Im like reading all the responses on this thread bring up really good points without too much personal arguments. Honestly i just hate that the game reached the point where you need DLC packs for your DLC to make it enjoyable. This is one thing sam used to point all the time. People don't realize when you're buying a a 40 dollar dlc then a 15-20 dollar add on pack for more freight services on a dead timetable. Then another 15 dollar dlc to have another passenger train you want you end up almost $70 into a route you make it fun. If the 101 was sold with an optional bundle with Dresden or Salzburg route for $50 i wouldn't mind it but for me to enjoy the 3 scenarios it comes with and limited services made for it i would have to buy another 40 dollar dlc (Bahnstrecke Salzburg). Otherwise i would have to run it as a sub can apparently the cab car doesn't even sub.
My view of the pricing on this DLC is pretty simple really, people will happily pay way more money than what's asked here in a restaurant to eat a gourmet meal that will probably only fill up about 10% of your plate if you're lucky, that will be eaten in less than half hour, if you want to eat it again, well your coughing up the cash again. So in this case, yes you buy the DLC at that higher price point, but you can use it however many times as you like and never pay for it again......
If you haven't noticed but the base game has also increased in price each iteration. Can't wait for TSW5 to be $80.00 this time around. They brought us in with low prices and Matts comment just confirms that they think we are already paying too little. MSFS prices here we come.
I'm pleased to see DTG making more in-depth and detailed locomotives but £30 is far too expensive, especially with the track record of missing or broken features on so much previous content. Far from being too cheap, TSW is already overpriced. £30 for a few added (but welcome) features for a loco that already exists in the game IS flight sim pricing, but I'd bet with nothing like the quality or depth. I feel the same point needs to be made about the Scotrail 158. It is literally a copy and paste of many of the elements of the EMT version (to such an extent all the screamingly obvious bugs and omissions in the original are present and correct in the new one) yet costs £12.99. As someone else has pointed out, the 380 (which was entirely new) was the same price. One of those two products was value for money, the other is a good product but value for money? Not so much.
I can’t believe the EP is seriously suggesting they should be charging more for the 101! If that’s the future vision for TSW - either a one handled EMU with a simple power curve for £12.99 or a more complex loco but at £30 - then I hope they have a good redundancy package at DTG Towers and on speaking terms with the unemployment office. And if they want to start charging that amount of money then they need to get off their behinds and start fixing all the core issues that are constantly swept under the rug and all the faulty DLC - going right back to the beginning. You want a payday DTG, better start earning it. Otherwise watch support and goodwill towards TSW dwindle even further than it already has.
Well, you know... It's a free-market society. The acceptable price will vary among people according to who you ask, depending mainly on their level of interest for TSW and their income level. If you plot the possible prices along an X axis and the number of people interested in buying/selling at each price point along a Y axis, the market price will theoretically be the one where the resulting supply and demand curves meet. It's no secret that the money supply in continuously being expanded in the US and the EU, resulting in the inflation of prices all across the board, itself resulting in increasing costs and (in the medium term) increasing wages, including those of software developers and project managers. It's also no secret that enjoying a gamified train simulation software such as TSW falls squarely into the discretionary spending category; in other words: it's a kind of luxury we afford ourselves because we're somewhat passionate about it, not something that we require to satisfy our primary or secondary needs. This is even more true of the expert loco being developed. So I think you can certainly expect the price of new DLCs to rise with time. And I think there's no real valid objection to be had to whatever price tag ends up being slapped on the DB BR 101. If it were sold for €35 or €40, I'm pretty sure to eventually buy it. If it were sold for €150, I'd probably refrain, but I wouldn't complain about it; it would only be a reflection of the user base's crying enthusiasm for such a product, not a sign that anyone is starting to lose it. I don't mean to come off as harsh, but such is the economic system we live in. And I can't think of any other one that would afford us the thrills and pleasures of operating a wide variety of trains from the safety and comfort of our homes.
That from the jt store made now (content for tsc): That was the same price 7 years ago except the cl.20 was sold at 49Bucks too. Its good tsw targets a lot of audiences. Pc, consoles snd allowes so many styles to play. casual, hardcore, no hud. The discussion about a paywall is totaly fine and should happen. But the discussion about pricing is totally out of place in my opinion.
