your point how is it a solid or fair argumentation. It's like the disaster thread (missing editor is the biggest fail in history of train simulation) or the newest route extension thread (only with extended routes you can get the full simulation experience). As opinion, fine. As player base assumption, in my eyes, bad.
Ooft! Confirmation bias is a can or worms to open. Relentlessly guarding against it and being aware of it is a fundamental part of my job, as is sharing mental models via open questions to prevent that very thing. I do get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure it’s entirely applicable in this situation. I’ll admit I’m basing my statement on anecdotal evidence, but that evidence is based on a number of years of reading and being involved in Train Sim social media. It’s not always the same people saying it, but the message is very often the same.
Adam talked about this specifically on stream yesterday. He stated that he believes they can do one item per week and then it's down to release timings etc. Given there are over 100 items that means the preserved collection will take about two YEARS to get released for the editor. This is separate to core development of the editor itself and they are not mutually exclusive. In other words a programming engineer can work on updates to the background software whilst a graphics designer can rebuild the loco, wagon, carriages etc so you could end up with both being worked on and updated independently It's the same with other updates generally. They have already said quite a few times on the roadmap threads that they tend to focus on clusters of items together, so if there's a US DLC pack being developed they will work on US focussed issues and release them all together. This means people only do ONE download to fix a load of things rather than lots of downloads which fix small things. The perils of needing to redownload the whole DLC to fix a minor issue I guess
Not on agenda, not even remotely. My post was based on Sam saying that people asking questions about the core of the game were wrong, and that people making comments like those ‘should be forced to live through 2020 again’. They were off the cuff comments but I thought they raised an interesting point, that what DTG refer to as the core of the game doesn’t appear to be the same thing that the (anecdotal) majority of players believe it to be. Hell, if it pleases you more then I’ll say ‘what I believe it to be’.
Oh, I thought it would be fun to fish from the parapet. Doesn't your castle have a moat? But to take the stream's chat as an example, I'm never on it, because I'm in a different time-zone, so I watch the stream well after it aired. (I don't know how many other people fall into that category.) So the chat isn't getting my message at all, but it's definitely getting the message of people who are regularly on it. All I'm saying is that the forums or chat is not a representative sample; some of the people who do interact there may represent a different opinion than mine, and shouldn't think they speak for me.
What is the community anyway? Is it these forums, all forums, the complete player base? Does it actually exist? I certainly wouldn't take these forums to be a yard stick to measure how satisfied or not people are with TSW as whatever the figures you use, we are certainly are not the complete user base and I would imagine far less than half. I would say these forums are a vocal minority which ever way the wind of opinion blows. I would also argue that the majority of those who are happy with their lot stay quiet and get on with it and I do think these forums, as with many forums can become an echo chamber and we can easily feel that we are the only ones who matter. We all have different priorities although I am sure we all share the desire to have a enjoyable and working simulator. For some, it is that now, for others, not so and for some will never be. I have never participated in the chat on the streams but I have been thinking of getting involved. I wonder how many times I can request more first generation DMU's before I get in hot water!
Being this the PC forum, I will give my humble opinion on this topic regarding the console, which is on the platform that I play TSW. Sorry for the intrusion. As a PS4 player I feel that the change to TSW2 has been a step backwards and I feel treated as a second class customer by DTG, paying the same price as PC users when I buy their products. Obviously the performance can't be the same, but I'm not talking about that but about optimizing the system. And that's where I realize that they are failing because the TSW2020 "feels" much better on the console because the gaming experience is much more fluid. That's why I keep playing in the previous version when it comes to preserved content, because I don't find any advantage to doing it in the new one with the problems mainly of sound. And if we talk about the new routes, the experience is not at all good, with those slow-downs and fps drops. Or the many times the system breaks down completely and throws you into the main menu, it's very disappointing. The new feature of adhesion seems to me very false, I hope you improve this because it does not seem to me anything inspired. Then the problem of the console layers, which I hope they will fix. Maybe this will change with the new generation, but right now my opinion is that they haven't worked as hard on the console versions. Maybe that's why they never make a single transmission other than on PC... In short, for me the change of version (in console) does not fit too well with Sam's statements that the OP has reflected. Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Not plucked out of thin air - it is an educated guess from searching other game forums where people asked the same question. https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/6447613 "Based on the number of people I have seen in the game that I have seen active on the boards, I bet it is somewhere between 1% and 5% who post. Lurkers, hard to say as most of the information people used to come to forums for (where is this thing or how do find this NPC) are more easily found at UESP." So my numbers were rather generous based on a modicum of research WHICH could be flawed since it depends on other forums. So the next question is what is the percentage of players that watch the streams and how diverse are they from those in the forums - I would think, again no empirical evidence, there would be a significant overlap. I do agree that most of the vocal participants of the forums and those that watch the streams do have the same concerns -- just not convinced that is the majority of the player base. So we are probably stuck in a semantical discussion on the term the "majority". And as a frequent user and contributor to the forum -- I am not sure if I have a solid understanding what the "CORE" is - would the PIS be considered part of the core? How about Adhesion - is that part of the core? Are improved clouds part of the core? or are we talking about lower level features. Really not trying to be argumentative, just trying to understand what exactly is being discussed.. Best
Absolutely, nor me. I do feel a little that the point of the thread has drowned somewhat under a discussion of what constitutes opinion/the community/the majority of players. In the same way Sam made an off the cuff remark last night I did it today using 'we, the customers' and it's been pounced on that I'm attempting to speak for all TSW players which was never the intention. Anyhow handily this, in a nutshell, is my point. Sam castigated someone on the forum for stating there had been little to no core changes in the last year. So what is the core? Logic dictates that there must be one. When I use the term it is in reference to the issues that are seen across all routes - shadow draw, flickering AA, lighting, sound, weather etc. Maybe they are, in fact, DLC specific. Judging by last nights stream DTG see the 'core' as something entirely different - I would never have listed the 'Preserved Collection' as a core upgrade for example. The 'looking better' thing confused me too, as Matt stated unequivocally prior to release that inherent changes in 4.23 aside, zero work had been done on the graphical side of TSW. As I said way back in post one, the distinction intrigued me and I thought it would make an interesting discussion. Sadly it got wildly sidetracked!
