In my opinion I think going forward if u can't get the licenses for certain routes then don't make it untill u do have the licenses, it's a simulation game that's supposed to be realistic and without licenses it takes away a massive part of realism to me, trains without licensing is like looking at the trains roblox, the same with gwe remaster putting a bunch of unlicensed skins in the game it's pointless meaning I have to play gwe with loads of trains unlicensed running around my game it's just looks cheap , unless people make licensed versions to download, I literally only ever download licenced liveries for the reason cos it looks stupid if it's not licensed , I personally don't understand the people who think unlicensed doesn't matter but thats a matter of opinion which is fine , at the end of the day this is just my opinion
They were given permission from LNR to use their branding, just at the very last minute they changed their mind. Only doing routes and trains with a secured license is something DTG have always done in TSW. What are they supposed to do now, scrap the route? All they can do is fix what’s broken and hope they can come to a resolution with LNR.
In all due respects it wasn’t DTG fault. They went into making the WCML assuming they had the licensing and branding for the 350. I think there needs to be firmer restrictions in place though a.k.a a written contract, so that these silly train companies can’t back out at the last minute.
I couldn’t disagree more. It’s disappointing not having branding or logos, but in no way can it, or should it be compared to looking at Roblox trains. Obviously you’re entitled to your opinion, but personally if something as small as branding or logos is enough to completely put you off a product, I feel that you’re potentially going to miss out on a lot of good / decent content over a minor issue
Just because one train has an unbranded livery doesn’t mean the entire route is redundant and useless, otherwise IOW2022 would be stuffed.
Disagree with the OP - It was intended to be branded and I’d prefer it that way. But this was very last minute and I still think it looked ok. I’ll always prefer branding but if there was a route I really wanted and the only way I could have it was unbranded - I’d still be happy to have it. I really enjoy Island Line 2022 - I don’t even think about it being unbranded anymore.
You don’t actually know that, all DTG said is they understood they had permission to use it, not that it was expressly given.
It does say in the announcement that the permissions were “withdrawn” - you can’t withdraw permissions which were never given to begin with, can you? Much like you can’t withdraw money out of a bank machine if you don’t have money in the first place
A written contract would have an exit clause. No business would ever licence their brand without an exit clause (Source: My 20 years of licensing experience). We don't know all of the details of what happened in this instance. They could have had a written agreement.
I was unfamiliar with that term so I looked it up. I have to say in business nothing is concrete then if even written contracts can become void at any instance. Yeah I agree, we don’t know what went on behind the scenes. Surely it would’ve had to have been something serious for LNR to back out so suddenly. I wonder what DTG did to rustle the hornets nest?
Again, not necessarily. Saying “it was understood that we had the licensing permissions, but that has now been withdrawn” to me is just a more polite and ‘neutral’ way of saying “we had the permission then they pulled the plug” - Which I consider to be done to try diffuse any potential situation in which players will go and complain and harass LNWR about their decision
You think that DTG had a licensing agreement to produce content, made said content, marketed it & then spent resources undoing all the branding? Seems like a very one sided deal to me, not one that many businesses would take. Saying DTG had the license to use LNWR is as much as an assumption as me saying they didn’t have it, because DTG hasn’t said they did have permission.
There are many things that could have happened, for example the TOC could have appointed a new Marketing Manager/Head of/Director who saw it as a distraction. Or they could have made unreasonable last minute demands. If it was something DTG did wrong, they won't tell us, but equally, to try and maintain/rebuild the relationship with the TOC, if it was the TOC being unreasonable, they won't tell us that either. As disappointing as it is, I don't think we can read too much in to a statement that is clearly designed to break the news without antagonising a partner they will want a future relationship with. As for the purpose of exit clauses. A brand is often the most valuable asset a business has. No business would give up control of their brand to another company. A few years ago? I worked for a branded company in the UK many would have heard of, and we licenced our brand to companies in India and China for domestic sales in those countries. Those contracts were worth tens of millions of pounds a year to us. We still reserved the right to withdraw our brand.
You have a fair point - but I hope you can understand where I’m coming from when I say that in order for something to be withdrawn, it has to be in place to start with.
Yes but like I said, the way it was worded contradicts itself. I saw another comment that was likely closer to the truth, LNWR may have had a preliminary agreement in place & then found something they didn’t like. All in all, it’s pretty alarming that it was so easy for LNWR to pull out at such a late stage.
It’s not alarming. A company brand is extremely important. If there is ANY risk to how that brand is perceived, that risk has to be eliminated. LNWR clearly had a reason to pull its license. We will probably never know the exact reasons why, but it is entirely within their right to do so.
When I first came into contact with DTG's train simulation world, it felt very real, but later I found that there are still many areas that can be improved. Some people may not agree with my point of view. First of all, since it is a simulation, it should be comprehensive. We all know that the game cannot completely simulate everything in reality, and can only get closer and closer to reality. The rails in the game are very different from the rails in reality. The rails in the game are very straight, while some of the rails in reality are rusty. There are many similarities between the game and reality. The scene is very empty and the surrounding environment is very unreal.
Isn’t it? Can’t say I’m a huge fan of the prospect of having content majorly changed a couple of weeks before release. Yup, you know what else is important? Making sure this sort of rug pull can’t happen. Imagine what would have happened had this occurred after the 17th - there’s certainly something amiss here.
30 second hypothetical for you: Company appoints a new senior manager responsible for brand management. That new manager carries out a review, and decides that there is little value in licensing out the brand for a computer game, and that too much time and energy is spent managing the relationship and content. He decides, on the eve of a new game going on sale, to withdraw the licence. The game producer has three options: Issue legal proceedings, permanently damaging the relationship with the licensor, and giving other potential partners the jitters. Take a risk that they can argue bad faith by the licensor if the licensor sues and press ahead without the licence, but face an inability to sell on consoles. Remove the brand for now, and seek to work with the licensor in the hope of regaining a licence in future. What do you do?
