Should Just Trains Cover Steam Locomotives In Tsw?

They would be both good, just a shame it's one route a year at the current rate.

 

Bravo et merci pour cette remarquable démonstration de talent et d'humour !!!
Sincèrement, tof

 

Et merci

non talent , je viens de chercher sur Google Badger Train mdr

 

The questions should be:

Do they want to?
and
Do they think they can pull it off?

 

I think that what they are doing now is better than what anyone else is doing, as the saying goes, if it aint broke dont fix it. Its a no from me.

 

Indeed, that's all I use them for, albeit as AI only.

 

Tbh, i dont think its just BR Blue that sells, its also the outstanding quality.

Both WCMLoS and their upcoming 86/2 Loco DLC feel like a Statement to me.

 

I mean if they did it right which I have no doubt about sure.

 

JT would probably get the aesthetics pretty good, but the realistic performance, and manual control might be harder.

 

The reason that comment about BR not selling is that it was given as to a halt of anything BR era after several good DLCs for TVL. Right up until Blackpool Branches came out the community was starved of older diesel stuff.

 

Would love to see the North Welsh coast as being a student in Bangor recently I'd love to see JT recreate it in the period! See how the line actually worked before it was just 2 carriage DMUs and the occasional voyager going back and fourth once in a blue moon

Although coming across the 67 with the DVT on the back broke up the monotony somewhat!

 

I would have to agree with you there, they could and should have given us another steam locomotive with it (like a shunter).. SoS is a TSW2 route so it actually eligible for a Remaster should one occur.. I was more talking about the locos themselves

IMO, I think Peak Forest is more of an enjoyable route even if we only got a 4F and a new wagon with it however I still have issues, one of them is that the timetable reuses the Jubilee and 8F from SoS which is lazy as, in 1963, that line would have seen a lot more locos then 3 classes and that is including diesels. Another issue I have is that DTG chose to model the 4F which (of the 3 in preservation) none are operational which I thought was an odd choice and when it came to the sounds for the 4F, they used the sounds from some footage taken by a DTG employee

 

Quality over Quantity

 

No, the pushback is from the steam purists who don't want a "compromise."
Which is what we currently have in game.
So it's a choice of more of what we have in game (which they consider an unholy abomination) or nothing.
In any case, no Just Trains likes doing 80s blue diesel electric routes.
Why would you take their passion and suggest they do something not in their wheelhouse?
Seems kind of selfish.
What we'd need is a dev who was passionate about steam to tackle that.

 

I am a steam purist but would be happy if new steam content was produced along the same lines until improvements to the physics etc could be implemented. Not development stopped indefinitely.

My biggest complaint and one I would want fixed is the silent AI which would be bad enough if it was an ACS64 or an Electrostar but it is totally immersion breaking when a Jubilee glides past silently up a gradient with several mark 1's in tow.

DTG have seemingly given up on steam but it is their decision and I don't see it having been brought about because a small section of users would like to see it accurately portrayed or even as close to.

If some of the other content was in a similar state the forums would be in meltdown.

 

Im sure steam isnt a thing now, neither for dtg nor jt.

But actually i can see jt doing a loco dlc such as
- cl.150/0, 150/1 and the 150/2 -- all in one pack

Obviously with proper physics and working guard panel.

 

Hmmm is that a console thing?
I never lose audio when driving the Jubilee on PC.
It's not just one factor, but a few factors.
DTG is already making money on steam in TSC of course, it's harder to implement on TSW, and I'm betting that because steam is on TSC mostly already, that most of the users are there anyway so the amount of additional sales from steam on TSW would be relatively small, not enough to overhaul the game engine.
They will probably take another crack at it when they move to a new game engine.
In any case, there is nothing stopping a third party developer doing "steam lite" as it is on the current system. It's just up to someone who wants to do it. The devs who seem to be into that sort of thing however, tend to be on TSC already so you'd have to prove to them there's a market on TSW for it.
They are VERY different player bases in large part (although there is some overlap) and the sales of existing steam routes (SOS and PFR) haven't gone well. That's not entirely the fault of it being steam. Part of it was just a very sparse timetable (the routes themselves are actually REALLY good visually) but it is what it is.
Twice burned, third time shy so to speak.
It'd be a lot to ask DTG to foot the development of another steam route after two bad experiences.
And what drives a company releasing successfully on TSC to move to TSW?
It's a big ask, and would require proving it's worth the effort.

So I put it to the people that want that.... what are you willing to give the devs to assure them there's a substantial market for steam on TSW? Suggest a specific route and traction. Do a poll. Do a crowdfunding campaign. Sign up for preorders. Be constructive.

Simply wishing upon a star probably won't accomplish much sadly.

 

The sound is missing on AI trains something which has been much mentioned on these forums. I probably should have clarified though.

The two routes are very good but SOS has a very poor timetable, other routes which suffered the same have had new or revised timetables.

There have been suggestions threads for steam routes. In my opinion if they had made more of an effort to continue developing for SOS and used it as a base for DLC and fixed some of the issues then they might have seen how well steam could sell. Instead, they abandoned one route with a sparse timetable then gave us another route with very odd beginning and end points whilst not fixing some of the issues with steam. What did they expect to happen?

 

If you read the complaints about Peak Forest you will see that the majority of players biggest complaint was the unreal physics asides the strange start and stop.

That is why it didn't sell well because us Steam fans don't want it to seem like running a diesel. We want it to run like a steam loco and the challenge that brings.

Look at most of the suggestions for steam routes most of them want the physics fixed first.

So why make it if the community has already voiced their displeasure with the product and why. And they cannot accomodate.

We already proved our point with our wallets with PFR that we won't put up with that and this is the end result.

Also look at the complaints about the Flying Scotsman as well. Mostly physics again.

