Why No Route Extensions?

Discussion in 'TSW General Discussion' started by kosti.nuuja, Dec 9, 2020.

  1. formulabee#1362

    formulabee#1362 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2020
    Messages:
    1,476
    Likes Received:
    1,865
    Like cologne to Frankfurt
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    They could extend SKA from Koln HBF To Frankfurt HBF which would be a 94 mile extension and you would get a standalone German High Speed route from Koln-to Frankfurt in which you can do 300+KPH and everybody has ska since it comes with tsw2 so I think an extension for ska to Frankfurt for the ICE would make sense since the current route is too short for the speeds of the ICE3M and everybody owns ska and I'm sure in high speed routes like HMA and LGV can sell well, then a high speed extension to ska could sell well in my opinion. This is a route dtg could definitely extend with the new tech they have
     
    • Like Like x 6
  3. martschuffing

    martschuffing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2020
    Messages:
    921
    Likes Received:
    668
    I must be in a very tiny minority who enjoyed driving from Reading to Penzance albeit in 3 hour stints over 2 day's.
    I definitely like the idea of driving from Wuppertal to Finnentrop and indeed to Siegen if possible in TSW in the future, same goes for GWE etc etc.
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2021
    • Like Like x 4
  4. markhazeldine

    markhazeldine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2020
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    369
    I come from a Flightsim background mostly, so when I first got TS2021 last year I was quite surprised (in a disappointed way) to find out that I couldn't just go from anywhere to anywhere I liked in the world like you can in Flightsim. I get that trains are different because you're viewing always from ground level and so the detail needs to be much higher, and tracks and timetables are more complicated that flight routes, but what I really wish was possible was for DTG to have made a game where the whole world is modelled in a basic form and then you add "scenery" on top of it to add detail and realism like you can in Flightsim. I know that this is probably not going to happen for a long time, if ever, but I guess what I like about how Flightsim does it is you have complete freedom to go from anywhere, to anywhere, and if DTG can get us closer to that, that is a good thing.

    What's important to me in a train simulator is:
    1. Realism (how true to life is it)
    2. Variety (different routes, trains, random things changing like weather, people and events)
    3. The ability to play both long and short sessions depending on the time available
    4. The ability to do a longer session in shorter stints if I'm short on time or get interrupted or bored

    With those things in mind, I would love to see either long/full routes come out without getting too expensive (via improvements in route creation through auto-gen tools), or if that's not possible, I'd like to see routes released in shorter chunks that can be played independently without having to rely on other DLCs, and then have the ability to join them together to enable longer/full routes to be driven in one go. It would then also be nice (well, kinda expected) if there were discounted bundles offered, like Just Trains did with Western Mainlines and their respective extensions, or discounts when you buy more sections of a route.

    If timetabling/scenarios are an issue, then I like the solution that some people have suggested about using extra layers and I would be happy to pay a bit extra if it meant I could connect up 2 or more shorter DLCs into a full run that came with the associated timetables and stock. Basically, I think we need a modular approach.

    The other thing I wanted to say was, I don't think route length is the main key to variety. Shorter, slower routes can be just as interesting as longer faster ones, but a short fast one (like GWE) is just a bit dull. GWE either needs to be longer, or have some branch lines to increase variety. The main reason why route length is important to me is realism. If the real trains go from London to Bristol, I want to drive in the game from London to Bristol and not hand off to another driver after 20 minutes. I want to have the choice to be able to go on and do the full run, and if that goes over 1hr, then let me save the game so I can resume it next time.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  5. Alex_m30x#7297

    Alex_m30x#7297 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2021
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    447
    My thing with long routes, for instance gwr in an hst at the moment is very boring. If they were to add extension with iet (unlikely i know) with more or less options to stop every 5 ish mins then i would buy. Freight is very borign in my opinion as it is couple and shove the handle in to full throtels, stations stopping is what makes it enjoyable for me
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Quentin

    Quentin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    426
    I seem to recall (this is going back into the mists of time, so I've probably got many details wrong) Microsoft announced they were going to do this with an MSTSv2 - use their 'world model' that they had/were building for flightsim (and other purposes), populate it with every rail line in the world and allow players to drive wherever they liked. It never came to anything (AFAIK), probably because of the many complexities involved, though (as computer models of the real world improve) it would be lovely to think it might be possible in the future.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    It might be possible
     
