You come to a point in a station (similar to a scenario marker), which has predefined list of 'connecting routes'. You pick one, and the game will load that route, and teleport you to that marker on the selected route. But you'll be at the same situation as if you would spawn at the other route on foot, from main menu. None of the trains from the origin route will be preserved, and nothing from the old timetable is used. It has potential in making the experience much more streamlined (I really hope we will be able to select a service in the future and spawn directly into it) and immersive. But it is in no way a step in route merging.
Yes exactly. Correct me as I don't know anything about the UK network but BML in theory could have route switchers at both ends. Time periods will indeed change but the still to be announced Time travel feature in TSW 6 would fix that issue
Route hopping is switching between routes during your trip, while route merging is when routes combine and share the same path.
So I presume route hopping will work at Edinburgh Waverley, So you could hop from the Queen Street services to the fife circle without going to the main menu? Am I right or have i missed something?
Matt was saying on the stream that you could drive to St Pancras, route hop to Euston, drive a bit to where the Bakerloo starts and then drive that to the point before it goes underground, route hop to the Bakerloo and drive that to Paddington, then route hop to Paddington to drive to Reading. Honestly sounds great, not having to keep exiting to the main menu and loading up a route, just seamlessly loading in the next part of the journey. I can see myself using this feature a lot.
Is there a link to the stream? And I wonder why timetables wouldn't synch up if they do in real life. For example, say there's a REAL train that goes from Eastbourne on ECW, goes through Brighton, through London and out to Reading. If it exists in REAL LIFE...why wouldn't the timing match up? If all the routes are using the ACTUAL timings of the REAL train...then why wouldn't they match up? Since that's what the train is doing in real life anyway. I'll have to wait and see how populated the "route hopping" possibilities are. I know a lot of people are going to complain they're not the "exact same train" (different liveries between the maps, maybe different number of cars, etc) My concern is that there just won't be a lot of "hopping" possibilities...and that they won't "synch up" so you'll be standing on the platform twiddling your thumbs. I don't see a lot of freight opportunities given the timetables and maps listed, but maybe.....
I think you’re misunderstanding what is meant when people talk about syncing. An example of syncing: London to Brighton and East Coastway are set in two different years, meaning two different timetables. If you drive from London to Brighton on any service, and get out at Brighton and hop to the East Coastway, when you load into the East Coastway route, the train you have just driven from London will most likely not appear. Each route is set in its own period and year, and timetables won’t necessarily match. I assume DTG could hypothetically alter this to make sure as many trains and services match between routes as possible, but it would take such an extensive rework of the timetables for the routes
If you have to stop and look up timetables and stand around on the platform, then it seems less useful than just going to the menu and going back in on the new route. It's only useful if it's actually convenient.
Perhaps. It adds a little more immersion and realism into a more seamless transition between routes, and I think that’s exactly what was in mind when this was added - for those who like to chain services, can now do so across multiple routes more seamlessly. There’s nothing stopping you continuing to use the main menu every time. The route hop feature doesn’t take anything away from anyone, only adds it for those who want it. If you don’t want to wait for trains then don’t. It is very highly unlikely that DTG will go through and rework all of their timetables.
It's not on ALL the routes anyway. Just a select few. Again, we'll see how it shakes out. Seems like it takes more work to have you "stand around" than not. If for example there is a Brighton to London train in timetable that arrives in London at 5:30, then there's a train leaving London at 6:00 on that timetable.... why would you stand there for 30 minutes? Why not just load from one timetable into the other? It seems like MORE work to drop you off specifically early, rather than just load the next timetable. Yes the in "game time" it would be 30 minutes later, but to the player it'd be "seamless" because you'd appear next to your 5:40 train on the GWE timetable instantly. That's how I figured it would work since it takes the least amount of work (essentially it becomes a "next mission" sort of thing like "Journey mode" There just seems to be no reason to NOT load into the next timetable directly is my confusion. That would require more work to specifically put your avatar on a platform at a time before the "normal" spawn for that service. When you JUST play GWE for example, you'd spawn in at 6:00 for the6:00 run (or a couple minutes before to set up the train, whatever but not 30 minutes) Spawning in artificially at the end time of the previous time on a different timetable would require specifically programming a different start time than is normally in the timetable. Do you see what I mean? That seems.... weird and more labor intensive. I can see saying "well you spawn 30 minutes later" in game time, but you're not "waiting" for 30 minutes. To you the player it's just a simple loading screen and you're at your new train. That was my initial understanding of how "route hopping" would work. The rest I get.... you can only work with what you have. If there's only 377's at a certain time then you have to connect to only the services that are also a 377 if you want to make them "match", but you might drive a 3-car stack off of Brighton and then a 5-car when you leave London on the GWE.... I get that. It's just how they could manage to do it easily. It's this weird idea of having to "wait around" that seems counterproductive. If I'm wrong and it IS just loading from one timetable into another one then that's great. That's how I thought it was going to work. If not... then why not?