One thing I noticed watching the stream, does anyone else think environmental art has gone BACKWARDS? watching RT, which admittedly I havent played since the release of the 182 looks much more authentic than the new routes, especially when it comes to ballast, track cess decoration etc. Ive just done a run on MAG and it all seems very flat, shiny and dull compared to RT, which is what, 2.5-3 years old? On top of this im going to agree with OP (shock) but theyve had 4 years to learn unreal, and we've seen stagnation in lighting, textures and shadows - all things I would consider 'core' as they are fundamental to the game regardless of route. I would say lighting (without ini tweaks) is poor at best, texturing is incredibly inconsistent (a good example is Queens Park - where you go from a pretty well done brick wall showing grime and damp to a plastic looking brick wall within 50 meters) and the less said about shadows/the sky the better. Sam talks the talk, but I think he has his head equally in the sand as the rest of them when it comes to the glaring shortcomings of their product and what should be expected from a 2020 title on a engine like Unreal 4. We all gave them the "we need to learn the engine" but thats gone now, whats the new defense? artificial console parity? I would like Adam to go into more detail on why something as fundamental as shadows is "complicated" (beyond the obvious) - guessing from his awkward expression when he said it it has something to do with their self-imposed limitations but I guess we will never know.
Now I agree with the point of the thread. In terms of "core" features or what people consider to be the core of the game that has or hasn't been improved is completely subjective. The game has some improvements but some aspects of the game got worse in my opinion and I will state what I think the game has improved on and what it hasn't in my opinion Graphics are a improvement but it really isn't a massive improvement in my opinion on consoles. The clouds look the same as they were in tsw2020 in my opinion. The weather is a massive improvement in my opinion especially when doing autumn drizzle where it rains then turns to snow which I think is cool but I feel like the game should've had dynamic weather by now. It's cool that we got dynamic skies though. Draw distance has not been improved at all which makes no sense if they have a upgraded engine. You would've think they fixed that by now. The UI in my opinion got much worse. It's too small when put in normal mode and when you have it set to large, it's way to big so the balance is not right. The adhesion physics are pretty much from ts2021 (railworks) and it's a cool feature but at times it makes no sense. For example, when doing a service on the bakerloo line with rain turned on, for some odd reason the train wheelslips when applying too much power in the tunnels or too much break power in the tunnels which makes no sense when your deep underground. That should not be the case when you're in the tunnels because it does not rain underground unless if there is some unknown leak causing water to rain down in the tunnels. Sometimes when doing freight runs on spg, when you come to a stop in a downhill gradient, the train rolls backwards when it should technically roll foward if your on a downhill gradient. If you are for say at 60% power in rsn but go to 62% power, the wheels start to spin which I don't think is realistic. Game performance on console seems to have gotten worse in tsw2 than in tsw2020 and this is supposed to be a "new game." The constant lagging in the new routes, game crashing at times out of nowhere, sound issues especially on preserved collection makes the experience worse in my opinion and shows that this game was poorly optimized in that department. Not to mention the layers issue in the new german routes. You can't complete a service to Koln on ska with layers on because the game will crash The modeling of trains seems to get better and better which is cool. I'm always impressed when they make new trains because of how accurate they look although the sound of the trains aren't always great as is usually the case with a lot of first party dtg loco's especially in Train Simulator 2021. Scenario Designer and livery designer are cool features however the scenario designer is basically quick drive from ts2021 and is very limited in the game. Hell, you can't even share the scenarios that you made with other people in the game nor can you do a return journey from where you started or back and fourth services in the game. Livery designer is cool as well but I wish we could share them with others but I could understand why we can't share liveries. Sam's comments about people who say that the game has not improved are somewhat justified because the game has improved on paper at least. In reality there have been some slight improvements with the upgrade to 4.23 and other new features to the game such as adhesion physics, scenario and livery designer, improved weather effects and more realistic looking trains. However in terms of the package as a whole, it has not improved. Some things got better while other things got worse. Sam's comments don't reflect what the op has stated the problems are in the game at least for the console front. This game sometimes feel worse than the old game in terms of performance. Adhesion physics at times don't feel realistic, the amount of bugs that comes with a route when it's released is stupid to the point that it annoys some players. The textures haven't improved as well in some cases in some routes. Lighting has gotten worse in my opinion especially at night and I would assume that to be a "core" feature. Hell the sun is missing on Xbox and was missing on ps4 which is ironic. Sounds are a mess as well in Preserved Collection. The amount of times that they seem to shrug off problems and criticism like they did in that stream is just silly. This game can be improved and I'm certain it will but dtg have a long way to go and they can't be talking the talk and not walk the walk.
