So we know Rivet had some involvement in WCML South as already confirmed. But whenever I see an issue with the route, fingers are immediately pointed in Rivet's direction for just about everything from the timetable to scenery. What I want is a bit of transparency from DTG on exactly what Rivet contributed to the route, all we can do is speculate. I'd also like to know who else contributed (if they even did) as Rivet apparently weren't the only ones. It might also stop people pointing fingers at Rivet for something they maybe didn't do. I can't see them having done much as the route is supposed to be (and is marketed as) a core DTG route.
I agree, I'd also like to know. I know they helped/did the stations on Cathcart Circle, so did they do the stations on WCML south?
On the other hand, if people know conclusively, those that make it their mission to hate on rivet will then go into overdrive trying to find every little fault with it. So maybe best not to know?
Thing is, they're being blamed for something that they probably never did in the first place. Missing/wrong scenery, Rivet did it. Poor timetable, Rivet did it. Poor sounds/physics, Rivet did it. The slightest thing wrong, Rivet did it. All people do when they find something wrong with the route is blame Rivet. Knowing what they did or didn't do won't make a difference I don't think, as those people hating on them will find literally any excuse to do so anyway. Maybe clarifying what they did will stop people pointing fingers at them and only them when there's something wrong?
I'll go this far, as saying I think that Rivet most likely built the entirety of the route based on how it was built. The section of the Bakerloo Line looks like it was literally copy and pasted across from the original 2020 release. The Class 350 has the giveaway Rivet hallmarks (all Rivets products that I have the ability to open the cab windows at 0% - 100%, where as all other developers have just open and close options. There are also a few other minor bits of bobs). I think the only part of the route DTG had a hand in before the updates, was building the Class 390 in house... The community guessed WCMLS was developed Rivet just by the quality of the route in the preview, before it was officially confirmed. That gives you a good indication of how people notice how poor their work is and how they can identify a Rivet product without being told... It really does speak for itself. The thing is though, the Rivet saga has been absolutely discussed and debated to death, so there's not many more answers or opinions you'll get that haven't already been discussed in a great amount of detail in other threads.
DTG are unlikely to reveal something that formed part of a sub contractor agreement, so with all respect to the OP it's a bit pointless to ask and expect an open answer. As stated the clues are everywhere from the sloppy tunnels to very basic Superquick stle textures on bridges, or the fact it cut off short at MKC rather than potentially going a bit further etc. At this point unless DTG can bottom out the yet further introduced with the update, I will more or less write it of as a % of the TSW5 Deluxe price wasted and just hope at some point we get another route where the Pendolino can be run.
I'll say this, Rivet could have done 100% of the route...or 0%, but considering the condition it's in especially after the updates, it's very much a broken route and for now, it's going to be consigned to the least played routes alongside Cross City and Manchester-Glossop. As I said before I'd personally like to know what they did, because if it turns out they only did the stations for example than they shouldn't be blamed for other things that are wrong. But OldVern is right, We'll more than likely never know.
The section of the Bakerloo Line was a copy paste from the original Bakerloo Line route. I agree with you and OldVern though. DTG aren't going to just reveal what Rivet did with the route but it is pretty obvious that Rivet did have a hand in this route (DTG themselves admitted that) and it does say alot that the community was able to realize that early on.
I honestly think it is best to draw a line under this whole Rivet and WCCL drama. No matter which side of the debate you are I would say it is unarguable that the route were released in a shocking state, and even with DTG Liam's recent efforts still isn't to the standard of previous core releases, such as ECML or SEHS, when all factors (particularly performance) are taken into account. It doesn't matter who made what in the route, it were released by DTG and so ultimately they accept the responsibility for both the positives and negatives fed back from us to them. They aren't going to grass on Rivet/any other 3rd party who helped, so there is no point pushing on trying to make them. As I say, Liam has improved the route vastly, but it still remains a strange one in terms of the scope, the actual mainline services on the route are pitiful 30 minute speed up slow down jobs, leading the route to just feel like another stop start commuter run. Not only this but the performance is still well below other routes, even WCMLOS, which I just think is a massive, massive shame. As I have said multiple times, I really cannot stress the appreciation for Liam's efforts, but I honestly think this route is just doomed, it sits below, not only the ECML, which is an overall good effort, but also SEHS, which many will know is not a route I am particularly fond of.
