Roadmap Transparency: Yes, Then No, Then Yes, And Now No Again.

The roadmap promised extra transparency into what work is going on at Dovetail. It was OK, a bit messy in the early months, but critically did what it set out to do.

Then roadmap 2.0 came along and put extra details into a forum thread. This solved the readability issue. Looking good right?

Wrong! Actually that was way too much detail - dovetail must have been uncomfortable with that level of transparency! The new Dovetail switched back to old Dovetail, with all the interesting detail disappeared, and we basically got new routes only. I for one am much more interested in the upgrades than the routes. The reason was kind of fair, but had plenty of holes in it. Surely the simple addition of the man who schedules releases into the roadmap meetings will sort such an issue!?

Then we were kind of getting somewhere, with the preservation crew focus points, with the summery from Adam on stream. It was looking good, bar the glaring omission of the continually promised new routes.

And now we are back to square 1. ‘Roadmap excitement scales’ banned. Anything that is more than 6-8 months away banned from the roadmap. The whole point of this roadmap was to stay away from dates was it not?! The excuse on the roadmap article this week is in my opinion poor: there is some excitement upon announcement, but after that it all calms down until the DLC moves into upcoming, then the hype resurfaces, but that is OK by the definition of the roadmap that normally means it is only 2 weeks ish until DTG start talking about it, and then you know it is only 3-4 weeks ish until release (for a route). Take SEHS - hype died quite quickly after September, and resurfaced in January. It wasn’t considered ‘old news’. Nor did cause any issues at all to anyone.

This roadmap update in my opinion is simply not worth reading, despite the fact that I feel a lot of good work is happening in the company at the moment. Rush hour, Adam’s focus’ (which seem like they are actually doing a really good job at fixing routes).

I suppose the crux of my long-winded rant is this. If the roadmap is not working quite as you anticipated, then fix it. Every time a fault has been found so far, the solution has been to bin the section in question: in other words give up. Please don’t. Just try and fix it. At least TRY.

I’m tagging DTG Protagonist , although I don’t expect a reply or anything - the explanations on the stream tonight will probably be the best I’m gonna get, and I don’t mind waiting save repeating yourself. My suspicion is that there are now DTG DLC in development, ‘concreted down’ as they like to say, that in their old roadmap definition would have qualified onto the roadmap, which are not on it because of this new stupid ‘dates’ clause in the roadmap rules. It’s completely unnecessary and defies rule #1 on the roadmap: stay away from dates.

Interesting to hear anyone’s thoughts. (And if you’ve got this far I’m sorry you are never going to get that time back!

EDIT: One more thing. “If it’s not on the roadmap then it’s not being worked on”. Similarly, If it is being worked on then why isn’t it on the roadmap!?!?!? I’m sure if DTG want a catchphrase, the community can come up with one too..

 

Off topic a little, but today’s release notes appeared then disappeared and are now conspicuous by their absence.

 

I agree with OP. It's a dissapointment to see DTG sway away from the original roadmap and not reveal upcoming projects simply because they're too far away from release.

TSGs add-ons are a nice example. We knew it'd take long time to develop them, and I knew I shouldn't be expecting a release anytime soon. I also didn't understand people complaining about the Class 313 taking so long. I'm still patiently waiting for its release.

"We want to try and ensure that a new add-on doesn't feel "old" before it's even been released."
This sounds like a bad excuse for a simple marketing strategy.

There were reasons we really liked the roadmap when it first appeared. Now a number of these things are being taken away, and it really feels like DTG falls back to it's old habits and patterns. And it was exactly those old habits that gave DTG a bad reputation.

Lets get the roadmap back on how it started. Reveal whatever is 'locked in'. Give us back the roadmap we liked. Holding back information is exactly what we don't want.

 

If you are expecting DTG to announce all of their upcoming DLC in one go, it's not gonna happen. I'm content with a listing of whatever fixes Adam's crew are up to; I don't lose much sleep over what DLC might be released next October.

 

Why don't you give an example of what you think the roadmap should look like? And then you do a poll like the forum thinks it is.

I think the current version of the roadmap is very good.

 

That's what they did back when the roadmap was first created, and that's what they told us they'd do in the future.

They can still do it, but apparently they decided it'd be 'better' not to. Probably for their own good, as I didn't see anyone from the community ask for it.

 

4th of May at 3pm they will be announcing new content part of Train sim world rush hour.

 

There are two lines in this thread now both entirely related to my original. Tell us what Adam is working on, and tell us upcoming DLC. Both of which we had in the Autumn, but have since disappeared. Both are reasonable asks going on the fact that this is a roadmap of DTG development, and not a random list of some stuff that we might or might not be doing anything with.