I think the distinction needs to be made between a cost and value for money. If something is value for money then I’m happy to pay for it. If something is overpriced in my eyes and doesn’t return the value that its cost implies then I’m out. In terms of value for money I don’t think this 101 stacks up, those Just Trains examples certainly don’t/didn’t. Using one overpriced product to justify another is not a valid argument. The PMDG 777 for MSFS costs approximately £68. There is likely more work in the FMC alone than any TSW loco has ever had in it’s entirety, and that’s before you even mention the intricately simulated and interactive systems, the model, the highly detailed and high resolution texturing. That product is worth the cost, steep as it may be. We have yet to see for sure, but I find it very hard to believe that the ‘expert 101’ will have enough there over the existing loco to justify another £30 purchase. There will be people that will buy it come what may, and there will be those, like me, who see it as overpriced. Neither position is particularly right or wrong, but the discussion about pricing is entirely valid.
I wasn't name calling. One, one off , expensive DLC comes out and suddenly it means there is going to be a price increase. I might be wrong and if I an I'll say I am, but I don't see any evidence of that happening. There are some on this forum who seem to want to believe it.
I mean have you seen replies to SCS blogs when they announce £3.99 trailer packs? Sometimes the price isn’t the issue, but the value & other factors. RE the price increase, I’ve seen a couple of people mention it, doesn’t seem to be a general consensus. That issue probably wouldn’t come up as much if there wasn’t the cab car locked into the pack. The bottom line is that DTG dug this hole themselves, they wanted out of the market TSC had and drove TSW into a much higher percentage of casual users. It’d be like Lidl stocking Waitrose. Ultimately I think a lot of people just wanted a cabcar & even if this pro loco had come out at £20 you’d have seen much less backlash, with people just buying it even if they didn’t want the pro aspect. It’s all well & good people saying this should be €45, it’s too cheap etc, but at the end of the day you’re going to price out your market & this is the result. McDonald’s, Starbucks & Sony are all very recent & real examples of the same issue.
I don't disagree that it is on the expensive side I said myself I expected it to be £24.99. But for a one off experiment, likely never to be repeated then I don mind paying if it lives up to the hype on this occasion. Although I feel it isn't available on enough routes. A good point is made about the cab car. However that is more on DTG for not making it themselves. I didn't mind the prices of routes increasing to £30, they had been pretty static since 2008. If in the unlikely event that this new DLC causes prices across the board to increase then I will be alongside you and many others complaining. However considering the anger over this new release DTG would have to be crazy to raise prices.
In DCS you can expect to pay circa £50 for a detailed and complex simulation (emulation) of the aircraft chosen. Likewise PMDG in flight sim. If that level if complexity is delivered with solid update support to rectify bugs and/or flight models, then people pay. Trying to apply the same model to a train sim is going to be a thin line for profitability I'm guessing, because its even more niche, although DCS won't run on consoles and I haven't checked but I imagine flight sim 2024 doesn't either, so maybe that console exposure to tsw works out. In which case it might be worth asking why it works on console, whether the level of complexity is comparable and therefore worthy of the also comparable price tag? Someone else made a good point about the spaghetti code it's being asked to run on (his words, not mine), and how it was throwing up issues that even the devs agreed shouldn't be expected to have to be dealt with. I wonder if at some point people might be happier spending £50 on a release of TSW that actually has all the promised features at launch, is feature rich and allows complex dlc to be added without issue. Edit to include update on above from dev in the interests of accuracy- see my next post below. In short a step change in quality to go with the step change in price.
Doesn’t really apply to me as I’m no expert driver nor do I want to be, so I won’t be buying that particular dlc. For me train driving games are all about rest and relaxation, looking at the gorgeous graphics from outside the cab (especially the train itself in this game), and experiencing the scenery going by in different weather conditions and time of day. I understand there are plenty out there who want to literally be real train drivers, and this expert mode will help them a lot to achieve that. As long as the respective loco is done in both variants then everybody will be happy.
MSFS does run on the XBOX. I think it is valid that routes cost £30. I think £12.99 is a fair price for a decent loco / train DLC (SR 158 excepted for the mentioned reasons). I’m very happy indeed that better simulation is coming to the game but I think it’s a huge leap to go to £30 for a loco, especially one that is already in the game and has repaid its existing development costs about 40 times over. Remember now as well, that all the scripting that has been done for this loco is now done, and can be copy - pasted to things going forward. How many times did AP’s GSM-R repay its development costs? Literally zero further development, but included as a feature on every one of their products. Again, the 101 scripting will doubtless repay itself many times over, and I very highly doubt this expert loco will be a one-off. I don’t begrudge DTG or the 3rd party devs making money at all, but ultimately it comes down to a personal perception of value for money and in this instance I can’t square that circle. If it represented better value I would buy it, as it is I won’t.
