Now that the company has been sold to Focus and the pressure to maximize short-term revenue has receded a bit, I think that DTG, in order to address the erosion of trust which in my view threatens the long-term viability of the company, ought to halt the spin of the infamous flywheel momentarily before restarting it. Specifically, I think DTG ought to postpone the release date of every DLC currently in production by eight weeks (the usual interval between DTG's in-house routes), in other words skip a release window, and concomitantly add two months to the development time budget for all of their current and future DLCs. This, in my view, could make all the difference. If there is one thing which has become very clear over the last run of sub-par routes, it is this: they were rushed. They weren't given enough time. Necessary features were cut out, timetables castrated, huge bugs put in and even if caught in testing not fixed. The result has been disastrous: terrible reviews, poor sales, and an ever increasing workload of bug fixes, even just of the ones DTG can be arsed to fix and not simply ignore. Simply put, routes of the quality that customers expect cannot be made within the current time budgeting assumptions. These assumptions need to be re-thought, or else the loss of customer trust will hit that fatal tipping point (rather like structural failure, the bridge will stay up for quite a while even if people report the groaning and sagging, before one last heavy truck causes it to collapse). So, take the revenue hit from skipping one release cycle, and allocate an additional 60 days to every DLC's development schedule.
Would this also apply to their partners like JT, Rivet, SHG etc. I'm thinking that they are suffering from the same time constraints, probably due to DTG's frantic scheduling. Also, do we know that this has led to " poor sales "? Is that merely an assumption? Forum and Steam reviews are not necessarily an indication of sales performance. Who would have guessed that LGV has been a top seller? I'm not disagreeing with your proposal, by the way; just that it may not align with the business reality from DTG's standpoint. Once a flywheel is set in motion, it's very hard to bring it to a stop. And, just to add, " the viability of the company " is really not in question since the purchase by the much wealthier Focus Entertainment.
While I wholeheartedly agree, I too question whether it can actually happen. If I'm not mistaken, this sort of thing came up last year (backing away from new content to focus on improving existing content) in the form of a formal apology, only to discover that no less than a full-fledged sequel had been in development the entire time. DTG, accept my apologies if I'm misremembering this. My memory isn't what it used to be, but that's my recollection. But I will add my voice anyway and say yes, absolutely. DTG, please consider the above suggestion if you're not doing so already. I can't speak for others but I can 100% guarantee that recent product quality and the neglect of numerous legacy issues has affected my spending habits.
Unfortunately it’s very difficult to delay stuff, there can be huge repercussions. it’s not as easy as most people think.
This is a really well thought out post and it does sound great from a consumer standpoint. The only counterpoint that I can think of is: The longer you withhold a product from the market, the longer it takes to gain vital feedback from its initial release. It’s much much better to release a product too early than too late, for this reason and more than a few other very, very good reasons. You do not want to delay the customer feedback loop, especially in this digital age. But this only holds water if there’s a plan to follow up with improvements based on that feedback. (Example: adding traffic to Trenton route, etc) And this does not excuse why they keep releasing stuff with bugs that the beta testers could not have missed.
Yes, things worked out so well for CDPR with Cyberpunk..... I think the industry is knotting its own noose with this "release now, debug later" or "paid=participation beta program" approach to marketing.
Star Wars Jedi Survivor is another example of a botched release with it's performance issues that makes the game literally unplayable in many cases. I do agree with your post though. I haven't bought any DLC for this game. Most of the routes that have released have been rushed. DTG and their third parties (except TSG) are just essentially rushing routes to meet a quota rather than take their time to deliver the quality that I'm sure they are capable of. All that does is turn potential customers away from a product. You can look here at the forums and the many people here that have said they will not buy a dlc or got a dlc refunded due to the issues of said dlc. I hope Focus Entertainment can turn around the company and that DTG go back to make the high quality DLC we all know they are capable of
What is focus entertainment and what does it mean for dovetail games and partner program moving forward
Focus Entertainment is a publishing game company that has published high quality games such as A Plague Tale Innoence/Requiem, Snowrunner and other successful games which does give me hope that DTG can turn it around and make better quality content in the next 12 to 36 months
Focus entertainment sounds like an an awesome company I hope DTG can give us high quality better content and better overall TSW experience
Oh, unfortunately I think the chances of this happening are slim to none. I'm only going on their current form, of course.