For Kuchun (who asked what the roadmap should look like in my opinion), in my opinion the RT, LIRR, and MSB upgrades should be listed as one point each, with an additional forum post giving a detailed list of each:

LIRR Upgrades (Upcoming):
- a
- b
- c
- d
RT Upgrades (Upcoming):
- a
- b
- c
- d
West Somerset Upgrades (In Production)*:
- a
- b
- c
- d
*NOTE as this list is in production, not all items on this list will make it through to release.

 

I agree

That’s true- why did they [DTG] do that?
Talk about transparency huh...

 

Ok... now that even DLCs won't appear on the Roadmap (IDC that much, DLCs can be revealed later, whatever), can we put back the fixes??? It was a way for us to have at least a bit of control over what's been registered. They've promised to tag technical issue threads when seen... nothing happened on that front. We're blind as to what's going/not going to be fixed - a situation very reminding of the pre-Sam era.

 

bit confused what do you mean now that even DLC's won't appear on the roadmap

 

I did not like the reference to TSG in the roadmap at all. If they wanted to set an example they could have done it with something of theirs and not involving a third party developer. What's wrong, that now these developers can't say what they are preparing until DTG sees fit? What's wrong with knowing what we will be able to enjoy in the future? I guess most of them would prefer to work as long as it takes to bring the products to market and no one is going to reproach that and no one is going to mind waiting as long as it takes.

 

DTG would much rather point the finger at TSG as opposed to their 313 (which has been on the roadmap for longer than the TSG stuff, and doesn't seem to see any movement).

 

That was not intended to in any way be a finger point. TSG were mentioned purely to illustrate that as it stands the Roadmap contains releases that aren't due for over a year and that's likely to create greater discontent than clarity.

 

But tbh, it does not feels really good at least. DTG should have told me using TSG as an bad example for adding stuff to early to the roadmap. I was surprised to read that today.

Maybe DTG then should have selected something (starts with a 18x ^^) that is really over a year on the roadmap now with no further information to it. The TSG stuff was put on it at the end of november 2020, what is barely 5 months yet. And there were a few updates from my side here on the forums. And it will not last a year to bringt something from it to a release, promised!

 

Even if it did, quality is worth the wait and from what you did for DTG so far, I am more than willing to wait

 

I really think anyone who was here before TSW2 released could say that DTG has made a huge turnaround when it comes to communicating with the community. It was really brave of them to do a roadmap, especially with how the TSW community is (Can you imagine if a route was scraped). I see the roadmap as more of a privilege then a right, and wanting to keep the roadmap within 12 months is a very reasonable change . It was pretty clear that it was something new for them and changes to the way they do it were expected over time. I personally don’t need to know what they are doing two years from now, and I really don’t need so much info that I know what they ate for lunch that day.

This is a great reason why the roadmap change is happening. What does DTG gain from “pointing fingers” at TSG, one person 3rd party developer for their game? The TSG content and the 313 have been on the roadmap for a while, I’m assuming you had expected it to come out within 12 months, or at least for it to move on the roadmap. I’d say that “finger pointing” is actually DTG using communication.

 

Thanks for your answer, maybe I got the wrong impression, but it's not unreasonable to think so because there were other examples as LucasLCC said with the 313 and they didn't need to involve a third party, which seems inelegant to me to say the least.

Anyway, I don't quite understand this reflection that something that has been in production for a long time will feel old when it comes out.
For example, GTA V was announced two years before release, and I don't think anyone felt it was old. Hell, it doesn't even feel old 7 years later! And that's because there's a job well done behind it.
Many of us look forward to TSG add-ons that we know have a good chance of being of high quality, precisely because time is not a major factor in their development. This is a rare occurrence and TSG is an exception for reasons that Mike has already explained in various forums.
But hey, it's their roadmap and they will do with it what they think is best, which I think is the right thing to do.

 

Probably so for the DLCs, but I think some roadmap is definitely a right in the realm of fixes and improvements.

 

Nope, I couldn't care less when the 313 comes, but instead don't think it's wise of them to point fingers at others when they're just as bad.

 

Except the 313 is due an awful lot sooner - you're comparing apples to oranges. The 313 was added earlier than we would do under the new timing guidance, but we're not talking 1+ years away here. Absolutely nothing wrong with how TSG are working through development or the length of time they will take to perfect their releases, the only change is that we would not choose to list them until they're within a tighter timeframe for release.

