Tsw 2 Is Officially Dead

When did GTA V come out? I’ll save you Googling it, it was 2013. So once in 10 years. DTG on the other hand do this every year, and have done so since TSC was a spring chicken. They also have sales every other week. Back when it was still on the go the minute a Steam sale ended the DTG store piled in straight away with another one. Haven’t seen Rockstar doing HumbleBundle’s either.

Quite from being poor little DTG, they are literally the dictionary definition of a company that uses loss-leaders to drum up business. They have more sales than DFS!

Is that 1-0 enough for you? Also, stop playing the man, again.

 

You got the point! The train sim market is very, very small. So DTG can have very satisfied long term customers with delivering what is promised or can have customers which will go away as soon as a similair or better product is on the Horizon. RailSim is getting more content and it seems they are giving the best currently to avoid DTG`s failures. Derail Valley Simulator update is fantastic.

When another Truck Driving Simulator would be announced, do you think happy ETS and ATS customers will just get away? No they won`t, they stick to SCS and their reputation. But every long time DTG customer will get less loyal to the company when he learns more and more about how he is treated.

The sim market is a niche with enthusiastic and loyal customers. You can loose them only once but when you loose them they will be gone, that`s what it is all about. Building a buisness means generating customers, because customers generate money. You need new customers and you have also to adress your long time customers. A good customer is a returning customer, if you don`t have them something is wrong and in the long term you have a problem.

 

You said it- to drum up business. (Note however that sale discounts, while also affecting the P/L balance, come at it from the other side from investing resources into modifying old content).

The market appeal of a DLC is like a movie: huge at launch, and then dropping in an exponential manner. Sales of older content, and especially really deep sales of very old or unpopular content, are just a way of squeezing out some little bit of continued revenue (like movies' progression from theaters to subscription services to TV syndication). Patching content takes some finite and generally measurable cost, dev man-hours plus distributed overhead, and only makes sense if it is going to result in increased sales of said DLC sufficient to pay for itself with a decent margin.

DTG have determined - and with the experience of 2020, 2, Rush Hour and 3 behind them - that there is most definitely a cost associated with porting old DLC to run on a new core. Now, should they, on top of that, also patch the old versions of those DLCs which can be expected to have a future revenue stream of close to nil? I would say unlikely. There simply is no money in patching TSW2 or 3 routes. So they have chosen not to do it, nor do you have any right to expect otherwise. Again, the Peak Forest you have is exactly the same one you bought and you most emphatically do not have any right to demand that DTG come back and change it to suit your preferences, and especially not some indefinite obligation extending into the future.

 

Did you notice that DTG`s buisness model is selling DLC`s?

New customer buys TSW4. New customer likes german routes. New customer buys Leipzig S-Bahn and expects something like he already got with DRA in his bigger TSW4 Edition. Now the customer is disappointed because this legacy route is not up to DRA. What will happen? The customer will buy the next route or will the customer start reading negative reviews on Steam or in forums?

But as far as I understand you the only person here to blame is the stupid customer, because he bought exactly what he paid for.

 

Of course. That doesn't alter the fact that a DLC's peak profitability is in the first months after release, after which it drops off.

 

Actually I agree with you. I think DTG is using a flawed strategy, and it could come back to bite them if a direct competitor turns up (Derail Valley is fictional, and RailSim to date doesn't appeal to single players or those not interested in Poland). Were I God-Emperor of DTG, "Thou shalt keep the fan base happy and loyal" would be the First Commandment.

My point in these last few points has been that DTG is under no obligation whatsoever to do these things, and those claiming they have some imaginary right to demand it come across like entitled children.

 

Yes that is right. But with new customers wanting more stuff they have to buy what is now called legacy stuff. So with every new customer buying TSW4 you have a new guy who is interested in buying the DLC stuff to get more routes or complete his collection. So having unfinished or outdated stuff is not good for this. It does not help the new customer or the guy who bought it already two years ago. If the new guy asks in the forum "should I buy this?" the reaction from 10 people will be "NO DON`T! And don`t buy this and this, it is all not fixed, this and this is not working" etc. The new customer will loose trust in this moment.

Rail sim btw. did it right from my POV. They first build MP and later will add more SP stuff. They have a fully working dispatcher AI which can handle MP and will have no problem in handling AI. TSW doesn`t have a real dispatcher AI behind all the stuff.

