Why Isn't Dtg Actively Communicating More Like In The Tsw4 Editor Thread?

I am positively surprised about the communication between actual DTG employees and their customers/fanbase/community inside the TSW4 Editor thread I posted, I didn't expect really a ton of conversations about it especially from DTG (I don't mean it in a insulting way or anything, it's just rare to see especially in depth continuous conversations from DTG). I wish this would be more often the case, because then it the general environment in the community wouldn't be so heated, separated and ambivalent. Zusi is a good example - one man - the sole and main developer of the simulator - is closely working together with the community. Why can't DTG do that? My point isn't that all DTG devs and the upper management should now be active in the forums answering 100% of the questions and calming down people. Larger game studios have one or more employee(s) or volunteers dedicated to forums, community hubs like Discord servers and so on for their game(s) (that's what I've seen most of the time) - community ambassador or whatever it's called. DTG doesn't have to reveal any internal company secrets - so I don't get why DTG isn't actively communicating with the community and only in very special cases like this thread/topic.
It would clear up a lot of the negativity and prevent further negative misconceptions and everyone benefits from it.

 

At the moment I want them to dedicate all their time to releasing TSW4 on time and I want their release to be as perfect as they possibly can. Every time I see a DTG employee commenting on the forum I always wonder why they aren't working on TSW4 (just kidding)

 

Because this doesn't happen.

 

They have a new game releasing literally next week, I think it's fair enough they're all hands on deck focussing on that.

Even so, I've only very recently started regularly checking the forums but I feel like I've seen the devs fairly regularly in various threads. Maybe not having super in-depth conversations but they're there.

There's also the livestreams where they've been quite open to answering questions. The Antelope Valley preview stream last week had a load of random questions being answered, loads having nothing to do with the route being shown off. They even had the courtesy to refuse my request to show off the fully modelled toilets (which we all know are there, they just won't show them ).

I really don't think the devs have been particularly absent at all.

 

From what I was seeing especially in the Editor Feedback thread. Matt has answered nearly every question. Probably your own thread was overlooked? But this could happen here pretty fast given the amount of posts here everyday.

 

I think the answer is that the Editor deals with things they won't look bad for answering...

 

Of course if there's a lot of work to do then obviously they should focus on finishing their work, my point is the communication in general outside of any large events like upcoming game releases, like everything between the release and the phase of an upcoming release.

I mean the thing is with Roadmaps and live streams is that they happen once a while, and community input is limited because 1. there are fixed topics that you (DTG) choose, 2. as I said, they aren't happening actively (as in; there is a fixed start and end for them, they are planned, and they are mainly controlled and created by you (DTG) only), they aren't as dynamic as forum threads and posts from various users, and 3. I've seen mostly only moderation posts on the forums and not active contribution and participation in community forum threads (except the Editor thread).

What I, and probably others miss there is, as I said previously, there is a lack of active participation and contribution to threads and co. where for example, things are cleared up (general questions to misinformation - which is, in my opinion, due to the lack of participation from DTG), answers, general status updates like fixes or anything else, any updates, and so on and so on. I mean yeah Roadmaps and live streams exist but as I've said, they are fixed events, are not dynamic, they happen once a while, and they contain fixed topics.

 

I noticed a lot of participation about the Editor, which is really good, I just wish they would extend this to other topics. They also actively participate in my thread, so that's not my issue

 

Also noticed the quick and numerous reponses of DTG members (mainly Matt) in the Editor-thread.
It would be nice if we could see the same level of DTG-communication in the Technical Reports-forum.

 

...isn't it active enough?

 

Personally I think the comms level is about right at the moment. Matt has certainly been popping up in a few threads answering questions etc.

My only slight gripe is that certain key questions do seem to be ignored… Save game improvements one I’ve raised a couple of times and there are some very valid questions around AVL as to why the heck the route didn’t just come with a UP freight loco as standard to avoid all the DLC dependent layering that’s had to be done.

On wider issues concerns about the Class 700 sounds (not that long since it released) seem to be getting stonewalled.

 

Save game aside, I suspect the reason why those subjects aren't broached is because they were commercial decisions, and not development decisions

 

Depending on the question/discussion, the silence is their communication.

