Again, the question didn't change. You are making an assumption based on your personal opinion. You don't know if either DTG or Rivet did any market research. That's not a little thing. Their business depends on making money from satisfied customers. If people really WANTED something and they knew it, what reason would they have for NOT selling it to them? I suspect they have a lot of data backing up their business decisions regarding what has sold, what hasn't and any marketing/focus research they have done on top. It's been mentioned before that long routes cost more to make, and making longer ones would break that "optimum price point" so doesn't have count as valid business market research? Comments from DTG (dunno about Rivet) have said they don't want to break that $50.00 price point, and if anything be closer to the $30 level. Asking them to IGNORE what they know by sales to be a good price point in order to make a tiny few people happy (maybe) just doesn't seem to make rational sense. This is why I suggested people do a specific project for a specific route with backers to prove there is a market for routes that are over $100.00. That has not been proven. If they are making money selling short routes, the burden of proof to disprove what works is on YOU to make that case to them...with your wallet.
The average route adding them up seems to be about 75km (47 miles) That's... pretty decent. Some are half that. Some are twice that. The Wurburg is 116 miles (186 km) So how long is "long?" You could argue that you ARE getting "longer" routes all the time when extensions are made to maps like the Southeastern High Speed and the Leven part of the Fife Line. Those aren't even costing anything (although they seem to have been planned in advance and not a new choice) The definitions of "long" and "longer" have been all over the place in this thread, just as personal opinions are. Personally, I think the Wurzburg for example is REALLY LONG, as is Cajon Pass. They're a bit of a grind to be honest. Other routes don't FEEL that short to me because there's lots to do on them like Oakville, Niddertalbahn or Maintalbahn. So really it seems to be about personal perception and not a set "length." It's all up to the individuals experience and expectations. And that's why I think they would be better off doing more on the shorter routes and getting the most play out of development cost.
But you would have the discount on the 745 as you require a subscription to have the Gemma. I am also shocked you are openly admitting you find it acceptable to “steal/pirate” from a 3rd developer who is working with DTG giving your status with them. This seriously needs to be reported and dealt with.
My point is that ATS products are not worth the money they demand. For the amount of use I'd personally get out of that train - maybe one or two drives occasionally on the only payware route that uses it - it's not worth more than the price of a regular route. That is what I mean by it being more beneficial (which does not mean the same thing as "acceptable", an obviously different meaning in every way) to steal than buy as it would be removed to make room for stuff one would want to keep. I also know why it's that price, and it's a laughable reason. By comparison, the 700 and 800 each have multiple routes to drive on and, in the case of the 800, a lot of liveries, and are way better value for money. GU would have been better working with AP on the 745. BTW, I have no interest in the 745, just to be clear. To have to pay 33 pounds for a subscription and then still have to pay another 30 for a train to drive on the route you get for subbing? That should have been a single package, route and train, with all route assets (except the base route, for obvious reasons) bundled to give a reason for such a price, and $51.99 CAD is a route price with a train on Steam. $40 CAD should have been the price for both route and train. 37 pounds is more than that. Do the conversion. It's a money grab to cover their past mistakes. And they will probably do it with the 755 as well. Maybe they'll learn from their mistakes and work with DTG to get a package on Steam with the Norwich extension and the 755. But I'm not holding my breath.
If it's not worth it...then don't steal it. Just don't get it. It's an odd use of the word "more beneficial" when you mean "stealing." Is it really worth your self respect and integrity to steal a digital train route?
It's a value comment. There is not 38 pounds of value in that edition of the 745. Most trains sell for way less than that, and given the rare use of it, this one should have too. Even the Searchlight CP train, which I thought to be high in price, is less than that, but it has been well received and critically praised in comparison. I'd be curious to see if someone else takes a stab at it, or even a 720.
If I was you I would drop this subject altogether before you land yourself in very hot water. A admin has already edited your comment out. I know as well as you do why you grudge paying third party for any content. And giving that stance you have with DTG you will be treading on very thin ice. Alan has also been made aware of your comments and no doubt will be taking things further his end as well so do yourself a favour and say no more on the matter.
Just a reminder for folks that discussions about piracy will be removed and repeat offenders will get a warning. Please also bear in mind to keep discussions respectful towards other members of the community.
I have sent you a DM. It should be noted I've only been trying to discuss an opinion that certain products are low in value and nothing I am doing personally. I've moving on from this discussion as it's a bit of a touchy subject and it could be taken in the wrong way (the latter like a lot of things I say, to be fair).
