Hey, just wanted to get a general feeling from community on whether Rivet should release modern trains for the new Cornwall route. I am aware the era is set between 1950-1990 but would players want newish trains i.e. 1985-1990? Thanks
Personally I would also prefer the later part of the period with Sprinters. However, I suspect that the decision has already been made,
When you put "modern trains" as an option in the poll I assumed you were referring to the class 800 things with class 66's, Sprinters or Network Turbos alongside? Trains at the end of the period, 1990, I would not consider to be modern.
Appreciate the enthusiasm, unfortunately the poll won't be able to change what locos have already been decided. Rivet will have already started development by this point.
Yes, I was referring to modern as in terms of the era it is set in i.e. 1950-1990 So this would be class 150 etc
I understand, well it was always worth a go to see what others thought! Let's hope Rivet choose wisely... Will we hear what trains have been included in the next roadmap?
Ah okay, seems strange now to think of the class 150 as modern, but yes in 1990 they were, I didn't like them then but I have a soft spot for them now.
While I like the modern stuff, I much prefer vintage stock and routes. Waiting for BR Green to get some love, BR Blue seems to get the most attention!
When I saw this route come up. I thought "PACER" or Sprinter. Which will be bloody boring. Also like some others have said a recycled British Rail 101. Its unfortunate DTG has Poopooed this poll as it looks like they don't care what we think!!! Which is not the case, I feel and hope.
They hardly poopooed it! They correctly pointed out the Rivet would have started development so it is rather too late to try and influence their decision making.
I understand that, But this guy set up a poll asking what people would want to see on that route prior to knowing what it contains. He or she is entitled to ask such questions which gives DTG ideas of what people want. He or she should not have been shot down in flames by DTG. The poll should have ben a bit more specific mind.
It’s the second such thread in as many days and so DTG probably just wanted to make it absolutely clear that there can be no influence, despite there being two threads that suggest that people power might work, which is what this thread is really about. People can still put their preferences into words if they feel the need.
Well I don't think he/she was shot down in flames, it was a perfectly reasonable response "appreciate your enthusiasm". You would have to be particularly sensitive to see that as some kind of angry retort! I think the trouble is the wording of the poll doesn't describe what he wants to ask! I don't imagine I was the only person who saw the phrase modern and assumed it meant something representing now, not what was modern in 1990 so the results might not accurately reflect what information he was trying to glean.
I agree with you. I just think the DTG response was very dismissive and a more constructive way of addressing the poll a bit more PC. I just think we need to be a bit more patent with folk!
{Humor Mode On} Shot down in flames?? Only a snowflake would think the message from DTG was anything akin to being shot down in flames..... (Humor Mode Off} <——— now the proceeding was an example of being shot down in flames. I thought it was a rather nice message that thanked the individual for their interest, but the decision has all ready been made by Rivet.
That is your opinion. I'm far from a Snowflake! But if that is how you see me then happy days. It occurs to me you fluff your chest here like a bully. And the moderator's let you get on with it from what I've observed.
Hopefully they made the right decision then. For TS Chris Longhurst always asks the community opinion before starting a new project for a Dutch train using a poll. Sometimes it turns out he cannot do it due to licensing issues, but because he is very transparent about this he made himself really popular in the community and he gets a lot of support. Rivet might do this as well, and for DTG I cannot have more than the vague hope they will someday dot hat.
To some of us, first gen Pacers and Sprinters are modern plastic, even though technically older now than the heritage DMUs were when the newer stock arrived in the mid to late eighties! However, for the purposes of simming, I defy anyone not to feel the juices stir taking a Class 50, or 42 or 52 on full bore from St Erth up through Hayle to Camborne. Between a choice of That or an IET, I choose the former...
When they're talking about a route DTG is making that would be relevant, given they're not, it's not. I'm sure Rivet have also been watching the thread, but I don't see any bile aimed at them for not responding so that does make me wonder whether your intention is to aid in getting people what they want through appropriate channels, or you just want to bash DTG
Please keep this discussion polite or the thread will get locked. It can be quite disappointing being informed that a decision has already been made for a route/loco you want. We have no intention of "shooting down" ideas, but we do need to manage expectations.
We haven't been told what decision has been made, or if it has what that decision is So maybe disappointment isn't warranted and they'll get what they want anyway, we just haven't been told that yet
I'm a personal fan of the transition era from the 1st Gen to the 2nd Gen. Have always modelled that era sticking with circa 1990 usually. It's also a period when BR blue could be seen along side various sector based liveries and locos had depot stickers and unofficial names. I appreciate its not for all but the noise for modern stuff won't go unheard by DTG and other producers. I have said it before though if they only cater to modern tastes then decades of railway operations are ignored and huge markets also.
Perhaps if DTG and Rivet were to come forward and just confirm their intentions for the accompanying stock pack, some of the speculation could be quelled?
