This is very true! Its not a particularly bad route since the update I will concede. As with all earlier Rivet routes it just lacks substance in terms of the original timetable and playability. The scenary before the update (in the original release) was pretty shambolic though. Rivet do seem to be heading in the right direction over the last few months, and with the Inter7City HST coming along, Tyler may have made a full working timetable to match it (one can hope). I feel Skyhook are also frustrated as the timetable has been with DTG and will now most likely be replaced again by the Inter7City one. For players though, this will be very good however.
We don't know who is making the Inter7City HST or if it will have its own timetable. It could be Skyhook, considering they have an actual HST model to work with. Hopefully we find out next week on the roadmap.
If the new HST is already in this timetable that could indicate that it won't get a new one - hope it does though!
Was thinking about the scotrail hst earlier, and with the confirmed Rivet timetable pack, both use stock modified from stock they used; 170 and 171 from the original 170, and 377 likely used from the wcml one. Rivet never made a HST. Skyhook, however have... This is just speculation so take it with a grain of salt.
That's how i read it as well. I think the HST will slot into this Sprinter timetable and that will be that. Honestly feels like this route is a bit cursed Shame too as it's an interesting one to drive despite it's flaws. Multiple paths and service patterns, Firth of Forth Bridge is very cool, etc Bringing the ScR Class 170 up to standard would go quite a ways imo. Really disheartening to once again have to drive the worse version of a particular train because of.....timing, idk? The sound mix in particular is all over the place- reverb and engine sounds are extremely loud while running sounds are so quiet you can only really hear them in exterior cam, and the train announcents haven't been updated at all from the original release- you can barely hear them most of the time- maybe they only come from the speakers in the passenger compartment idk?
Having 3 timetables for the route would be silly. Hopefully they can just sort the 158 timetable to make it to today’s real timetable. Can appreciate why the newer Leven via Dunfermline services weren’t originally included but if there’s a I7C coming they’ll surely have to look at the code anyway so just make it modern day. Do that above and sort the apparently already sorted 170 sounds(in terms of dev work already done), signals, announcements and it’s pretty much a great DLC. Yes I know there are still some scenery not quite right but overall that’s never gonna be perfect. The frustration is with this snd the Edinburgh to Glasgow route is it is fairly easy fixes preventing them from being very solid routes and that was never revisited so fear this will likely be the same.
Having the 220 would be nice also, but you can't fault Skyhook for that considering it didn't exist when they made this.
One can hope with talent like Tyler onboard they will revisit E2G and FCL and update the scenery even more. They'd both be sound routes if they were given the relevant love. Edinburgh to Glasgow has the potential to be a great commuter route... But along with the scenery needing a touch up, the 385 desperately needs to have it's sound improved. The 3D modelling is great on it, but unfortunately it doesn't have sounds to match!
I'm a little more invested in this route given its my home route. So im more disappointed about this one than other DLC's. The route has bags of potential. Variety of scenery, track and destinations, varied stock using the lines. But its been fumbled badly from the start and it does feel like they've just given up on it. Yea they have made some improvements to the scenery, which is welcome and the 158/170 combined are great. But its missing the HST which is apparently coming with the HST pack. Given the delay I thought adding the 220 might have been a possibility and I was hoping that maybe we might have got Azumas playable. Theres gaps in the timetable in the morning and at night. The Leven train stops are still well back from the buffers, I'd have thought that would be a straightforward fix and seems to sum up the apparent lack of effort that's been put into the route. Also the 158 seems to struggle with acceleration above 60mph unless its going down a hill. Has a bad habit of rolling back when you're trying to leave North Queensferry heading to Edinburgh, even when its dry and unlike the 170 I don't think there's a hill start feature.
Put the brake into step 1, apply power and then release the brake when the revs have built up - works like that in the MML one anyway. Same goes for any 2 handled unit that I can think of.
Wouldn't work since we only have 801, not the bi-mode 800. (801 only has a singular diesel engine for emergency use only, and as such, diesel performance is atrocious) Leave it in brake step 1, apply power, then fully release brakes.
The route isn't that bad. Quite scenic in parts; far better than the dull ED-GL. Probably Rivet's best route aside from Bernina.
