Tsw: Seaside Spectacular!

Another to short, like Clarkson said. And DTG don't even to try reach best parts of this route. Pay for it and another route will be 1 mile long. With one loco from core routes or even a bus.
I will be asking forever : where are core updates, when core bugs will be fixed. Like in Ts. ... never. Just spend over money and mayby finally DTG will thing about it. ...
Haters please write how dtg is best in best. Don't care I will don't spent any money until they finaly fix it like professional devolpers did.

 

And you'll say the exact same thing when you inevitably buy the next route!

Not where I live...

 

Not necessarily Unreal requires a much more extensive setup compared to the TS20XX engine. Materials have to be PBR compliant, train objects mapped in different ways (unreal allows the possibilty of using decals, which can help save on performance/texture space by keeping locomotive body shells to mostly block colours). Lighting is completely different, so no more attempting to overbake Ambient Occlusion into train models. Models also need more efficient LODs. About 90% of the time, you will have to effectively start from scratch again.

 

You're right, it's also Lewes!

 

Many thanks I’ll definitely be buying lovely touch to have Derby made bombardier train featuring in game will be interesting to learn route as never travelled on Brighton trains lol just hoping the electric destination displays work on train as they appear to do so on the pre release artwork

 

I really hate when people downvote anything that is critical of TSW. LastTrainToClarksville was just expressing his opinion. It's sad to see that some people have no regard for personal opinion and automatically downvote something they don't agree with.

 

Having developed for TS2020 and moved TS2020 assets into UE4, there's no way you have to start from scratch 90% of the time, and assuming the assets were created correctly in the first place, you'd never have to start from scratch, certainly not on scenic assets made in the last 3-5 years. Materials are based on .TGA files, which are just as valid for TS materials as UE4 materials. It takes about 5 minutes to bring a simple asset like a house into UE4. As for LODs, my highest LODs on all TS models I've made in the past 5 years are perfectly adequate for UE4.

Anyway DTG think this is acceptable:

So let's not act like DTG have these ultra high standards for scenic assets in TS2020.

 

Well yes, the menus are extremely laggy, but TSW isn't exactly well optimized and easier to run. I get better framerates with higher graphics settings in TS than TSW. I use medium in TSW and I can barely break 30 FPS.

 

Looks OK at 125mph though..

 

To be fair, not all are like this, some look almost as good as the trains themselves:


While others are really shoddy, much more so than these vans. Look at that truck, which was also recycled from TS20 btw:


I wonder if DTG creates all these assets themselves or buys them somewhere..

 

Are we getting back to the age-old "how much do you see as the driver" discussion? Certainly, if the route is engaging as a sim experience, you don't need to go wandering down Clapham High Street, or see the 5 split-spoke wheels of a car?

 

That's true. That's why DTG put all these just as you're leaving the station; When you have a van asset with fewer polys than the shipping container next it, you wouldn't want players to miss it:


Who wants more services on console when you can have more cars 200yrds from the track hidden behind a fence, I still don't know where the optimisation issues come from though:


Meanwhile in 2010 Railworks:


Oh, wait, it's actually TSW:

 

Sure, but don't forget people love taking screenshots, for which higher detail models are useful. Plus, in a game where TSW where you can walk around on foot and explore the world like that, there are genuine situations where you spend prolonged amounts f time at one place.

 

I'm glad you selected a picture of low-poly van and made it the entire thesis of your argument. Nor did I say you couldn't re-use assets. And as someone who has also worked in Unreal engine as well as making assets for other platforms, I think you're completely dropping the ball here in an excuse to attack DTG here. Anyone can click on Unreal's import function to bring in your TS20XX model. What's important is that the model is setup correctly for the unreal engine environment

Your single diffuse texture (.tga) ≠ a complete material setup. e.g. https://i.imgur.com/lBd8Nl6.png An asset for a platform mirror object which uses a diffuse, normal and metalness/roughness/AO setup... all to take advantage of Unreal Engine's environment. Granted you can grab these automatically when exporting from substance painter. But my point being is that alot of TSXX assets will not have been created to take advantage of the Unreal Engine (PBR compliant, decals, rain/snow culling). It is up to the artist to pick an choose how they want their scenes to look.

You don't get this kind of detail from just porting over from TSXX...