So does this mean that there will be timetabled services from London Victoria to Eastbourne via Brighton for example.
No. You will be able to drive a service from London - Victoria to Brighton, then you get out of the train, do the route hop, get in another train and start a service from Brighton to Eastbourne (the new Map 2.0 feature in TSW5 will make it easy for you to find out which train is going there).
Well, it might be useful for those that have unlimited play time, but I doubt if I'll use it much since I barely have time to finish one run never mind two successive journeys.
Its not a convenience feature. Its not like quitting one route and loading another was ever all that onerous. Its an immersion feature to make it feel like you are going from one place to another in a continuous journey (even if not the same train). Not for everyone but I think it will be cool. It's not meant for people that want to hop into a service and get going as soon as possible, its for people that like staying in the world and walking around, picking one train after the other, etc.
Yeah I am with you. I used to do 2-3 hour freight runs in a single sitting but rarely have time for that now. That said when TSW5 comes out I want to try a Lancaster > LA > San Bernardino > Barstow in one sitting just to say I did it. That will be an entire day .
Over the weekend I have come to the conclusion this is just a massive sales gimmick. Essentially just a means of circumventing the menu to choose a different route, with no continuity between one run and the next. Would much rather developer time had gone into something more worthwhile like the save game or fixing steam physics.
Yes. To me, this " hopping " feature ranks along with the eye- adaptation, bouncy suspension, snow bloom, volumetric fog and other features which might seem good superficially but add very little to gameplay. Rather like cotton candy. Tastes good but has no nutritional value. Bread and circuses meant to distract us from real deficits in the game. Meanwhile, the save game, NPC behavior, steam traction and freight among myriad issues are largely ignored. The other irritating aspect of TSW5 is the matter of Cajon Pass. There's something questionable about the inclusion of this route in the deluxe package which I can't quite put my finger on. I suspect that many more people than DTG are claiming, already own this route. So why is it not free to those of us who already have it? Those who don't can pay for it if they wish. It's not as if the route has been remastered or extended. Is there something I'm missing here?
The route is just there for the "new people" to have that and San Bernadino out of the gate. Then then can "route hop." The claim was to be able to download Deluxe and have access to ALL the features of TSW 5. So they needed a second route to "hop" to. That's it.
Its a very ood inclusion. Hell I remember back when AVL was released, Matt stated that Cajon was used as layers for freight cause "More people owned Cajon that Sherman Hill" But now DTG are throwing it into the Deluxe package for layers/hopping onto San Bernardino? Existing players already have it or don't care for it. It seems like its only a marketing ploy to new players so they can use the route hopping feature for SBL. (But how many new players is DTG even gonna get who are even interested in US content to invest in this package?) Especially since Cajon isnt getting any changes for TSW5.
It's simple... the veteran players who have "all the routes" already are collectors and will get Deluxe for the 390 and the Vectron to "collect them all." They already have them "hooked." The new players need Cajon Pass to complete the "set" of San Bernadino and Cajon Pass.
Kudos to this comment! This is exactly how this feature will work - not more..not less. There are no time adjustments to the timetables at all. I don't think that DTG will rework all timetables for this single feature. So yes, if you "hopp" to another route, it is possible to stand around for up to an hour to take another train. It´s only an immersive thing.
It's still not clear what "time" it is in the new route. If the first route ends at 5:30, the new route starts at 6:00... We agree that the next trip is starting at 6:00... but when do you actually appear on the 2nd route? As I said before, it doesn't make sense to spawn someone in at 5:30 if the second timetable run "normally" starts at 6. That would require artificially changing the start time JUST to stand around for 30 minutes. A lot of work just for someone to stand around. IF all it does is "stop this run...start this run" you would simply "jump" to the 6:00 run but you wouldn't wait... it would just "hop" to the new time. That seems like less work and less waiting...which would be win-win.
Does it allow you to choose the time you want to spawn into the other route I wonder? Would make the most sense.
From what I've seen it just lists the potential routes you CAN connect to in the 2nd route timetable. You don't decide what time...just which one to go to.
You can see it that way. But the cynic in me thinks that a lot of people who already own Cajon Pass will buy the deluxe package, thinking mistakenly that they need the " new " version of CJP to enable the freight layers and the hopping feature, even if they're not likely to " hop " from a commuter train to a freight run. Of course, if they want the UK and German emus, that's a different matter. Then CJP is just superfluous. The whole thing is odd and confusing to say the least.