  8. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    If a timetable says Aachen to Frankfurt, I want to go to Frankfurt. The problem with this game is the lack of full line routes for the feature train such as the ICE. Hopefully in the future, we can get full line routes and not have to hand my train over 30 minutes later which in many cases would be unrealistic compared to reality
     
    • Like Like x 3
  9. Mich

    Mich Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2020
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    1,342
    It was working and still planned for MSTS2, the only reason we never saw it was Microsoft canning the ACE team and thus canceling it, reportedly in final stages of development too, basically just bug fixing needed.
     
    • Helpful Helpful x 1
  10. Quentin

    Quentin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    426
    I expect we'd all like that tallboy7648, but Aachen to Frankfurt is over 250km and takes almost 2 hours to travel IRL. No doubt it could be done, but (a) you'd need a large PC to run it and it would struggle on older consoles, and (b) it would take 4x as long to develop and therefore cost £100. Both these factors would substantially reduce the sales volume.

    And think of the numbers of people complaining about missing fences. ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. FD1003

    FD1003 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    3,955
    Yeah I remember you could drive everywhere but you could buy route DLCs otherwise the scenery and signalling would be very very basic (I think about FSX level), I also think there were some trailers?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. markhazeldine

    markhazeldine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2020
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    369
    Wow, I never knew about MSTS2, but yeah, that's exactly the kind of thing I expected from Train Simulator before I knew how it worked. Maybe one day someone will do it. When you look at how amazing MSFS2020 is, I can't help but wish that level of tech could exist in a train sim. We can dream!
     
  13. Quentin

    Quentin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    426
    I'm not sure the levels of tech are very different. The difference is between creating a 2D representation of the earth's surface that looks realistic from 30,000 ft (or even 2,000 ft) and creating a 3D representation of the areas adjoining the track that look realistic from 50 ft. If I understood Sam and Matt correctly, when they were talking about the creation of the LGV route, considerable use was made of 'Google Earth' type information, which allowed DTG to create a longer than usual route relatively speedily - but even with a lot of hand tweaking, that can't match the level of detail that we're used to (and now expect to see) on the best TSW routes.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  14. CK95

    CK95 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Messages:
    3,177
    Likes Received:
    9,162
    Personally after scanning through this thread, I think people like to drive their train for around an hour, regardless of the train they are driving.

    I agree with that, I would like to drive the HST/ICE/LGV for a length that actually gives you the experience of said train, and with that said, I probably would not like to operate a frequent stopping service or a lower speed train (say under 125mph) for over an hour.

    I think that another contributing factor is that there are more than a few routes which seem to terminate at any old random station, as opposed to what could could be a realistic terminus.

    Take a look at SEHS for example, the 375 will terminate at Rochester, which from Faversham will be a journey length of around 25 minutes, which falls into what DTG say is a popular average service time, but the simple fact that your journey ends in Rochester would leave you unsatisfied, unlike a comparable service such as Brighton to Lewes, which makes you feel asif you just did an actual service.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  15. Blacknred81

    Blacknred81 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2019
    Messages:
    5,571
    Likes Received:
    11,845
    I mean, when you take a look at the UP steam shops in the newest Microsoft Flight Simulator, it looks interesting, but would need some definite touchups to make it look more usable for a train simulator.
    117638626_2784462195119754_6659323848716931351_o.jpg
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Mich

    Mich Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2020
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    1,342
    Indeed there was, most notably this one.

    It was even playable at a train show, not a ton of footage of it from there, nor is it very high quality, but it exists.

    The area looks basic for sure, but very playable, and a more detailed area like Horseshoe Curve looks pretty good, especially when you compare it to early Rail Simulator routes.

    I'll leave it with this video which was made for the booths, which shows some nice images and behind the scenes stuff..
     
  17. FD1003

    FD1003 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2019
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    3,955
    Yes! I remeber seeing the first video you linked right about when it was released and I was just a kid, thanks for sharing it.
    Also interesting seeing the other two videos, the scenery was pretty good, particularly for a late 2000s game, although I don't know how they would handle signalling and more complex track work, such as yards and big stations.