i think this is absolutely spot on, usually there'd be an article showing off all the work that's been done over the past year on this, showcasing all the new playability and giving information on things like new service levels and total playable/AI count of the timetable.. it speaks absolute volumes that this was practically hidden away at the footnotes of a wider patch release, as both DTG and Skyhook knew exactly what the reaction would be when those who have waited patiently for this very release see just how little has improved, and in all honesty just how much this timetable, which has been many, many months in the making, is actually a huge step backwards. Unless this is improved (which i doubt will ever happen now given just how long this 'improvement' has taken), any faith and goodwill i had towards Skyhook has gone completely, i just don't see how this offering can even remotely be justified.. especially given the timetable standards of other recent releases. The route visually was markedly improved by Rivet after release, credit where it's due for that.. but from a timetable perspective this is a massive, massive let down, it's literally worse than the previous original timetable and i don't know how this has been passed fit for release, i really don't
I agree, and actually I think that the large amount of fragmented timetables that we’re getting in general is a little annoying. I understand why it has to happen, because it’s hard to slot things into timetables and simulating them to test takes a lot of time. But like for example with the cargo line packs, we have a separate timetable on WCMLOS for a military freight wagon, and there’s about to be another separate one for the nuclear wagons. It’s not a great experience. But more related to this case in particular, I wish that DTG would give us the ability to hide timetables that we don’t want to use, and disable them from being used in Quick Play, for example. Also just because if we did theoretically get a third timetable for this route, which I don’t think is going to happen personally, but if we did, that’s two timetables that become redundant in my mind, and now every time I want to use the route I have to make sure I select the correct timetable. Maybe it seems like it’s not such a big deal, but I just think the user experience could be improved by letting us hide timetables that we don’t want to see. Back to the overall point, I do hope that Skyhook revisits this timetable. Even if it was based on real train timings, it’s clearly missing services that both existed before this timetable was set, and existed after this timetable was set. I don’t think that emergency timetables should be used in place of full timetables, even if it was technically correct for the short span of time in which this timetable is based on.
In regards to you saying about the 801 not working as it’s not the bi mode version. There’s still AI Azumas running north of Edinburgh which are 801’s (801234 I saw which doesn’t even exist) so you think they could have made them playable in some form.
Koeln - Aachen has three. I agree with the post above - it would be nice to be able to remove them and hide from quick view, as I have no use for the older two, same goes for routes like Cross City, East Coastway, etc
Just had a quick run through the menus and guessing, in addition to the other issues listed, SHG didn't bother setting up (or expanding the existing Sprinter Express) Journey mode for this timetable? A tad disappointing...
It’s the Aberdeen services that are seen on this route. Currently there’s one in each direction that stops at Markinch and I think two in each direction that stop at Kirkcaldy. The others run non stop between Haymarket & Cupar.
Extremely disappointing to finally jump into this after 18 months of waiting and get blurring textures from the just before the turn off to Edinburgh gateway on ps5 pro. this game is ridiculous now; I'm totally disengaging now until they sort it out… more than 5 minutes to load and then get this rubbish going on with the core or optimisations across routes, it’s really a joke
We really are starting to see an actual PC/console divorce. Either console players have to put up with blurred textures -which are built into UE - or PC players will have to tolerate simplified routes with less traffic and visual appeal. At the very least, I can't see TSW 7 continuing to support Gen 8. And, no, there is no Magic Optimization Wand that's going to solve it.
Exactly. You have lightened the processor load back within parameters. So, does this mean in future, DLCs will have sparse schedules just to keep console players happy?
I think you're right. The road was signposted with the Frankfurt S- Bahn. As far as I know, Gen9 still doesn't have the full timetable. If I were on console, those blurry textures would drive me nuts, I don't think I would be playing TSW. And, as a PC player with a fairly decent machine, I would not play any dumbed- down routes. I want whole milk, not the watered down varieties. We'll have to see what happens, but I'd say DTG finds itself between a rock and a hard place, along with its 3Ps. It goes without saying that they should have seen this coming at least a couple of years ago and instituted a full court press to solve the memory problem with all hands on deck. But they chose the short term solution: release as many routes as the width of the Chatham front door would allow and worry about the console squeeze later when it might be too late.
I've done two runs on my toast... er,, I mean Series S (a 158+170 combo from Leven and a 158 upto Markinch) and not got any blurry textures at all... And this was with all layers turned on (minus the inter7city obviously), although granted I did coincidentally pick occasions were there were no 390s at Edinburgh both times
Very interesting. DTG themselves mentioned a couple years ago about an issue with the digital displays on some trains developing a memory leak. I don't remember them ever stating it was fixed but i could just have missed it tbh. I don't play TSW much on my Series X anymore but when i did two of the worst performers wrt blurred textures were Goblin Line, which heavily features the Class 710, and the WCMLS, which features both that and the Class 350. Now Birm-Crewe is running into the same problem and has 3 variants of the Class 350. Maybe it's just coincidence? Maybe it never was fixed, or a later update re-broke it? Or it's just so deep in the code there's no easy solution? I definitley don't think recent the foray into UE5 development on a side-project is coincidental to performance issues on TSW if you read between the lines a little.
The thing that confuses me though, is how consoles were able to handle full timetables previously. I think it was after TSW5 where the blurry textures started their rampage, and there hasn't really been a massive jump in terms of route complexity since TSW4. Something clearly has gone wrong in the optimisation department, and DTG are doing their best to resolve it (At least, that's what they keep telling us..). I definitely wouldn't want to see more reduced timetables for consoles, but I'd be willing to sacrifice something like scenery quality. I'd happily take a route with the same scenery quality as East Coastway if it means I don't run into memory issues. Perhaps there could be a toggle for less complex scenery, which removes a few objects or foliage.
