They were being passive aggressive to people over on the Rivet forums they haven't been seen here since Friday
My personal speculation is that LIRR2 missing its release window severely impacted DTG's finances and they had to scamble to get something else out the door before March 31st. Circumstantial evidence points to a June/July 2024 release: Would have been timed to the opening of the Leven branch (why would they have planned a route extension for a few months after release?) The Skyhook 158 would have been day-1 DLC (that's probably where some of the missing services are) Clearly rushed/incomplete scenery work and other detailing (off-route destinations, etc) Maybe it was even something DTG had done most of the basic work for previously and it was put on hiatus for some reason or another. When was the first mention of the LIRR2 issue? Could a bare-bones route have been built out to the current FCL release in that time? Edit: FCL had a pre-order and Goblin didn't, which i still find very odd.
There was a first-time response to that by Jasper in this post. His tone want to emphasize on the fact that he said that airport and planes were cut out because of performance during the livestream. However, there are two issues with that argumentation. 1. This statement does not address why the airport (as generic scenery element) is missing. That moveable air vehicles (with according sound) do have an impact on performance is reliable to me and I don't question that. However, this does not answer why almost the complete airport was left out. A few static meshes to enhance the scenery high probably would not have such an impact as described. For example, the runway. This is easily done in the PC Editor via something called a landscape spline and something I could place there correctly in under 2 minutes. Just place the 2 spline points in the correct distance, then select the segment(s), assign an asphalt road static mesh to it , adjust the scales, (in case it's necessary) smooth the terrain and done. How on earth does that take so much performance? 2. He mentioned the performance loss, reasoning in spawning in the Forth bridge. However, he did NOT explained in detail what did this performance loss causes exactly. It's a lie. At this point the Forth bridge is quite in distance and pretty far off the airport (there even is the station of Dalmeny in between). Facing the fact that the scenery around the Forth bridge seems also not the most performance-hungry one (as it does not seem to be filled with a lot of things which could eat it up that much... unfortunately), I can't see the sense in this being the reason the airport was cut out completely. What true is there is indeed a performance-loss dependent upon the amount of static actors you place in the Unreal Editor/PC Editor. This is not a lie. However as someone, who basically has problems with the exact same thing all the time, I say that I can't explain that the level of detail at this location has such a big impact on performance as stated by Jasper, that you can't even place some static meshes on the scenery. I can't simply believe that. By the way, I made poll about whether or not the user would be willing to sacrifice performance for scenery and gameplay elements and independent upon the specific statements in question related to Fife circle. In case, you didn't saw it, really consider leaving your opinion there. Would be very helpful. https://forums.dovetailgames.com/th...-for-better-immersion-scenery-gameplay.79981/
with an airport and a plane landing or taking off taking up so much performance. I wonder why the entire track of E2G is in the route. seems like that would even make the strongest pc bluescreen if a plane is too much already.
The entire track of the Edinburgh To Glasgow route is laid on this route. Maybe that is the reason for the "performance" issues. It doesn't make any since and is frankly quite sloppy to have the all of Scotrail Express on this route when both routes aren't merged as one playable route.
If the route came out with TSW2 it would have been ok/quite standard but for £30 in what should have had 2-3 more years of improvements since TSW2 it seems to be under standard. Against other routes or even other £30 games it really doesn’t stand high ranking when it comes to decisions on what to pick up.
whilst I would expect the Edinburgh tile to extend maybe one or 2 stations wide out that way, I didn’t think they would be connected all the way to Glasgow that seems very impractical if it’s not being utilised.
I'm sure that the movable 3D plane assets as seen on the BML do have an adverse effect on performance, however I would argue it would add so much to the immersion that it's probably worth it. This is a simulator and not an online shooter after all, so I don't really care if I'm getting, say 50 FPS instead of 60 in a particular section of the route. If you think about it, when you are stationary at a terminal station with multiple other trains moving around you, you do lose a good 20-30 FPS anyway, unless you're running the game on a higher end machine, which probably most of us aren't, yet no one seems to care so much, as it is a "busy area", it is what it is. You pointing out the distance to the Forth Bridge was exactly what I was thinking. I have checked in Google Maps and the distance from the runway of Edinburgh Airport to the Forth bridge is about 4.2 kilometers. I'm not sure how large a tile in TSW is, but I doubt it would be larger than the actual draw distance, which is probably not more than about 2 kilometers. If my assumptions are correct then I don't think there should be much overlap between the airport and the bridge in terms of rendering, obviously if the route is modelled to scale. You seem to be fairly knowledgeable on this subject, so correct me if I'm wrong. EDIT: I voted on your poll.
