It’s the lighting which is the main issue. Everything looks too dark, especially shadows. It almost feels ‘cold’. We need the lighting we had in ECW, which gives off a ‘hot’ and dry feel to the route. Which is ironically wrong for a British based route.
That's very ironic and not a surprise. DTG just simply can't make a lot of their tsw2 routes look as close to realistic as in real life as their marketing team says they can. It's quite baffling at this point. Their marketing team shouldn't be saying then that they make their routes as close to real life as possible because this is just the latest example as to why that is not the case
I am not trying to hate on DTG, I would like to pretty much echo what Stujoy said, up until now DTG has really done a good job at capturing a route's "feel" even for ECW... yet I don't know why this route feels wrong, it might be just the fact that living in a similar place it's easy to point out the differences, and I wouldn't really know how HRR would look, except for the "stereotype" of "germany - cold - lots of big dark green trees" and I think I have gone a bit overboard with my previous comments, mainly driven by "emotion" let's say... and for that I apologize to everyone (especially in the remote possibility that any DTG staff read my comments). Anyway, I feel like this route is different from the other routes, while putting slightly larger tress closer to the rails would change almost nothing let's say on a german route, I saw a cab drive of RSN for example and it has a fair bit less vegetation but that doesn't change how the route "feels", however in this particular case it does, and while the difference might not be huge, little details can have a big impact on the overall look, at the end, it's partly subjective so we will never agree on an objective answer, little things such as missing bare ground without any vegetation (like the fields near Eastbourne on ECW) can make a big difference. Take a look here for example, even the "greener areas" TO ME look completely different from this While it's not absolutely awful like my previous comments might suggest, it still has something "wrong" about it and just making the tree line a little bit shorter would add a huge amount, because while IRL there is vegetation, the real vegetation is not comprised of those huge trees we see in the screenshots, and while that "the trees are simply taller and closer to the track" is a really small thing, it changes A LOT of how you see the route and what "feels" it gives you... The fact is, ECW is very similar to how LGV ""should"" look so what's the difference, how come that one is great and the other is meh/sufficient? I don't understand... maybe the new tool they use? Maybe the fact of creating a brand new territory never featured before? Maybe we are all idiots and it will look much better in the release build, who knows?
Both look ‘meh’ in terms of lighting because ECW shouldn’t even look like that, being a British route. It should look and feel like a typical British route, with both routes swapping their lighting properties for each other. I really don’t get the choices DTG choose sometimes. It’s like they don’t stop and think about it for a second...
I’m cool with routes from TSxx being recreated in TSW, but what’s the point when the final product looks worse than the TSxx version?
It makes no sense at all. It's like a player is better off buying ts2021 since the routes look better than in tsw2. It's quite baffling
Keep also in mind that despite the artistic licenses trees and small hills are frequently used as a performance saving trick. The reason is that they block the view from the cab perspective or even close external views, avoiding you to see distant empty areas or even the tile boundaries. So you can populate the sections close to tracks with vegetation and more details and the mid and long distances with less detailed objects or no objects at all. This improves the overall scenery performance which is very important in high speed lines like this one. We have to be a little bit practical in this case in my opinion. We can´t ask them to place every single object in every single location as it is in real life as this is not possible. It has sense for main actors like the stations or railway infrastructures but not for decoration like foliage. They also need to balance eye candy with performance or people will complain about performance, and this is the most challenging performance situation so far due to the high operational speed. Even in other games using real photogrametry data like Flight Simulator the fact is that only few locations in world are true to life modelled. Others use autogenerated data based on aerial photos, but the real 3D models used in game are generic for the area, country or even worldwide. Cheers
That's true, but I would rather have bland scenery rather than forest... MSB is one of my favourite routes even if most of the background is hills with no detailing or lighting... also didn't they say that HS makes no difference? The game is capable of loading scenery fast enough and doesn't have to load more scenery than usual
I still agree with you, but DTG obviously hopes to release DLC before Christmas. If I buy DLC after Christmas, will DTG be bothered? Haha, good idea. forgive! Today's computer hardware can completely control the realistic scenery. Although I know that the game presents a scenery that is impossible to 100% route, please don't be lazy DTG. Use your enthusiasm! Lead us into a realistic game world
I remember when TSW2 was being talked about, trees were one of the improvements talked about. Now, don't get me wrong, I love trees just as much as the next man. Run8 for example (as I remember it) had few trees and it made the landscape look at bit boring, regardless of whether or not that's accurate compared with reality. But sorry, the fact that the trees in TGV Mediterranee look a bit different to how they look in a picture of how it really looks isn't going to stop me buying the DLC. The artistic license with the catenary seems like more of an issue and I don't think I'll lose much sleep over that either. I realise that if someone built a model of my back garden then inaccuracies in it would probably bother me more than other people, but it isn't that big an issue imho. edit: And I'd rather that the poll had a 3rd option: a) It looks like the South of France b) It looks like a big forest c) Its close enough for me, thanks. (I vote 'c')
The thing about building up an asset library is that once built you can then use it on subsequent routes (say a TER route in the same area, or it could even be useful on an Italian or Spanish route). This route looks like it's suffered a work scheduling issue - it's understandable why objectively it's pretty demanding to build a new route (the longest route), test a new technology, build an asset library for French buildings and Mediterranean biome, and construct several new safety systems. But why would you plan to make the ambitious one for the pre-Christmas release, where realistically you're not going to have the ability to delay? Would have made more sense to aim for something RRO or HRR in scale and make sure you get it right.