    What a shame it got cancelled, particularly if it was that close to release :(
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2021
  18. Mich

    Mich Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2020
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    1,342
    Keep in mind that they almost certainly didn't spend much time touching that up though. The airports on the other hand did, and even though the autogen airports are basic for sure, they're pretty solid out of the box. I'd imagine they could give the big yards and a handful of major mainlines similar treatment as the none handmade international airports, spend some time to make sure signaling and track plan's correct. Then give most lines and smaller yards a basic pass just for quick fixes and to make sure that it works.

    Not saying it would be easy by any means, but it's probably doable with the resources that Microsoft have. Perhaps you wouldn't even need to start over from scratch, it's likely still in their archives, there's probably ways to import the data into FS2020 and you could update it from there, it's what they did with the FSX data afterall. Hell, I believe adding AI trains is on the roadmap for FS2020, I wonder somewhat if old MSTS2 data might be used to help with that. Maybe could even update some of those old loco models and use those as the basis for the AI trains, I mean those walkers at the airports probably have more polygons than the player train models for MSTS2 at this point.
    Like with airports there's databases which have all that data, you can import which will give you all the basics for track plans and signals for a good chunk of the world. It won't be perfect, but it will at least give a good base which you can build off of.

    On that note there's one other video which I left out initially because I didn't think it was particularly interesting, but it's related to that.

    This showing a bit of the "World of Rails" as it was called by Microsoft, only bit of media from MSTS2 I know for sure showing that particular aspect. I believe I did see some screenshots of it that was on the TS Insider website which showed some in game shots of it, but last time I checked I couldn't find them, so maybe I just misremembered.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. skyMutt

    skyMutt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2019
    Messages:
    601
    Likes Received:
    1,702
    The problem with importing a 1:1 scale model of the world and trying to make a train simulator out of it is that it won't be feasible at all. It really is like comparing apples to oranges here.

    Recreating the Earth in a video game isn't nothing new, FSX did it back in 2006. But the way that flight simulators deal with scenery is very different compared to train simulators. In the real world, we pilots can do what's called VFR flying– that's flying under Visual Flight Rules, where you navigate using landmarks and references in the scenery. It could be any visual reference: a landmark, a river, a mountain. Its necessary to model all of these things correctly so you can know where you are in relation to the world.

    Train operators/drivers do something similar, where they'll use visual aids to help gage where they are, and what's their speed. The difference? They're looking at the world not from a few thousand feet up, but from the ground. They're looking at bridges or certain buildings that are– at most– within a couple hundred feet/meters from the trackside.
    Flight simulators model the general look of the area, but even MSFS isn't completely 100% accurate with its scenery. It doesn't need to be. Train simulators don't need to be 100% accurate either, but players do get up-close and personal.
    This is where the confusion lies.
    It seems that most people think that route development would be much easier and quicker if you could grab an area from MSFS and lay some tracks over where it is irl...do some tidying up so it'll look good...and voila! You got yourself a route. Unfortunately, this wouldn't provide that much benefit. I mean, just look at the screenshot that Blacknred81 shared:
    [​IMG]
    It looks good from the air, definitely! But down there on the ground? It's no bueno.
    All of the textures and meshes are too low in resolution for a train simulator, this is quite evident if you look at the individual train cars (again, pilots won't mind since they're referencing big objects while they're flying far up in the air. The up-close quality wouldn't matter much).
    There's also the question of what to do with all the distant scenery? It'll be a waste to have your computer render all of those things when your train is like 5 miles away!
    Also, you'll have to worry about creating certain assets that players interact with, such as signals and switches...by this point you're wondering why you didn't just create the whole route from scratch, since that's almost what you're doing anyways :D
    Time is better spent by individually curating each route by hand. You can try and join up the routes to form a large network, but then that brings performance and gameplay questions.