As far as DTG is concerned (and it's their trainset ), it's a synonym for customers - the people that have paid money for their products, and will pay for future ones. I'm sure they find these forums very useful as a form of feedback, but assuming that the most popular/prominent views on the forums are also the views of the majority of customers might be a mistake.
Thanks for sharing the video, as I couldn´t see it live. And also thanks to DTG for exchanging the information with us in an open way. I think those streams are always useful. I could see some of the issues I reported myself, and probably also reported by others, as fixed in the list (for instance the player being able to cross couplers in a moving train) so I can only say that reporting works, they listen to us and they really take care to analyze and check the bugs, because that was a really tricky bug and not easily noticeable in regular gameplay. What I don´t understand is the statement about TSW2 being too huge so that the things need to be addressed with priorities. And even worse: your creative ideas to add new features to game need to be postponed on the list. That´s true. It´s a huge game but also it´s what you created for us. Guys don´t let that happen. If more people needs to be hired do it. If more testers need to be put on the testing teams do it. If more people is needed to correct the bugs use them for that. One of the best things you can offer to us are innovations, new features and improvements. That definitely keeps game alive and customers happy! Solving issues should never block that, as evolution to more ambitious targets and incorporation of nice new features is always the right way and I´m sure that it will always be welcomed by us in the best way we can say "thanks": with good purchasing volumes. Cheers
I'm sure that they could hire more people to address these problems, add new features and improvements
Regarding the core yes, it has been improved and yes the routes run and look much better now than in the past, as the unreal engine was updated as well in game. The problem, if I understood it properly in the past, appeared to be related to the customizations they did to the unreal engine. That made it hard to upgrade to the latest versions, which now support ray tracing, DX12 or longer shadows distances. I´m not an expert at all in Unreal implementation but if they have now an own version of the engine then the upgrade it´s hard. The point is that unless they decide to take a more modular approach which allow them to patch the engine more efficiently in the future this type of problem will just stay here forever and be reproduced over an over again, which on the other hand will block them to benefit from the future Unreal upgrades. So maybe it´s time to think about it, invest some time now and save it for the future. This is not an easy topic, that´s clear. Cheers
I think the biggest and most vital thing he didn't mention is that these changes are only applicable for TSW 2 NEW ROUTES ONLY. For newer players, they wouldn’t necessarily know this and would thing that ALL TSW routes look and perform better.
I know of the comment he is referring to, and it is not your own. The user said that there has been absolutely zero core updates to the game in the past three years, which even I scoffed at.
That is true unfortunately. I hope they say most of the tsw2 routes don't all perform the absolute best
If you watched any of the streams, they have been hiring new people, mostly to fill out the team that finished with the preserved collection. Of course, having dealt with IT since the early ‘80s, the mythical Man-Month comes into play and adding resources does not necessarily result in improved production. Hiring more people increases the overhead as well as increasing the need for better coordination which requires resources as well. I think the problems with the roadmap is a prime example of more people working on a project does not result in an improved product.
The crux of your argument in this thread is this: The only point I was making was that someone had said that no changes had been made, and that is entirely incorrect. Even if we haven't addressed areas you feel are critical, that doesn't mean that there haven't been improvements or changes. We haven't dismissed other areas that some players have voiced an eagerness to see tackled, and as we point out regularly, there's a massive amount we still want to do. At no point have we said we're not going to address them, only that the roadmap shows what is in active development. It's a big list and there is finite time to tackle individual areas of development. Changes have been made and are continuing to be made, as evidenced in every new route we bring out. The core experience of the game is evolving. To say otherwise is, as I may have bluntly pointed out, wrong.