 

“The main reason new add-ons aren't being added to the list at present is that we don't want to be adding them at a point that gives too great an expectation of release in the near future. The TSG items currently in development are a great example of this, as they're unlikely to arrive within 12 months. We want to try and ensure that a new add-on doesn't feel "old" before it's even been released.”
“The TSG content is unlikely to arrive within 12 months.” That is communication. Are DTG not allowed to use a 3rd party developer as an example where it fits? The very thing this thread is saying there is not enough of.

 

Can you believe GTA V released in 2013?! Although I love your example, let’s be honest. GTA has a lot more hype around it then TSW2 add-ons. I think feeling “old” is only part of the reason, with managing the community’s expectations on timeframes for releases being the biggest part.

 

Yeah did we know about how long the TSG addons would take when announced? They only disclosed their expected timeframe rather recently on a german forum.
In the mean time we have people asking if we will see the first steam train route on the next road map every week...

And why should a company not be allowed to withhold information if they see fit? I feel like there is a lot of news-sensationalism going on here, where people expect new addons and features to be announced each roadmap. They chime in every two weeks and if nothing in that regard gets added to the list they just write a comment "boring. See you in two weeks".
It is really not a given that you get shown as much work in progress as we get shown here and I appreciate it, and personally I am fine with the roadmap the way it is right now. Not too convoluted and has meaningful entries.
Now what I didn't like and still don't like is the constant teasing for teasers which eventually don't come. Sam apologized several times now for that, but it still feels sour. "next RM or the RM after that we will have new entries" into "wait for the railfan festival for new entries" to "wait for the 4th of May for new entries".
Which, the Rush hour reveal at said festival weekend was also just a teaser for a teaser...

 

I disagree. I‘m sorry about continuing the trend of using TSG as an example, but Maik Goltz has been quite active in sharing TSG‘s progress and asking for feedback on it. If the TSG add-ons weren‘t on the roadmap, there could only be two outcomes:

1. The forum users create and use their own unofficial roadmap which would probably just make things more complicated all around for everyone involved.
2. Maik Goltz would not be allowed to talk about his work (through some NDA I would guess) or at least be discouraged from talking about TSG‘s projects which would stop the loop of feedback and sharing progress that seems to be very promising thus far.

To be quite frank, I get why you or DTG in general may want to keep things that are still way off from the roadmap, but not listing stuff that‘s being worked on does undermine the purpose of a roadmap which‘s supposed to list what‘s being worked on.

 

Just a quick question, was the updated speed limit trigger zones on Bakerloo Line on this update? Sorry if and when it's a little bit off topic.

 

It’s okay, I was wondering the same thing. I’m not sure if it’s in this update though. They haven’t released the patch notes yet!

 

The answer here is simple. TSG could still talk about what they are working on, you just wouldn’t see it on the official roadmap until it’s in a 12 month release window.

 

Well, as TSG confirmed in this thread that it won't last for more than a year from now on, to release something from their list, it should be listed on the roadmap. Why DTG keeps their statement, that there won't be any TSG-releases within the next 12 months, that should be discussed internally between DTG and TSG. But to speak in the name of TSG without having spoken with them, is hmmm...no good manners.

 

How did we come up with the assumption DTG didn’t speak with TSG before this article, DTG know the progress of content being made by 3rd party developers and I’m sure are in almost constant communication. I don’t understand how people are taking the words from the article and flipping it into this story of pointing fingers and going behind someone’s back when there is not one hint of that around.

 

The problem is, unfortunately, the people on this forum are their own worst enemy.

The idea of the Roadmap was to give an idea of what’s coming in TSW2, from upcoming, to in production to in planning.

DTG have said they aren’t going to give release dates, until a lot nearer the time.

That still didn’t stop the “Where’s the 313?” “Why is the 313 taking so long” “It’s a conspiracy so it releases around the same time as Cathcart Circle as DTG as lazy so they can recycle it for the 314” comments we get on here of course.

People don’t help themselves on here, and ultimately as quoted above, it’s now has possibly led not to a case of less transparency but keeping more things quiet until further in development.

 

Well, for some reason TSG said in this thread, that they haven't been contacted before...

But it is not our thing to wash the dirty laundry....

 

Maybe cause the GTA franchise is the biggest, most profitable entertainment product in the history of mankind.

 

As someone who read the article, I didn’t think the TSG name was being used in a “bad example of being on the roadmap to early” but more just an example in general on the new roadmap format, It’s purely about keeping expectations on release windows for the community. You must expect your content to be mentioned in some form when it was added to the roadmap? I can’t imagine developers want to be asked for more then 12 months if there content is coming out this week, do they? No where does this article hint at any bad feelings towards TSG and It seems some of this community has turned this simple example into something it isn’t. It doesn’t matter how long your content has been on the roadmap, what matters is the release window we can expect the content.