Added below to balance my earlier point, to correct and address accuracy issues in my earlier post which repeated some erroneous conclusions drawn by others, accepted by myself and expressed as a concern about the state of the core game. An attempt at fairness and due diligence. The reason? When a dev clarifies, it can be healthy to self correct, acknowledge mistaken assumptions and concentrate on what is right, not who is right. The more we can deal in facts, the less assumptions need to be made.
Matt was specifically talking about the price seeming low in relation to the development time and effort put in.
Maybe the Focus Entertainment overlords are demanding more for their pound of flesh.. Idle comment, but I have found myself reflecting on the nature of the acquisition, its purpose and implications.. Anyway, read more here and make your own mind up. At least it becomes possible to discern method from the madness https://dovetailgames.com/news/focu...s-the-acclaimed-uk-based-dovetail-games-group Summary- "This acquisition of this UK-based studio, with established owned IPs and delivering recurring revenue is aligned with Focus’ Strategy and is a step forward in moving up the value chain. Consequently, the Dovetail acquisition is expected to be somewhat accretive from a percentage margin standpoint."
Well no, it'd have to be "expert level" and take at least twice as long to create as other routes to be the same comparison.
As long as the base game includes 3 routes i can turn a blind eye because i just see it as 3 dlc for $40(if you buy on release) They day that stops ill probably go back to playing other games.
I've wondered about that. They must lose some money on the route bundles, but it's seen as acceptable by increasing the number of players since the new announcement brings more new players in. (I'm not saying that's what DTG "said" but that's how the business model for that sort of game release works, so since they're using it....I'm guessing that's their thinking.) The problem with making the core game "free" is that you'd have to include at least one route to make it usable. (Can't drive trains without rails) so you'd have to include SOMETHING for free in it. The flight simulation "Digital Combat Simulator" for example offers one free map and the base game is free, including all updates. With that you get two low-fi basic starter planes (one unarmed, one combat ready) HOWEVER, significant to this thread (not the TSW 5 one) is that the DLC add ons are a LOT MORE EXPENSIVE. A "cheap" aircraft in the game is maybe $15.00 but it's low-res. The "quality" planes start at around $60.00 and the "expert level" are around $70-$80.00.They make their money on the add-ons, not the base game. Therefore, the costs are higher. Now they DO have a "flaming cliffs" pack of a bunch of low-res aircraft you can get cheap for variety. In some ways having a yearly TSW release with a bundle is a BETTER deal because it defrays some of the cost and it allows new players to start with several maps. Even if you have the game already, you still get a good deal on the new maps. When I first got TSW 4, it included Cajon, Antelope and East Coast Mainline so that was a LOT of content for $35.00. Relating back to the "modern pricing"... I just don't see it as that high compared to other games and simulators of the same quality and customer base. Rail simmers aren't a HUGE group, so you don't get economy of scale. Then once you get down to sub-groups like "German-focused players who want an expert level 101 with a cab car" it's VERY few actual people. It's a very niche market. Niche markets cost more. The "1%" comment isn't far off the mark. It keeps striking me as rather selfish for people to set an arbitrary standard for what they WANT to pay and then DEMAND that it be at that price point. The simpler, non-selfish answer is.... don't buy it. Money talks, even when it walks. If the "expert" 101 is too expensive, don't buy it. Use the default one. Don't demand that it "should" be $15.00. Don't buy it... wait for a sale if you want. Compared to the whole of gaming (and a lot LARGER games at that with far greater economy of scale) TSW is still pretty cheap. The companies involved need to pay their bills. I can't prove it's "greedy" or not what they charge. I don't know their costs. What I DO KNOW is what it's worth to ME as an indvidual. That's all I can effectively control. If it's worth it... I buy it. If it's not... I don't. Saying that "routes should be X dollars/pounds/rubles" that's just silly. That's like saying "all food costs the same amount" or "all cars are identical in price." That's just silly. Applying cost "rules" from 5-10 years ago is likewise silly because if everything ELSE went up in cost, why wouldn't video games? I find personally that comparing video games to their alternative recreation possibilities is where you find true value. What ELSE would your money buy? If something else holds more value....spend your money on that. However, if you REALLY want it bad enough and you'd ENJOY IT.... then buy that DLC for TSW.
At the risk of repeating myself, I thought we were already getting the features that are mentioned in the expert 101 article, detailed modeling, screens with information, the best sound available, refined physics etc. If these features are " new " or " expert ", then we've been rather short changed with all the previous loco dlc in the last 8 years. Expert modeling, sound and physics should be standard. Engine room access has always been possible, just not implemented. So what's the big deal about this loco that it's priced so much higher than normal. Should we assume that all future locos ( there may not be any for the UK or US ) will be less than the best that the developers can do? Shouldn't all loco dlc from now on be " expert " at the usual price?