    This approach sounds great at first, but it's something that won't be very practical. Theres reasons why train simulators don't have massive nation-wide networks. We're still far away from being capable of attempting such a thing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Mich

    Mich Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2020
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    1,342
    Sure the ground data's low resolution, the Cheyenne data hasn't been optimized at ground level, largely because it's unnecessary for what they're doing. If you want a example of what could be done look at the stuff at airports, if that was left as is as well it wouldn't be great either. But with just a small amount of human input it can generate all the elements like the tarmac, buildings and grass, thus becomes pretty reasonable at ground level. There's ways you could further refine that data if you had the goal of making a train sim out of it, like telling it to generate ballast up to a certain distance from the tracks.
    You'd just need to tweak the game a little, MSFS already has adjustable levels of detail, and it can be tweak very easily by just regular users, let alone Microsoft. With MSFS I believe its high detail radius is about a mile or two out, you could probably cut that by half easily for a ground based sim, maybe more. Also having extended range wouldn't be a bad thing for say mountainous railroads, or even a place like Denver. Think about it, the Rockies are over 20 miles away from there, yet it's pretty dang visible from there. But I don't believe TS Classic or TSW would be able to even display something that far out, definitely not in any sort of detail.
    I disagree, there's way more to a route than signals and switches, it would be a noticeably reduced workload, you don't have to source terrain data. plus you'll already have many of the basics put in, like generic buildings and trees. Closer up you'd still need to do quite a bit work, but you could likely leave everything beyond a couple hundred feet away alone pretty much. So I would think it would save a lot of time and leaving devs more time to work on trackside items. Also again think about making place like Denver for example, you could have a basic rendition of the Rockies without having to do a single thing, it would look fine from the distance 20 miles or so distance it's at.
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2021
    • Like Like x 3
  21. LeadCatcher

    LeadCatcher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    1,415
    Likes Received:
    3,746
    Not just a “touch up” as you say, all those elements are static elements, no track properties, no signaling, no physics for the rolling stock, just a nice picture. To be able to create a world wide rail network, and to give the unrealistic freedom to run a train across the entire network as many state they would desire, at the fidelity people are demanding fromTSW, would require a beast of a machine, and like FS2020, stream based world, no way that level of fidelity could be stored locally.

    Would such a system be possible?? Would need a company with real deep pockets and a much larger potential customer base to even consider making it profitable. Nice idea, but with rail simulation being a niche hobby all ready, I do not see it every becoming a reality.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  22. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    It's not just ska as well. Shorter routes like The LIRR from Penn Station to Port Washington instead of going from Penn Station to woodside. It would only be 14.3 additional miles of track with 10 additional stations or what about Penn Station to Ronkonkoma instead of Penn Station to Hicksville. It would only be 22 additional miles as well. Not all routes that could be extended are long extensions
     
  23. mattdsoares

    mattdsoares Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2020
    Messages:
    640
    Likes Received:
    1,281
    Not at all. I just finished a series of scenarios going from London to Edinburgh in a Class 91 along the ECML. Enjoyed it a lot. As a result, I'm creating a scenario series at this moment taking a class 156 from Glasgow to Mallaig across the Glasgow Suburban, West Highlands South, and West Highlands extension routes. I think we all need to remember that an "extension" doesn't need to be a true extension based on a previous route. I can simply mean another self contained route that lines up with the endpoint of another, but it's at all dependent upon it. That would really serve the same purpose, which you and I both described.
     
  24. mattdsoares

    mattdsoares Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2020
    Messages:
    640
    Likes Received:
    1,281
    I mean, to be fair, that's more a product of the Great Western Mainline being a boring route in reality from London to Reading. Personally, I think DTG made the wrong end of the GWR. Bristol to Swindon via Bath would have been significantly more interesting.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  25. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    I wouldn't mind doing a passenger service for more than an hour but it would be cool if we could use the high speed train for more than an hour. One of the reasons I didn't buy lgv was due to how short the time is to complete a service and having it end at Avingon doesn't make it a proper terminating station. I enjoy this game and the trains that I have but many of the routes don't feel complete. HRR in my opinion is a route that could've at least gone to Dortmund and most of the cons of that route was how short it was regardless of all the variety. Most of the cons of that route was how short it was. I hope with the new tech developed, we can get more full line routes. The 375s on SEHS makes me not happy with those services because it terminates at Rochester which is very short for those services and doesn't feel complete
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2021
    • Like Like x 5
  26. Mr JMB

    Mr JMB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2020
    Messages:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    3,079
    I like the idea of trying to join things together using stations as hubs, so you transition from one route to another by walking through the ticket barriers or entering a different part of the station instead of going back to the main menu and choosing from a list. This would work for routes that share a common end point.