Indeed I would like longer routes for high speed but I think the local commuter services we have the routes at present length are good enough.
I wonder if anyone who is clamoring for "much longer routes" has driven the longer routes on the game, such as Wurzburg/Kassel or Southeastern High Speed or Cajon Pass. Even at high speed those are pretty dang long, and running freight it takes a lot longer than the HSTs. 116 miles when you are only doing 50ish takes about 2 hours and you cover a lot of terrain. Just how much longer than that do you need? Again, it's one of the drawbacks of a super-long routes... time investment. I'm not convinced a huge part of the player base want to do 4+ hours trips at a stretch. I agree that there could be more CONTENT for many of the routes, or that they picked weird start/end points, but that's an entirely different question. What's on the route, or where it should have started/ended are both still content comments, not length comments. A route with more timetable and scenarios or more rolling stock...or a route that is "shifted" 10 miles further along the track to hit a different start/end point station could both be done within the same length limit. So again, I'd invite people to actually RUN those available very LONG routes and give some feedback on what is already in game and why it is or is not sufficient. A "long" route to me is one that's a solid 1.5-2 hours to complete. I use time measurement because that's what I'm investing in the game (and we all have a finite amount of) and it all depends on speed really. A 50 mile run at 25mph on steep slopes is still a "long" run....
I mean, most services on Cajon Pass are split into 2 segments, with them ending either at Summit or Victorville, so 1 part of the run mainly focuses on the Pass itself, while the other part focuses on the flatter desert running. I think only 2 actual services run end to end without a stop. But of course, US freight fans, especially those that are used to the longer routes from MSTS, OR, Run 8, Trainz, and TSC aren't worried about run time, as it would more or less reflect parts of a real world operation of one of these trains. But the lack of anything to do on the uphill climbs is what causes them to drag on, since you just shove it into notch 8 and wait till you reach to summit. One of the reasons most people don't really want to see another mountain route made (Either for TSW or TSC) but the problem lies in that the well known routes sell, most of the well known freight routes in the US....are mountain passes or long slow hillclimbs. -Marias Pass -Soldier Summit -Tennessee Pass -Tehachapi Pass -Feather River Canyon -Mullen Pass -Donner Pass -Saluda Grade -Blue Mountains etc.... Very rarely do you have something that isn't a Notch 8 slugfest up the side of a hill, or at least not a slow climb. Montana Hi-Line is a good example of a route that would be long, and at least challenging due to its changing grades with its sawtooth grade profile, plus the various grain mills on the line for extra services to run (On the left, especially when compared to Marais Pass on the right) I don't even know why Im mentioning this though, I know US freight is dead on TSW at least from DTG.
I think you could MAKE some interesting scenarios, the routes (as most are in DTG) are lacking in content as I said. For example, there's a lot of variety of terrain, slopes, assets on Antelope or Kassel-Wurzburg and they're pretty long. The problem is much of it IS in fact "stick it at full throttle". However, that could be tempered by having lower freight speed limits (as happens in real life) and more complicated scenarios/timetables using the sidings/destinations available. As an example, Wurzburg has lots of cool tunnels and changes of grade, it has siding yards, and they even seem to have focuses, you could do a pretty long run with several stops to pick up cars and build/detach consists along the route. It would take time to get up to speed and slow down, you'd have to get on the right sidings, you're have to watch for traffic and slopes when starting/stopping. Granted, when I play it I do notice the annoying wires clipping through a US freight loco since it's a smaller gauge German line, but just giving an idea of what is achievable without going "longer" per se. (I think it has a bit of "Western Canada" feel so the GP-38/GP-9 from Oakville fit on it pretty well in my scenarios) Adding in several stops, the average speed drops considerably even if you do use "full throttle" in between, and it could take over 3 hours to do one run up Wurzburg collecting/dropping off cargo. The same could be true of Antelope or Cajon Pass if time were put into building those scenarios/services. Even shorter maps can get lots of play on them by having "turn and burns" where you pull freight into a central railyard and then head back out to distribute back down the line. That's kinda what happens locally around here from what I've seen. Local products go in, then imported products go back out. Again, I don't think it's the length it's the amount of content in between.