Derail Valley is for sure fictional, but it is only half way through its journey. Passengers, AI trains, working economics, all this is coming in the future. Sure it aimed for another playstyle but not consequently for another customers base. I enjoy it quite much since the update, very challenging game, where I like TSW to relax for a few hours.

If you are for example new to DCS and you like the F/A-18, sure go on, buy the F-14 it will be up to the same standard. You can either buy the F-16 or the A-10, all are up to the same standard.

 

they could have fixed the broken achievements in like 10 minutes or even deleted them! Not sure what the policy is on consoles but on Steam they have deleted achievements that they did not want to fix True Steam Achievements mentions they have deleted some !

 

Yes, however cost-benefit analysis rules. For example, one of my favorite routes is Clinchfield. And, yes, CRR has many flaws (I did a series of very, very long posts on these back in the day). But the odds of getting fixes for banking comms, routing, poor night lighting etc are slim to none, much less a loco DLC like a GP7. Why? Because Clinchfield didn't sell well when it was new, and today probably hardly any copies. So there is no way DTG could recoup the cost of patching it.

 

This is why it shouldn`t have been released in the state it is. Clinchfield got much love with mods, new vegetations added, bugs sorted out etc. So it does have a special place for many people. Clinchfield is the only US route I ever bought when it launched. Banking comms and night lightning are also not only a problem of Clinchfield but of other routes as well. And this is my core critics that this stuff is not fixed and it is very likely will even not be fixed with new dlcs arriving using the same assets.

On the other hand we could basically agree I think that Niddertalbahn is in theory also a "niche" route, one train only, basically the same service over and over again but it has been done with so much passion and love that it is just a route you have to own and experience it yourself. So in this regard my conclusion is that also how something is made does have a direct impact on how well it is received.

I`m also very sure at the moment from what I`ve seen that I will buy the Just Trains route, because it looks awesome, even if UK stuff is normally not "my" stuff.

 

Oh, I don't disagree. I have given my opinion, for what little it's worth, that DTG should reset its DLC release schedule by one cycle so as to in effect add two months development time to each route over the current allotment, just to make sure they are polished to the level of Niddertalbahn or, apparently, the forthcoming Preston route. But, again, that's two months of salaries.

 

I don't play truck games, but doesn't farm simulator do the exact same thing as TSW, except on a 2 year cycle? Pretty sure I owned Farm Sim 17, 19, 20, 22 if I am not mistaken. And all those core games were pretty similar IMO. They make you buy a new game every 2 years at full price vs DTG every 1 year at a reduced price as part of a DLC package. Big whoop. I am assuming Farming Simulator 24 will come along at full price next year.

Flight Simulator is a good example but its also owned by literally one of the biggest corporations on earth, Dovetail isn't a 2.4 trillion dollar company like Microsoft.

Snowrunner is a season pass system so they still get your money at the end of the day. I've sunk probably as much into Snowrunner as TSW. Also not really a simulator, only a fraction of the technical side of things goes into a Snowrunner release that a TSW would have.

Elder Scrolls Online I do not play but I know it is full of microtransactions, has a paid subscription side, not to mention to multiple full price DLC model. Not a good comparison to prove your point.

All the whining doesn't outweigh simple math here, which I've shown repeatedly: if you are interested in at least ONE of the new routes, the upgrade is "free". It doesn't cost you any more than the route would have cost anyway if it was a TSW3 release. If you are not interested in ANY of the new routes, you don't need the "upgrade" anyway because you can keep playing TSW3.

 

ESO is a good comparison if looking simply at gaming examples. Yes the game is full of cosmetic microtransactions (kind of like the TSW skin packs) but also big major DLCs (like routes in TSW). The base game costs a few dollars and gives you quite a bit of gameplay. That core gets regular updates and you purchase the bigger and smaller DLCs as you please. So it does make sense as an example.

You are correct about Farming Sim, but indications are that FS22 may stick around longer and get additional core and DLC support. Not sure if this is a function of Giants getting away from the boot of Focus.

Anyhow, just saying that there are examples out there of games and companies big and small (i.e. Hello Games) that continue to thrive for years without having players pay for core fixes / enhancements to the same game under the guise of a new version number.

 

I get what you're saying. There's plenty of ways that DTG could do it, I am still not convinced any of them would automatically be better.

