Xbox Any Reason Why Some Scenery Is Basic?

Just played a Clinchfield scenario on my PS5 and the trees were laughable. Pink and white.

 

Let’s not talk about Marseille-Avignon, I think the community and the developers have agreed to just forget about that route

(seriously, if you think about it, it’s basically the only route that never gets mentioned on the forums)

 

high speed lines in general always look a bit less realistic (picture from SEHS)

 

Yet strangely I quite enjoy driving it. The only high speed route that allows up to 320km/h/200 MPH even if only briefly and is one hell of a rollercoaster ride. Though on balance I would rather have had a classic SNCF route along the Riviera.

 

So the reason I brought this up is because ive been going back and forth from Train Sim Classic.

Yes I know its an older game on older tech and theres no doubt some bits don't look amazing, but what impressed me was the detail around the track compared to TSW.

So for instance, North London, one particular part of the route I started at to hackney over a couple of stops, there was lots of landmarks through the Olympic village and West hams stadium, I could also see central London in the distance with Canary Wharf, shard etc. There was more litter, side clutter, bushes and grass. London at the sides of the tracks is grubby and raw like real life.

But houses...now I've been on London trains a lot and it might not be 100% accurate but the difference in buildings is stark compared to TSW3. Theres less copy and paste, theres more types of buildings synomous with London that you can see, you can recoginse pubs and stand out building and different types of terraced, semis etc theres even stuff in peoples gardens!

Im from Liverpool and did Liverpool to Manchester for three years and when I played that route, the housing around Mossley Hill and Wavertree is almost spot on, I could easily recognise just by the sidings, where I was.

There just seems more detail and more care taken on these routes to me that makes it a more enjoyable and interesting experience. Wherry Lines is another and so is North Wales. TSW3 graphics look a lot more realistic due to better trees and lighting, but for me it stops there. I would love to see a conversion of say North London to tsw3 with the details they captured. I need to post screenshots.

 

Look, you generally come here to stir the pot so I’m not sure if I should be taking you seriously, but here goes.
I’ve been agreeing with scenery complaints in the thread. Sherman hill has nintendo 64 terrain. I’d love improvements. What more do you want me say?
But fair is fair and the MSFS comparison is a ridiculous one and I’ve recommended comparisons to other train sims and driving sims to gauge where we should be at this point. That’s a more constructive comparison.

You’re also trying to argue in bad faith by quoting me out of context and removing my supporting point. I made a bunch of points about issues I have with the scenery. That’s not even bad reading comprehension; that’s just straight up disingenuous.

 

Or there is just a misunderstanding of what is being said. I understand the comparison with MSFS but I also understand your counterargument.

But MSFS is actually a great example. MSFS scenery works very well for planes. The TSW scenery doesn't really hold up very well for trains.

 

another cool thing is the price, £60 for;
37 planes, gliders and helicopters at 25 handcrafted airports and the entire world to explore with
or for £120;
11 trains across 4 routes at a length of 307km worth of route

 

The default MS planes aren't great to be perfectly honest with you.
You really need the third party ones, and they can easily be £40+ per plane. I've spent Hundreds on MSFS aircraft, and hundreds on airports.

 

yeah add-ons for simulators are expensive, but the base game still gives alot for such a price,
are the included planes for x-plane 11 any better?

 

When MSFS first launched, I would say yes. I wouldn't anymore though, they have improved the base aircraft a lot.
Since the last Avionics updates for MSFS, several of the planes in the sim are decent now :747, 787-10, A320 with the FBW mod.

If you want really good planes I'd recommend: PMDG (Boeing 737), Fenix (Airbus A320), Simworks Studios (Several different general aviation aircraft), Cowansim (Helicopters).

 

Do LIDAR trains exist? How do rail companies manage their infrastructure? A railway network sounds ideal for mapping with LIDAR

 

They might of raised the price also with that, the edition i was looking at for £60 when I remember it being £50 previously

 

If you're going to get it, I'd really recommend picking up the ultimate edition. It comes with the 787 which just got a massive upgrade, and it gives you a permanent discount of all other MS planes in their store, and they have some pretty decent planes like the AN-225, AN-2, ATR.

 

I think that’s where the comparison ends.
How’s the game look compared to Derail Valley? Simrail? Any of the big driving sims?

I was playing fernbus the other day and if some of these people played it, their heads would explode. Talk about reused assets, pop in, etc. Road networks all look the same. Tramsim, meh. Some of the racing sims look great while racing, when you don’t notice how actually bad the textures and draw distance are… distant scenery like mountains look wonky, etc.

ETS gets a lot of play from me but it’s dated, visually. There’s always a weekly “we have to upgrade the engine” rant on the forums. Yet it’s still the one of the best.

