Thames Valley Branches Discussion

Do you mean "only sold with DTG approval" or only through DTG stores?
Because you can buy the DLC direct from Skyhook, Alan Thompson, etc in TSW.
So do you mean they just have "final approval?"

 

It’s not where you can buy the keys from, it’s that DTG publish all TSW DLC. Everyone has to go through DTG via their 3rd party partner programme to have their content in TSW. Nobody can publish their own TSW DLC and sell it direct like they could for TSC.

 

Very goid you know how to build TSC routes but hiw are you with the TSW editor.

They are 2 different games just because you know TSC procedures for building a route does not make you an expert in TSW.

Ii's like comparing apples to oranges.

 

It's content creation for games, the methods are different but the overall logic is the same. The fact that you think it's apples and oranges shows us you don't really know much about it. I've been in software and IT for 25 years, and you conveniently only mention the TSC editor, not the fact that building routes requires extensive knowledge of 3D modelling packages, 2D graphical packages, file structures, in-depth technical knowledge of how operating systems work, and of course some level of artistic talent. Ask any route builder here, or any DLC builder for any game, for that matter.

I don't create content for TSW so I don't see why I'd be an expert with the TSW Editor. Are you an expert with the TSW Editor? You seem to think you know more than everyone here, despite your posts clearly showing otherwise such as this excellent example where you appear unaware that absolutely every DLC for TSW has to be approved by DTG in terms of what can be done, how it should be done, when it can be done and how much it's going to be sold for.

You may want to stop with your patronising suggestions that content creation for games is within anyone's reach, before you incur the wrath of the long-established content creators on this forum. Feel free to show us what you've built.

JB

 

I'm not sure what personal attacks, insults and insinuations have to do with the topic at hand.
The original claim was that DTG should have encouraged/forced the lines to be "linked" by GWE, even if it's unrealistic and a third creator "because you can do it in TSC."

Whether anyone knows how to code is irrelevant.
It was a request from someone unhappy with 3 disconnected routes who was demanding something they want that wasn't done. I'm sure there were many reasons for it, but the bottom line is that yes it would require more work, time and difficulty than not doing it.
The creator chose not to do it.
Presumably because they MADE the DLC, they chose not to "link" them and they are well aware of why they did it. There are many reasons why it would be unadvisable to bother with it.
-Coordination between parties
-Legal issues
-Maintenance/updating issues
-Conflicts
-Unrealistic (since there'd be nothing to run in a timetable across those branches in real life)

In the absence of DTG "demanding" them to link them, sure... if you want to mod it yourself, go ahead and do so. That is what happens in TSC, people mod the hell out of it. No one is stopping you from doing so. However, realize that it's not incumbent on the creator of any route to have to do whatever any one individual wants with their creation.

But yes, the people who want to make a mod to "merge" routes are free to do so if they have the capability to do so on their own time.
It might even become quite popular with the community.

 

OK there where did I ever say I was an expert? Please point that out.

You are the one who replied with a novel on what makes you an expert not me. I don't even know what brought that on since I wasn't even quoting you.

I like just how you are making up things that were never said to just argue with me. I don't remember ever saying you were someone complaing the the Editor was too hard and obviously you don't find that. Guess what then you weren't who I was talking about.

Dude I don't even own a computer and never said I was an expert in anythig software related. Please point out where I said I was.

However I will say just because I can play guitar and bass doesn't mean I know anything about playing drums or piano. Even though they are all musical instruments and the theory is similar.

But I guess you know it all. Continue with your made up arguments in your head there.

 

This seems like a nice route; most people who want these branches assumed that we’ll never get them at all & we’re getting them all in a bundle. It’s a concept that I hope continues in the future!

 

What are you talking about? We've had a number of route extensions in the past. Nobody's asking for "route linking".

 

That's exactly what was asked for.

 

Maybe you should quote the post you're referring to? The only ones I've seen are from people saying this should have been built as an extension to GWE. I've searched this thread for the word "connect" and it doesn't feature, other than within the word "disconnected". I've also searched for "link" and that appears a few times in posts from people asking just for the stretch of GWML to be added between the branches, and also in the post above that makes the claim that people want "route linking" (incorrect) and that what's being asked for - an extension - has "never been done" in TSW (very incorrect).

It's getting a bit tiresome repeatedly explaining what a route extension is so I'm going to unsubscribe from this thread.

JB

 

Hopefully he can do the Exeter to Okehampton Crediton and Barnstaple lines (hopefully with Okehampton Interchange in there for a modern touch ) -- id pay for that. Complimenting the Plymouth route.

Not so familiar with the Thames lines but interesting to hear about the stuff not seen in an existing TSW route...

 

An Exeter Branches type of route with Exmouth is definitely something I'd like, but it would 100% be problematic with the community since that idea isn't an extension.

 

The word to search for in this thread is “merge”.