From what I understand from the direct, when you hop into the new route it will be the same time as when you left the previous route. For example if you drive from London to Brighton, arriving at 08:00 and jump to East Coastway, then when you are on the East Coastway route it will continue from there - the idea being to make it feel as much like one world as possible without actually merging multiple routes together. Therefore if you’re expecting to jump time while hopping to another route - it kinda defeats the whole purpose in the first place - and you may as well just use the main menu instead
The route hop feature will work with the existing Cajon Pass. Cajon pass is included in the bundle for those who don’t have it as it is a perfect example / demonstration of the route hop feature, particularly given that the San Bernardino line is considered one of the core TSW5 Routes I have Cajon Pass. I will be pre ordering the deluxe version because it is the cheapest way for me to get the WCML, the Pendolino and the San Bernardino line - even if I do already own one of the routes in the bundle.
Guess we'll find out. I don't see why they would intentionally put labor into making it LESS convenient for players, especially freight players and "express" players who wouldn't be stopping normally. That's the opposite of being authentic or immersive. In fact given that many of the routes are different years it would make it LESS immersive if you had to have lots of mismatches that create waiting where there is none in real life. In fact, that's probably more often than not the case.
How on earth would having to wait for connecting trains after route hopping be less immersive? Surely it’s the complete opposite.
Please read my comments. Many of the "waits" are created by mismatched schedules, when in fact in real life the trains don't have lengthy waits. That's especially true with freight and non-stop runs.
I guess only Just Trains is trying to set up a realistic experience.... the next route is set in the same year as the blackpool branches.
In terms of pricing, really given Cajon is owned by most players Deluxe version should have been only £10 dearer than the Standard edition, which would have been £5 each for the two new train sets. But as it stands, Cajon included is pretty much worthless.
I’m so looking forward to that. We basically have Blackpool - Carlisle in TSW once the second route releases. Over 100 Miles.
Yes they exist. No one is arguing that they don't exist. Just saying that the game has artificially created ones because of the routes are created since there are no artificial "cut offs" in real life. A trip across 3 routes in game if done in real life will often be "continuous" while it's not in game. These routes that don't have layovers are then UNAUTHENTIC because they don't in real life. Yes SOME layovers exist in real life...but not MOST trips, especially short ones. Regardless... how many people downloaded Train SIm World to spend 40 minutes standing on a platform? Is it "Waiting Simulator 5"? I'd say the number of people loading into a video game just to stand on a platform for 40 minutes is rather low compared to the ones who want to continue a trip quickly. It's probably similar to the number of people who would CHOOSE to wait in real life. How many people if you asked "Would you rather wait an hour... or continue your trip right now" would say... "ya know what no.... I don't want to get where I'm going. I WANT to stand here twiddling my thumbs for another hours." That's just weird. If you want to do that you can already do that by going into Free Roam on your own and just standing there at any time. You don't need a special new feature for that. You ONLY need the new feature if you want to move from one map to another quickly.
You already get a "deal" even if you have Cajon Pass because each train's individual cost adds up to more than the Deluxe upgrade.
Yes I know it's cheaper than waiting for the individual DLC, though not for a sale next year. The point is, Cajon is still a bit of a dead item to pad the Deluxe pack with then trying to justify the route hopping to/from SBO. The chances of wanting to go straight from a run on SBO to Cajon are fairly remote anyway and whether you already have the route or not, might as well just go out to the Main menu and pick the route you want.
Ah. I see the misunderstanding. I meant the specific trains referenced "in real life" compared to their TSW counterparts that don't stop irl at the edge of in-game maps. Not all trains. Just ones that don't match irl.
Dead item to YOU. DTG is banking that upgrading to TSW 5 will bring in a TON of new players. You can disagree with their marketing, but that's the plan. The constant focus is on what NEW players want and seeing things from the NEW players perspective. Yes, you can argue that veterans players are more likely to buy additional content... BUT that has to be balanced with the PNI ("Potential for New Investment) Look at it this way... if you have ALL the routes already in your library, they already have your money. When they release a new route, yes you may likely buy that route... you might get them $40... but probably less because many vets wait and buy on sale. But a NEW PLAYER will have to buy TSW 5 AND that new route.... and potentially will get hooked on MORE routes. They have basically an EMPTY library to fill. That new player could be HUNDREDS of dollars in potential new sales, and they might in that initial rush buy things at COST too because they are eager to fill out their game and want more to play. As I said... agree or not with the marketing plan but that's generally how it works in that style of business. They see more marketing possibility to keep oriented towards NEW players. Players who won't have Cajon Pass and will WANT Cajon Pass to try out the "cool new route hopping thing." That's why they need to keep the marketing up, keep releasing a "new" TSW every year, and why they bundle some older stuff with the newer stuff that TSW veterans already have. From THEIR perspective it makes sense. It's worth given the discount to the new kids with a "free" Cajon Pass because it could generate more sales. Veterans who really want to "collect them all" are more likely to pay more for the 390 and Vectron to add to their collection anyway. That extra bit that caters towards newer players could pay off with many more sales.