For example maybe they could have released the core "new" game as a free update, and the 3 new routes at full DLC price. Would that be a better way to do it? Well not for me, as someone that wants all 3 routes. I'd be out like $159 CDN all together instead of $53 CDN now which gets me the 3 routes and "TSW4". Functionally serves me no purpose to have a "free" update if more money leaves my pocket to get the components I want. The only people that would benefit from a "free" update would be people with 0 interest in the new routes, and even then what would they even be getting for "free" anyway? A lot of the upgrades only apply to new routes going forward they'd have to shell out for eventually.

 

Wrong, from the roadmap we know that many people only get fixes for routes they bought if they buy TSW4. So the only chance to see improvements for DLC`s they spent money on is buying TSW4.

 

Well a few things here:

1. There is no warranty on a video game, or set support period. Maybe DTG should do a better job putting that in stone, and commit to say 1 year of patches on any given route/game, but any post release support is basically up to them.

2. Are we talking about "fixes" or new content? Thats two different things. Because if you say, buy Koln-Aachen in TSW2 era... and then years later Joe decides to make a new timetable for that route in the TSW4 era that only releases on TSW4, that isn't a fix at all. Its fresh content for free. And nothing automatically entitles people who bought it for TSW2 to get that expanded content. They bought it knowing the timetable it had at release, and got what they paid for at the time, and still have what they paid for. Later expansive support is a bonus so its really up to them where they apply their resources. If a route is straight up broken, and doesn't work, that is a different story, I'd say they have more obligation to provide bug fixes. I am not sure any routes on TSW3 are currently in that state though.

3. TSW2 they did promise fixes and new timetables on the roadmap, and won't deliver them. So really the easiest solution is for them to just promise less stuff in advance and surprise us more with stuff right at release. Then they don't end up breaking promises because they promise less. Maybe thats why the Koln timetable popped out of nowhere.

 

Sorry, I can’t resist.

That is because, as I said yesterday, these things are route / loco and not core specific. They did not require a ‘new’ game to be utilised.

 

Yeah you're right. The Rush Hour season ticket model was nice, but was it really worth it to them in terms of development time / sales? Who knows. It was a customer friendly package for sure despite its initial problems. In the end it is what it is. Some will jump on the new version straight away sight unseen and others will wait and see and others will simply walk away. Maybe DTG has some internal stats on attrition rates when they do this and are ok with the loss of some customers if in the end they expect to gain more. It's their business and they can choose to run it as they wish. In the end we are not individuals to the bean counters. We're a number on a spreadsheet with an average $ number that can be extracted from each.

 

this is what joe said on one of the threads which talked about the koln timetable doesn't seem like much though

 

I don't get why you can't wrap your head around this.

TSW4 has TSW4 routes.

TSW4 routes have TSW4 features.

TSW4 also supports backwards compatibility with TSW2 and TSW3 routes.

TSW2 and TSW3 routes do not have TSW4 features because they are not TSW4 routes. TSW4 just manages to run them as if they are being run in TSW2 or 3 (wherever they came from). They are not advertised as such, they are only sold as "TSW4 compatible".

My Xbox Series X has the ability to play Xbox 360 games.

Do I expect GTA 4 to play in 4K just because its running on a Series X? No.

Does that mean my Series X is the same thing as a 360 because it runs 360 games? No.

Does my Series X play Series X games at 4K? Yes.

TSW4 is TSW4. It is not TSW3 or TSW2. My Series X is a Series X. It is not an XB1 or 360.

I hope this clears things up for you. Not sure how simplify it further.

 

Dude, you’re not simplifying anything. You’re just demonstrating further how little you understand of the way this works.

 

Here is your answer (fixes / updates for TSW4 only):

 

How many people on this entire forum need to tell you you're embarrassing yourself before it clicks in?

 

Is MSFS going to fix the existing bugs before they release the new version next year.....no they aren't.

And they are stopping support for MSFS2020 when the next one comea out....yes.

Did Madden 23 fix all the bugs in the game before Madden 24 came out.....no.

And they have stopped support for Madden 23 now as well.

Do you really think Rockstar is going to fix all the bugs in GTA6 before the release GTA6. Probably not and they won't fix any after GTA6 comes out.

I don't think there has been a bug free game for many years that they just don't move on to the next version.

So its nothing new or unique to DTG.

 

Not necessarily with MSFS. We don't know yet, but they have committed that they will keep supporting 2020 for some time after 2024's release. It for sure won't fix everything, but they (at least on paper like DTG) committed to continued support.

Sports games are hilarious and have been laughed at for years. Paying annually for a new menu and roster updates. Hmm.. maybe that's why I have been laughing at TSW4 so much.