My hope is with the sim genre becoming more popular and filled with casuals who only care about muh graphics, we’ll start to see some visual improvements.

 

It only took them a few years to fix the 787 (Rivet seal of approval) but yea it’s actually great now.
Highly recommend the AN-2, gets a lot of hours from me. Ugly duckling but fun to fly, lots of functionality and if you put the parking brake on right before you’ve landed you can flip the plane. Learned that last part the hard way

 

Yeah the AN-2 really loves to flip, I love how ridiculously slow you can land the thing.

 

Surely there should be patches to update scenery?

 

Who knew stating an honest opinion stirs up the pot just because your opinion may differ...

I know exactly what you said but like I said, your posts suggested otherwise. I stand by what I said. You may think that the msfs comparison is invalid but I'm not the only one that doesn't believe it is

 

You would think they would but DTG's flywheel means that once a dlc is out, they move on to the next and forget about the older DLC for the most part

 

Must be a Playstation thing

 

Think it was supposed to be the fall on the scenario. Went on again on foot and looked fine.

 

You quoted me out of context to willfully ignore the overall point. You ignored the nuances. Now you’re trying to gaslight me into acting like you didn’t do that. And then completely ignore questions about what relevant comparisons (besides MSFS) you can come up with.

I’m trying to give a fair/realistic perspective, but you’re so biased with your hatred of the game that if someone doesn’t align 100% with you- they’re against you.

I’m pretty invested in sim games. I don’t have an allegiance to any particular one. They all have their pros and cons, but no one studio is checking all the boxes at this point.

ETS needs upgrades, but at what cost.
MSFS is the best looking sim around but lacks in terms of physics compared to titles like x-plane and DCS. But, in turn, those two titles lack in graphics, are more mod dependent, and DCS is more military aviation.

The train sim genre is just as quirky. Derail valley is great but it’s not visually awesome. Run8 physics are very good, the multiplayer is unbeatable, but the graphics stink. Sim rail is worth watching but needs a lot more content to be replay-able, among a lot of other things; it still needs work.

TSW has the right formula at the moment because while they don’t have the best visuals, or the best physics, or the best sounds on the sim market… they have pretty decent visuals where it matters (not houses from super zoomed out perspectives, but good work with visual train models, stations etc) and they perform everything just well enough and sustain a steady flow of licensed content to keep their players invested. I mean it’s why you’re here; you don’t even like the game but you’re here because you’ve invested in it. You probably did that for similar reasons to the above.

So, they’ll upgrade things like visuals when the market basically requires them to do so, and when we look around, right now the market is not really requiring them to go much further…. Especially when the market isn’t even pushing them to drop gen 8 yet. The time will come but not yet.

 

Don’t get me started. I have appealed to Rivet to update WCL as the scenery is absolutely diabolical. It fell on deaf ears. They are not bothered about doing an update and to bring it to reality. I know the route well and it looks nothing like the real thing.

 

Was playing peninsula Corridor yesterday and the houses look like semi detached from the UK.

 

Yep, literally what I thought when driving on it. The ocean looks like a solid grey object as well.
It's a shame as I really like the route, and really, really like the baby bullet.

 

Again, I know what your said but looks like you didn't catch what I said. I'm not gonna go back in circles with someone who is gonna make excuses as to why the game has basic scenery when the game has been out for a long time

 

Was on Antelope Valley last night and whilst some scenery is good, theres a part about three stations down where the freeway is running alongside the track and goodness me its so horrific. Its almost Amiga era graphics. The roads don't match up, the curves are all wonky, the lines on the road don't even look American, theres no cars!

They need to adopt an approach of instead of copy and paste everywhere, there should be detail lod boundaries. So anything next to the track and 1/2 mile out should be well detailed. Next 1/2 mile should be lower detail but still good, a mile and 1\2 out low details and then any distant mountains could even be detailed 2d.

Instead we get a mix of high detail and low detail across the board resulting in low detail next to the track.

 

The answer is simple: strict release deadlines, no matter if work is finished or not. Very obvious with TSW4 itself (console crashes, missing formation designer, suspension probably coming with TSW5)

 

I always liked the TGV for the LGV route, but scenery compared to what I’ve seen of the real life counterpart (especially the distant scenery) is very off.

 

It's definitely better in TSC.

 

Marseille - Lyon in TSC:






Compare the last screenshot with the first one on this page by Ewan0025 , it's the same location...

To me, it's clear that TSC does a much better job of representing the area. It is a myth that TSW routes are more complex. The vegetation is much more varied in TSC, and TSW is just brown / dark green, the same trees all over the place, and it looks extremely simplistic, rushed and poor overall. They have improved though.