Nothing, because this entire discussion is based on assumptions. The only facts are that the LNWR licensing is not in play & that licensing can clearly be pulled from a marketed route - which going back to my original point, is alarming.
That's why I called it a 30 second hypothetical. Even if DTG did everything right, and the TOC were completely unreasonable. The only choice DTG have is to fight them and destroy the relationship, or comply with their request while working to (re)build the relationship. This is just a normal problem of doing business.
Maybe LNWR realised the timetable didn’t accurately represent their service level, which wouldn’t be what they wanted to see at all.
True, it’s probably not the best approach, but I’m not wrong though. A lot of people feel the same way.
Well we don't know that for certain. Something obviously changed behind the scenes, whether it was the beta leak or something else I doubt either party is going to do the dirty washing in public. And if it was the beta leak, then that's somewhat on DTG for not vetting the integrity of the participants sufficiently. Or maybe LNWR simply weren't happy with how the route and their trains looked, which again comes back to the standard of work done by DTG, or rather the subcontractor some of us now are inclined to think did most of the work.
One of the best routes IMO, (which was made by - excuse me, I’m going to swear - Rivet) is the remastered Island Line with a non branded train. And this was actually sold as a loco DLC, not a route. If they decided not to go with it, we’d still be stuck with the much inferior original version. I can understand that branded trains are a big deal for many people but if it’s a question of non branded train or no route, which may be a route I crave, then I’ll take the non branded train every time.
I feel like Avanti would have done about the same if it was the beta leak and especially since First are tight right now with licensing so I think we can cross that possibility off
And this is why US freight is dead. Granted US freight isn't a licensing issue, rather they can't gain access to the trains themselves to get them to the total 1:1 realism such a statement as this desires. I know that the OP was about liveries and branding and not the internal workings, and there are no issues with branding in the US, but the mindset still creates the same statement. "Get it accurate and right, 100%, or don't do it at all." And here you go, congratulations, you got your two straight years of no US freight whatsoever with still not an end in sight. Happy? For the moment in other countries we're okay. DB are incredibly cooperative with games development, as are many UK TOCs. One day that might change however, as the recent LNWR change shows. For all we know, after this new renationalisation being done by the new UK government, they might not be able to use any modern liveries whatsoever. What then? Don't make the route until you have the licenses, which these corporate entities rarely ever want to budge on once they give their final word? That almost directly translates to "Don't make the route ever." At some point something, someone, has to give. I hate to say it but when a corporate entity such as a railway operator has come to the view that being featured in a videogame isn't of any benefit to them and have rendered their final word on that, that position is likely never going to change because we, a load of computer/console dwellers, are nothing to them. So there is no 'until you do have the licenses', because in most cases with these operators if they say no once, they will always say no. Understand that I'm not trying to shut down or offend anyone with this view. If you only want real branding on your trains then that's your choice, you can just buy or not buy where appropriate for you. However, although it is very unlikely to reach that point, my intention is to demonstrate that "without full branding it shouldn't be made at all" has the potential to end the game completely for everyone. Just because you personally don't like a product, doesn't mean it shouldn't have been made for anyone. My intention is to demonstrate where such a stubborn ultimatum gets us, and in the case of US freight, where it already has gotten us. Alternatively all releases going forward could turn to the BR days, and the whole game becomes a historic sim. Though I can think of a few people who wouldn't complain at that possibility, if DTG's statements on their audience numbers is anything to go by, that would practically signal the end of the game as we know it anyway. So either way in that situation we're all buggered. Or...
Can't say I ever notice the trains missing their branding. Then I'm normally in the cab driving it, not standing on the platform admiring it.
It wasn't last minute cos they have had time to remove it all from everything so it's not last minute is it
Takes too much off the realistic aspect foe me to enjoy it unbranded , unbranded for me doesn't make sense and will never make sense ro me
So you are more concerned about some missing logos than missing scenery across all routes, plus the terrain being completely wrong in places, assets looking completely different to real life. Bridges in the wrong place, tunnels having the wrong texture or no textures. But all that's fine so long as the trains have logos on them.
For ages we had the avanti branding without the train , get the licenses secure first then make the route not make a route without licenses, completely pointless in my eyes
How somebody can care this much about some logos is truly beyond me, it takes away some authenticity yes but it's really not the end of the world. In the world of UK TSW routes there's a good amount of stations without branding where there should be, I guess they should just delete the whole entire everything now its all ruined
So u don't see trains drive by or at platforms, only the cab yeh also the signage looks stupid without its branding and the seats lol it's just all stupid without the branding in my opinion
No, I don't believe that for a second. You can't just back out of a legally binding contract at the last second, unless there is a "get out" clause or something serious happened which would break the contractual agreement. If you pull out of a contract at the last second for no good reason, there is usually a high financial penalty or legal consequences. There is something DTG are not telling people here.
They did not. You can even find plenty of shots in the First Look trailer that has the LNWR logos in the distance.
I totally agree. I hope they can somehow get the license for LNWR and, especially, the Island Line. I really hope they didn’t give up on getting the license for the Class 483 and 484. Honestly, I’m not very excited for GWE, knowing there will be a lot of unbranded trains running around. One of the main reasons why the game is fun to me is because I can see the licensed brands from real life driving around in my game.
that would not be a simulation anymore and you’re better of playing like roblox or sum most people play the game because they want the realism of a simulator and that’s what it’s always been