As for extensions, what has never been done before is an extension being able to be sold as a separate DLC. It’s always either a free upgrade or the whole route is sold again in extended form. Neither of those can happen for this branch line for various reasons.

Leaving the thread might be a good idea.

 

I think i would have preferred him to another london overground and give the treatment he is giving to mildmay line.

 

Am in agreement here. The price of this will be very interesting to find out. There won’t be much AI traffic, the scenery will have to be impeccable and I fear the Marlow line will have to be driven as two separate journeys (as with Glossop) due to the reversal at Bourne End.

 

I always find on Glossop, if you want to continue it’s best to change ends first before releasing the doors and completing that leg. Otherwise, you return to free roam and while you’re walking to the other end, the AI grabs the train and drives off!

 

A simple extra option after finishing a service would help here: do you want to continue the service to .....? If yes, no AI driver takes over, if no, the AI drive continues the service.

 

I had the same issue when driving the expert 145 and the last objective was to uncouple the cars/wagons. So this would be a nice broad improvement, but off course highly relevant when doing the short services on this route.

 

I have to say, after reading the roadmap and looking at the screenshots I am actually quite looking forward to this one. I understand the branches are short. But I'm intrigued to see what can really be done with scenery and the route itself without having a massive heavy timetable.

The token system looks interesting and I'm hoping it's a little more in depth that what we had on Blackpool Branches (although I do like that system) as it's kind of a selling point. Pigeons reacting to trains sounds like it could add some nice movement to the world.

The screenshots look really nice to my eye at least, the parts I'm familiar with look really good. As one of my issues with the GWE and ECW remaster was the scenery wasn't really updated and Maidenhead etc could've looked better.

I do also have to say that with these self contained branches continuing back and fourth, chaining services into one session really does need to work on this one. If it doesn't and you need to keep saving and reloading for things like passengers/pathing to work I think that will hurt the replay ability of the route.

But I do think the big thing with for this piece of DLC will be the price. I think that'll make it or break it.

 

Reading the roadmap, the class 70 will somehow layer onto the DLC, Interesting

 

I have to agree with you, this looks very good and detailed. To be honest I do like the idea of smaller but more detailed routes like this, especially when those are also full length routes.

Better detailed buildings are very welcome too, as a lot of buildings are really ugly for today's standards and it can really break the immersion.

Actually, this DLC is the one I'm the most looking forward to.

 

I must say, this route is growing on me.

 

As someone that lived their first few years of their lives living in Windsor and travelling around the areas covered by this DLC, I'm quite excited by it.

The entry to Windsor is looking amazing from the screenshots.

As somebody with very limited time to play, I quite like the idea of a few runs up and down a branch to relax in the evenings. For me it might also mean I can achieve the mastery occasionally when it requires a number of timetable runs!

 

Personally I would prefer to see the Gunnislake Branch than Okehampton/Barnstabubble. Though small and largely single track, it is so interesting. You have the commuter stations to the west of Plymouth along the river, the Tamar Bridges which you pass under, the bridge over the Tavy, Bere Ferrers station with its museum, the reverse at Bere Alston, Calstock Viaduct and the slow winding climb up to Gunnislake.

 

The problem when a developer does local stations you use all the time is that you immediately notice any differences, however subtle.

I really hated the scenery around Slough station on the older DTG GWR route (it wasn't even fixed it in the remaster) as it's so inaccurate and the scenery looks suspiciously similar here. I think it's even the same buildings which look nothing like the ones in real life.

And if it is the same layout, the road on GWR (Brunel Way) led into the West Car park, when in real life it goes up to the bridge to join the traffic on Stoke Road.

After all, why would you have a bus stop on a road leading INTO a car park? In reality, there's a road which runs along the fence behind those cars and that leads into the West Car Park.
And I can see houses visible in the distance of the East Car Park, which is not possible in real life as the car park raises at the far end and the treeline hides them. I have parked in those car parks often, I have the APCOA receipts to show for it!

And if I wanted to be really pedantic, the Thames Valley bus is inaccurate as they only started up in 2021!

I'm guessing the Windsor railway bridge is a generic bridge structure as it doesn't look enough like the real thing, plus it even looks unsafe, as the bridge needs to be built into the viaduct for support!
As for the buildings around Windsor & Eton Central, not really the sort you'd see in Windsor, and no, I'm not talking about the castle!

Even though I decided to give this route a miss, I hoped that the area around Slough station could have been more realistic, especially as some of the other places featured in the photos look really good. They look TSW6 worthy, Slough looks original TSW.

Slough really needs bulldozing and doing again and I'll leave you to decide whether I mean the real one or the TSW one.
(Living locally I reserve the right to slate it! )

 

I think in that previous post I used up my annual allowance of exclamation marks...

 

Just a shame Preston park (bml) is still so wrong. No entry/exit Access on the west side, no white railings, steep embankment with no walkway.