 

A vocal minority. As far as I can see, there's a considerably larger amount of people who didn't keep asking about the 313, knowing it would take its time and it'll be ready when it's ready.

 

But by which data do you estimate what the minority and what the majority is?

 

I have no data, but I'm pretty confident the community is much larger than the relatively small group of people actively poking DTG about the 313.

The problem with silent majorities is that they're not as visible as vocal minorities...

 

Fair point

 

I think this is a good comment. If DTG does not want to take the responsibility to put long running projects on the roadmap, it might be good to have a third party forum at DTG live where other parties can have their discussions with the community.That would be perfectly OK. Railworks America has a third party section, which is mostly run by a number of smaller developer companies.

 

I totally agree, the point of a roadmap is looking into the future, what is coming up. But since the beginning of this year, and now confirmed with the preamble to the latest roadmap, it will now become a "we-will-release-this-next map". Either there is an actual roadmap (looking in the future, like half a year and more), that tells us what DTG is actually working on, or they skip it and go back to the previous method of announcing things when they release (like two weeks in the future). I am not saying that either version is better or worse, it is DTGs decision in the end, and I will accept it, but I cannot stand that dodgy behavior and even more the statement "If it is not on the roadmap, we are not working on it". That statement is an utter lie, of course you are working on things that are not on the roadmap, or does it mean no more German or American routes are coming in the future - because there are none on the roadmap? Maybe at least say "If it is on the roadmap, we are working on it", which would be correct.
And I don't mind things going slowly through the roadmap. It is clear that a new route will not make it through the process in 2 weeks, but we know what to be excited for - and that is the main point of it, right? It is building up more hype, rather than reducing it. The only hype that is dying for me personally is the roadmap, after 4 months of constant "new routes will be on there soon" not a lot has actually happened, for whatever reason DTG is stalling.

 

The problem with the roadmap isn't actually a problem with the roadmap at all but how some people in the community VIEW it. And what I mean is they see something new on the roadmap and then want to know all about it, including what underwear it's wearing, on day 1. And it's not going to be released for six months.

If the community took a deep breath, calmed down and let the developers develop then it would work better, but it can't

Look at yesterday. A new route was put on the roadmap and I've seen almost a dozen posts on the subject. We don't know that a single inch of track has been laid on the route and yet people are quibbling about trains, branches and slating the devs already.

Dovetail have tried to do right by the community, whilst going through their own issues (beta testing, QA etc) but some people really do stop the rest of us being able to be told anything constructive because they jump on every... little... thing and run with it.

Maybe it's me, I don't see the point in "getting hyped" for something which is by definition months away. Happy Xmas everybody

 

I think that reason is Rush Hour - Sam wanted them announced when they were 'locked in' but hasn't been allowed because DTG want to make a big song and dance about it all with a flashy livestream instead of a couple of sentences on a document and Sam on a stream going "it exists and we've nothing else to say". Perhaps they dropped Cathcart as a hint and no one picked up on it, and West Cornwall is 3rd party and rather rural so no way will it qualify for RH, so they felt pretty safe including it.

 

I really hope the wait will be worth, cause the last big thing that got delayed in announcement, because they wanted to add more information, was steam engines. And then, that announcement was basically "Steam is coming, nothing else to say at that point" - aka disappointing. Keeping my fingers crossed it will be containing more detailed information this time, otherwise it could just have been put on the roadmap months ago

 

I disagree that was disappointing. I didn't expect any details. It was very nice to see steam coming to TSW in future, and I'm patiently waiting to see which steam routes will be the first ones.

 

I don't know why it's disappointing that they cannot give you absolute detail right now on something they've said will take an absolute age. Surely more disappointing for them to make promises as absolutes and then for whatever reason end up doing something different

 

You didn't get my point there

 

Personally I'm more excited for the preserved collection fixes than the new content which is again all UK and there's not a single interesting route in sight for me (Cane Creek is, but nothing out of the ordinary countries). However, it's disappointing to see those fixes in "Upcoming" while they are so far away (Sam said "in eight weeks", which is either terribly far off or was intended to be a joke but it wasn't funny - why put something in Upcoming when it's 2 months away?).

I just wish Train Sim World would finally become Train Sim WORLD and that we could finally see some signs of that on the Roadmap.

 

I think they should really rename "upcoming" to "in testing" IMO, or split it into "in testing" and "Awaiting release date" with "next arrival" becoming "release imminent" or something like that.

 

If what Sam said on the roadmap stream is true and the "bottlneck in QA" releases then there shouldn't be much need to, because upcoming would become "in testing" almost naturally