If you had the option to disable visible (or even just animated) passengers, for the sake of better performance and timetables, would you? It wouldn't be ideal, but I think I might.
Still had no blurry textures myself on the 158 timetable but did disable the Azuma as a preventative measure - you barely see it anyway since it’s tucked away on the ECML platforms. As disappointing as the absent Cowdenbeath services are (or the newer Leven via Dunfermline ones which admittedly didn’t exist when the timetable was created), don’t think it’s quite the disaster people are making it out to be and the 158/170 5 car combos are fun.
Just fired up the timetable, and my goodness, something has clearly gone horribly wrong. The Perth and Dundee services have gaps of up to 3 hours. These services are hourly IRL. For some reason there seemed to be two Glenrothes services 8 minutes apart. The service to Glenrothes is hourly. I found at least one 2 hour gap in the Leven services. The Leven trains were hourly at the time. The electric services with the 380/385 don't have off route destinations set up correctly. They just say they call at Haymarket, Stirling and Dunblane where they should call at at other stations as well. They also didn't have their headcodes set up correctly. After the Sprinter Express timetable for Edinburgh Glasgow (which was great), it seems like making this timetable was a timed sport. Tomorrow I will try and create an overview of what the services should be like for people that are curious, or if Skyhook want to improve the timetable.
Tried disabling the pendolino and actually all good until Dalmeney, so was hopeful; then blurry texture fest. Will wait and see what any future updates do and just avoid the game and any DLC til then (PS5 Pro)… I do have a big backlog tbf
So after all the wait the Fife Circle update was the incentive for me to give TSW6 a try and on that occasion purchased the 158. So far my motivation for TSW in general isn't at its highest, so therefore I decided a timetable run first - the 9.45 to Dundee was my choice, since its one of the first after you select the timetable. First thing I noticed that there wasn't any time for preparation- you're put in at 9.45 where your service is to depart, since the obvious door opening procedure in order to let your passengers disembark the train you're automatically running late. Waverley was quite empty but I don't own Edinburgh-Glasgow, so I don't have the full experience - occasion #1000 where a separation between trains and routes would become in handy, but well. The 9.45 Service to Glenrothes was routed first by the dispatcher despite my express-like service should depart Haymarket first, so my delay summed up a bit soon. +5 at Haymarket - but I found it okay, so the run should be quite entertaining having to keep an eye on adverse signals, so I thought. My first try then came to a sudden end before North Queensferry because I crossed a red signal - I wasn't paying attention but kept an eye on the village from outside camera trying to get an eye on Deep Sea World, so I was a bit surprised but couldn't outrule an error, so... next try. Since no autosaving on xbox is available everything again from the beginning, similar experience. The 158 is very silent after changing gears at 60 mph, maybe the ratio isn't set up correctly as well, since then even in notch 7 there is hardly any accelerarion. Approaching North Queensferry again and now paying attention I noticed the station entry signal being red because of the stopper train in front of me - unfortunately no adverse signalling on the bridge, if you rely only on them you hit it at full speed. But since I was prepared I managed to proceed further to Inverkeithing. Since I was at +10 behind schedule I gave it the bees... and run into an unexpected and unheralded red signal before the station. So.. boom, everything again from the beginning... that's where my motivation left me. Some other thoughts: it's a bit sad that Edinburgh trams aren't modelled although of course Rivet needs to be adressed for this. So far no blurry textures on SX, but not all layers as well. So I'd consider the overall experience a bit meh... not much of a difference to the original, but it feels more immersive seeing at least 158s + 170s instead of just one of them..
So no yellow sig als before north queensferry? Thats not good, should be double yellow and then single yellow before a red. Shocking but not suprised. Am going to have a look at that service later, am curious. Yeah the 158 after 60mph, just hits like a speed limiter, then nothing, and no engine sounds, this route could be so good, but nope. Lol. Its my local route and know how busy it normally is, but on game not so much
Why on earth did Skyhook even change the 158 physics and sounds, from what was in the original MML release and the original ScotRail release? They need to be restored ASAP to how they were. Sorry for ping but any thoughts, Adam LucaZone ?
Yup, even if the signals on the bridge only have single lights, they should at least have been yellow... AWS wasn't triggered as well of course. I visited Edinburgh last year and find the overall scottish feeling captured quite well and find the missing parts only minor... but aside the blurriness that sums of the current overall TSW situation
The Pendolino add-on is clearly not optimized, at least on routes where it isnt playable (same on Edinburgh-Glasgow). Never had blurry textures on other routes, even on busy ones.
Oh wow. Thats bad likes, really need to sort that for sure. Yeah the city center looks good. But the blurry textures is really letting me down ever since i first seen it on wcmls.