You're probably right, but a little bit of cynical marketing nevertheless. Anyhow back on topic, still of the view that route hopping is going to be way overrated and a waste of programming time that could have been directed elsewhere.
This seems right to me. Marketing 101 you put more effort into new customers than existing ones. I don't have a problem with it and a larger player-base benefits all of us. I ordered the deluxe version for the Vectron and the 390 and wasn't confused or angry about it. I'm getting 3 new routes (already own CJP) with accompanying stock and 2 new locos, plus early access for $71 including tax- that's a great deal! New players would get 4 the same plus CJP for that price- even better. New players who buy the Special Edition are getting 9 routes (with stock) and 2 locos for $114 including tax- that's fantastic!
Agreed. 9 routes for a new player is REALLY sweet. It's a steep entry price, but that's a LOT of content. And to be fair many AAA games with DLC bundles offer similar deals to get new players "up to speed" quickly.
Gotta see how it plays out in practice IMO. If the new UI/Live Map is snappy and loading times are short, it could be pretty neat, especially for freight free-runs. If i can re-spawn my train in the new route within a few seconds of loading in, i'd say that's an improvement. It's not revolutionary, but it is evolutionary IMO. If it works, and players like it, the next step might be to enable auto-loading of chained services (as an option). I realize not a ton of these exist right now, but if it becomes a core feature, when new routes are being planned, it could influence the setting/time period to keep several routes that share a terminus consistent with each other.
Possibly. Although if (as I suspect) they are JUST writing a simple code to reroute from one "mission" to another, then it's relatively little actual development time involved compared to say a new route or loco. Since it's essentially the same thing for every route, just changing the timetable tags, it's pretty easy to duplicate across routes too, unlike having to say model suspensions that can vary from train to train. The same people doing the UI interface update could honestly have done most of it in addition to other UI changes. The hardest thing would be simply looking at spreadsheets and deciding what routes should connect to what routes. The comment about it "retaining the same weather" was interesting to me... that can come directly from what is chosen for the previous route, but that could be a bit more work to "synch" up. Still though it's not hugely labor intensive because it's still the same type of work, not a whole new skillset like a digital artist, a route planner, etc. It's linking already existing assets. It's not creating from scratch. In the end though, yes it's a bit "gimmicky." Still, if it brings in sales and keeps butts in seats then it's worth it.
The last part is my biggest concern. You have to PLAN AHEAD for this sort of thing, and some routes will "work" and others will have to be "shoehorned" or miss out. For example JT doingn Blackpool and Carlisle will match perfectly since same company, same timeframe, same rolling stock. However, moving between two routes by different companies, different ears with different rolling stock.... (and no history of regular runs between them) might be problematic. The players will still WANT to drive from map to map, but this is where the "game vs reality" thing kicks in. Maybe railtours are one way to bridge that divide a bit... but if for example players want to go between NTP set in the 1980s and Glossop in modern times and the player wants to drive the 323 between them... well that's a problem using this system given it's limitations. It's not just a game limitation, it's a fundamental issue between different types of gameplay and players. In TSC for example it's often fun to run "non-historical" runs with trains on different rails (often because the actual train isn't in game) but there's often a HUGE uproar over that, and the system only goes from timetable to timetable so it has to be "officially in the timetable" to work. What would be "officially in the timetable" of both NTP and Glossop for example that would be usable between them? There's the possibility of different "era" timetables... but again there's HUGE pushback by the "authentic perfectionists" who won't accept 2000s rolling stock on a 1980s route like NTP because "it's an entirely different route in that year." As I said, I'd be good with alternate timetables for some slightly non-historical use of routes even if the buildings won't match but a lot of players aren't as generous or flexible. Does the current system mean that no modern lines can connect to Liverpool because the SOS line is late 50s/early 60s? NOTHING modern would be ANYTHING like that to "match" it, even the routes did touch or overlap.
It’s not about players “not being generous” or “flexible” - this is ultimately a simulator. You call them “Perfectionists” - I call them setting fair and reasonable expectations.. If people want to complain about wrong era stock not matching the Route era then they would have every right, and I would completely agree and support that. As much as I’m not a fan of the older era routes and don’t enjoy them as much, having completely out of place stock to cater for this suggestion would absolutely completely destroy any realism and immersion for me, and for a lot of others. Saying that these players aren’t being “Generous” or “Flexible” is unfair. It’s not as if we’re talking simply talking about a 1 or 2 year difference in most cases
Ultimately the route hop feature is designed to create a more seamless transition between routes which overlap, or routes which share similar points within the same area, such as Edinburgh to Glasgow Queen Street and Glasgow Central in Cathcart. If you use this feature and have to wait, so be it. If you don’t like waiting - use the main menu instead The focus is not to link the timetables.