And this is one of my other complains with DTG's stuff, alot of these routes have industries that get sat unused with no interactions or services, so they are just pretty scenery for some. 2 examples being the Grain Mill in San Bernardino on Cajon, and the Cement Plant near Sun Valley on Antelope Valley. Not sure if its just time, complexation or the the game itself, but its a shame the only ways we can sort of use these is with free roam. (Both of these industries could of had unloaders, but dont, so they arn't interactive)
I play ECML a lot, and while the length is decent at 80 miles it still feels short. The non-stop ones I feel aren't long enough, but then if I do a York service which stops at every station, it seems longer despite being the same distance. It's more about what you are able to do, the type of service you're driving, rather than the actual length. At least, to me it is.
Whilst the ECML is good you can tell they had the same amount of time to make that longer route that they get giving with a shorter route. The level of detail in the scenery just is not present in the ECML as it is with shorter routes.
The SEHS looks so much better and it's just as long. On the other hand, I'm mixed on Wurzberg. There's a LOT to see, but some of the further out stuff is kinda bland (and I think they "cheated" a bit by making a lot of tunnels on the route, which cuts down on size/production) Still a really long route in my book.
Yeah, to me it feels like the development time felt rushed. It definitely lacks the detail as you say, and that make other scenery in routes stand out. It doesn’t help that it’s one or the most bland sections of the route. I tried playing this route last week, but ended up quitting after 15 minutes into a journey, it’s a right snooze fest. That’s why a long section from Kings X to Peterborough with commuter services (Class 700) would’ve been so much more interesting to me. That’s probably about the 50th time I’ve bought that up in conversation (Kings X to Peterborough) lol.
If we had a longer commuter service, say Charing Cross to Faversham that would’ve been better. As much as I love the Dartford to Faversham, once you get into a rhythm, it’s over before you start. I want more long UK commuter routes like BCC.
Aren't there already quite a few? Fife Circle is a long commuter route for example and that just came out. At least it seems long to me since it's over 50 miles and there's a lot of stops. I don't have BCC to compare, but that's one of the shorter lines by length so maybe "long" isn't dependent on miles/kilometers? More the "feeling?" If you're willing to go outside of the UK, there's a lot of them. Antelope is pretty good for commuters (not my thing, but it's a detailed route) Tharampter, Nahverker-Dresden... Commuter routes don't have to be as long in miles (except for the high speed non-stops) because they take a lot longer to run.
May surprise you to know Kings Cross to Peterborough is actually smaller than Peterborough to Doncasterby around 8 miles. Although, yes, having the commuter services would make it feel a lot longer.
It's really about perception and content. Cajon Pass is actually shorter than Southeastern High Speed, but it feels a LOT LONGER because of all the slow grades and less scenery to break it up. East Coast Mainline is almost as long as Southeastern too but as said before it's so bland.... it seems to take longer. (It's also very linear whereas SEHS is more like 3 smaller railways on the same map so there's more variety and each "leg" isn't as long) For me non-linearity is a huge plus.
I agree that a long freight slog makes a route seem to take a long time. "We're only at Victorville? Gads..." Whereas if that was a faster route with stations along the way for passengers - I'd love to see what it would look like in a UK passenger environment with built up areas around everywhere - then the breaking up into chunks makes it seem faster because you get those chunks as separate little drives instead of one long slog, making it seem quicker.
Not a lot of towns in the middle to go to (but for California urban commuting there's already Peninsula in San Francisco and Antelope in Los Angeles, so there are lots of options) For an inter-city style run, Amtrak does do the 3-stop run as part of it's "Southwest Chief" service that stops at Barstow, Victorville and San Bernadino. Seems that would be low hanging fruit to add with even what we have in game. I've run it on a custom scenario and it works fine. It does break it up a bit more than the long haul cargo. Then again, simply having BETTER cargo runs would do that too. Going INTO the sidings for example to get the rolling stock or drop it off would change the whole dynamic, as there are a number of industries along the route that you could stop/start at...but don't. It's always starting int he intermodal yard and pushing down the line to a spot ON THE MAINLINE. Just stopping in the middle of the tracks. That to me kinda ruins the immersion. You aren't actually delivering anything, you are just stopping in the "middle of the road." It'd be like a truck simulator that ends when you get on the edge of town as "close enough."
I've run the original Cajon Pass Yard Work and they do that. One actually has you leave a siding to a reverse point and head back on the other track to the siding across the tracks to do your work. In the scenario that follows, the train you take actually passes the final setup of that engine driving to its end point. LOL
Not to correct you or be that guy, but I just looked at the distances on google by car. There shouldn’t be much of a difference. Kings X to Peterborough works out at 84.1m and Peterborough to Doncaster works out at 87.9m.