 

Maybe DTG want to use my Vario model I once made for Cities:Skylines.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1552272431
Box Truck and Flatbed versions available too :p
Oh wait, no Mercedes-Benz license

 

It's one of those things where it's fine to use that van 200 yards from the track, it's low on resources and looks acceptable from 200 yards away. But we have situations where that low poly van is used 10ft from the track and then a high poly excavator is digging a hole behind a building 200 yards away. It's inconsistent and shows that whoever built the route doesn't understand the basic principles of building a game world. Then DTG turn around and say they have issues with optimisation.

You said:

That's not true, you almost never have to start from scratch if the models were well made in the first place.

As for the materials side of things, you have different materials in TS2020 which have multiple slots for texture files and 101 different settings that can be adjusted in the RW materials plugin for 3ds Max. UE4 is little different to this.

Scenic assets in TS have multiple materials, with multiple settings and texture files. They have a reflective material for the windows, they have a material for objects illuminated at night, they have materials with transparency to hide geometery, and materials to create different effects based on the season, materials for decals etc etc. But still, for a simple house asset, I could bring it from 3ds Max into UE4 in about 5 minutes. It's not complicated because the 3D model and the texture files required are the same and it's just a case of telling UE4 what texture files to use and how they should be used, which for a house or station building is simple. Exporting from 3ds Max and importing into UE4 is about 3% of the time in the total workflow of creating an asset from scratch, which means bringing an asset from TS2020 into TSW probably saves DTG about 97% of the labor involved in creating the asset.

 

There's no denying that TS looks like Lego compared to TSW, and that's why the old reused assets look rubbish, lazy crud.

 

It's probably more a question of whether those TS meshes are still appropriate for TSW standard. You said that yourself about the Brighton station asset.

Most of the things - buildings specifically - that I modeled for C:S are based on buildings I made for MSTS originally. Back then, a house was flat walls with a photo texture plotted on each one, and that's it. 15 years later, people expect the recesses of each door, window etc. being fully mehed out. To make it short, remaking from scratch was faster than overhauling the old mesh. Or shape, as it was called back then.

 

TS20 can look really good if you use some mods though. The game isn't always ugly since some content is of better quality and looks better.

 

For me it’s also about foliage density near the track. A lot of DTG TS classic routes had long sections where there was no grass or anything at the trackbed and scenery would start five metres from the end of the trackbed when in real life things are a lot more clustered together. This is fine in rural countryside but in commuter routes such as MML and London to Brighton it just felt too sparse. Third party routes were a lot better at creating denser scenery.

In TSW this problem seems to be mostly rectified also there’s are still areas where hills at the trackbed are too far away from the ballast shoulder creating a sense of space that is just not there’s in real life. Real railways generally have very narrow sections of land to get through.

 

In alot of cases... "can" does not mean you should. I can only imagine the absolute frenzy if you ported over items like this (london to brighton) into East CoastWay

Also pertaining to the text above, most models made in TSXX are not authored to the higher quality standard that TSW has set because
a) TSW was not in existance at the time
b) Performance requirements were much lower 5-10 years ago
c) For alot of hobbiests here, I suspect that a generalisation of an object is much faster

Even with original source files in 3ds max or blender... it can be easier and faster to just remake assets

Only exception to the rule is with some of the newer content coming out, which is authored for multiple environments. This seems mostly applicable locomotives, where that content has been created in high-poly... then optimised to meet TSXXs recommended 300k poly limit, and textures tweaked to compensate for poor lighting.
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/N5qlb1
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/ZXV01
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/1nkYlZ

And even that can be a stretch. So going back to the original question And with TS, they have almost a decade of assets they can reuse don't they? ... the answer is still "not all the time".

Anyway, I'm a bit tired of arguing this point. I look forward to seeing any routes you come up with (should we ever get the editor... ho ho ho )

 

Exactly.

 

Me too. I'd love for DTG to release the Editor. I've even applied to work at DTG (both pre and post TSW) but despite having what I thought was a fairly decent resume (project management in real railway engineering as well as over 10 years of software development including Train Simulator) I didn't even obtain an interview. So I might never get the chance to develop for TSW which is a shame.

 

Classic example of overqualification.

On the other side... I've just taken a look at those prehistoric MSTS models... as long as they are placed some distance away, some of them might even do for TSW.

 

Yes it has, Scotrail156467 like it or not

 

Didn't say it didn't already know that

 

I remember around this time last year we had about 6 routes and weren’t quite sure of what the future held for Train Sim World. I’m glad to say DTG really has been doing a great job on the route and locomotive add ons and now when I look at my list of routes and all the different locomotives that can be used on multiple routes really just makes me happy on where we are now. I’m looking forward to the last route of the year and I’ll be looking forward to the year ahead of us.
I think no matter what people’s idea of a great DLC are, we all need to remember we are here because we all love trains and that is something we all have in common.