 

I appreciate you saying that, but why did you not just say that publicly? Why spin this yarn about waiting for a release slot for close to a year?

 

Sim Update 13 Beta just arrived: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/sim-update-13-beta-release-notes-1-34-10-0-august-9-2023/604327
Roadmap is still planned until release of 2024 version: https://www.flightsimulator.com/development-roadmap/
FS2024 is coming late next year.

FS is getting regular world and sim updates. Lot`s of new features since release, new assets, better graphics. Technical improvements, new render with DX12 etc. No comparsion to the step in one year from TSW3 to TSW4.

At least in a new F1 game I get better physics for all cars, they are not just adding 3 more teams with updated physics and the rest remains as it is. Even if tracks are reused but their is a newer weather system I have it on all tracks, not only on the one which was build especially for the new release and so on.

Remember we got motion blur fixes with TSW3? Still only applies to TSW3 content, so rolling stock on TSW3 routes from TSW2 still have motion blur problems, even as the route was made especially for TSW3.

 

No one in their right mind would compare FS2024 to TSW4. For a start, FS2020 has had 13 sim updates, countless world updates, city updates, avionics updates, free additional content like aircraft etc. Not at all bad for the £50-£100 outlay depending on version. That’s not even counting things like the addition of DX12, DLSS, Frame Generation etc all of which has been added, for free since the game released.

Unlike TSW4, the switch to FS24 is entirely justified as it is genuinely, to all intents and purposes, an entirely new game with a re-write of significant parts of the game engine and the way it interacts with the cloud based side of the structure. Not only that but it’s purported to bring significant enhancements to the way the streaming side of things works, making it more efficient and less problematic. I suggest, if you’re not aware, that you have a look at just what is to come with FS24. Additionally, as a sim it is in a different league to TSW. It still has a good way to go, but it is a very faithful recreation of the whole of aviation. The fact that a home PC has a sim like that is genuinely mind-blowing.

There is one valid criticism of what Asobo are doing, however, and that is that they had said their commitment to FS2020 was a 10 year one. Although you could draw a valid comparison to the ditching of TSW3, I think that given the massive amount of content that has come since FS2020’s release and the fact that FS24 is such a big change on balance, the switch to FS2024 can be justified.

 

Why would TSW5 be "in the works" when TSW4 hasn't even released?

 

Great example!

Imagine if the new Forza Motorsport released with the new deeply enhanced driving physics, but they said only the entirely new cars would have the new physics.

Now look at TSW4, which announces new suspension physics, but only TSW4 rolling stock will have them... And only a single train will have it at launch, the rest to be promised at a later date. I assume we all know what a later date means from DTG. And knowing their track record, future TSW4 rolling stock won't have the new suspension physics either - just like many TSW3 trains missed new TSW3 features.

 

Because it seems that real core upgrades and feature additions are only coming with a major new release now. Which means that all the technical stuff which has been added to TSW4 is implented already and content is being build by other people. The conclusion of this is that if DTG is working on additional core features they could be already in the work and are planned for a possible TSW5 or another sort of Update for next year.

It is also possible that the technical staff is working on a new Simulator on UE5 based on Simugraph and other stuff from TSW based on UE4 so it will be adapted / ported or made compatible.

 

For the same reason TSW4 DLC is already in the work even though TSW4 hasn't even released.

 

Exactly, and even if we are not talking about graphical updates to routes like TOD4 at least it would be nice to see updates to rolling stock which is reused when applied to a new route. So it should have all new features available. But we won`t even see that. Money here can`t also be an issue, because on one hand this rolling stock has already made it`s money and fine tune or add new features can`t be as hard as developing or building a whole new locomotive. But it helps those rolling stock being reused and not seeming to be outdated compared to other stuff.

 

The reason that is not the case is because for some reason their developers decided that every route should use their own copy of a given rolling stock, instead of there only being one and it being shared. Honestly one of the stupidest decision you can make during software development.

Now they are forced to either update every copy of a given train, or just make a new one and keep the old ones as they are. This results in inconsistent quality between rolling stock. Such a rookie mistake, and goes against basic programming principles.

 

Object Oriented Design anyone

 

Yeah, apparently DTG has not heard of it.

A train game that does this system perfectly is Rolling Line. In that game you can have a base variant of the train, then make separate "livery mods" for it - and these livery mods will use the base train as dependency, except with a different livery. But you can also change 3D models or add extra details per livery. So while the different varianty can differ from each other, they will all use the same base unless changed.

