Personally, after spending thousands, on every DTG DLC, every AP DLC, every JT DLC, I still found certain things lacking. So, I worked very hard over a period of about five years to "get good", and address some of these areas. If that isn't to your taste, then fair enough - fully respect your view.
Such a first world problem. I've found that the instructions that come with scenarios, or the descriptive text on whichever website they're housed on, tell us what's been used.
Would you care to elaborate then? It seems to me that if it's an LNER cab then it's not likely to have features specific to GWR examples.
But then the old EP cab wasn't accurate for an MTU HST either with the old desk so it evens out really. I'd rather the modern desk without ATP than the original style cab with ATP. Especially as we don't have any decent routes in TS that cover any sizeable section of the ATP parts.
The key is to be picky about what you install. Just download scenarios that don't use weird and wonderful freeware patches and you'll be fine.
Did the ATP do anything in the game? I remember seeing the Green Lights around the Speedo but not if it affected the driving
It did show the speed limit and did the self-test, but there was no speed monitoring as according to the manual it was impossible to implement properly. To be honest the lack of ATP in the new pack is a deal-breaker for me.
Wivenswold I fully agree that things are getting confusing and difficult at this point (even for seasoned players). The same thing goes for German content by the way. It´s a general thing and does not only apply to dunkrez stuff.
I've released 2 stand-alone full OTP packs and one comprehensive HST cab pack so far (which I've tried to make compatible with as many things as possible). I don't really understand the push-back, all in all, I spent a year building HST cabs in many flavours for people to enjoy, for practically no profit and a lot of pain. Good experience though.
there is no push back... I´ve been criticizing this on Railsim with lots of German content. We´ve got the same thing going on with the Baureihe 146 and Dostos in the Germany community. That´s all I was saying. And about building something with no profit and lots of pain. Really? Unlike my freeware route, your stuff is on the ATS page and has a price tag. If you´re getting nothing and someone else is keeping all the money, that´s unfortunate....but your barking up the wrong tree with me, when talking about "making stuff for nothing".
I never said making stuff for nothing, we about hit break-even. I like building things for people to enjoy, and the experience in learning has been invaluable. The market is small, so this is to be expected. The 3 packs I've built so far, well, that's around 4-5 years of effort. About 20% of TSC players have invested in me for which I am eternally grateful and this has given me the spirit to carry on with things. I have experienced a lot of push-back (not from you as you've rightly pointed out), and I have diligently carried on to the best of my ability. And will continue to do so as there are people who appreciate what I bring to the table.
There are always people who will never be appreciative of what you or any other "hobbyist" dev do, it's the curse of the modern digital age, in fact the loudest voices will always be the critical ones, for every noisy complainer moaning and griping about a small detail that has earth shatteringly ruined their lives and must therefore articulate their derision and wrath behind the comforting safety net of anonymity there will be tenfold or more quite happily and gratefully getting on with their lives and enjoying the content for what it is, always take comfort and focus on that. I'm not saying we should sit back and accept poor quality or broken content, if there's a problem then yes of course report that to the relevant people so that a resolution can hopefully be found, sometimes it's a genuine mistake, sometimes it's a quirk of different systems or hardware sometimes it's plain and simply user error, but to go on to the forums or Facebook and to actively vitriol and hound the dev is unacceptable and shows the small mindedness and cowardice of those individuals. The focus of late especially in the North American thread, the Rivet thread and on the TSW forum in general seems to be pitchforks and torches all the time, people moan about a dead game or lack of content whist trying to cut the throat and ostracise anyone trying to improve it just because it didn't meet their exacting standards (standards that they themselves could never hope to achieve) or the functionality or modelling isn't 1:1 scaled accurately to real life. Of course none of this applies to DTG, they've earnt and encouraged any and all derision their apathy has created! Anyway, not sorry for the rant, carry on. P.S. Love your work Duncan I own all your content, your enthusiasm and dedication to bettering and honing your skills is a breath of fresh air in amongst all this negativity stench, keep up the good work, I'm looking forward to the HST and OTP updates.
I would also like to thank you (and others) who humbly provide for us sneering public, the additional joy we get every day by following our hobbies. Respectfully
Yeah, maybe but things are more confusing and hard work when you have a neurological disorder. Perhaps you've never had one. And yes, each scenario does come with a list of co-dependencies that I have when I download the scenario, however, when I finally get to that scenario, say 3 years later, those co-dependencies have been replaced by newer versions. Maybe you only download 1 at a time, play it then delete it. I will check-out Locoswap though. Might help with my HST and 390 issues.
So even though Richard (AP) said he could not fully implement ATP because the way the game is set up the fact he has not done it is a Deal Breaker?
I've over 3,000 scenarios installed, some dating from the days of the original Kuju Rail Simulator iteration of the game. I dare say they all still work too.
No, that isn't what I said. I like the partial implementation of ATP in the current HST packs and for it to be removed in the new pack is a step backwards.