While everyone is entitled to their opinion, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I went back to TS20xx and ran the TGV route more to refresh my memory of the signaling, but to state that the consist and route looks better in TS vs TSW2 is really a stretch in my opinion. The consist while nicely modeled looks like a low poly 2nd cousin to the one in TSW2. While the number of trees might be a concern to some, at least they are crisp and again, in my opinion look much more realistic than those in TS20XX. The wetness displayed at the station can not be touched by the graphics in TS20XX. And do not get me started on the extremely excessive stuttering on the TS20XX route. Of course that has always been a problem in the original because of the way tiles are loaded. But hey, if people think things look better in TS20XX, that is the beauty of free choice - concentrating on that simulation if it matches better what you are looking for. Personally, with over 5000 hours in the past 8 or so years in TS20XX, I have found TSW2 to be taking up more and more of my simulator time for various reasons, with graphics being high on that list.
The only thing that is kinda "Meh" to me are the stations. But that is because in real life they are also kinda boring.
I think saying the TS version is better is not true as well, TS since the TSW release seemed really basic to me and I almost completely stopped playing it... and while the issue of the trees is not a deal breaker, I still can't figure out why they decided to do things this way, I took a break from HRR and RSN lately and played a bit of SKA and there were a lot of places, especially in the HS section between Düren and Köln where there wasn't that much vegetation, same for much of ECW and MSB... the biggest issue for me is that I don't understand why, I just want to know the reason, what's the difference between this route and SKA? Do 80 km/h really impact so much performance that every area 100m away from the tracks has to be hidden? Why was this route in particular created like this, if it is the new automatic system I, personally, would rather have shorter routes better modeled, but I know this sentiment is not very popular.
I don't think it is a good idea to base the real feel of any area from one youtube video. I.e. We don't know the camera settings, which have a huge effect on how the colors look. We also don't know the season, and if it wasn't i.e. exceptionaly dry. The amount of rain the area is getting can turn the feel of the country from week to week. Check the streetview, it is just next to the track. It looks nice, lush and green. Move a few meters forwards and the season changes, drastically affecting the look. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.739...4!1spLiRDFx4ceAhXDdbgAz92w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 While I agree that lighting is one of the weakest part of TSW2, we also should have realistic expectations about how close a recreated route can be to reality, considering the myriad of states the real countryside can be.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.512...4!1sbrNUfhoPnEjjH2d2ubX2SQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 This is further south and it still looks quite green
I watched the second live stream and two things came to mind while I was paying more attention to the scenery after this thread. It isn’t all as north European as this thread would have you believe although some areas do look like that. I don’t think it’s a big issue any more. So, in conclusion, we’ve had our initial response and noticed some things that are a bit wrong or could have been done better and now we can all relax and look at the things that are good about the route...
Agree, would you look at that? I jumped to conclusions without having the full picture... that's the sort of things I never do :/
Who wants to bet if they made Cajon Pass it would look like this. Instead of this Lol both photos mine btw.
It’s okay to make DTG’s route and scenery very accurate. Nowadays, you can use “UAV high-altitude camera to obtain real-time landscape” and then use computer to generate The GOODLE satellite imagery used by DTG and its own art production route scenery, so there are deviations