A system like this would have been perfect for TSW as well, both for rolling stock, signalling system, ATC system, etc. But sadly they choose this weird way of making a game, and now we are stuck in the situation it caused.

 

I know how they did it and I know that it was stupid as well. But exactly this would be an improvement they could make when moving to a new version. They have to recompile / recook all content based on the new version, so why not replacing things like "BR143_DRA" with one BRA143 only, couldn`t be so complicated. Also they could just find another way of how a customer does have access to a product or not. The way they did was the most easy and unprofessionell way you could choose.

It is a problem which they should have adressed in TSW2 times already when this mess had begun. Their will be some point in the future where they have to get rid of it, so better to start sooner then later with it.

As said this would be an hughe step that would help them for the future and a reason why to move to TSW4 for example. It would also get them rid of many problem they have with console DLC`s.

 

I agree. A change like this would be something actually worth a re-release. Though ideally should've been done correctly from the beginning, but it is what it is, we all make mistakes.

 

It can be actually. Things that look and behave exactly the same to the player outside are not actually coded/scripted the same way internally.

Example: IIRC one of the BR182s could not turn on the lights on some version of the Dopplestockwagen because the power system was coded differently.

I think your suggestion to standardize is OK looking forward, for the UE5 version of the game whenever it comes. Changing everything backwards right now would be a major pain.

 

A problem dating all the way back to ECW, where the new Class 66 was different from, but subbed for, the GWE 66-- leading to an undoable scenario because the ECW version doesn't have a working fuel cap. Now we have how many 66s? Four?

Agree with you completely on this one, Dino: each piece of rolling stock should have a shared "base" version across routes, which base version can be upgraded as needed; and different liveries, when required, as a route-specific "skin" layer. (This would also enable, say, MAG 425s to have proper Munich markings rather than Rhein-Ruhr versions)

 

Which would not be a problem if they only ever had one 182 and one Dosto, upgraded as needed over time.

 

True, but if you have done a mess someone has to clean it up. It would have been possible to solve this within the last 12 month, without having a person working on this 8 hours a day.

 

To be fair, that was what I thought they were doing when training centre first reared its head. It doesn’t appear to be the case though.

I’d be surprised if anyone had an issue with this, but I would like to see them declare some content as ‘as is’ (pretty much everything pre Rush Hour) and leave it. I would be happy if, when I went to select a Class 66 that I didn’t see the one from GWE to be honest. The ones they choose to take for the ride going forward should then be brought up to the very latest standard and then go to this model of one of each type of loco going forward. Part of the reason I’ve given up on German content (which I used to enjoy) is because I’ve literally no bloody idea what I’m driving, or even if it’s the correct loco for the route. I go to change the destination and it doesn’t work etc. The only way I can be 100% certain is to use journey mode. I get that’s a ‘me’ problem, but if I’m like that I’ll bet I’m not the only one.

 

Yes, but the devs did not have the same level of experience and know-how when they started developing the game 5 years ago as they do now. If you start playing with the PC Editor when it releases you will soon find out that you do not design things the best way possible at the first try.

 

As the thread title says TSW2 is dead, but let us never forget the game that died before it so it could live, the majestic work of art that was ......................... BRIAN BLOODAXE on the spectrum 48k, nothing will ever come close to walking through a completely empty screen and having a Monty Python foot come down from above and squash you for absolutely no reason.....

Point being games have always died, even in the early 80's, so why should this game deserve a thread to carry with it into the annuals of history, my mind ponders these kinds of thoughts daily........

 

That’s a really good point, which again is why I think some of the older stuff needs cutting loose. I’m surprised that so much of it has kept pace for as long as it has to be honest.

 

But here in 2023 it isn't too late to fix it. Just pick one model, slip it into all the routes on which that loco is included, and quietly delete the others. In fact, better yet, use the Training Center as the "depot" for the new consolidated models.

EDIT: that would however tick off those who have used the old models in LD or SP.

 

This is incorrect. UE5's hardware requirements are the same as UE4's, and UE5 does work on gen 8 consoles. What has changed are the software requirements (newer minimum version of Windows, Visual Studio, and such).

Don't lose all hope.

 

No, because you can run into issues like that the latest loco version does not interact with the newest route track lying system in the same way the old one interacts with the track lying system in its old route. So, if you put the new loco on the old route it might now be able to move. Again, many things to consider. Seems very easy. It is not.

If it was easy, they would have done it already.