Yes, and the position seems to be if one doesn't like it, don't buy it, dtg need to make profits, inflation and just be grateful we have a train sim. All good points. It doesn't make it any more palatable (because a good meal costs more too, I almost forgot that one). The pay wall, build quality, inevitable bugs and/or missing features and so on are all just a fact of life, certainly if the last two years are anything to go by. As so eloquently put, buy in or bugger off, it's all a matter of choice as we are reminded.
Yup. I thought that was just accepted as reality. If you look around and EVERY loco you see is to this level...why would you assume that superior is somehow normal? Normal is defined by what is the most common at a given time. Note that I'm not saying it's not POSSIBLE... but the devs said getting to that level takes "much more developer work and time" so... that just reinforces my comments above. To get to "study level" (as they call it in the flight sim world or "expert level" as they call it in TSW) is a step above...and you pay accordingly. Twice as much to pay for twice as much work seems fair. They offer what they offer because that's what they can produce within the given budget and cost range. If you want higher fidelity, then you will pay more. What we have now is a compromise between cost and capability, as most things in life are. As time goes on, things ARE improving even at that price point as technology improves and the team gets even more experience. (Lighting, suspension, etc) However, that means the upper level will also keep getting higher of what would be possible.... for more money. It's really not the devs driving this... it's the customers. It's like when there was the whole "Buy Local' movement here. Turns out buying all local stuff was more expensive than the mass produced, lower quality imports. So, people who SAID they wanted "high quality, local products" actually kept buying the cheap, lower quality imports. That's what the stores stocked.... because people spoke with their money. This "expert" 101 project is testing the waters to see if people WILL pay twice as much for twice the quality. If people don't buy it...then no you won't get more. You'll get more of the current quality because that's what sells. I can't blame the devs who charge twice as much for twice as much work. Would YOU do twice the work at YOUR job for the same pay? Or would you expect to get paid more for more work?
The pricing is fine IMO. Lol at such drama about digital trainsets from people who are at least theoretically adults
Which is the position regarding pretty much anything for sale which has ever existed in the history of human kind! If you like it buy it, if you like it but don't like the price, wait for a sale. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Why does it matter or are you just trying to stir up a controversy where there isn't one?
So I am watching the YouTube live stream as I type this post. - NO suspension. - NO Ebula - Screens are not translated into English. If you can't speak German, you had better learn it fast, or search the 100+ page manual to figure it out. Oh, and no community managers from DTG bothered to show-up to the live stream.... No Alex, no Matt, No Harry.
Why would they? They are in German, as per reality. Why is the 380 TMS Not in german? There will be an english manual explaining it all
I’m watching the preview stream right now, and to be honest, the price tag is becoming way more understandable, with the amount of detail, features and quirks it has.
Let's just have a recap, shall we? 1. Train simulators are niche. 2. Expert locos are even more niche. 3. You have to be a native German speaker to effectively use this niche expert loco in a niche train simulator. Do you see the point that I'm trying to make here? Oh, and it has a premium price tag.
People when they realise they don’t have to buy a loco: also, you are complaining that it’s a german loco, because it’s German, what are you trying to prove exactly?
I am not a native German speaker, but I will buy the DLC because I am looking forward to take a deep dive in the operation of this locomotive. It will take me tens of hours to get through the manual and get familiar with all the details. So, in the end, in terms of hours spent for the cost of the loco, it might be the cheapest DLC I ever bought.
I went out for dinner in Brighton last night. There wasn't a bottle of wine on the list that was as cheap as DB 101 and the wine lasted an hour. Five years ago £25-£28 was the usual entry level price for a bottle of wine in a restaurant down here in the south. It's almost as if there's some mechanism that's causing prices of consumer goods to inflate over time.