 

Well IMHO go hand in hand and when the reps come on here to answer questions surely it's on behalf of all stages of the decision making process. The company isn't that huge...

 

I coudn't say. While I expect Matt has creative control, any of his decisions can be overruled or even reversed at the whim of a commercial requirement, I'd have thought. I've not been here forever, but I don't recall an instance of a staff post on the forums from anyone that wasn't either in the dev team or a community rep?

 

To expand on this, let's hypothetically say that DTG were planning a pack with Antelope + Cajon + ...Horsehoe was it? to "complete" the layers, for want of a better description. That's a commercial decision. (Whether it would be popular or not is a subject for another thread) It would directly address the queries that have been raised regarding the freight layers, but if Matt or JD posted that info on the forums without an official clearance from (I assume) the marketing director, they''d be swiftly handed their P45s

 

Oh I see your point. I agree in some aspects.

What really grinds my gears on the communication topic for a while now is their policy on announcing. New stuff gets announced on the last possible date it seams, when there is no point of return.

I work in communication myself, developing strategys and wordings for companys. It is hard to get reliable informations from software companys ahead of time. But boy, working on a new version of the game for more than half a year and announcing it a view weeks ahead, thats just odd and in my opinion really bad. That is not transparent at all.

But, I still think the DTG devellopers and communication team is doing a good job here in the forum I believe. They give most of the answers. Sure not always what I want to hear but that is not their problem.

 

I've had positive communication and feedback from the DTG team on feedback I've given them. They even corrected a sound problem I pointed out and got it fixed before the release in a few weeks. And I had good communication with Matt, who first replied to the thread, then took it to Discord, who then had the proper party (sound engineer) come on here and personally reply to me to tell me that they appreciated the feedback and had fixed what I brought to their attention. I was extremely surprised it went that way but also happy to see that in some cases, they will work with the community. Makes us feel less ignored where I think a lot of people do, myself included. My experienced renewed my hope.

 

Great thread and good responses from Matt and Co.

People may experience personal disappointment when something they seek doesn't happen, but I'll take an honest and upfront messenger over a BS artist anyday. Think of the military in which some here will have served. Someone who is clear about the challenge, clear about the objective and clear about the realities of the situation will be followed, trusted and respected more than someone who blags it or stays silent hoping for the best. Taking the loyalty of the troops for granted doesn't end well in business terms either and so I think the level of comms recently is to be applauded. I think it'll go some way to rebuilding credibility and (depending on realities as they unfold), towards rebuilding trust too.
It's a fine line between brutal honesty and preparing expectations though, so it's not as simple as it can appear.

 

Well said Matt.

These posts are unfair as Matt and JD are often on the forums answering questions that are train related.

It shows the passion of the developers and DTG and oh how they do such a good job with very little credit!!

I wish I could invite them to Wimbledon one year and give them each a trophy every one of the staff including the cleaners gardeners and cooks!!

You deserve more recognition than you have got so far.

Thank you to the entire team, the management the workers and the people that do the less attractive tasks.

As you can see OP Matt has come here and made an in depth comment. He does this often and to his credit he is a total train buff.

Instead of making questionable posts like this how about a bit of gratitude?????

 

I'm honestly impressed by the active responses inside the various threads. Especially Matt giving insight, help, and straight up showing interest in route suggestions, ideas, or directly telling us that there are no plans for it at the moment.

Even if I don't like what I hear, (no US steam anytime soon for example), it feels a lot better to have the transparency and knowledge to know what to expect.

And speaking of, the roadmap covering the major releases up to 6+ months post release is a good step into the right direction, I believe.

I do hope that wherever TSW goes, this is the new standard in customer care and community / developer communication.

Big thanks to all of the team for that !

 

Is there a reason why the method TSC uses, of having unpurchasable loco DLCs that are included with the relevant route DLCs, cannot be used?

The problem is that in the past "we're working on it" has turned into "update cancelled, buy the next game instead".

 

Yes many of us do, but what about new players. Not having a freight layer for first timers seems short sighted to me.

And why is the LATC freight yard missing?