What more do you want them to say? They've already said they outsource to 2nd parties such as Rivet and TSG. It's a fact in game development. They would not have the staff or time to do it all in-house. We'd be waiting two years for each route DLC.
I even found myself jumping over to Germany and playing Maintalbahn, rather than WCMLS. As said, Liam’s efforts are really appreciated but he has had his work cut out by the people who signed off on this being released originally and presumably then pushed to get the updates out before thorough testing and validation done. It’s not quite down there with WCL or Rapid Transit (though in fairness both of those run much better and in the case of RT the route itself is okay, just the train is off), but a close contender.
I think I agree with Oldvern here, they are not going to tell us. It’s published as a DTG route and DTG is responsible to ensure the work of its contractors is up to standard. Makes no sense to name then. It’s DTG that have messed up here In allowing the route to go out, they are the only ones the community should be blaming. As for the update I’m guessing DTG had good intentions here to try and get us an improvement before Christmas. It hasn’t quite worked though. Personally I am not seeing any crashes (PS5 and High End PC) but others seem to be finding it worse and that is not good news. In my opinion it may well have been better to wait until the updates were finished. It’s clear from what Matt has been posting (and I appreciate his input) that there is still more to come such as the AI Pendo Speed,he also mentioned a memory leak has been found. I hope there will be a full review of AWS (really annoying) and on train PIS (wrong in many places). Meanwhile, I quite enjoyed playing this route yesterday. For those without crashing issues, it’s a step forward. I feel bad for those with issues though. TLDR : I don’t care what Rivet did or didn’t do. DTG are responsible for Routes under their name and this one has been a poor release. Besides Rivet are not the only developer with issues. MML by Skyhook was very poor and took Skyhook a long time to get to its current good state. They haven’t attempted their own route since. Their DB187 is abandoned
For the sake of fairness, I find some things throughout the Rivet routes are done quite nicely: 1. Really good 3D modelling of rolling stock. 2. Nicely modelled stations. 3. Interestingly written "out of the box" scenarios. I won't purchase the WCMLs until some serious fixes are applied. But if you find the above mentioned somewhere on the route, it might have been built by Rivet. Just a positive approach to the OP's question. Because DTG won't comment on that. Why should they anyway?
There are many things that Rivet do well, as you say those three they excel at. Edinburgh-Glasgow as a route itself is actually a decent route, it's not their fault the scenery is a bit bland, it's bland in reality as well. It's a commuter route between Scotland's two biggest cities and Glasgow Queen Street and Edinburgh are two well modelled stations.
Personally I think the route is very good now. It seems to run better now on my potato of a PC than before and feels more alive. I don't see how it is broken but I can see some are having issues. That doesn't mean a majority are having issues though. I think retreading over old ground will just result on more bile thrown in Rivets direction. DTG aren't going to say who did what and I don't feel it is helpful if they do.
What rivet did on wcmls was a pretty good job. Ok the community and dtg had to step in and make some changes, correct some errors. Without rivet, who would be driving wcmls right now.
To be honest, I'm just looking for a more logical explanation of why WCML South is the way it is other than Rivet did it (a statement which is thrown around with pretty much any issue with the route). Rivet's routes aren't usually as bad as this one (WCL aside, that is abysmal no matter how you look at it) which makes it an anomaly, so I'm curious what actually happened. Like, did they halt development because of that leak over the summer, resulting in a rushed release? At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter who did what, it should never have been released in the state it is. But why was it? I suppose I'm more thinking out loud rather than looking for an actual answer as I know I'll never get one. For clarity, I am not, nor should it ever be interpreted as, trying to stir drama or discontent in any way, shape or form. Curiosity kills the cat.
I can't understand the complaints about West Coast Main Line. What's wrong with the route now? Well modeled, beautiful scenery, extensive schedule, varied and interesting gameplay! I can't say that I encounter a lot of errors and low performance. I admit that everything could be better, but now everything is at a fairly high level of quality. After installing mods and a new schedule (which is not finished yet and will be even better), I admire this route. With such an approach, you can incinerate any existing product. I am sure that this route has a high rating among users, which significantly exceeds the rating of most existing routes. Let's play and have fun!!! What difference does it make now who made more mistakes. Now it is more important to be grateful to the team of modders who continue to improve this route! Thank you very much!!!