Given the recent run of form especially, there is definitely an issue with the whole process of contracting 3rd party's, controlling the standard of work, testing, then releasing the DLC before it's actually decent enough for the end user to use with few complaints. I'm not an insider, so really anything I write here is pure speculation. I have no idea what the selection process is for the 3rd party developers- I would assume some competency with the Unreal engine, simu-graph, and the other tools. I gather it's a learning experience for some, if not all, of the 3rd party developers. With that in mind, perhaps they should be given more time to perform the task they're contracted for (or, they need to ask for more time as needed, and DTG need to relent). I'm unsure who (if anyone) is controlling the standard of work, telling the developers 'Yes, this is good' 'No, the iconic bridge must actually look like this set of photographs...please fix' etc. Once the pieces come in for QA testing someone needs be responsible to listen to the testers and actually have the necessary fixes implemented...before the release, not after--- especially as I can imagine the 3rd party developers having already moved on to the next paying project once the DLC gets a DTG stamp of approval (patch it after it's out the door). If we're lucky, perhaps they have left one or two people to work on the needed fixes. Might explain why stuff stays broken in DTG products, or takes 'forever' to patch acceptably. Anyway, like I said, pure speculation on my part. I just think something(s) in the process is broken and needs fixing before a lot more DLCs come out the door. My two pence worth. Kind regards, Dave
I mean, I hope you’re right. I hope this sort of thing comes to an end. It’s not fun to be one of the first to buy a product, at full price, and basically be a beta tester. But I don’t think it will come it an end. Believe it or not, Cyberpunk is a perfect example of what I mean. CDPR rushed out an unfinished, and embarrassing product in 2020. But they turned that around over time, fixed the product, capitalized on the animated Netflix series, and used discounts to drive sales to the point where that product was the main driver in their monster Q3 2022… Cyberpunk has basically led them to their largest profits ever despite a horrid release. Could say similar for no man’s sky and a lot of other similar games with horrible first years, that eventually fixed things to take in big profits. With all this in mind, unfortunately I don’t see the industry changing. There’s no incentive for them to release a good day one product. Sucks for us as consumers.
To my honest personal opinion, they lost my trust with the many rushed routes in 2023. I can overlook a few usual dtg bugs we had in the past, but sloppy timetables and routes where even tsc has more details, thats a bold fact i just wont accept and immediatley stopped supporting. I bought every single dlc mostly day1 or full price. Even if DTG is going back to make the very detailed routes, which brought me into the franchaise, i stay away from giving any more money to such a short sighted company. Rare exceptions might be content on a 85% christmas sale. Second reason is, that i dont believe they can fix the huge mess in tsw with all the double and triple loco versions. Also i was looking forward to many more loco dlcs and content in general, just to find out that dtg isnt using the stock in timetables even if its already available in tsw. (Yea we just ran out of time..) After reinstalling the 230GB, i had a nice ride on the bakerloo line. "Just" a tube line, but they even made the effort to put cables and working tripco-cks. Its my favourite route because its details. With many recent releases there were comments of a more detailed tsc version. Oh Whait, wasnt the huge amount of details in tsw the reason for the shorter routes than in tsc? I guess another excuse.
Couldn´t agree more with the OP. If DTG would design, develop and build cars, busses, trucks, pharmaceutics, kid´s toys or ........ say airplanes in their flywheel fashion rather than game software, they´d have their buggy a$$es sued to Armageddon. Good thing DTG doesn´t. Brands like Boeing just learnt it the hard way and they´re still paying billion$ for not taking QA seriously. I´m observing this quite some time now: The game software industry seems to act in a kind of legal vacuum. The EULAs are full of producer / publisher rights, hardly any duties. Not even trial versions are mandatory. We, the paying customer, have no legal leverage whatsoever when being taken for fools just for the next time. And again. Not only have they sold unfinished and bug infested DLCs. No, also reasonably working DLCs have been screwed up by amateurish and ill-conceived "patches" or "fixes" and then abandoned. So, how do you vote with your wallet in these cases? Additionally the paying beta-tester is getting mocked by an executive producer: "If you don't like TSW, that's fine, you don't have to play it" The pinnacle of impudence. Well, at least in my books. Indeed, this has to stop!