DTG Rivet and Dovetail are simply tinkering around the edges with these ridiculously minimal improvements. You state that your teams have been preparing for this release along with Rivet. What were they doing? Playing other games rather than carrying out proper quality control? Could they not see an entire bridge twice the size of the Forth Rail Bridge was missing? Did they not notice the Forth Rail Bridge not rendering until a train was on it? Did they not notice the incorrect ballast colour? Were they totally blind to the pathetic quality of distant scenery and the quality of buildings along the entire route? Did they not see the amount of missing line side fencing? It's also obvious they couldn't care less about Edinburgh Airport and invented a nonsensical story about resources. I could go on but it would get more embarrassing for Dovetail and Rivet. It seems clear to me that both Dovetail and Rivet have carried out negligible quality control on this DLC. Now, with both companies caught with their pants fully down, we hear the same jam tomorrow excuses about fixes that should never have been necessary for a DLC that should never have been released in the state it currently is. Those responsible have turned this new release in to a complete debacle and made both companies look like amateur fools. How can Rivet and Dovetail possibly try and justify releasing this atrocious and sub-standard release to the public? I note that neither Dovetail nor Rivet have released any apology for the bin fire that this release has become. Fawning off paying customers with this TSW2 level release is truly appalling and shameful. It shows a clear contempt for your existing customer base and potential new customers. Both companies should hang their heads in shame at the overall shoddiness of this thrown together and chucked out the door release. Is this the new quality level we should now be expecting from Dovetail going forward? Take your customers for fools and you'll soon go out of business. I look forward to your reply.
Not the entire one. Matt showed the route map in the livestream. As I see it, it's only up to Manuel. But quite a piece with the scenery sites surrounding the airport still but not really reasoning the elimation of it, either I think. If this is the reason for it, I would ask why it is necessary to replicate these two arms. Facing the fact, that we have almost no AI traffic, I'm not able to understand this being the reason for it.
Hmm, weird. Usually any usable track should show up in the route map. And what is the reason of this being implemented in this DLC? Edit: I noticed the conversation about this being number one cause for the performance drop down is on in the recently created Fife Circle Feedback thread. However, one thing I can say. I still doubt whether the performance loss is due the laid tracks and unusable tracks to Glasgow (whatever reason this has), because of the level streaming architecture of Unreal Engine TSW uses.
considering they have been saying it’s too much performance impact to decorate the scenery at the airport up, I can’t see it being a connected route, it also doesn’t require the Edinburgh Glasgow route which would make that redundant and near un sellable.
Not all track will show on the map, pretty much every route has usable track absent from the map, although nowhere ever 50 miles of it. It’s not being pinned as the number one drop for performance either, it’s just been pointed out that A) it should not be there. B) Rivet said no to quite a lot of things existing on the new route due to performance, yet 50 miles of track is fine. C) Why is it there? It seems extremely unlikely that someone has laid the track, much more likely they they took E2G’s framework and built Fife Circle on it, which could explain why Fife is in such a dire state.
Probably the same reason why SFS Kassel - Würzburg has an entire extension to Lohr (including a complete non-high speed connection to Lohr) and Dresden - Riesa an extension to Dresden Airport
When tracks are laid in the Editor, usually every track should be visible in the Route Map. I once had an issue where this wasn't the case, and I couldn't use the tracks anymore - aka ghost tracks. I think if there are tracks in any route which are not visible in the route map, they kind of need to have been deactivated by purpose of a developer. Need to find out how to do that. Thanks for the info.
I could think of these being created reasoning in a possible future extension. But Edinburgh to Glasgow is an entire new route. And one we already got as a separate DLC in Train Sim World as well.