The problem with that is that even if they have made their decision there could be unforeseen issues during the development process. It is best that they don't reveal their intentions until they are certain of what they are bringing. That is not to say that they will stop the work they have already started based on the results of a random poll on the forum. I will point to an example of a sim racing title from a few years back now, in which they had to swap out a number of vehicles that were all but officially confirmed to be in forthcoming DLC releases but due to licensing problems and lack of information those vehicles were not released, I believe they were substituted with alternatives. By not announcing specific rolling stock for the route Rivet Games will not have to deal with the backlash if people's expectations are let down, because an expected piece of content did not make it to the final release version. Also, it is important to note that speculation is not an inherently bad thing. By leaving certain things unknown it gives people reason to discuss the content and the more people are talking about it, then the more eyes will be on the product. Plus of course, revealing bit by bit certain aspects of the content (such as articles on the Dovetail website on the route, specific locos and the development process) built a certain level of, if you'll excuse the pun, hype train. From a marketing perspective, it just makes sense not to reveal everything at once, they will want to maintain a level of discussion and excitement from announcement to release and the best way to do that is to slowly reveal aspects of the content, and not announce everything at once.
That was a week ago and since they've probably decided. Note it was classed as 'in planning'. My guess it will be the same stuff that came with GWE diesel legends, and if we're lucky a new DMU or locomotive.
Agreed, people seem to holding their pitchforks even before they know what will happen. Lets just assume DTG and Rivet have been paying attention to the suggestion forums, the results of several surveys both companies held in the past, and the number of sales of past DLC. It is in their best interest to make something there's demand for. But as different people would want different things, I think we can be pretty sure some of us will be dissapointed, no matter which trains they'll choose. :P
Or, let's pay attention to what both companies have done in the past, which seems to be what they want to do irrespective of what's being asked for... And then wait and see what surprises they come up with (good and/or bad) Just seems to be a lot of "jumping in with both feet" when the place people want to jump into hasn't even been formed yet
Can you please tell us where you obtained this information because I can’t find any record of it. TBH, if this thread and past experience is anything to go by, whatever they do will be welcomed by some and “ the worst thing in the world I’ll never buy anything from Rivet again” to others. Let’s just wait and see.
I agree that it's good to see a Cornish route in TSW. However, I'm still disappointed that they've decided to go this far west. 'Cornish Railways' always says china clay trains to me and we're certainly not going to get those this side of Burngullow!
Exactly what I meant in my post above. To me, China Clay trains would be the most boring thing and I prefer the west including the St Ives branch (as long as they don’t mess it up). Each to his or her own. Some will love it (hopefully) and some will hate it. Of course, the ideal would be Penzance to Plymouth with a mix of passenger and china clay (with the Looe Branch and Moorswater works). But sadly, we know that won’t be the case.
I think you misunderstood me. I certainly wasn't implying that Rivet would get the route wrong, I was just disappointed they had chosen this side of Cornwall for the route. But, as you say, each to his or her own. I'm still looking forward to it as any Cornwall route is better than no Cornwall route. I agree but route length does seem to be a factor in route selection.
I'm curious to see what rolling stock this route comes with. I've looked up a cab ride of the route, and personally I don't think Penzance-Truro is really anything special, but the St Ives branch looks quite interesting (albeit short). I guess the rolling stock decides how high up on my wishlist this DLC gets. As I'm unfamiliar with the route and its history, I really have no idea what kind of trains to expect.
A few things 1 I am very disappointed with the current setting (era...) 2 Why is rolling stock not listed next to the route in the roadmap like previously (transparency...) 3 Why don't you involve the community earlier to slightly adapt your plans? 4 Cornwall = China Clay, so why is China clay not featured? 5 I assume that the GWR license could have easily been given or renewed for this route... 6 If you plan on making a more modern variant in the future then please change the scenery as well and not just rolling stock like in GWB.
And how would the community help them adapt their plans? You will be arguing for a more modern version, I would be arguing for a more historic version? How would that help?
For those unfamiliar with the route here's some info about rolling stock: Class 08 1960s-now Class 22 1950s-1970s Class 25 1970s-1980s Class 37 1980s-2000s Class 41/42/43 1955s-1970s Class 45/46 1970s-1985s Class 47 1965s-2000s Class 50 1975s-1990s Class 52 Western 1960s-1975s Class 117/118/121/122 1950s-1985s Class 142 Pacer 1980s-1985s Class 150/1 Sprinter 1980s-2020s Class 150/2 Sprinter 1980s-now Class 153 Sprinter 1990s-2020s Class 155/156 Sprinter 1985s-2000s Class 158 Express Sprinter 1990s-now Class 253/43 HST (Valenta) 1975s-1990s Class 43/255 1975s-now Dates might not be 100% accurate, but overall you'll get a rough overview. The hymak and others are not western cornwall regulars, therefore not on the list...