Well, if it isn't in there, I'll write a partial implementation to solve the issue. Much like the basic DAS implementation I wrote, they both work in roundabout the same way.
Even if AP were to implement the same ATP, and there is nothing to say they won't, it is only the GWR HST's that had it.
Dunno.... looking good actually, and the correct cabs will have ATP. Wobbly wiper blade washer tubing as well apparently. I do like touches like that.
So now we start the great debate... Do we prefer Duncans Shiny knob or Richards dirty well used knob.. Discuss.
Why? We'd still be stuck with this if people didn't build the same thing again: https://store.steampowered.com/app/258640/Train_Simulator_First_Capital_Connect_Class_319_EMU_AddOn/ Sounds to me that AP had little option after it became apparent GST couldn't supply their cab. This will be much cheaper too than someone shelling out for this new HST and another £16.99 for the cabs.
I don´t mean really old stuff getting made new. That is good... But like with the HST Cabs now, when stuff is beeing done double in the same timeframe and quality. There is not many people working on TSC content and it´s a shame when time is used for doing stuff twice. 3D Zug, Virtual Railroads and Railtraction have built the same freight waggons in the past. As a German player, I´m biased from those experiences.
Don't see your point. AP have made the HST EPs many moons ago in the early RailWorks days. Duncan's cabs were only implemented for a few selected engines, some requiring additional revamp packs, not all. It's everything but a "shame" to get a fully out of the box working modernised HST now. Don't really understand you here. I'm eagerly awaiting that pack, as you might be enjoying the 3DZug ICE2 for example. Matthias could have made something new, but it's his business and freedom of choice what to develop. And the market for one of the most important british trains is there. There would have been no "double" development if Duncan hadn't made the contract with ATS which he can't get out of easily. Just bad timing it was. Glass is hall full not half empty
I don´t mind the new HST pack by AP... I´m sure that will be embraced and used by everyone. But maybe Duncan could have spent his time with something else, if he would have known. As Richard has been on ATS streams and they seem to be in contact, it´s a shame this was never considered.
That's how it is. Richard asked Duncan to do the cabs for the AP HST, but the rights were already in Alan's posession. It's a business, doesn't mean AP and Alan are enemies, no. But both need to secure their income. And Duncan has actually worked on something completely different and new, the MPV and Tamper.
With regards duplication of DLC. It's worth remembering that DTG's Class 319 makes no money for AP. Which is another reason things get duplicated.
Is there a confirmed source for this? The last I heard this was just a speculation. Not calling you out Peter I'm just trying to get up to speed as it seems I missed something along the way.
Not everything is as it seems as ever... the cab(s) were offered to be bought from me at a very low-ball figure, very low. No names shall be mentioned, of course. Also, the rights are not in ATS's possession. I'm the developer and the creator. ATS is the publisher of my work in this instance. I like the AP cabs, they look alright. Love mine though. Over a year of sweating HST cabs and implementing features that nobody has seen before.
Spikee1975 I just don´t like stuff beeing dupicated because devolpers can´t agree on something. The best example for this is the Mittenwaldbahn. Built by DTG and RSSLO. We could have had another German route insted of them bulding the same thing twice. Same story with many waggons in game.
In this case AP decided to update their vintage HST pack. There is nothing wrong with that. You're dragging it a bit off topic imho. You are a creator yourself, and you're free to do whatever you want. Even if it's updating another old route. I think you're seeing it as if there'd need to be a centralised control board deciding what gets made . But that is not and never was TS. I'm happy and currently exploring all the dutch routes (and buying the whole ChrisTrains catalogue). There doesn't need to be something new for me - the back catalogue is too big for one life anyway. I've dumped TSW because it's the same boring, limited and bugged stuff over and over again.
I concur with your sentiments regarding TSW. There is so much more to TSC than meets the eye. Respectfully
yeah... having shots of both in the same thread, I do prefer Duncan's. The AP one looks great, as you can only expect from AP, and a one stop solution to the HST is welcome, but I just think Duncan's looks better.
Thanks Pookey, though I do think the new HST pack will be ace. Much like AP announced that they did reach out to GST, I should also add that GST did reach out to AP and offer their services for modelling on a longer term basis (I figured I could help out, and the sim would only benefit from this), and proposed a meeting - a sensible suggestion given how the land lays in TSC, to kick things off. This was flatly refused which I found quite odd.
Yes... sounds odd indeed. I'm not sure why anyone would burn bridges that may be useful in the future. I can't see the sense in that, as we never know who we will need further down the road. Personally I'd always keep things open, but... (shrug).
Yep me too... I like to be helpful, but, mine is not to reason why. If you look at the timeline of events surrounding HST packs, offers made, etc, it all becomes quite interesting. I am not going anywhere. I've shored up things to enable me to continue doing this for a very long time. And I think I'm getting better over time. Still, should a certain someone change their mind, my door is open. Also, thoroughly recommend NOT making packs that depend upon other people's offerings. Just leads to awful situations.