Nothing of this will happen. In the end, DTG is DTG and we all know how they operate since the dawn of time. TSW is a broken product with fundamental flawsy it's not even about the buggy messy DLCs they pump out. As long as enough people buy this messy software nothing will change. It's the free market.
They should tell DTG to make quality routes some being France to Germany cross border route like Metz Sarrebruck Saarbrücken.
Pay to beta test is fine so long as the developer actually fixes the faults and the merchandise is priced accordingly. £30 for the standard we are generally getting at present is not really acceptable. There is a glimmer of hope with SHG and the input from their new rep on MML, but doesn’t really excuse it being released in that state - possibly deadline pressure from DTG. But even though I’m generally supportive of TSW and enjoy the game there are limits. How long have we been waiting for banking comms to be implemented on Clinchfield to mention just one of many. Or why has it taken so long to fix spurious SPAD’s on SoS and get decent steam physics implemented. Still waiting nearly a year after release, though possibly incoming soon. First we had the “Fire and the Preservation crew will get to sort out our mess” paradigm. Now we get “Fire and Forget”, ‘cos we sent the Preservation Crew down the road…
Your suggestion fails on this point We Don't WANT two months of development, as what happens is people think "I'll just add this feature" and "I'll just make this window reflective" and so on and you don't end up with more things working, but more interactions breaking and not being tested What would be preferential is a break to all development eight weeks ahead and ONLY employ fixes and testing A four week preview would also be a good thing to allow the community to "tear it apart" online (which they're going to do after release anyway) and then they have the devs fix or at least update the issues before it gets full release. We have a good community of people who can give constructive feedback (as well as the haters who just like to tear everything down of course) but between us and them a lot could be given direction and focus without devving into corners or adding "flourishes" which end up breaking something substantial
I just wonder how much income comes to DTG from nosafetysystms/justnicescreenshot/easydriving/fanboy players, if it is a bulk income, then we are done, DTG will continue producing profitable shoddy.
As much as im agreeing on pretty much everything said above, i have lost trust that this will happen. These Posts seem to be a common thing now but with more and more people are criticising that where defending in some way before. The problem for me startet long ago, when Rush Hour released. Since then there is a continuation of releasing bugs, which often DTG just fails to fix. By the time so much stuff was released that i think its even impossible to deal with all the problems, especially when releasing Content in that speed they did. I remember the Live Stream where they told us that DTG will stop making content for a while to take care of all the problems and bugs. Well that was just to release TSW3, wasn't it ? So i can understand that Players now want there promised bug fixing agenda, im waiting for this aswell.
DTG worker: "Hey boss, I think we should stop making money for two months." Boss: "Why?" DTG worker: "Some dude on the forum had the idea. He's upset about the quality of our recent work." Boss: "Well, all right then. I guess we need to cut out the snacks and drinks in the break room. But if it makes the forum happy, let's do it."
So stop doing it ! I have. If enough of us do, they’ll get the message. £/$/€ is the only language they understand. If you keep buying it, they’ll keep selling it to you. It’s a great business model, no?
The problem with that approach (what DTG claimed they were doing when in reality they were prepping TSW"3") is that it is just a one-time thing- attempt to clear the bugfix backlog, but do nothing to improve the quality of DLC going forward. To do that, they need to spend more time in the oven. While there is, as you say, a risk of mission creep, I think that is far outweighed by never having another "there wasn't time to complete the timetable" again. I do however agree that preview streams should be made much farther ahead of release, for precisely your reasons.