    If you wanted to take a service all the way through that station without getting off you might have to put up with a short loading screen but it would probably be the best option given TSW is struggling with some of the routes as they are never mind making them twice as long. Being able to go long ways without loading screens is great and all but if you have to have a small one as the price to pay for being able to stay in the world and run a longer service maybe it would be a price worth paying.

    The only other solution is this game being a subscription model that is streamed off big servers so that you don't have to worry about your local hardware etc and thus the servers can run huge routes and just track where people are and what they are doing.
     
  27. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    Matt has said though that tsw2 is made to handle long routes and long routes are possible but they just don't have the time to do it so the idea with the new tech is to make longer routes in a shorter amount of time. Also they are working on optimization so once that is sorted, I don't think long routes with huge stations will be a problem
     
    • Like Like x 1
  28. CK95

    CK95 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Messages:
    3,177
    Likes Received:
    9,162
    Yeah I completely get it that those who enjoy frequent stoppers want their services to be full, I tend to steer clear of things like the S-Bahn & Underground because I just don't get on with them, same goes for the all stop services on peninsula corridor, but I imagine it would be frustrating to spend a while on one of those services just for it to end abruptly (I know that bakerloo & PC are their full IRL serivce), things like RRO & LIRR just don't feel complete.

    Personally the passenger action I enjoy most are RE/sprinter services, and I think those suffer the same issue as high speed services, they just abruptly stop and I can't really get into it again because it feels like every time I play a HST or RE service it ends just as you get into the flesh of the route.

    Hopefully we will now be able to get at least 50 mile routes going forward, which is significant improvement over TSW 2020's last year of content which was typically short.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  29. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    50+mile routes or proper full line routes would be great. I don't use re services much on hrr because of how short the route is. I do like express services as well but it stinks when you can't go further and how quickly you can complete a re or express service
     
    Last edited: Feb 1, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
  30. CK95

    CK95 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2019
    Messages:
    3,177
    Likes Received:
    9,162
    Yeah HRR is abysmal for freight & RE.

    Why they've chosen it for the BR 101 is beyond me, maybe (and excuse my tinfoil hat) it's an effort to sell some more HRR copies, since the BR 101 is a very popular loco.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  31. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    HRR without the cabcar is realistically the only route that it could run on. SKA is a definite no since it doesn't run on the route. DTG wanting to sell more hrr copies since it's not a popular route would not be 100% surprising
     
  32. solicitr

    solicitr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2020
    Messages:
    11,736
    Likes Received:
    17,949
    I suppose what many people are feeling the lack of (and I with them) is a sense of closure on many routes; one does like a conclusion. It seems that some TSW routes were based on "start at major terminal, stop 30 or so miles away" rather than "stop and end at (semi-) major terminal," which feels better. On NTP, Leeds and Manchester bookend the route nicely; Munich and Augsburg work similarly. But in cases where the route just peters out, it's a bit frustrating: just to pick an example, is there any reason at all to end at Finnentrop? The RW services (RE16, RB91) run Hagen to Siegen, which is a respectable Hauptbahnhof, not a country whistle-stop- and the distance is only about 60 miles, not one would think too much for the engine to handle,
     
    • Like Like x 5
  33. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    LGV: Start at Major Terminal, End at a country whistle stop station 59 miles away
     
  34. Mich

    Mich Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2020
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    1,342
    Things like track properties and signal weren't done because there's no point in it for a flight sim, if Microsoft started development for a train sim based on the MSFS engine the priorities would be to implement those elements. Also the entire world doesn't need to be at the same fidelity as a TSW route, it just need to be playable and look decent at a glance, like with autogen airports in MSFS. You would probably only have three or four high detail routes included if MSTS2 is anything to go by. Then of course you could have third parties develop even more routes off of that.
    This I do feel is a fair point, train simulation is much more niche than flight sims, fact is a MSTS2's never gonna be as big as MSFS. At the same time though Microsoft thought it was still a viable market back in 2007/8, and this was at a time when DTG's DLC model wasn't really done, so it would've been largely greenlit off of just base game profits. The fact that you could have a marketplace just like with MSFS probably means way more money could be made off of it now than in 2009.