 

TS2020 and it's predecessors look very dated now compared to TSW. That's what will get first impressions made when new folk get into this niche part of the gaming/SIM world. The new route looks good should have some operational interest and I will be looking forward to it.

Folks wanting longer routes better detail and zero bugs. Is that realistic? I doubt it. Is that acceptable? Well that is up to the individual. The common theme is that whatever they release at DTG it isn't good enough. Only they will know how these DLCs sell and if they don't get supported then what next for the hobby?

I find a similar attitude in the model railway world. Nothing is ever good enough, detailed enough and costs too much....

 

Very well spoken. I forget that too, sometimes.

 

Amazed to see this of all things for a modern UK route, but I do hope there’s an extension either way to Portsmouth or Hastings. I am sold on it just for the 377 alone and the ability to walk to Lovers Walk Depot I presume? Will be getting this.

It’s always interesting reading people share the same wishes and wants I also have for this sim

 

I am abit gutted, first thought it would be brighton to london, the first 'decent' size route.....with lots of services express and slow, with the option of gatwick express and freight, and thought the wait since GWE would be worth the extra 5quid they could of charged for it........but.....no.

37min drive is the longest from end to end, which will again make this become the new GWE express very quickly, meaning tedious and repetative very quickly......will I buy it? yes, as modern UK is the only thing that takes my interest, I did used to buy all DLC to try support the future of the game but i suppose this is my one buy until 2021 when Watford Junction- Euston comes out......haha

 

Ah the classic, another downvote.

 

Short routes don’t really matter to me. What does matter is what kinds of activities are in the route.

 

Immersion allied to activities = much replayability

 

Although I would like to see longer routes, if it is varied and interesting enough to run, then the length wont matter so much to me. So I am certainly looking forward to first impressions and reviews when this launches.

If DTG would want me to purchase up front, then what I would like to see is more of the exisitng trains/rolling stock being used on more routes. I would feel more confident in purchasing new releases if I knew that the trains could be used across more routes, even a few services were added with those items to make use of them on other routes. Rather than the usual route, one new train, one recycled train and one addon 6 months later.

 

Guys, any thoughts on the BR Class 66 that will be in this DLC? Will it be the same GWR one or a improved one with sound and overall texture improvements ? Cheers

 

TrainSim-Dmitri said there were some improvements made, some of which will also be coming to the GWE class 66. Didn't say what precisely though.

 

Dmitri said it's upgraded in some way, but didn't provide any details as to what that means and whether the updates will be applied to the GWE Class 66.

 

Thank you guys very much for the info. I somehow missed it. Very good to hear. Love the Class 66 a lot. A very beastly looking freight loco that is going to get even better. Looking forward to it with the new route addon

 

I gather some of you good folk have asked on the discord already but why is it so short?

Could it be a test bed to see if Third Rail will work; as Simugraph still has hiccups?

Or, as someone said, accountants got on their calculator and priced up the labour to make it and decided 25£ for a walk to Sainsburys would be better?

I am excited for this, and wake up since finding out thinking wow; but I do hope they extend onto it

 

I hope there’s 12 car trains in the game with working door camera and the ability to close gangway doors of when detaching and with the real sound of the class 377

 

That's something I'm curious about as well. Will these cameras be functional? Gangway doors are nothing new to TSW, so I'm certain they can be used.

As for sounds... I didn't yet read anything about them being contributed by AP, so we'll have to see...

Edit: I mean, we'll have to hear.

 

There are some AP sounds.

 

Making EMUs for TSW is more effort and cost than a locomotive, so most if their time, effort, and cost went in to making the 377.

 

I thought diesel/electric simulation was the time consumer?

 

No

 

Where was the news about AP contributing?

 

Well... in turn, units don't require coaches to be made in addition.

 

Discord

 

It is. A diesel electric locomotive has the same equipment as an electric locomotive, except instead of the electricity coming from a wire above it's coming from a generator/altinator driven by a diesel engine. So to model a diesel locomotive, not only does the electrical gear need to be simulated, but so does the diesel generator aspect. That said, each locomotive is different, so there maybe an instance where a complex electric locomotive is more time consuming then a simple diesel locomotive, but generally it'll be the other way around.

The EMUs on LIRR are also 3rd rail DC, so DTG have a bit of a headstart on the 377.