I’m of the opinion that the extent of how much DTG could increase the budget for the development of their products and to what extent that would increase the sales of them is impossible to quantify from our point of view. We can easily equate a bigger budget with better quality but we can’t convert that into appreciable sales increases to the extent that it would cover the additional costs. We can tell that more is spent for the yearly route bundles as they have a bigger scope and I dare say much higher sales figures than many many DLC routes put together. Would DLC sales rocket due to a small increase in scope or quality? Unlikely I’d say. A huge increase in quality is probably not possible commercially. A price increase would not be tolerable so the costs could only be covered by a big increase in sales. Doesn’t look doable to me. I’d hate to have to add up what an extra eight weeks dev time for each DLC would cost but I can easily have a stab at saying it just cannot happen. Vern and a few others not refunding the DLC isn’t going to cover it.
While I have heretofore been one of the most aggressive posters here in pointing out business realities as opposed to pie-in-the-sky, here I am making I believe a hardnosed business case. This is a situation where underinvesting in a business can lead to its failure, and, no, we aren't talking about break-room snacks. It is about DTG recognizing that their short-term quick-buck thinking is going to destroy them; they are on the cusp of critical mass with regard to customer dissatisfaction.
You are making your case with certain assumptions (such as your comment about "poor sales" and your claim that *large* numbers of customers are unhappy) and almost no knowledge of the internal workings at DTG. No business person would ever take advice or guidance from someone in your position. It's a pointless exercise. The ONLY way for the customer to affect actual change is to stop buying the product. That's the bottom line to this discussion because it literally affects the bottom line. If you are really passionate about that, your modest proposal should be directed to the players.
You know every few months someone posts an " open letter " or a proposal like the one at the top of this thread, pleading with DTG to " pause releases " or focus on fixing existing products instead of launching yet more below-par routes. All sincere and well-meant. And what happens? Nothing. They appear to fall on deaf ears. The truth is DTG is a business and, as such, they simply cannot stop producing their products, not even for a New York minute. It's the nature of the beast. And, anyway, I doubt that it would make any difference to the quality of that product. The problem is not lack of time, but it's the apparent inability to consistently turn out high quality content at first release. Once upon a time, they were able to make excellent dlc that worked well right off the bat. We saw that with SPG, NTP, TVL, GWE and other early routes and locos. Something has changed in terms of product management and the resources available to it. It's obviously no longer possible to consistently reproduce that early quality without an endless ( sometimes literally ) parade of post release patching. When you see the stark contrast between SPG, the apotheosis, with NYT, the nadir, it's very clear, to me at least. I still enjoy the game, though my purchasing is quite limited these days. I mostly play the older routes and the current highlights, mostly German. And my optimism for the future of TSW has not been completely extinguished. But the solution suggested by the OP is not the answer, I feel. The solution, if there is one, lies with better choices, better resources and better management of those resources.
Hollywood will re-cut multimillion dollar films based on the reactions of test audiences. Focus groups are an inherent part of business strategizing- and judging by the three 'focus groups' to which we are privy - this forum, Steam reviews and YouTube- things are going downhill and accelerating.
I would add that we in the forum like to believe that we speak for the entire player base. Talking about " reaching critical mass with regard to customer dissatisfaction " is an enormous assumption. We have no idea what the " silent majority " of customers is thinking or buying. Relying on Steam percentages or other flawed data is not instructive. For all we know there might be huge satisfaction with the current game out there. If that's the case, the situation for " we unhappy few " is hopeless. We'll have to take it or leave it. No amount of complaining will make an iota of difference. In any case, for myself, I'm really tired of bleating and negative posting. So let's relax and play with our trains as best we can!!! I think that will be my " proposal " from this point.
Sorry; this forum, Steam reviews and You Tube video reviews do not come close to being " focus groups ", which are usually small and closely moderated. The forums and your other examples are not anywhere near being random or even balanced. They are composed of players with agendas that nullify any objective judgement.