 

But I thought that since TSW3 it was possible to decouple loco's from routes? So you'd get one 'repository' or 'pack' containing the UP loco, which you then 'unlock' by owning any of the routes that uses it. If you already own Sherman or Cajon, fine, you already have the loco installed. You don't own any of those routes, cool, the loco will download when you buy Antelope.

 

For loco dlcs exclusive to tsw3 and above, not those part of a route.

 

But wouldn't it make a lot of sense to back through the entire catalog and fix this issue?

 

I’m guessing there’s a lot of technical work behind doing it, but as an idea I do agree it makes sense.

What doesn’t make sense is DTG not simply adding the SD70ACE to the DLC,I see Matt saying the duplication is an issue (and I agree), but it’s an issue that exists only with the 17 dosto cab’s & 33 66’s. Making a second SD70 is hardly replicating the issue on the same scale. Especially when the solution is needing 15GB of DLC installed to work around it.

 

I think many will be disappointed that the Class 700 sounds will not be revisited - the levels are just wrong, far too quiet in the cab and if you turn your speakers up to compensate the external sounds, passing trains etc. are deafening. I know we have the unofficial mod but there is no guarantee this will work in TSW4 and shouldn't have been necessary if the volume level had been balanced better in the first place.

Save game... well disappointing but not exactly unsurprising there has been no change on the outstanding issues. One would have thought with the ever increasing portfolio of routes, at the least adding a few extra slots would have been on the agenda for TSW4. And I'm assuming my other pet issue, the loss of objective data if you save and resume on a chained run, has not been touched either.

Oh well...

 

Disappointed but unsurprised perhaps.

Still lost reputational ground to be reclaimed. I'd label it an opportunity and still harbor a slight glimmer of hope that it might be taken as such..

I honestly don't think it would take much because the vast majority here want to believe..

 

just to add my opinion here.. i have only positive things to say about the engagement of those at dtg on here

i've had a lot of my own questions or concerns answered here, not just recently but over the years, and i personally feel those at dtg do actually care about the game and the players, and do their best to make the game the best it can be for us.. sure it's not 100% perfect, but show me something in life that is..

i actually feel dtg go above and beyond on these forums to assist where they can, especially when in recent times there's been an unfair of (in my opinion) overy negative comments that aren't constructive, but just completely unnecessary.. the fact dtg communicate on these forums despite all that is actually a great credit to them in my view

 

But, you could of offset that issue by offering the other varient of the UP SD70ace, the later models with the nose headlight and an ISO cab.

The UP SD70ACe we got is the earlier thundercab with the high headlight and no ISO cab....



The model could of been slightly tweaked for the later ISO cab SD70ACe with the nose headlights or the heavier ballasted SD70AH's. You already have a nose headlight varient of the SD70ACe with the BNSF model. And we are still missing the ISO cab variant. This now negates the duplication issues since the model is now one that isn't in game.

 

If you would read my posts completely you would clearly see there is gratitude for DTGs work.

Criticism =/= Bashing.

Criticism: has arguments, sees room for improvement. Bashing: has no arguments and is often ad hominem, doesn't care about improvement.

 

OK, that makes perfect sense, and explains using a layer instead- but why Cajon Pass and not Sherman Hill? (or, rather, making Cajon necessary to underlie Sherman)? Because BNSF is simply wrong for Antelope Valley: that's UP country, and it's as illogical as layering a GWR HST into Midland Main Line.

 

Thanks JD. Its good that the duplication issues have been explained and clearly a decision has to be taken on relative merit on which items are duplicated. Without such restrictions it would get pretty dramatic in terms of file size, choice, clarity of choice etc etc. Ongoing review I think is sensible and until some kind of technical solution is determined its understandable.
I think most recently the biggest vibe change Ive seen is that your increased presence here as employees and representatives does indicate at least to me (one of your most ascerbic and vocal critics) that you are putting in the hard yards. Im sure most people understand that first and foremost you've got to sell product and I certainly am cognizant of that. Reputationally that becomes an uphill struggle if the relationship between the brand and the player base is lost or deteriorates. Your continued presence, engagement and most importantly explanations of decisions really pushes back against that.
Appreciate you engaging out of office hours. Thats noticed too.