 

Definitely the real one, I've been into Slough a few times and my favourite part was leaving it
(I'm down the line a few stops so can I also reserve the right to slate it? )

 

I'm not quite sure where you get your info from, but the area you describe has been fixed to match the real location

 

In seriousness though having looked closer I do agree. I think it's better than GWE but there's still a bit missing?

Unsure of what it was like in that direct time period to be totally sure but there is that taxi road by the station and a bit more outside the front station?

Still an interesting comparison though! And I can't wait to see the Maidenhead area as that's my local place! Drive through there every morning

 

I think this is actually the case with many, if not all routes . If you compare TSW routes with irl footage from youtube for example, you will notice how different it looks. From my country there is only one TSW route, I'm not living close to that area or did visit it, but I directly noticed the typical farm buildings missing and type of buildings near the tracks which are not existing in my country at all (copied over from German routes). So I can imaging when you're from a specific area, you'll directly noticed the differences.

For me the most important thing is, that a route catch the feeling of that area. This route does the trick for me based on the screenshots, but there are also many routes really missing that feeling. They're just missing that UK feel, and yes I have this somehow more with UK routes then with German routes.

 

That's great and note I said "if" but I stand by my point, the area around Slough doesn't look realistic enough.

 

Yeah the overhead comparison is quite different

 

Clapham Junction on BML is one of the worst examples.

 

I could be entirely wrong, but I've always felt the Clapham Junction in TSW felt like a straight copy and pasted asset that had been ported across from the TSC variation of BML.

 

shared these from the discord.


Thames Valley Branches will be the first TSW route to feature 3D interiors of houses, which are randomised.

genuinely adds so much depth to the route, and makes it feel more alive, rather than the copy and paste assets DTG use 24/7.

very impressive work from Johannes here.

 

Wow - that is fantastic and very detailed! Out of curiosity, have these tested well? I.e. is there a major impact on performance? I have no clue about this kind of things, so imagine there are probably ways to implement them with little memory footprint and doubt they'd be in if they'd affect performance too much.

 

No clue myself, however, I imagine it was done for a route like this due to the short length of it, and fewer layers being active, making it easier to run. If this doesn’t cause the game to be stuttery or lag, then it could be trialled on longer routes with more layers.

I guess this is one thing we’ll find out for ourselves.


EDIT: turns out, these are parallax 3D interiors, and thus, have no significant performance problems, so these could potentially be used on future routes.

 

Yes, the parallax 3D windows are a clever trick that make a 2D interior image appear 3D, which has only a minimal performance impact.

 

I have no idea as never played TSC. But if true, it could be why it's so poor. Nearly every platform is modelled incorrectly, platform 17 being a prime example.
Then you have putting the stairs down to the subway at the wrong end of the platforms, incorrect signage, the inaccuracies of the passenger footbridge and then not even trying with the Windsor lines side, just a platform and some canopies and I think some seats. Yes, Windsor lines side is not utilised in the game but you can still see it and it's really poor.
Not forgetting the barren Clapham Yard and by that, I don't mean trains as there aren't any in TSW. The lack of clutter, gantries and not even any stacked portacabins in the yard entrance.

I really hope if there ever is an SWR route in the future utilising Clapham Junction, that they build a brand new model.

I'll leave it there so talk can get back to the Thames Valley route.

 

Very cool - thanks both for explaining

 

Yep, parallax is a very common trick in most modern games, Spider-Man for example uses that trick heavily. Lot of airports in MSFS also use that to give a low cost way of doing certain interiors.

Frankly it's one of those tricks that are so common I have to wonder why it took nearly 10 years for anyone in this game to do it. (If what others said about this being the first time is true)

 

It’s used in Training Center according to DTG Matt.

I don’t play any other games so the only place I’ve seen it is in that free Matrix UE5 demo where it is used extensively. It’s an excellent little feature. Side note - I still load that demo up and fly around the city when I get bored of driving trains. It’s nice and relaxing.

 

Come friendly bombs and fall on Slough. It isn't fit for humans now. (Sir John Betjeman. 1937)

 

My father was from Slough. I think it was a nice place before the sixties got to it. I never thought it was as bad as people make out though. I probably would have been born there if his job hadn't moved.

 

I watched an old episode of The Office the other day. It's 25 years old and nothing in the opening titles is still there. The old bus station, roundabout, car park, college buildings, all gone. Even "the office" which was only used in exterior shots was demolished when the GWML was electrified as they need to put a wider road bridge in and the building had to go. A Premier Inn now sits on the site.

Of everything that has gone, I miss the brutalist bus station the most. In winter, it was freezing and dark and the wind would whip through it, but in the summer it was so cool and shady. The bus station that replaced it was awful with a roof that offered no protection from the elements. It's awaiting demolishing after some kids set fire to it a few years back.