A run on BCC takes over an hour on the majority of services, that being due to the amounts of stops all tightly compressed together. Most stops are just over a mile until the next one. I think the longest stop to the next station is around 7 miles, and that’s at the beginning of the route, going up the lickey hill section. Longer routes don’t necessarily mean X amount of miles. As you say high speed needs more mileage, probably double to what they offer now to compensate the high speed you’re travelling at from A-B.
TSW might not be 1:1 in terms of every single building or tree as IRL, but it is 1:1 in terms of track length and such, as far as I know
there is also that gigachad creator who is attempting to re-create pretty much all of London's railways... mad, but looking great atm I actually wouldnt mind long services like that to play from time to time... actually feeling like you did a real long-distance service first off, what is SCS and second, I think we can agree that TSW isnt 1:1 when it comes to every single detail of a route, but length and track placement wise, it is pretty much accurate 1:1
SCS is SCS Software, the developers of Euro Truck Simulator 2, and American Truck Simulator, and yes while the track layouts in TSW are mostly correct, it lacks in the small scenery details in comparison to what SCS does in their game. SCS actually makes (Within artistic liberty if needed) the actual buildings and landmarks in their cities if they are noticeable enough. The only part I see this ever done with DTG, is usually stations only.
Both ATS and ETS2 are still scaled down to 1:20 OTR and around 1:3 in cities. Dovetail aim for 1:1 scaling (natural size), even if there's no natural accuracy.
Even then depending on the map, the amount of roads in a single state in ATS could equal the trackage of a single route from DTG.
ATS and ETS also have to work hard to create the illusion of an area condensed into 5% of its normal size. For the most part they do that very well, though some of the older European countries and UK need a rework in particular using road tunnels as scenic breaks where none exists in reality. If you get the ProMods mod map you get a very convincing drive all the way through western Russia, Karelia up to the top of Norway also Iceland and the Faroe Isles.
Not really, the game only loads the tiles near to the player out to max game draw distance as far as scenery goes, so think about it - that doesn't affect the length of the route one jot. Memory is a red herring. Time and cost of development is the sole reason.
Memory is a valid concern on XBox or Playstation, which is increasingly more and more of the playerbase. A lot of players have over 200GB , some more and the "standard" for consoles is 500GB. It's a heavy commitment to put HALF of your space to ONE game. A DTG route can be 5-10 GB itself. Wanting that to be triple or more makes it FAR larger than whole games. Tripling cost isn't a "minor" concern either since games that are around $100.00 or more are pretty rare for a reason. Caveat: Having SAID that, I just picked up the Weardale/Teesdale map for TS2024 and it's laid out a lot better than the TVL map which would be the same region in TSW. For roughly the same size, there's a LOT more of a "network" there since it's not linear. It just FEELS a lot bigger with a lot more stock, a lot more switches and branches, and a lot more possibility than TVL. I really LIKE TVL in TSW, but I can see how the same company does it in TS 2024 with not the same but neighboring tracks and it's night/day in playability. I realize they're different games/etc... but it's the same company and the same general area. They don't need to go much BIGGER if they just populate their maps better. There are plenty LONG maps in my view that are pretty empty (like the 116 mile long Kassel-Wurzberg) that are just entirely linear and I just get bored of basically the SAME scenery for 100 miles of it with little to do. Compare that to Southeastern High Speed which again has more of a "network" and uses the space, size and stock better.
Is in game on the WCML Northeast by ATS. Also Stock on Trent is on there and Northhampton Loop is coming any day now.
Yeah, I realize that little bit is in Missing Link, I thought it was? I know the Northampton Loop has always been in the freeware WCMLS (at last check, v5.3, predating the payware one). Stoke-on-Trent I thought was also Missing Link, but maybe I am mistaken.
Which is why I'm always leery of the people screaming for "MORE HSTs!" That to me just means a lot longer, linear (boring) routes. I get that people like different things, but a long route with no variation isn't my cup of tea and it's gotta be a headache for developers. Whereas branch lines take longer so they FEEL longer, even when they're not very long, but they're much easier to develop in detail and fill with content.
Well that’s boring to you but the numbers don’t lie, most of the popular routes on TSW are high speed routes
personally love glossop and goblin line, smaller more interesting routes with more stops rather than, notch 4 and leave it there for half an hour
I'm still stuck with TSW2 routes. I have TSW4, but still playing TSW2. Most of these routes are max 1 hour and 50-60km (divide by 1,6 for miles) long depending on the route. Which routes for TSW4 are in the longer range you point to? Are there many?