 

Of course another solution might be reverting to the good old days when we actually got two new traction types with a route for £25, rather than £30 for a route with one.

Just saying...

 

Any word on why the choice was made to exclude LATC (the large UP yard right across the river from LAUPT)? Seems like that would've added quite a bit of gameplay options for freight, especially now with free roam.

 

The basic question has not been answered.

If you're going to release a mixed traffic route, you should include a passenger and a freight loco with the route and include appropriate rolling stock. Buyers should not be required to separately purchase either one in order to enjoy the full timetable. Saying " many more players " own CJP is just a rationalization in my view. Probably excludes a not insignificant cohort.

Whatever the reason for omitting a UP freight loco, it just feels like the short straw - again.

 

Yup, especially when said route has a very small timetable.

 

Yes the base question still hasn't been answered really. And again, NOT everyone has TSW3 yet the reply we got was the decision was made because it was assumed most people do. Well, like myself, a lot of people don't have TSW3 or the required freight DLC to make it work on AV Line. So assuming people would just have Cajon Pass installed already wasn't the right direction to go there.

 

The assumption wasn’t that everyone had Cajon Pass, just that more people had Cajon than Sherman Hill, which is correct.

Personally IF a layer is going to happen, I think it needs to happen accurately, not by making you jump through hoops by owning 2 DLC’s to get what should just be included.

Someone at DTG has been doing mental gymnastics with this decision, either include the UP stock with the route, or make it dependant on UP DLC.

 

Another day, another disappointment
It never ends really

 

Agree with you. Even if it would have been some kind of partial duplication, proper UP stock should have been included at no additional price without the need for any existing DLC. Again, TSW4 is supposed to be a new game...so don't rely on assets from TSW3 which in the minds of DTG is a "different" version or game. Even though it's really not.

 

And there are options so the loco isn't an exact copy to the Sherman Hill SD70ACe (Different paint or different model configuration) which DTG didn't bother to do or think about....

 

But you obviously don't read the forums do you?

Because you wouldn't of made this post if you did.

Staff at DTG constantly monitor them and Matt often get's stuck in to a post before others if timing is right.

 

While I like the path they took given the situation with using CJP as the standard to activate freight and then having SMH/CCP replace CJP stuff if its owned for the reasons given about players probably having CJP (a base TSW3 route) compared to SMH or CCP which are TSW 2/3 DLCs you buy on top of already buying the base game. I do think even just adding in the SD70 from SMH would've been more beneficial. End of the day there are going to be a few players who get TSW4 as their first TSW and wont have any of the DLCs from previous titles.

On top of that, AVL is releasing with a singular locomotive and a cab car. Most of the other NA routes have 2 engines, Peninsula has the f40, the cab, and the GP unit for probably the closest comparison. Comparing other base game/anniversary edition NA routes (forgive me if the info is incorrect on the early versions, its a little confusing to look for), CJP obviously has the ES44 and the SD40, BP for rush hour has the f40, cab car, and the ACS-64, SPG has the AC44, SD40 and GP38. LIRR being third rail makes a little more sense at just the m7 for TSW 2020, and the original NEC route had the ACS 64 and the GP38. Compared to other TSW titles, AVL does feel like its lacking the loco content to be a route when compared to the more recent TSW titles, I don't have much interest in non NA routes, but from what I can see the other routes of TSW4 have 2 engines without any additional addons compared to the 1 of AVL. I guess the argument to that is the Rotem cab car provides enough of a different experience.

In my opinion it feels like AVL simply lacks content compared to the other TSW4 base routes, and while Matt said simply copying over a engine/rolling stock from another route to be included is a lot of work which I won't argue, I do wonder if that is more work than making the timetable anyway, and adding in the CJP stock that then gets swapped out if someone owns SMH/CCP.

 

It's just disappointing that most US routes these days don't feel like they are getting their max potential. Alot of stuff gets left on the cutting room floor.

Bet the cement plant in Sun Valley doesn't have an unloaded pit, so we can't even use that in free roam to simulate the former Vulcan Rock train....