I think you mistake my intentions Development should and must happen for the game to progress, but rather than adding in another eight weeks of development, they should know their timeline, storyboard out exactly what they want to achieve, include all the basics that have been agreed as "must haves" on each route in the recent post on here and then set a deadline eight weeks before release and after that no new dev goes on. Things like timetables, additional scenery etc can still go on so long as it's non interactive but nothing that changes player interaction Those eight weeks are spent testing and fixing those bugs that are found It's about having a tightly organised development cycle and then a tightly focussed fixing schedule for me
I’m sure we have a thread like this every few months. I’ve said it on a few threads recently. The players can be their own worst enemy sometimes. The whole “Boycott DTG” “Not given DTG another penny”, let’s face it’s pointless. The only piece of DLC I regret buying is West Cornwall Local. I picked up Luzern-Sursee and Bremen-Oldenburg in a sale, because truthfully they never really done it for me. Although, I’ve been swayed by Bremen-Oldenburg. Like I said, on another thread. Midland Mainline is a key example. For me personally, I adore the route, I play it everyday. For example today, I’ve played a Birmingham Cross City service, a Cathcart Circle service and a MML service, pure enjoyment. However, to highlight MML look at the threads involving this route and the negative comments, usual suspects of course (again they have their opinion, not a problem). The usual it’s broken, never buying it, it’s unplayable (a comment that always makes me laugh) granted the TPWS bugs are immersion breaking, but they are getting addressed. Anyway, plenty of negativity (some justified) people saying they will never play it, not another penny. Yet, after some incredible engagement by Skyhook (thanks to Jane who is fantastic) but despite the route still being in the state it was released in bugs and all, the same people who protested so much and vowed never to buy this DLC (by the way something they said many DLC’s ago) they have now bought it anyway, despite the route allegedly being so terrible! You just couldn’t make it up. I completely get people have bought it anticipation of the bug fixes. But overall, what have these users actually proved? They bought the DLC regardless. It’s a sale. So what was the point they were trying to make? What has been achieved? Nothing. And I look forward in engaging in the exact same discussion after Peak Forest.
This is kind of my thinking. Does the problem come down to DTG trying to do more than they can possibly support, given the limited size and revenue of a train sim customer base? Should they be scaling down instead of up? Maybe, for one example, move the rivet/shrub accuracy needle over a bit to free up some time and money than can then be shifted to the dev end to reinforce the gameplay foundations.
Boycotts don't really impact overall sales revenue much. Keep in mind that most gaming companies execs seem to be very much prepared to take a Day 1 PR disaster, refunds, bad reviews, etc, simply because starting the feedback loop is so critical to them. They use that feedback loop, act on it, and eventually the consumers buy it when the product is in "better condition," or they just can't wait any longer. It stinks for the consumers and for the devs tbh. Would love for it to change but I don't really see how that happens.
Scenery assets generally take less time (and different skills) to core game development or interactive asset development
I wonder if DTG could get a deal with Netflix to produce a Train Sim World anime? That would turn things around
Boycott's if done en masse are very effective, look at Bud Light and is the ultimate way to voice an opinion to the game makers but then it all comes down to how many people are prepared to boycott. As to DTG being taken over, I didn't have a clue that was coming. I thought DTG was al about the Trains but seems to be all about the £ signs. I'd love to know the reasons for DTG cashing in. Will Focus entertainment be prepared to take TSW3 forward or as some bigger software groups just bury the game and just strip assets? I'm no businessmen but looking at DTG from the outside looking in does TSW3 look like an exciting proposition? IMO yeah once it did but now I'm not so sure.
Sure, both aspects are done by different teams, but the money is assigned from an initial common budget pool. I just think that giving more money to those who can fix showstopping playability bugs is a better investment.
Whilst that may be accurate, in practice it's likely to be overambition or lack of time rather than money which is the deciding factor
Im quite confused to what agenda a “average”/all forum member/s would have ? this whole idea forum members don’t represent the whole community is just a strange concept, yea sure not every player is on the forums but that doesn’t at all mean what they are generally discussing isn’t thought about between other individual players. I think they represent a large part of the invested ones. And they’re opinions probably don’t outweigh or equal everyone, but must still hold to one of the highest parts
I find this confusing as well. Political parties will take a poll of just a few thousand and if they get the answer they want will freely apply that to the rest of of the population in their millions. Or companies that want to push their products test it on a ridiculous amount of tiny samples and then say it will give the same results to the greater population. But where a video game has a forum that is a sizeable amount of it's playerbase people like 'Sam' will be the first to jump on a soap box and grandstand saying the forum doesn't represent the players. IMO, it does get over it.
Vote. with. your. wallets. As long as you keep partaking in DTGs practice by buying their content they will not listen.