    Also it's not having to be developed in isolation like with MSFS, refining the tech for a train sim would also mean being able to use that tech in MSFS to improve it further as well. Thus meaning a lot of elements like high detail landmarks don't need to be made just for one game or the other, but could be used in both.

    I don't think Microsoft reentering the market's exceptionally likely, but I also don't believe it's a crazy thought either. I think there's a case to be made for a new MSTS.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  35. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    I think if microsoft made a train sim for pc and console, it would be a true rival to tsw2
     
  36. solicitr

    solicitr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2020
    Messages:
    11,736
    Likes Received:
    17,949
    Microsoft dropped TS years ago because the entire revenue stream doesn't amount to what Microsoft spends on lunch. Way, way too small a niche for the Big Boys to be interested.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  37. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    That would make since for a huge company such as microsoft to do
     
  38. Mich

    Mich Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2020
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    1,342
    They also dropped Flight Sim for the same reason, and look at where we are now.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  39. solicitr

    solicitr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2020
    Messages:
    11,736
    Likes Received:
    17,949
    Flight Sim's user base is at least two orders of magnitude bigger than all train sims put together. Maybe three.
     
  40. tallboy7648

    tallboy7648 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    6,567
    Likes Received:
    10,793
    That is true
     
  41. martschuffing

    martschuffing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2020
    Messages:
    921
    Likes Received:
    668
    They should set up a route extensions team.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  42. tbaac

    tbaac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    382
    Likes Received:
    362
    markhazeldine - Thing is, even if TS2021 contained a beautifully 3D-modelled map of the entire world, together with the custom assets that they've had to add in major cities, it wouldn't mean that you could have a realistic train driving experience anywhere in the world. You'd still need to lay custom as needed, set up signalling, routes, dispatching etc. Arguably it wouldn't save much on what's needed now.
    I like that I can fly anywhere in xplane, or in some of the other flight sims, but train sims are different.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  43. Rudolf

    Rudolf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    2,488
    Likes Received:
    3,270
    Might be an idea for a small development team. IIf you can reduce your overhead, it might work, but I do not think a price of Euro 14 would work and would anye beprepared to pay say Euro 22 for a route extension? I don't think I would pay that for Sheerness branch,
     
    • Like Like x 1
  44. martschuffing

    martschuffing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2020
    Messages:
    921
    Likes Received:
    668
    Yes I'd quite happily pay more if it was a similar added route length. I mean why wouldn't you charge the same money?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  45. tbaac

    tbaac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    382
    Likes Received:
    362
    Because people would argue that it was only an extension, that they could re-use some of the assets and that it would be a lot quicker to build.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  46. martschuffing

    martschuffing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2020
    Messages:
    921
    Likes Received:
    668
    Not if it was another 40 or 50 miles added it wouldn't. Why wouldn't it be counted as a route started from scratch? Still going to take 9 or so months to build!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  47. tbaac

    tbaac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    382
    Likes Received:
    362
    Are you assuming that the original route that its extending is also 40 or 50 miles long, or is this an improved length because of "all the time they'll save"?

    Would owning the original route be required? Does it share rolling stock or will this one come with new rolling stock?

    Thanks.
     
  48. martschuffing

    martschuffing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2020
    Messages:
    921
    Likes Received:
    668
    Yes. And why would you assume that any time would be saved in building the route extension when you are bolting on another 40 or 50 miles?
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2021
    • Like Like x 1
  49. ShaneS89

    ShaneS89 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2019
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    189
    I don’t think we’ll ever see route extensions, at least not for a good while. DTG have said numerous times about not wanting dlc’s of dlc (they have enough problems with loco dlc’s).

    What we may see is route Mergers, 2 separate route dlcs with a shared station or yard being joined with a combined timetable. I don’t really see that happening anytime soon but it’s probably more likely than route extensions, as they can sell the route’s separately first then at a later date sell a merger pack for them.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  50. kosti.nuuja

    kosti.nuuja Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2020
    Messages:
    514
    Likes Received:
    1,233
    Mergeable routes would be nice, but I don't think that it's technically possible.
     

Share This Page