Performance impact is highly unlikely since 1. maps are tiled and load only when you enter that tile (level streaming) 2. assets are rendered in dynamically changing quality through various parameters (how important it is, distance from camera, is it even visible, engine graphics settings etc) (and probably 3. since I do not own that DLC) is probably completely inactive and has no services, animations etc.
There is a flag to hide tracks on the route map, this is mainly used to hide the portals on the route map since they are inaccessible through normal means anyways.
What makes it even weirder is that work had clearly started on building the Airport as the Control Tower and buildings can be seen in the distance and what looks like the very basics of putting a runway there had started. So that excuse of performance makes no sense whatsoever.
Theirs no tech developed to connect routes that way, theirs no detection system it’s been explained many times by DTG developers they can’t detect if one route is their or not to connect, and tiles still add up, among other potential reasons of its not just that tile.
Hoping that some dev company steps in and works on Rivets back catalogue, bringing it up to spec, if rivet don't. I wonder if SHG's 158 will give us a new... accurate timetable. Or even, they might fix the problems here.
And you interpreted that in different way to the subject of the core game recognition of whether a dlc is active for the implementation of a route connection how ?
I really hope that isn't a standard thing in the train sim community... I wouldn't be surprised by how defeatist everyone is here
To be fair from a business sense, they set a deadline, and businesses have to stick with deadlines to keep money flowing in at the points where it's needed. I have seen other types of businesses make bad decisions for the reason of sticking to previously set business deadlines before. The advantage in the software industry is that improvements can be made to a project, but without getting the money in as planned, they might not be able to afford payroll to get the improvements out to fix what users are seeing. I can see, from a business standpoint, why it is being released as it is now even if I might not agree with such a decision from the "first impact" side of things, noting this is turning into the E-G release with its realistic flies. Yes, flies. Rivet made E-G. It's not surprising they took the track to Edinburgh Park where the Fife Circle meets it to use as a starting point. I actually wish they kept Edinburgh Park in this because of that, however, but it's the same ridiculously silly reason they took the already completed Anderston Station out of the TSC North Clyde Line release. Honestly, that release should have had up to Glasgow Central. Taking that out removed usability for the release by itself and took scenario possibilities from Glasgow to Helensburgh out of the equation. This is another example of bad decision-making from Rivet Games. But let's not look back three and a half years, but instead discuss the airport. A basic airport should be there, not a desert wasteland. When Just Trains did the Blackpool route, they had to cut a station in the route today because of the era. They created an active construction site where the theme park near the station is today. The game can handle it. Not including the airport sounds like an excuse to players when taken in this view and the airport needs to be properly added to some extent, if it hasn't been addressed already. However, they have probably been working on actual gameplay over aesthetics coming up to release. It's time to look at aesthetics.
Their point is that because they do not own E2G there are no services loaded for that section of track, since those services use the 385.
Uh, they actually DO own Edinburgh Express. Unless you are referring to a player not owning it, in which case you are correct.
edit: time will tell if it’s planned for this style of extension, I can’t see it but time will tell. _______________________________ I think all that can be said on my first thoughts on fife for myself considering I was holding off purchases anyhow (unrelated issue) has been said, the stuff is known well and I don’t think I have any more to add, its probably at best going to be a while to get back to buying dlc so I’ll bow out of discussions on it and see how the route has turned out then.
I'm also a bit tired of the discussion that probably didn't achieve anything in the end anyway. DTG did reach out and issued a statement, but it only mentioned the collaboration with Rivet and that the 'experience should be improved'. These are typical marketing phrases, general and initially meaningless. What is it about exactly? What is being improved? Until recently, Rivet didn't even know what was meant by "bad textures" or didn't want to know. I have decided that I will only buy FCL once major improvements have been made. Not previously.
Sorry but this really annoys me- we're not part of some guild or union of TSW players. People can buy or not buy whatever they choose for whatever reason or no reason. To me this just sounds like blaming the customers as much as what Rivet have tried to do. Frankly, TSW is the only game in town for a broad-based train sim with a modern graphics engine so of course a lot of people are going to buy new content (especially if they don't follow forum/discord) without doing a ton of research into the details. This situation will continue for as long as DTG have no real competitor in the genre. Maybe SimRail will get there eventually, but right now it's too niche to really challenge DTG IMO.