The only problem I can think of is the route still feels notoriously empty. Missing Class 350 services as well as missing AI services that's supposed to replicate Avanti services not stopping at both Watford Junction and Milton Keynes.
regarding the services being missing, it has already been said that this is a problem in the UI (the services are there but are not counted by the UI counter) and that it is being fixed as for the rest, I totally agree
There are those for whom it is crashing so obviously their complaints are understandable. For some it seems they will never be happy. No route has been perfect. For me this route is now up there with the best. Looks good, runs fine, feels busy with a variety of services.
I suspect that this might be the case as the stations are modelled well but the station surrounds leave a lot to be desired, which seems to be a trait of Rivet. See WCL local for reference (Camborne for example looks like a model village though the station itself is good) and then compare to the station surrounds on Antelope Valley.
No doubt as part of the TSW5 package there was a less flexible deadline than a normal DLC. However presumably when it was whiteboarded and the timescale milestones sketched out, it was seen as feasible. Something must have cropped up to put a huge spanner in the works. I mean, it’s chalk and cheese compared to last years keynote ECML which is nearly twice the length and to a much higher standard of finish. Obviously there were the complexities of doing Euston and its approaches, but then Bletchley and MKC less complex than Doncaster and it does look as if Queens Park to Harrow was pasted in from BKL. At best we can only hope lessons have been learned and a better approach is taken next year. To all intents and purposes they should have already decided what the route(s) will be in the 2025 big package and started to lay the foundations. You cannot run a business on a whim, suddenly deciding in April, right we’re going with the Suggestions forum on this one and doing Euston to MKC for our big one this year. And putting my tinfoil sombrero on, I still get the impression DTG have cut back on the number of actual in house development staff, whether by attrition or redundancy, which leaves them on their knees and increasingly reliant on second or third party help.
To add to that, I think it was irresponsible of DTG to outsource the work to Rivet in the first place given their reputation as well as the physical evidence of the poor standards of their previous work. If the communities feedback was genuinely received about Rivets prior to their involvement, and it was genuinely taken onboard would they have been involved or the first place? Or was it a case of they were the cheapest developer to outsource the work to and the community would just have to accept WCMLS in its original condition because it was a flagship route? As much as I sincerely respect the attempted updates and hard work that's gone into trying to improve the route, I think the decision to involve Rivet has tarnished and quite possibly damaged the image of DTG in the long run within the community. (Aimed at the decision makers at the top who make the decisions to outsource the route, and not Liam or anyone else in the team who are genuine saints and are a complete credit to the game and are sincerely appreciated in the community). TSW5's British arm has quite a lot of reputation to rebuild. TSW5 has just been issued after issue... I think it'll definitely be resolved, but it will be a hard lesson in quality control going forward. Although this community has it's ups and downs I am truly appreciative of them staying firm with pushing for improvements and without them and their persistence I don't know if TSW5 would of been improved to the extent we are now promised. WCMLS has been a pain in behind since it was released. Liam has put so much hardwork into improving the game and bringing it upto the standard it always deserved, but it seems the original build and core issues have caused the updates to not work as intended or for people to only receive partial elements of it. I can only hope that there are genuine long term commitments to this route as we have been promised... For me, TSW4 really did live upto the expectations that I have of the game, and ECML I thoroughly enjoyed and still do. There were a few bugs but they were mostly small and have since been fixed (the suspension thing was probably only it's biggest gripe).TSW5 and WCMLS in it initial release felt like dropping a pound and finding a penny... The other flagship routes included with TSW5 just had more of an edge to them and were genuinely immersive and of a higher quality. WCMLS felt so deflated... As I've previously said, with all the update issues, and only partial elements of the update being released, I'm going to leave the route and revisit in a few months once further patches are out. I really hope whoever is responsible for releasing the updates implements the entirety of Liams fantastic work, and that they work on the core issues to make it playable are finally sorted.