I like steam to but I accept until DTG say otherwise its dead.

 

I'm coming into this late. I am only really here as I wanted to find out where on earth all the steam content has gone.... and why DTG insist on rehashing different routes and locos all between 1960 and 1980..ish again and again..... I havev SoS, I haven't bought the last 2 (TSW4 or 5) as realistically - for someone only interested in steam content (and I don't mean the game delivery platform...) what is there for me in TSW? I had even just "lost interest" and didnt realise there was a buxton route.... It may drive me to buy TSW5....

I think my experience proves its a bit of a self fullfilling proficy - steam content limited to 1/2 routes on a £50 game (ok i know there are good sales... but you get the point), steam fans don't buy game, DTG think "no one is interested in steam" - in circles we go....

To that end - how do they know that there is no "commercial appitite" for it - and perhaps why they keep rehashing the same content/era in a different package (BR blue) time and time again (which is pretty ZZZzzZZZ to me)...

Therefore the point made above RE getting more content into the game irrespective of it having some limitations is key really a more strategic play than perhaps the OP thinks (ilovelucky63 i think it was). By building up the content you build the userbase and build the commercial case for developing steam... without it you have nothing... and thats where we are now.....

I think perhaps some people have got too pre-ocupied by realism - as good as that is. I bought MSTS on release day and to this day remember how wonderful it was to drive Flying Scotsman from Settle to Carlisle.... All the incredible realism from the likes of Victoryworks or bossman that you see on TS Classic or rather "railworks" as i know it... are 3rd party developments - not offical content - and have been driven by their want for realism.... to expect a commercial developer to go to such extremes is unrealistc in my view.... but you need them to provide the starting point and build the brand if you willl.... and by getting more content in game (and that the end of the day thats all it is - a load of code - its not a physical engine... so simulation is an abstract concept...) you do that...

OldVern - i am going to presume you are (big vern?) he of the far north line and others? Happy times!

 

It is indeed!

 

I love steam above any other traction type but I think JT should stick to BR, they've proven twice now that they're experts in this field. If anything, I think DTG should reserve all the BR stock exclusively for JT as they seem to be the only ones capable to do it justice! This would prevent another Rivet 150 situation

As for steam, DTG need to start development back up again. When Peak Forest came along, I wasn't expecting massive upgrades to the simulation. I thought the plan would be to release further steam content with incremental upgrades to the simulation, so that it would get gradually better over time with each update being backdated to previously released steam locomotives. Unfortunately, Peak Forest came with no upgrades to the simulation and a rather quiet timetable with little to do for the new Fowler 4F. It's a shame because the route itself is a big step up from Spirit of Steam and is one of the best looking UK routes in TSW. Hopefully the upcoming timetable expansion, new wagons and Class 104 will provide some new life to Peak Forest.

I'd much prefer new steam content with tiny improvements each release than no steam at all. It hurts TSW's content variety in the long run.

There are third parties in TS Classic who do amazing work and can afford the time to do more in depth expert locomotives, but why would they want to come over to TSW when the base simulation is a complete mess? It's up to DTG to give them a reason to want to work on TSW.

Steam can sell. It just needs to be given a fair chance, that hasn't happened yet. Spirit of Steam's release was the big one, there won't be another release as huge as the introduction of steam traction. DTG really fumbled it by not following it up with updates and loco add-ons despite saying at the time it was the highest selling route in TSW.

 

I would like nothing more than a third party to step In and do it properly. I don't know about jt, they seem to be doing a good job at what they do Currently.

I don't think dtg have the time for stuff like this. Sos could have been great but it's dead. They didn't even bother to add 4f services to the route. Peak forest the same! They could have added some diesel services but couldn't be bothered and left it to a third party to try and salvage it.
But until dtg fix the core issues, which seems highly unlikely! What third party is gonna make steam trains with unrealistic physics?

It's actually got worse, when sos first released, climbing a hill with a heavy train was a real struggle, now its like driving a diesel! I don't even need to monitor the steam pressure anymore.

 

Well, there may well have been some market saturation, given within a rather short span of time DTG had released the 20, 31, 33, 37, 40, 45, 47, 52, 08, 09 and 101. But after that there was nothing, while demand regenerated- and all those old diesels laid the groundwork for Just Trains, who could build 1980s routes with lots and lots of traffic as a result.

 

Its the bicentennial of railways this year (Railway 200), DTG want their bumps feeling if they dont tie in some updated steam release for the celebrations; we had near on 150 years of steam traction, that’s an incredible range of routes and locos to go at and a crying shame if they cant get off their backsides and get steam improvements sorted. Not to mention the plethora of third party developers that have showed their abilities and depth of knowledge in TSC that are ‘waiting in the wings’ to move to TSW, assuming they havent given up all hope by now, that is. It would be nice to think JT gain someone who could possibly tackle steam simugraph, but really the onus is on DTG to finish the job they so enthusiastically announced with SOS.

 

JT must get very irritated by the number of posts saying they should stick to diesel/EMU, when for years they have proven to be capable of developing truly excellent steam locos, albeit for TSC and surely would not be stretched by doing both. However, those who post need to heed their (and others) statement that the TSW engine as it is now cannot properly simulate steam physics. It is obvious that the issue of Simugraph is not trivial and may not be fixable - realistically, a change of graphics engine is not on the cards just to fix steam. On the other hand, there is a very active thread on this forum from those who are living with the shortcomings by adapting to settings of regulator/reverser no seen in normal operation and successfully recreating real-life timetable runs, mainly with the Jubilee. So bringing the other 3 locos to similar levels and fixing AI sounds would certainly help.

 

JT have said themselves they won't be doing steam locos in TSW due to the core steam loco issues.