This baseless boring and tired response is everyone's response to people who say if you don't like it don't buy it. This is not helpful nor does it help anyone in this community. It's people who say this is why this community has so many problems that stick out through the cracks. If your going to say that at least say it with reasoning and more proper response than claim this boring and tired statement. Here review this to see why this statement of "If you don' like it you don't need to buy it or what you mean by when people realize they don't need to have to buy a loco" yet everything is subject to criticism. Assumption of Universality: The statement assumes that everyone shares the same preferences and experiences. However, people have diverse tastes, needs, and circumstances. What one person dislikes, another might enjoy. Dismissive Attitude: Saying “if you don’t like it, don’t buy it” can come across as dismissive. It overlooks the complexity of individual preferences and implies that disliking something is a binary choice with no middle ground. Lack of Empathy: It disregards the emotional investment people may have in their choices. Perhaps someone has sentimental reasons for considering a purchase, or they’re trying to support a local business. The statement lacks empathy for these nuances. Consumer Advocacy: Critiquing a product or service is essential for consumer advocacy. Honest feedback helps improve products and holds companies accountable. Encouraging people to voice their opinions constructively benefits everyone. Many people can't seem to understand this especially the hardcore fanboys in this community. Not pointing fingers...
My point is that this loco isn’t meant for everyone. It’s meant for more experienced players. Those who want more realism. And a bit more challenge. “if you don’t like it, don’t buy it” is a meaningless statement in a new game, yes. but in a loco dlc like this, it is understandable. this loco isn’t for everyone
It is as helpful as using the words fanboys, enablers, acolytes etc, etc. Words regularly used to dismiss the arguments of those who dare to show that they overall enjoy TSW and have a glass half full.
Yeah, that sort of thing actively dissuades me from praising things a lot. I even wanted to make content covering the game, but I'm not interested in getting called a fanboy for daring to say I like a game that I genuinely like.
You are literally violating the rules you're proposing with your post. Saying "you can buy it or not based on your personal preferences" doesn't violate ANY of those. It's quite literally disproving everything you just posted. 1. It recognizes every has individual tastes. I literally said "individual preference." 2. It's not "dismissive." It's just stating a fact. You DO have the right to choose for yourself. It's no more "dismissive" than saying "You can choose to NOT look directly into the sun but it's your choice." 3. The same thing as #1.... we said it's YOUR individual choice. Whining that we don't support your choice is being unempathetic to those of us who disagree. It's emotional blackmail to ASSUME that everyone MUST be upset about the price of the shiny new loco or we "don't care." 4. You are literally showing the company if you support it or not by buying it or not. That speaks FAR louder than typed words that probably won't get read. Sales numbers ARE looked at. You quite literally just exposed yourself for the very things you are trying to accuse others of doing. It doesn't make your position any less manipulative or more reasonable simply because you attempted to pretend there were "rules" backing it up. Refusing to apply the same rules to yourself negates your argument since you obviously didn't listen to those on the other side while you appeal for "empathy and understanding" of YOUR position. The reasonable middle ground is the statement above... that you can make your own personal choice based on your own preferences. It doesn't assume that either side is "right" (the too low price or the too high price), it simply states that "you do your own thing." Interestingly, the "it's actually a good deal" people haven't been pushy at all in this thread and have still been attacked by the "everything needs to be cheaper" crowd. So who is REALLY trying to be unsympathetic and push their agenda? The people saying the developers should be reimbursed for their time are seen as "selfish"... somehow... but the people that are claiming that they want more content for less money because...well because they WANT IT. How is that not inherently a selfish position? I admit I don't know how much work went into the loco beyond claims that it took "much more work" from the developers. Since I can't prove or disprove that, it seems reasonable that more features require more work. I'm not saying it's "expensive" or "cheap" just that it's fair for the people making it to earn a living, just as it's fair for the people buying it to get a product worth their money (in their own judgement.) That's just what seems "fair." The ONLY people disagreeing seem to be saying that they have a RIGHT to a "high quality yet cheap product" because... of their feelings? That's what you listed above... if you disagree they DESERVE a good product cheap, then you don't care about their FEELINGS. That's just not a good rational argument. I don't care how much people FEEL entitled to something for nothing, their feelings and "experience" doesn't trump the opinions of another person (namely the developers who built it) who also deserves the same consideration. What if they said they "FEEL" they DESERVE $200 for that awesome loco they just built? Are you disrespecting their feelings by not giving them that money? See how one-sided and biased that sounds? Hence why we have economics.... the simple fact that you dislike that either side is equally able to buy and sell (or not) in a free marketplace. It respects BOTH sides. That's the definition of fair. Sorry for the lengthy post, but this SAME issue keeps coming up OVER AND OVER every time something comes out. A healthy debate on value for content is a good thing. However, it should relate to specifically the product and it's actual features vs cost... not feelings and entitlement. When there is a debate over those differences of opinion, it should be with good faith and agreement that at the end of the day it's your personal choice and it's personally insulting or "mean" to simply not agree. If you're not going to respect others opinions, don't expect respect for yours. Practice what you preach.