I actually fear this could be the end of Rivet as a credible third party developer for TSW, its a shame they just didn't give a notice stating that they need to sell the route in its early development and unfinished state and that they would work and listen to its customers to enhance areas of the route as a partnership to make a great route addition to TSW, (its the sarcastic responses from their community manager that has probably rattled the potential selling of this route more than its actual issues. The class 170 model is exceptionally good, the route should be an iconic one and overall trackwork is also very good, the stations look great and well modelled in the main, the scenery and lack of timetable paths just give it a WCL feel, I so wanted this route very much and I just feel so unimpressed at the release. Skyhook learnt quickly and made MML into a masterpiece by listening to its customer base, hopefully Rivet will complete their FCL masterpiece for us all to enjoy. I couldn't expect to run a viable business if I handled my customer base like Rivet has done since Friday, its a ratner moment for them I feel and needs a positive customer embrace to move forward with our trust in them as a credible developer.
It ain't going to be the end of Rivet. WCL was, and still is, a disaster of a release as is Arosa, yet Rivet are still here.
Exactly. I mean the fact one minute Jasper was denying anything was wrong with the route and pretty much challenging people to point out issues. Then magically, oh there are issues but not even the vaguest plan as to when they might be fixed. Anyhow, it's out there now, or it will be in about 10 minutes on Steam. At this point all we can do is watch the feedback from those who bought it and the reviews on Steam etc. I hope those who said its okay do indeed get something out of it and the DLC is everything you hoped for. Many of us will not be joining you in that endeavour.
Those screenshots that Alex posted, still don't look good. Seems to be on the same level of quality, if not worse, as ancient Great Western Express, and really pales in comparison to Blackpool and Suffragette. It's a shame since I was really looking forward to the Turbostar, but I'll have to pass on this for now. Really mind boggling how the same company that gave us Bernalinie can release something like this.
Yeah this will get completely forgotten about. It is the customers fault if they knowingly buy a broken product though, ignorance can only take you so far. Fare enough some people won’t check the forums, but the person I called out can clearly see there’s a lot of upset and instead of boycotting they hand money to sloppy developers. It’s like buying a takeaway at the worst rated food place in town then complaining your food is bad, shocked pika
Despite me being unsure, I preordered and I’m in the process of downloading. What I will say the preview stream by DTG and Rivet done this route no favours. I’ve watched some reviews from ambassadors that still show that the route has issues but nowhere near what we saw in the original stream. The reviews from ambassadors were honest, fair and balanced.
Why not, for example on SKW you can drive the conventional line in free roam from Würzburg up to around Jossa, so around another 60km of laid track...and it appears on the map only as laid until Würzburg Rbf...(at some point between Gemünden and Würzburg there's a bump in the tracks, that will throw you off...)
Interesting. Was this meant to become an extension? And how good is the scenery there (if it even has been created)? And yes, the reason why this is possible even if the tracks do not show on the route map was later explained by dxltagxmma :
Would have made so much more sense to hold release until the Leven branch is open and deliver it then, giving the time needed to actually do it justice. Potentially also lining up with the release of the 158. Makes zero sense to release now in the state it’s in. Can only been a cash needed now type delivery for a year end accounts boost….however short sighted.
I agree, the sense to release now is it can make profit, the only reason for them or any developer to hold off is if it can’t make profit. Some scenery details, emptier timetable etc isn’t the overall decider to whether it can make profit, thus they don’t make that much of an impact to hold off. I think a weeks delay was hard to convince though, definitely wasn’t going to be June.
At the German streamer you live in a parallel world. Incomprehensible, I say that as a German! An ambassador who doesn't criticize anything and doesn't even address the mistakes. Without this forum I would hardly know anything about the problems. 'The route has very beautiful scenery.' '...you can say with a clear conscience that Rivet has made a huge leap forward.' Rivet 'has made up for, if not even surpassed Dovetail in terms of route design.' 'Might be more interesting than London Overground, which is boring after three train services.' Is that supposed to be funny?
